The evening Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1861-1871, 1867-08-17
s0 s8V 9
vocate Holt,

Judge Advocate Holt says, the paper rec
ommending Mrs. Surratt to mercy was laid
before the President as part Of the record
of the proceedings of the military commits
sion. The President says he never saw it or
heard of it. The New York Tribune ASKS
'what is the mystery? We WONDER the
true history of the Surratt family and this
mysterious assassination will ever be
known ?'
The mystery" does not seem to be diff
cult of solution, for the probabilities are vio-.
lent that Judge Advocate Holt did not tell
the truth. All the evidence tends to show
that certain officials, perhaps Holt and Stan
ton, who were determined that Mrs. Surratt
should be hanged, suppressed the recon-
mendation to mercy and Communication OF
punishment, and never permitted the Presi-
dent to see it. The odium they have incur
red by that trial and by their heartlessness
has induced the attempt to make it appear
that they withheld nothing from the Presi-
dent, and that he is the one that is response
BILE for the hanging of Mrs. Surratt. Upon
this subject the National Inteuigeacer says:
It is said that the paper referred to, although
now attached to those upon which are written the
finding and sentence of the court, has been per-
forated by q different and larger eyelet punch,
thus showing conolusivety that it was placed
there after the papers which now accompany it
had been completed and secured together. Be-
sides, the papers present other and plain indica-
tions of having been otherwise manipulated"
The correspondent of the Baltimore San
touches this subject thus:
Already have given you most OF the facts as
related by Mr.. johnson, who adheres to his as
seyeration tina. this recommendation was not
among the papers presented to him by Judge
Holt on the 5th day of July, 1855, when the ex-
eeutive approval of the sentences was written out
by Judge Holt and signed by the President
Mr.. johnson further says that the sheets on
which the court record was written were not fast
ened together when presented to him, but the
whole matter has since been made up and fasten-
ed together by eyelet and as showing that
the recommendation for communication must have
been separated and kept in a different place from
the balance of the record reference is made to Pitt
mans official account of the trial, which has no
mention of the recommendation of the court,
though it purports to give copies of all papers
connected with the case. This publication was
permitted upon the authority of the secretary
of war, with the injunction that it be prepared
and issued under The superintendent of Col.
Burnett, who, Judge Holt adds, twill be respon-
sible to this bureau for its strict accuracy"
In October 1855, three months after the assas-
siRation trial, Col. Burnett, special judge advo-
cate of the commission, certifes that, Gin obedi
ence TO the directions of the secretary Of war,
through the judge advocate general, l have SUI
perintended the compilation and publication in
book form, &C., &C., &C., and hereby certify to its
faithfulness and accuracy" No copy of the pa
per in question being found in the book, Mr.
johnson takes Burnett's certificate corrobora-
tive of the theory that the recommendation for
communication was not placed with other parts Of
the record until long after the trial, and conse-
quently he could not have had it before him
when the sentences were approved.
The radicals who say there is "a lie out
between the President and Judge Advocate
Holt, may, from the foregoing, be forced to
conclude that it is not the President who
has lied At all events it would be advisa-
BILE for them to ask their friend Holt how 1t
happens that the recommendation to mercy,
which he says was handed to the President
with the finding and sentence is not includ
ed in the official report of the trial, thu
''strict accuracy" of which the judge advo
cate was ready to vouch for?