New-York tribune., 1867-07-27


WASHINGTON, July 2G.-In the Suuatt trial today
the prosecution closed their case after hearing the
evidence of several witnesses to prove the bad char
acter of Dr. Bissell the person who to having
seen Surratt in Elmira the day of the assassina
ton. The evidence against Bissell has been dam
aging that the counsel for the defense to-day stated
that if number of witnesses they had summoned to
prove Bisselps good character did not arrive
tomorrow, they would ask that his tBissells) ey-
dence be stricken from the record. During
the proceedings to-day another one of those dis
graceful scenes between the counsel occurred Mr..
Bradley ST. lost his temper and looked for while
as though there would be q riot in Court The scene
happened during the taking of testimony of DIR.
Noble Mr.. PierrepOnt counsel for the prosecution,
was cross-examining Noble in relation to BisselPs
character In answer to several questions asked by
Mr.. Pierrepoint DR.. Noble said
He had never been indicted arrested for any crime
for producing abortion; never had "A charge against
him anywhere Dr. Bsse practced more less all the
witness was never partnership with him; Dr. Bssel
left Wavery between two and three years ago. he went
place In the northern part OF Pennsylvania where
he formerly practiced and from there TO New-f0k ad
been called TO consult with him in the family OF Mr. VIM
Curran hostler at Of the hotels IL case Of
dphthea consulted with HIM in case ofJohn Gutces
Dr. Bisscl and Clutches came to the house OF witness To-
gether: thought Clutches was now dead.
rQlcsii0n-We you tell us OF party living after
You ana DR.. Bssen held consultation AnSUer-Ies,
Mr.. Pierrepont Gaughjn@-wcI now, tell us of a party
living after your consultation
Mr. BradGy-You must not insult the witness Sir, and
| will not allow 10.
Mr.. PerrepontI asked the witness proper question.
Mr. Bradley ito the COurO-It is not the question l OBJ
ject TO, but the manner In which i Is put
Mr.. PeucpOnt-The question Is proper and he must
Mr.. Bradey-A witness shall not be nsulted while
under protection who OF good character as the
COUNSEL aud moves in good society.
Mr.. Picrrepont-Who does the gentleman mean by
Mr. Bradley advancing toward Mr. Pierrcpont his face
flushed with excitement, and all his actions making IL
mean yon Sir mean the witness is of as good charac-
ter as you, and moves m Us good society as you do
At this point Judge Fisher requested the gentle
men to preserve order and proceed with the examin
alton. Bradley still remained within foot of
Peuepont, staring at him wildly, the latter paying
no attention to him, but continued looking at the
witness waiting. for an answer.
MI Bradley dn reply 10 the Judge Yes. Sir. But my
witness Is under my protection and must not be III
snlted
MIR PiercpontThe witness is under the protection OF
the Court have asked him que 'tun, which by law he
is bound 10 answer and insist he shall answer IT, Judge
Fisher sand he Thought the question proper one ana e
Mr. BraIlcy-Ycs, sir but did you notice the manner
Judge Fisher-Wcl. don't get excited
Mr. Bradley ! DO not want % get excited, Sir There
is another place where can settle these things
Mr. Picrrcpont-A All right. / now insist on witness an
swei1ng my question
The witness then resumed Mr Bradley still ex-
smiling and cooly tanning himself the crowd in the
courtroom again brcathcd freely, and the case went
on without any more sensational scenes. The prose
cuion is closed and it remains with the defense
when the summing up shall begin
WAsHNGToN, July 2G.-Thc trial of John II.
Suratt resumed This morning In The Criminal Court
Judge FISHER 5,iiy,.a an oinon ,ne qo,a''on'
arpucd Yesterday relative nc ad1i'Aly OF certain
tcstimouv s follows Before took recess yesterday
witnesses were examined by tho couns Tor the proseou
ton 10 prove, In reply 20 the Testimony "hei'u py VI"
defense that the telegraph line between washington n"
Elmra y " was in good working order ana mat com
mupicatons were passed 10 aud ro between these TWO
poiu on the I2h 18Th Iih aud 18Th Of April 1865 and
were nlso examined who testified 10 the run
ming Of the trains between Washington hhd NeS vi vi
bccn Owen y the witnesses the counsel Tor the defense
moved that DE stricken out. on the gound thHt Mas
not responsive the testimony ohcftd O the uclcso
10 estanli.h an ahbl on the part oI the prlsoleI.
