The Elk advocate. [volume] (Ridgway, Elk Co., Pa.) 186?-1868, 1867-04-25

tee doubted whether Sanford Conov CT
committed perjury. a Republican court
and jury in the District of Columbia did
not, but without difficulty convicted
him on the corroborative testimony OF
Campbell and Snevcl the only witness
produced for the defense being Joseph
Holt, and he being careful, in view Of
all that had happened, to say as little as
possible. AS the prisoner Couovcr and
the witness Holt stood in each Others
presence in that court of Justice, varied
thoughts and memories must have
floated across the minds of cach The
memory of the days, not very
long past, when the prisoner was die
pet-relied on for everything, employed
everywhere-cpdorsed by Bingham,
praised by Stanton, introduced at the
White House-sent travelling by the
War Department visited" said
Conover to the committee, a number of
"places last winter iR the service Of the
" Bureau-in Virginia, North Carolina,
" South Carolina, Louisiana and Canada,
/" To give them all would make a long
3" list and I would hardly be able to do it
=" without my notes" His notes Per.
haps, like Booth, he kept diary Aud
then he and his employee once so inti-
mate, though separated by wide gulf
now ,,may have thought of the 25th of
November, 1865, and the afidavits i'm
plicating Jefferson Davis, distant aud
Helpless prisoner or their minds, by
common instinct, may have gone further
back to scenes of epauletted j ustiee, ard
Conoyer in another witness stand at the
Arsenal-or to the end of it all, the 7th
of July, 1865, when, in the company Of
brutal assassians and ruffians, for such
were Payne aud Azerot, woasp, for
whom at the threshold Of the house
where Campbell was afterwards a
visitor, and when then it is said Preston
King was on guard, a daughter inter-
eeeled in vain, was hung to death
1t was on the ttial of Conover that
curious incident occurred, confrnatexy
of the truthfulness Of the witness who
fixed the perjury On Conoyer, and whom
it was the interest of the government, if
possible to discredit. Campbell swore
positively that, when he made his afii-
davit at the War Department, Holt not
only wrote it down, but accompanied the
witness to the Justice to have the jurat
affixed. Campbell testified thus !:
Q. Who'reduced this to writing
A. Judge Holt.
Q. Were you sworn before you made
this statement? .....
A. No. sir.
Q. What was done after you made your
statement
A. Wewcnt to Notary Pub lie on F
street.
Q. Who went with you?
A. Judge Holt.
Holt, when examined for his friend,
the prisoner, said {:
Q Did you accompany Campbell before
the Justice or Notary Poblic ...
A. I did not.
@. Who went with him before the No.
tary
A. do not remember. My habit is to
send with witnesses the Chief Clerk of the
Bureau Whether in this instance he ac-
companied him or not, l do not know
The deposition was brought back to me
certified, as you see
Now here was positive and fatal
contradiction by high official or an
humble any degraded man like Camp
bell which would probably have so dis
credited him as to acquit Conover. But
before the day was over, it turned ou.
that Campbell, after all, was right and
Holt wrong, for we read in the notes of
the trial
The Hon Joseph Holt, roealed--I simply
desire if the Court please to be strictly ac
curate upon point Of fact This morning
when was asked in regard to CampbeIrs
deposition, did not refer to it, but said it
had been sworn to before Notary in
Winder's building and that l did not ac-
company the witness On looking at the
deposition l find that it was taken as Camp
bell states and have an impression that
did accompany witness about that time
defore Notary, and if did so, it must
have been Campbell felt it due to Mr.
Campbell to make this statement .....
All this, however, was relatively i'm
material, for on the full testimony of
corroborated accomplices Sanford Cons
over was convicted of perjury in this ::
That all he swore on the trial of Mrs.
Surratt was false, and that everything ne
supplied Holt with, and testified before
the Judiciary Com mittee, was false too.
And, a new trial having been refused,
he now awaits sentence. Why that sen.
tence is not pronounced, it is not for US
to conjecture. We have done a plain
and painful duty in stating these
frightful facts to the public.