Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1867-06-24
THE TRIAL OF JOHN Il. SURRaTT.
Gen. Grant in Gourt-yudge Fishers Opin.

Gen. Grant in Court-Judge Fishers Opin-
zsa ion on recalling the Witnesses-Impor-
tant Witnesses examined To-day.
The trial of ohm H. Surratt was res sumed this
morning in. the Criminal Court before J udge
Fisher; Messrs. Carrin gton, PierrepOint and
Wilson for the prosee ution. Messrs. Jos. H.
Bradley, Sr. and Jr., and X. T. Merrick tor
defense. As before, the room was densely
crowded previous to the opening of the Cour
and the number of ladies in attendance was
larger than on any previous day. The Jurors
and the prisoner were brought in at ten s'cl'k
and the Court was opened by Mr.. Mulley.
Among the visitors this morning was General
Grant.
a soon as the Court had been called to or
der, Judge Fisher read the following opinion
upon the motion submitted on Saturday by the
defense, asking the recall of witnesses for the
purpose of further cros5-eXamination.
81 have been called npon again by the coun-
sci for the prisoner at the bar to order the re-
call of witnesses summoned by the prosecution
after the cross-eXaminaton has been ended
and the witnesses dismissed, in order that the
prisoner may recross.examne, with the view
OF ing quiring OF the witness so to be recalled as
to whether some moral stigma is not resting
upon his character, or whether he has not
made statements out ofdoors, prior to the trial
or since, in conflict with the testimony deliv.
cred at the bar, and thus to lay the foundation
to impeach his credit. 1t is claimed as the
have heretofore refused to order witnesses
to be recalled, and yet the counsel for the de.
tense have again presented the question for q
reheaIing, and with so much apparent conf.
dence Of the rightfulness of the demand, that,
in spirit Of accommodation, / ventured to
listen to their appeal, with the sincere desire
to correct any error which may have COM
mitted, if satisfied of its commission.
1t could afford nae no qualification, Heaven
knows, to contribute by any error OF nay judg-
ment to the rendition of verdict of convic-
tioa in any case where the life of a fellow
6 "
might have been verdict OF acquittal. Such
a reflection would be lasting canker in my
conscience, even in q case where knew the
conviction tell upon the guilty felon.
In such spirit have heard the counsel for
the defence in this case through arguments
which it seemed to me would have been bet
ter addressed to the jury than to the Court,
aHd have endeavored to discover whether /
had not possibly erred So far from being
convinced that was wrong In my decision,
the more l have reflected upon the ruling L
have made in the matter the more am con-
yinced that was in the right.
In this case there have thus far been exam
med witnesses brought here from Canada,
from Maine, from Vermont, from New York,
from Virginia, and from Mississippi. The
trial, It is con ceded, will not close with the
present month. The witnesses are engaged in
the various pursuits Of life. Some are farm
ere, some merchants, some lawyers. bank Of
ficers, railroad conductors, and others, all Of
whom or most Of whom have necessarily to
be away from their homes and business to at
emu lDls tTldl. Iney are OF course subject to
some, and most of them to great inconveni-
ence, not to say sacrifice, In attending court
at all. = -
1t is now demanded by the proposition of
the counsel for the prisoner that each Of these
witnesses shall, after goiag through the ex-
animation and DISCRIMINATION, be either
ordered by Court to remain till the trial shall
be ended or the case argued to the jury, or
else shall be compelled to return here after
having gone home TO place himself in posi-
ton to have his character for veracity attack
ed by other witnesses to be procured for that
purpose by the defense, to tell the public
himself that he is a criminal without charac-
Ter and not worthy of *elief. This is simply
whatthe proposition Of the counsel in sub.
stance amounts tos and a new statement of it
N Its simple naksdness is suffi cient to show
the lmpropriety of granting II. Let us take the
case OF the witness from Maine. examined on
saturday, for the purpose of illustration. We
will suppose that he has now gone home and
the prisoners friends have telegraphed to his
neighborhood, and have been informed BY
somebody there tha. he has said something to
somebody, no matter to whom or how careless
ly, which they suppose may in some degree
conflict With what he testified to when befor e
the court. The counsel for the defence pre-ent
their request TO have him recalled from
distance Of sor1e seven hundred or eight
hundred or one thousand miles. He is sent for
and asked whether he has not said thus and SO
to John Jones, or John Smith, or John Brown
He denies il. Jones. Brown, and Smith are
Immediately sukppnaed, and come on from
Maine, and when here they all swear that the
witness for the prosecution did say something
which was inconsistent with the testimony he
gave. These three persons return to their
homes, and afterwards the counsel for the
pro efution discover that they have said after
going home taat they all had falsfied their les
tinony. Theynust all then be recalled to be
questioned ontthe subject before they can be
thus discredited, and they are brought back to
be recross-exanned by the prosecution, ana
with them the prosecution summon at least
Two more witnesses to dlscredIt each one Of
them; and SO the matter should go On, each re-
call necessarily involving q multiplication of
witnesses, going forward in geometrcal pro-
gression. Can any human being tell when
the case would end The only solution of the
qnestion-the only termination of the case
rors trying him. But for the intervention OF
death. it would be difficult to say which of TIVE
events would first happen, the ead of this
trial or the retu-n Of the children to the Holy
iCity-their ancient Jerusalem,
1t lis Just because all trials must have an end
In some reasonable time, and because wit
nesses must have some protection from un-
ending annoyance and inconvenience and
sacrifice, and because jurors and Judges are
moi expected TO spend generation in trying
any canse, no matter how important; and be-
icanse facilities are NOT to be afforded 10 have
witnesses hunted down and wrongfully robbed
of their fair standing IN community-their
reputation attacked without a chance for de.
Tending them; that the rule OF law, as have
heretofore ruled it, was established in Eng
dand many generations since and accepted as
the law everywhere in this country, where the
law is rightly understood Z. =
Lord CranWorth, (then Baron Rolfe,) in the
case OF the Attorney General VS.. Hitchcock,
Ex., so, very properly remarked in reference
to the law Of evidaace on this subject that it
-"nust be considered as founded on q sort Of
comparative consideration of the time TO be
occupied in EXAMINATIONS of this nature and
the time which 1t Is practicable TO bestew upon
them. If we lived for q thousand years in.
steaa OF about sixty or seventy, and every
case; were of sufficient importance, il might
be desirable to throw light on matters in
whic1 every possible question might be sug u
gested for the purpose of seeing by such means
whether the whole ives 1unfounded or what
portion OF il was not, a:ao to raise every pos
sible ing nry as to the ruth of the statements
made. But do not see how that could be: in
fact, mankind find IL i'm pessible." Il am. how.
ever, very doubtful il has Lordship's limlta-
ton of q thousand years As human lifetime
would be q SUN eient period In which to con.
eluda acase Of great magnitade and extensive
fami6 cations if we once throw aside the rules
Of evidence and embark on q wild ocean of
inquiry, ana raise every pessible question as i
to the truth or statements m ade by witness. o. 1
The ruie fos conducting the examinations Of
witnesses Is, as have before stated 1t to be 80
lsr. The party desiring the tesIimony of the
witneas calls aim, and after he Is sworn exam,
ines him in chief putting no leading q uestions
TO him except II shail be manifest TO the court
that he ts an M willing witness, or unless IT.
al fault and may be set right by suggestive
question; or when the mind OF inc witness
cannot be directed TO the subject matter of
N -