In support Of their motion. the counsel Tor lns Pr%so %
coptc thar the rule by which evidence offered IN rtpy
/, tn be- admitted rejected s ihat no evidence VII.
might been addressed originally IN snIpolI oI op m
Crniaton ~ the charge Laid u the Indictment can DE re-
Cy,'" i Vblch can be- Given in reply is that which
ynr ~ cnt down the cuse the part Of the defense
without being IN ay way conmat0ry Of tie case ON tc
mari of the prosecution Ia support OF that pf0Pos,
tSn. the King against Hilditeh and others, on
Darlington and Paine 229, ana tne m GnsI po,na ~,
the King against simpson, 2d Carrington, ana Taine
as and the ease Of the Gtd states against Garaer
sd CrawiOrds Opinions, page e. was ren,u ul". iso us
against stpson, decided 10y Baron Gasson on the tai
Of an Indictment for larceny, wheh me case loI So - ~
had settled solely the fact OF recent possession OF te
stolen articles by the prisoner whO Oy way ot uclehsc
called witness who prUyedthat he had bought te prop
crty from third person. In reply 20 s % ,I LOT
the defense the counsel for the Crown called sald thfd
person 10 prove only that the witness dd not BUY te
property Of him, but that ne saw lhe prisoner
steal H. Baron Gasson held that this last evidence was
only admissible It went TO destroy inc case set
mn on te tr of the prisoner that j. To say that the
witness for the could only be allowed TO testiy
that the prisoner did not buy the proler9 9i NIL anu
could not be allowed 10 TESTIFY that lie saw le proer
steal IL; because the latter evidence wOud Dc cOhnrma
On Of the original case ana tat u was oy MioMapie @
10 give In reply evidence when eoes 10 .l. Jomn NV, @ '
defense without being confirmation OF he o,igaI ease
The case Of the King against ditcn ana , 1I1ls va" .;
decided by Justice lauhloh' ulyn ,no "utnViS Sotd
! the case OF the King against simpson. As sald
before these are mere ns. wSd d tnstce Tunt"n 1
able and learned as Baron GassOn anu Js.es
may have been undertake TO say tey are ehtrey VIII
Sisosed Of iy Nt Philips in his Treatise Evidence
PAGE 40; in which, speaking OF Baron nsson ueelson
ne saws. tThc stealing ~ the goods by the prisoner
yorid bc strong evidence that he did not buy them SO
il may be remarked Of the case declded ny Jusee Ihu
ton, that the evidence offered ~ iePy @ ,e th6 ~
alibl set up by the prisoner ia Ihao n "oue as
showed continuation OF inc olIsini & raso' Nas ,as
Certainly proof dD that 'ote%pted nS place s's them
think that moments reflection Will show that both
argument or considerations inconsistent with sound
! reason common sense aud good policy oerthny no
rcupg attorney can fail appreciate tRe unreasonable
ness Of these decisions. II is utterly Impossible Tor the
trosecuton before the tra TO know the whereabouts OF
tbe accused for days weeks before the commission OF
the crime charged upon him. or to anticipate Tue various
contryances which may be resQitcd 10 DS way vi Ne
! Tense and II il unjust well as unwlse N policy
| 10 require that the prosecution Should meet al
! those defensive contrvanccs aud nave witnesses
in attendance a great expense for that purpose or for
the purpose of proving the Whereabouts G the prisoner
tor ds fogc6r in order 10 make out MS original case
or else be deprived Of evidence in reply Let us take the
c,se Jetded bN Baron GassOn as an example The prose
tou ten having found the property IN the recent pos
session OF The prisoner had right by me rules OF law TO
nresnc that he had stolen IT, and ld the right there to
et his csc and I'm the absence OF defensive proof to de-
mand verdict OF conviction. AZ theit Is an ofense
almost always committed with the greatest secrecy,
! ne might have summoned the entire Vcinage without