The New York herald., 1867-07-19
Evidence Of Several Canadian
Advocates.
ALL GIVE ST. MARIE A BAD CHARACTER.
The Defence Unable to Close Unt.l
To-Day.

yersal,sus with him outside Of the confessional
O. Did ws,chman ever tell lou that he was in ONCE
In the War Department, and that he was sending In
formation TO the confederstesf
Mr. CarriBgton objected.
Mr. Merrick read wechman's testimony 10 show that
ths latter had said he gave such Information
ALLUDED 10 above TO Nv. Rockoiford.
Mr. Darlington argued that this testimony could not
be given a. IL went 70 collateral ISSUE and had
bsaros upon this ssne to show that weichnan had
given information 10 the South II the object was 10
prove that Wcichman sonspiratov facts must b
protucsd to chow the fact Of such completely.
Mr. Merick said object TO show that we,ch-
nplice and that he had tes''ded merely
for security II substantial fact and could
be proved because the tes mony OF aceompce II 10
be taken with great grains OF allowance. 1t was well
settled rule thai testimony OF accompce alone
wa, not suficont to secure 4 conviction
Mr. Carringon admitted that and said he had never
ask ed conviction on the uncorroboraed testimony Of
accomplce
Mr. Merrick contended that the testimony was then
mlsslble, for he expected 10 prove that Weichman
had told this witness the stand that he held his
position the War Department using for the
purpose Of conveying information 10 the rebels II was
certainly admissible TO show tine feelings Of Weichman
upon the subject
Tho Court said would be proper il the conederacy
was the principal in the conspiracy.
Mr. Merrick contended that the Court bad allowed
witnesses 70 be examined TO their sympathes, and
proper TO show where wechman's sympathics
were
The testimony was ruled out by the Court.
Rev. J. A. Walter sworn and examined by Mr.. Mer-
ck.I knew Mrs surratt. aud was her spiritual advi
ser; was present at Ars Surratrs execution
The witness was asked whether Ms. Surrat avowed
her innocence 10 him on the day Of the execution.
Mr. PerrepOnt objected.
Objection sustained and the defence noted an excep-
ton.
Q Did no, Payne tell you on the day he was being led
TO execution that Mrs Surratt was innoeeniS
Mr.. Pierrepont objected.
Objection sustained and the defence noted an excsp-
tom
John n Reove, srrnrn and nv ed nv Mr. R,adlev
Jr.-I reside In Montreal, Canada and q tailor by
occupation; know the prsouer; made Garibadi for
HIM IN 1865 the Garibadi Is plated garment plated
back and front, and has atm wristbands; it buttons
close up to the throat; have no doub, tat Surat 10
tho man Who bought the coat after The purchase Of the
coat Surrat at my store him before April 20,
1885, !. was between the 11th and 18th OF April; he
left his measure on the sh 9th Of April he after
wards to mo and said his coat too tight
and he wanted me 10 alter h; saw Surrat' at Father
La Perres where FIRST got acquainted with
him; then invited him to my house. and be staid
with me daya
By Mr. Bradlev-Hc stayed at my house two days
about Ave or six days after he got the garment; when
Snrrat left my honse went with him about thirteen
miles, 10 Long Po mt; Eve six days after sold him
the clothes be came to my house, and when he went
away with me Mr. Mteria went with us; saw Surrats
my do,r day two before he went 10 Europe; he
at my door tho two days Surrat at my house
was not possible for him TO have been absent ten
BY Mr.. Bradley, Jr-I know Mr.. 81, yarie; that is,
saw him there but did not know him personally.
q What 10 his character for truth and veracitys
Mr. Darlington objected, IS The proper founda ion hat
not been laid
wrness--l st. Marie In Montreal, and know hs
resid there because him; ho In tho bank Ut
MontreaI-the Montreal Bank.
BY the Corrt-St Marie was 10 q bank there about
am certain, OF my own knowledge, that 81 Mario aid
live 10 Montreal.
Mr. Perreponi objeetod that the proper foundation had
not been laid 10 ask the witness 10 St Mares char
acter.
