Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1867-07-23

| WASHINGTON, July ZZ.-CnaS, B0lcneI
| testified and was cross-examined at great
length. In 1865, resided in parish Saint
! Liboire; recognize the prisoner at the bar
/ saw him in April, 1865, he was in COM
pany with Mr.. James Butillery, who
brought him to my place; prisoner re.
manned at my house about three months,
and after that went TO Montreal | saw him
from time to time until he went to Europe;
Esaw him well a week.
p Q. Asked if the witness if he knew
Of the prisoner receiving any information
in regard to his mother?
Mr.. Pierpont objected.
Mr.. Brady said the defense desired to
prove he was not aware Of his mothers
condition, and did not flee as a coward.
The court declared the testimony mad
missible.
Witness resumed: Ny place was four
miles from Montreal; when they came
they gave me the name of the prisoner
as Charles Armstrong; l was told that he
was coming TO the country on account of
his health and of being compromised in
the American war; l did not then know
he was accused of being a conspirator to
murder the President; from the time the
prisoner reached my home, until he left for
Europe, the prisoners health was very bad ;
he had chills and fever twice a week; he
remained in bed most of the time; at times
l despaired of his life; / saw it in the
papers afterwards that John H. Surratt was
accused of being aconspirator; when saw
that Surrat was missing | coupled that
with the secrecy Of the young man in my
custody. l put some questions to the
young man and he acknowledged that he
was John Harrison Surratt. His friends
came to sec him at the house. Some peo-
pie that did not know came on one occa-
sion to see him. Four or five came in the
course of the summer. Some of the names
of the persons who came were given me.
Q. Did any of the st. Alban raiders come
to see him at your house?
Mr.. Merrick objected to the question, as
it had no relevancy to the case. Sus-
tanned.
Witness resumed: One of Surratt's visit
ors was Father Lapierre. Others came
with Mr.. Lapierre. A man named Lack
ry came with him. He stayed at private
house two or three days, and several times
came to my house to see Surratt they
came on hunting expedition, and took
Surratt with them; Surratt went out one
evening with James A. Lilley to take a
ride: he sometimes walked out in the
evening; he went to church in his common
dress he did not go to church at the first
Of the service, and only remained about
quarter or half hour; | did not commune
cate to any one that l knew the young man
staying with me was Surratt; said he did
MT 70 10 e
his visits to my house; my house was Wis.,
tied by my Pensioners every day, and
they sometimes saw Surratt, but / did not
tell them he was concealing himself
at my house. lie was Surratt. | did not
report him to the United States authori-
ties, because / believed him innocent.
Witness testified chat McMillon's reputa-
ton for truth and veracity was bad.
Before closing the defense, Mr.. Merrick
asked the ruling of the court on a motion
before made to strike out certain testimony.
The court said they would first go through
with all the testimony.
After recess several witnesses were eK-
amined for the prosecution, in regard 10
the movements Of trains between Elmyra
and Williansport, April ii, 1865. 1t APP
peared there was at that time necessarily a
ferry at Williamsport
Maurice Drohon testified In April,
1865, ! run the ferry at Williams
port. Don't know anything about
a special train running on April II;
remember a man coming to me l was
on the Williamsport side coiling up my
rope and q man came TO me 10 ferry him
across l said l would, if be would pay he
said he would pay The man mad on a
peculiar coat that attracted my attention
the man asked what charged 10 take him
over. said the charge would be fifty cents
in the middle Of the river / stopped and
collected the fare; he gave me dollar,
had no caange and he allowed me 10 keep
the dollar; witness identified the prisoner
as the man whom he ferried across on the
day referred 10.
Detective Bigley testified that he went
with Halohan, McDevitt, Carver and
Weichman 70 Montreal. Halohan told
witness at Montreal that he lost hand
kerchief at ST. Adams he did not see
Halohan lie down on a settee at Burling-
ton he would have seen him if he had. !
doubt whether We ever went 10 the depot
There was a track outside, and We waited
there, think, for the train. think We
did not wait more than FIVE or ten minutes
AZ the depot. The lost handker-
chief was mentioned in Montreal
either by Mr.. Porter, american Consul, or