The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-06-23

murder" witness Ieaped upon the had and in scusns
wounded twioe about the shoulder and he made A.
effort 70 Qua wsiness In the breast while doing TIM
witness and the man were clnched; after wness eos
the knife where no could not witness grabbed For
the mans throat while We scuiing was GRABBED
i was Major sswapa eas
Major Seward and told HIM to let CO. and 70 erab ne
and Payne GOT away and on h s0' 70 the door
he stuck Mr. Hanson, the chef nesss so"S
OF o. she state Department ! afterwards recos
four wounds from Payns-ons the forehead two N
the right shoulder and one under the left shou,ds
blade; during the scuffe saw revolver in Payne,a
hand The knife WAS long. bright, sharp one-w6at il
called bowie knife; Paync dressed in drab over
coat dark pants and siouch hat; I think he wore
pair Of heavy boots but don't recoec whether he wore
spurs or not ate! Payne had saw spners Of the
conspiracy trial have the knife in my possession 4
was presented 70 me by the Secretary OF War Witness
here described the wounds on Mr. Frederick Stewards
person Witness then. resumed. and said he
sheu turned his attention 70 Mr. seward ana
found ni. lying on q; nsos Miss Fann':
Mr. Seward revived, and said, 81 dead-send fse
doc.or-ssnd fer the polics-close the house," wit
then placed e bed all the blows struck At The
Sccretay Of State while he was lying in bed Pay0s
= ~ ss O s5 and with mso
described Mr. Stewards wounds)-Payns was . veg
strong man.
John v. Pyles sworn. and examined by Mr. Wilson
Resides 10 Prince George county Nd. and was las
conversation with him either In 1854 1866 YES
about three months before the Of Mr. La
coin; witness had left homo and was working a. hi
mothers; Mr. Surratt to to sign papers .
yustice Of the Peace he seemed TO b. urgent
and We proposed 70 60 over 70 my brohess and
70 avoid the draft; think he SAID he going -
Canada; don't remember whether he said he wanted
wanted money for his voyage: sure about the
conversation but think he wanted to make his mother
stood that he was 70 raise money and he wanted -
secure his mother.
No GROSS examination.
At hafpast twelve tho court took Cor hAf a.
hour
aon be decided whether witness could be recalled
for the purpose Of cOntradicting him.
Judge Fisher said be had already decided tina. point
Mr.. Bradley said he desired the Court hear the
question further. as they now had authorities IN court
upon the subject
Mr. Merrick hoped the Court would hear the autheri
tea Ho understood the other day that the
had consented that witnesses who could be got here
Mr. Bradley said they desired to recall John Lee.
Judge Fisher asked they proposed to oross-examns
him with 2 view O. discrediting him.
Mr. Bradley said they proposed 70 lay the foundaoa
TO contradict him fatty Mr. Bradley proposed 70 argue
the merits OF tho motion
and the common practice was mot to allow that thak
rule broken through there telling how long
Mr.. Bradley said there Ingenuity whereby
counsel could know what witnesses were to be caisel
no until s hey had BEEN
might protract the trial; organized -
do Justice and justice should DO done even though tine
Mr. Merrick argued that whore facts were developed
subsequent crossexamination that would tend -
discredt the Witness II duty 70 recall the Witness
and support Of this he read from .'Starke Evt.
dencs Sherwoods edition, page 242 Mr. Asrrck then
rss upon point upon which proposed TO centra
dict him. The rule that the witness must first -
nterrogated and r. after examination hcts
that would tend 70 discredt him. Che witness
could be recalled TO DO examined ON such facts Brode
saa e. .
take The mask from perjury and show 70 the jury what
tho witnesses really wsrs and to expose them il an
NJ Psmspons argued chat Mr. xsrick,s ooustrucsloa
Of tho referred not correct. Hs held ts
was asked the qusstios and before ne bad ls ~
stand Thia he argued, Wa quesen purely for see
there would DO no Ssrcship IL the casa The rule wss
right in II right another and
could tell where such cause would end IN this oag
Mr. Carrngton said the prosecution desired to throw
obstacle in the way Of the defence discredtng the
the defence should b compelled 70 Law the proper osn
dalton before they could assa his general reputation fer
veracsty III any witness had been convicted Of crime
the dssnce had way Of proof By producing the recosa
OF such conviction. II the def0ucs fad 70 make the
Witness FOR the purpose Of laying such foundation Il
absolutely essential 70 the ends Of JUSTICE and there
HS other way 10 m which - the ~ss -. can % s
CoaI. i ,Ss s.s.s:: 2. Z: ud.s. dlso.ssos .l.s
formoo counsel that has made satemonts
ary 70 his testimony the stand There nothing
to show that this essential 70 the ends Of justice
Mr. Bradley said II Was remarkable that upon tho
question authority has been submitted to the court
Mr. Wilson said they supposed the question settled
Mr. Bradley said that he did not understand It. The
question was submitted court the prosecution
requested TO furnish authority, and produced mona
sou that he would not DO governed BY any decision q.
cept thai Of his immediate superior tribunal and there
FORE u the risk Of being critical he mr. Bradley would
produce the authority OF OF the most learned judges
| that have graced the bench. Mr. Bradley then
preceded to comment upon authorities already
produced. Referring to the case Of the witness
| John Lee, Mr.. Bradley said it was not possible
the defence know that he would DO brought here
testify to when here Il was manifest therefore, tnas
the defence was surprised and they had right there
fore, 70 call him back upon Information recesved -
witness left this stand he declared his corruption.
could he not b recalled for the purpose Of proving bin
judge Fisher said il was probable be had not fuzzy
understood the point; he thought the motion was 70
ments made before being placed the witness stand.
Mr. Bradley said the principle was the same IN either
Lees case the defence proposed 70 prove that three
days after the assassination, when tho officers were
seeking after surratt be dee) said he did not know
Surratt and had seen him. The defence were
surprised because II could not DO known that Lee
would not be placed the stand and did not ascertain
that he had made counter statements until After
| he had left the stand. IL was insis Cd
that all the authorities allowed the recall Of the witness
such had been stated This principle extends
not only to the OF John Lee but also to another
witness who had not left the Court House when he
avowed his corruption TO several parties The defence
would also impeach two witnesses who were now under
indic for criminal offences. The argument that 10
would create Inconvenience and proract the trial. he
argued, that should not for moment be entor-
tanned In court Of justice. mans life Mt stake.
aud should be said that the government would set up
dollars against that fey Was II 10 be ques.
tion the pocket against Dusces For himself and
scces they would that any witness for the de-
fence whom the prosecution had the least ground
| OF suspicion should be recalled.
The Court reserved decision upon the motion until
| Monday MORNING. 1t q take recess
The jurors asked II they would DC permitted to attend
church In bodyf
Mr.. Bradley said-Any church except the Catholic.
Mr. Perepont said they agreed Tn at The jury should
| go,to any church.
Mr. Bradley said he glad To hear that for the
prosecution had refused TO allow Catholo&on the jury.
the Court directed, however that The jurors should
kant torether and IL they church they must