Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1865-06-29

| suspicion against Weiehman's character, or to
| cortradict single fact, to which he testified,
| the accused had to fly to the last resort an
al,bt, snd very earnestly did the learned ooun-
| sci devote himself to the task. II is not mate
| rial whether this meeting in the hotel took
| place on the 23d OF december or in January.
| The witness is not certain about the date of
this meeting. The material fact is, did this
| meeting take place-either on the 23d OF Decem.
| Der or in January last!
OF what avail is the attempt to prove that
| Mudd was not here during January, il it was
clear that he was here on the e3d Of December,
1s6l, and bad this conversation with Booth!
| That this attempt to prove an alibl during
| January has failed, is quite as clear As is t.e
| proof OF the fac. that tine pri oner was here on
| the evening OF the Odd of Decem Der, and present
| in the National Hotel, where Booth stopped.
| The fact that the prisoner. Samuel A Mudd,
| went with J. T Mudd on that evening to the
| National Hotel, and there separated from him,
| is proven by his own witness, j. T. Mudd
| and that he did not rejoin him until they re.
tired 10 bed i'll the Pennsylvania Hotel is proved
by the came witness, and contradicted by
| nobody. Does any Uhe suppose there would
| have been such assduous care to prove that
| the prisoner was with his kinsman all the time
on the 23d of December In Washington, if they
| had net known that Booth was then at the
| National Hotel, and that a meeting of the pris-
| oner with Booth, Surratt, and WeichmanD on
| that day would corroborate' and confirm
WechIuanns testimony in every material
statement he made concerning that meeting
The accused having signally failed to ac-
| his witness, J 7. Mudd, early in the evening
| of the I'D of December, at the National Hotel,
| until they had again met at the Pennsylvania
Houee, when they retired TO rest, he now
attempts 10 prove an alibi as TO the month Of
| January. In this he has failed, as he failed in
| the attempt to show that he could not have
| met Booth. Surratt, and Weichmann on the
23d OF December
| For this purpose the accused calls Betty
Washington. She had been at Mudd's house
| since the Monday after Christmas last except
when here at court and says that the prisoner,
Mudd, has only been away from home three
nights during that time. This witness forgets
that Mudd has not been at home any night or
day since the court assembled Neither does
| she account for the three nights in which she
| swears to his absence from home. The testi.
mony of Henry H. Mudd, his brother, in sup.
port OF this aIibi, is. that the prisoner was in
Washington on the 23d of March, and on the
10th OF April, four days before the murder!
But he does not account fol. the absent night in
January, about which Betty Washington tes-
tifiee. Thomas Davis was called for the same
purpose, but stated that he was himself absent
one night in January, after the 9th OF that
month, and he CO uid not say whether Mudd
was there on that night OR not He does testify
fixes one occasion on the night Of the 26th Of
January. In consequence OF his own absence
one night in January, this witness cannot ae-
count for the absence of Mudd on the night re-
ferred to by Betty Washington. This matter
is entitled to further attention. 1t can satisfy
no one, and the burden Of proof 10 on the pris-
oner to prove that ne was not in Washington
in January last.
How can such testimony convince any ra-
uOnal man that Mudd was not here in Jauu.
ary, against the evidence OF an unimpeached
ws1nss - ws.Siasson a in the month Of January
Who that has been examined here as q witness
AhE Tne Rev lev. III MI T: Evans wears that saw him
in Washington last winter, and that at the
same time he saw Jarboe, the one coming out
OF and the other going into house on H street,
which ne was informed, on inquiry, was the
ness called to contradict Mr Evans, and he
leaves 1t In extreme doubt whether he does not
corroborate MIN, as ne swears that ne was
here last winter or fall, but cannot state ex.
actly the time.
Miss Ann H. Surratt is also called for tn Q
purpose Of Impeaching Mr.. Evans. 1t is suf-
fcent to say Of her testimony on that point that
she swears negatively only-that she did not
zee either Of the persons named ather mothers
house.
1t is further in testimony that Samuel a.
Mudd was here on the Sd day OF March last,
the day preceding the inaug guration, when
Booth was to strike the traitrous blow and il
was doubtless, only by the interposition OF
that God who stands within the shadow and
keeps watch above his own, that the victim Of
assassln's hand that he might complete his
work and see the salvation OF his country in
the fall OF Richmond and the surrender OF Its
/ great army DR.. Mudd was here on that day
1the Sd OF March) to abet, to encourage, TO
nerve his co-conspirator for the commission
of this great crime. He was carried away by
rushed into the room of Mr.. Norton at the Ma
| tionel Hotel in search OF Booth, exclaiming
eXcitedly: I'm m1StaRen; tnOught this was
Booths room.' He is told Mr. Booth Is above,
| on the next floor. He is followed by Mr. Nor.
ton, because Of his rude and excited behavior,
and being followed, conscious OF his guilty
! errand, he turns away, afraid of himself and
afraid to be found in concert with his fellow
| confe derate. Mr.. Norton Identifies the priso-
| ner, and has no doubt that Samuel A. Mudd
The Rev. Mr.. Evans also swears that, after
| the 1st and before the 4th of March last, he is
| certain that within that time, and on the I'd or
nf ha
Washington city. The endeavor is made by
| the accused, in order TO break down the tes-
| umony OF this witness, by proving another
alibi.
| Judge Bingham proceeded to comment upon
| the evidence on this point OF the sisters OF DIR.
| Mudd and OF his servants. The sisters say
| that he was at their fathers house for break
fast on the morning of the ID OF March; the ser.
| wants say he was at home for breakfast with
them o. that day. ,,t II this is testimony is fol-
| possible, in the nature of things, that the ues-
| timony of all these four witnesses can be true.
| Seeing this weakness in the testimony
| broueh bit to prove this second alibi, the en-.
| deavor is next made to dlscredit Mr.. Norton
| for truth; and two witnesses, not more, are
| called, who testify that his reputation for truth
| has suffered by contested litigation between
| one Of the impeachiHg witnesses and others.
| Four witnesses are called, who testify that
| Mr. Norton's reputation for truth is very good;
that he is man OF high character for truth,
| and entitled to be believed whether he speaks
| under the obligation of an oath or not.
| Judge b. said he would pass for the present
| from the consideration OF the testim opy show
! ing DR.. Mudd's connection with Booth in this
| conspiracy, with the remark that it is estab-
lshed, both by the testimony adduced by the
| prosecution and that by the prisoner, that since
| the commencement OF this rebellion John II.
| Surratt visited the prisoners house; that he
| concealed Surratt and other rebels and traitors
| in the woods near his house, where for several
| days he furnished them with food and bedding;
| that the shelter Of the woods by night and by
! day as the only shelter that the prisoner dare
furnish these friends OF his; that In November
Bootn visited nm ah4 Zen rem ainea over Tn nisaG
| Gardner's, from whom he purchased one OF
the horses used on the night Of the assassination
| aid tho escape Of ens of his confederates;
that the prisoner had secret interviews with
booth and Surratt, as sworn to by the witness,
Weichmann, in the National HOTEL, whether
on the 23d OF December or in January is q mat.