Mr. Bradley said he would withdraw the question for
the present
Cross examined BY Mr. Pncrepout--I am tailor and
NY place Of business Is 10 Nors Dame srcet; saw
Surralt my shop April or o. 1885, when he came
10 get the clothes; saw him again about the 11ih Of
April; saw him afterwards st Father La Picrrcs but
cannot rscollsct the date II probably between
April ~ and 20 that Surrat: cannot mber the
day when Mr. Mi,lena Tor surrait: IL in April
lS65-the latter part OF April; this occasion Jeff
them at tavern at Long Points eit Sur nt there; be-
SIDES .he Ganbald jacket made panalocns Surratt
there we're four OF us went 70 Long Point.
BY Mr.. Bradley -Surratt came W me for n stick he
lett there before he went away and saw them there
sarsiieid d. Nasie sworn. and examined by Mr. Brad
lev Sr =: Reside at Montreal, and advocate: have
resided Montreal since 1859; know St Marie re-
sided In Montreal in 1885, 1850 and 1861 ST Marie
mere NJ vsS,len ors nna yc,,s 1esa .onege and
going 10 the University, and also when resided at
LenDoxve; had opportunities Of knowing McMnlan's
character at Lennoxve for truth and veracity; have
heard his character generally spoken Of on
report dcMilan's aracter WAS bad; from Ina general
reputation, should have doubts Of his truth der cath
II we're Interested myself.
ny Mr. Pierrepont-Have heard many persons speak
sf McMilsns character; have heard Antonio rrudeau
taking about The trial and about Surrats capture aud
Trudeau asked me II The Who made the cor,plapt
against sarralt the hcNilan who bad resided
IN waerloo was surprised that Mcmillan should have
denounced Suratt because looked upon In tho light
Of in.ormer while at college with Nc lillian never
heard his character esteemed took part In tho
late struggle; during the "Ircnr affair my sympshes
with Tho South during the struggle .ympathzed
more with the South than with tho Mr. do not know
that any charges were ever made against me IN Mon
trsa mover public prosecutor tiy rrusecator In
Montreal.
Bv Mr. Nerrick-I would not believe Mcmillan ifI
had ca-s I would not want him for q witness: AZ 4
Juror would no, believe him
LOUSY Sicotts swsrn, ant Colonel o'Berne sworn a.
interpreter for him.
ur Darlington objected TO Mr.. s,cos,s' testiryinx
The Court decided that the witness should first trv 10
speak Eoglsb and he could be understood then
tho interpreter could be used
The wtness-f reside In Montreal Canada: am an nd.
vccate BY profes ion; am nos employed In the Crown
Law Department. have resided IN Montreal since 1855;
kno~ Sc Marie since 1859 20 1902; know his repuia-
ton for truth and veracfy IL is very bad would not
bel eve him on his oath.
Gross eramned-T drst saw e. Marie when he wa,
Law student at Mr. Locna nbcsu's; have spoken with
him business, sud know msny OF hs friends ana ac
was in Ia Pierre last winter: II ~ 81
havc known him since his birth, and who spoke
very bsdly Of him; do not know that be
Tnl,ed states because he 70 obet IN. Eaues,Ian ce ~
niue hundred dollars heard that he had betrayed Sur
rais IN Rome; thcnght t was right FOR him 10 mako
the deposition that be did have feelings favor OF
surrsu and against ST. Marie; have said few words
against ST. Marie. which canno, explain 10 English
BY Mr. Brsdiey--I said ST. Marie was coward 40 he.
tray his frepd-thss was mean and uppriuc pied In
him
Dr. Ladder Ia Bell, sworu-I live In Montreal: I an
advocne have becr City Counsellor for iour years.
l know 81 Marie since eight years knew him in Mon
trca, made hs acquaintance in 1s5s; he lived thore
October ' isso Angus. Issa 'Iys' n iss ssacs, c
ton 0nice In Nonueai I knew the friends
he associated with; was then editor Of paper next
week In tho beginning he not known ss bad ssp