Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1865-06-20
THE CONSPIRACY TRIALS.
THE CASE OF HEROLp.

| we noue yesterday Such BRIEF men ton o
the argument OF Dir. f. Stone in the case o.
Herold as we were able to do so.
In his argument, MIR. Stone proceeded frs
to consider what is the law governing the CASE
| as to the crime and the punishment, upon the
| hypotnesls that martial law generally was in
force in the District Of Columbia on the llth Of
April, le65, and still so continue in force; and
tial law did, in fact, exist within the District
| OF Coium bia on the 1ith of April, and does
| now exist and to what extent
Dealing with these matters at considerable le
| length, ne proceeded to examine the charge in
tnls case. Ihe parties accused are charged
win conspiracy in aid of the rebellion, with
| murder, with assault with intent to XIII, and
win lying In wait. 1t is extremely doubtful
from the language Of the charge and the specl-
fcatiops under which of the following crimes
the accused, Herold, is arraigned and now on
his trial, viz:
/. Whether he is on trial for the crime of
conspiracy to overthrow the Government Of
the United States, as punishable by the act of
congress OF the United States passed the 3lst
OF July, 1861 or,
II. Whether he is on his trial for giving aid
and comfort to the existing rebellion, as pun
lshabie oy the act OF Congress passed the II tn
of July, 1862; or,
III. whether he is on trial for aiding and
abetting the murder OF Abraham Lincoln,
President of the UniIed States.
His counsel well understands the legal def.
milton oi the three crimes above mentioned, but
does not understand that to either the common
law or the law Of war is known any one OF.
fence comprised Of the three crimes mentioned
in this charge. He knows Of no one crime of
a conspiracy to murder and an actual murder,
all in aid OF the rebellion, distinct ana sepa-
rate from the well known and defined crimes
OF murder, Of conspiracy in aid of the rebel :.
lion, or of giving aid and comfort to the rebel
lion as defined by the acts of Congress. 1t is
extremely doubtful, from the language of the
charge, whether the murder OF the President
Of the United States is not referred to as the
mere means by which the conspirators gave
aid and comfort to the rebellion-whether it
was not merely the overt act by which the
crime of aiding the rebellion was completed
The language OF the charge and of the gener-
al specification, as well as of the special speci-
cused is charged with all three or any one, it is
necessary for his counsel to present his de-
fences to all three of the crimes mentioned in
the charge and specification.
First, as to the crime Of conspiracy. What
evidence is there of the accused, HerOld, hav.
ing conspired to murder the President, or TO aid
the rebellion and overthrow the Constitution
and laws OF the United States The evidence
upon that point consists Of but very few
facts.
The first that is necessary to notice is the tes-
timony OF Weichman, who says that he saw
Herold once at Mrs. Surratt's since he went
there to board, which was In November, 1861.
tste single visit Of Young man to house,
where there were both young men and young
ladies, as evidence Of completely in conspira-
cy OF so grave and heinous character, espec-
tally as the same witness deposes that Herold
g. pre- yeas @ % G
down ia the country, at q serenade there some
eighteen months before.
The same witness (Weichman) also deposes
that once in the winter Of 1865, he, Holahan,
Atzerodt and this boy Herold went to the
theater and gefng down the street, he (the wit
ness, Weichman,) and Holahan going in ad.
vance, they found that they had outwalked
(Weichman) returned, and found B9ath AZ. 80
THat n apf As59ld II cose conversation near
stove and upon bis going in they in vited him
to take drink. 1t the fact OF two persons
geing TO theater to see popular play, and
third, and stopping at a restaurant and taking
drink, or standing all three (as in the witness
opinion) in confidential conversation, is an
population OF Washington city during the
winter could be convicted on the same testi.
mony.
The only other testimony is that of John NJ
Lloyd, who deposes that John Surratt and
Atzerodt, some weeks before the assassination,
passed his house, and that on their return
Herold was with them, Herold being in a
buggy alonei that they stopped at his house
and took drinks: that John Surratt took him
(Lloyd) ont by himself, apart from Herold,
out Of Herolds sight and hearing and handed
him Lloyd two carbnes. There is no eyi
dence whatever in Lloyd's testimony that
| Herold had the most remote knowledge that
| Surratt had given Lloyd the caroines.
evidence by the Government, and that is the
| testimony OF the witness, TaltavulI, the res.
taurant keeper, who deposes that one night
or Thursday, the night before 1t. Herold came
into his restaurant and asked if Booth had
| been there.
| These facts would probably convict fifty
| people; but they do not give either separately
| or collectively the slightest evidence that thi:
| boy Herold ever conspired with Booth anC
others in aid OF the rebellion, and for the over
| throw of the Government OF the United States
In the special specification there are two
things charged. The first is the murder of thu
I President of the United States; the second, aid
tice after the murder. An accessory after ths
| fact is thus defined IAN accessory after th'
| fact is one who, when knowing felony Il
have been com mmitted by another, receives, re
| is no reasonable doubt from the evidence IL
| this ease, that the accused, Herold, was guilty
OF aiding and abstting Booth in his esctF,
| was an alder and abettor in the escape OF Booth
| there is no rational or reasonable docbt HI
| was clearly guilty OF that crime, and must
| abide by its consequences. But the accused
| by his counsel, altogether denies that he wa
| guilty OF the murder of Abraham Lincoln
President OF the United States, or that he aidet
| and abetted in the murder of Abraham Lin
coin, President of the United States, as Sc
| forth in the specification and the charge.
| Herold is charged in the charge with th
| murder OF the President. 1t is shown as clear
| ly as the sun shines that he did not do th,
| murder with his own hands, that he did no
| strike the mortal blow; and the only question
| that can arise under the charge and specifica
ton and the evidence in this cause is whethe
| he was such an alder and abetIOr as woult
| make him equally guilty with the party VIII
| did strike the blow.
AS to the second branch efthe definition of I
| principal in the second degree, was he con
| strnctiveIy PRESENT. He was not actually
| present, as we have seen above. Was he theI
constructively present? That is to say, in th'
language last quoted from Wharton, was he
"with the intention OF giving assistance,
| ..near enough to afford 1t should the occasion
arisei" What saws the evidence on this point
| John Fletcher, the only witness who mention
| Herold at all on the 14th OF April, 1865, says
| that he saw Herold at twenty. five mintes pas
ten O'Clock that night riding on horseback
| slowly, on Pennsylvania avenue, near VII
| lard's Hotel, coming from the direction o
| Georgetown; that his horse seemed to re some
| what, though not very. tired, and gave evi
| dence of having been ridden. The main por
| ton Of the tes timony places the assassination
| OF the President at fifteen minutes after ter
| O'Clock. That the assassination took place ir
| the midst OF crowded theatre, there is M
| controversy or dispute