The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-07-22
THIRD EDITIO N
TRIAL or FJOHN II. SURRATT.

WASHINGTON, July 22-rhe trial Of John II. Sur
rat was resumed this morning In the Criminal Court
opened MIR, Merrick stated that Mr.. Queen, who was
Ill last week when summoned, WAS now Ia Court, ana
he asked that he be now examined The eXamina-
tion would occupy but few minutes.
Mr. Pierrepont said be would not object to the ex'
Rev. Charles Boucher was sworn and examined by
Mr.. Bradley-I reside In the parish OF 81 Hiliere,
Canada rector OF that parish; in 1865 resided In
the bar; saw him in April 1865 ST. Liooiss; about
the 22d OF Artil, 1860; ne was Ia Company with MI
prisoner remained at my house about three months;
after that he went to Montrea then saw him from from
time TO time until he left for BurOpe saw him twice
week until he lett for Europe. ,,,--
Question. DO you know that he received any intor-
maion from the United States with regard to ms
Mr. Perrepont objected
, Mr. Bradley. ST. said Il was stated In opening by
his mo her thus showing cowaTdice. The defense
desired to prove that he od not flee as coward that
It was proposed to show what he did when he ascer
tained his mothers condition. 49,, 49,, .
Mr.; Pierrepont said it was plain that The evidence
could not be admitted.
MIR. Wilson said ne had not referred Mrs. surratt
Mr.. @erricf contended that It was proper to show
this TO deny the statement OF counsel
MFR. Pierrepont asked ifthe prosecution was to show
that all was not so that had been stated by the ator
BY Mr.. Plerrepont-I recognize the gentleman by
positively that he was present at the time OF this
Il Tec0spze that mSa as D EEsspe & ne
the time of the quarrel there was some one with
tR Snf wS 10 the
house do not think any one was in my parlor at
carnot TecolIect whereabouts saw NJ NIillar after
this II is hard to recollec as shortly after le Shelf
fard: DR.. NcMillans general reputation was bad;
can mention some names OF men who would not be.
lieve him, and among them a SCOtchman named
McRae and Frenchman named Potur; another
name occurs to nv mind, that of Daniel McGl a
farmer of West Shefard cannot now recolect any
others.
ally because there was not auoher physicna at
WaterOO: / think DR.. ErSKine attended previ
Ously TO DR.. McMilan saw him pass by several
times he attended several families there In Shefard
1 knew Dr. Mcmillan; will not say he bore bad
character for ruth the first year knew him; Il was
about the year 1852 or 1858 that first heard OF Nc MIL
ans bad character for truth: after 1858 his reputation
did not go for the best left West Sheard because
was removed by my bishop; was removed for a bet
torment; some complaint was made to my bishop but
he never censured my conduct; he did not remove
me until asked for 1t on account OF my health.
was in Shetlard five years ana for four years
asked to he removed; said Mcmillan inSulted me-
it occurred in my house.
Question-Was DR.. Erskine present
MIR, Merrick said the witness had said no one was
in the parlor, although he recoected some one came
The question was admitted and the witness re.
sun ed do not recollect that Dr. Erskine pre-
sent when Mcmillan insulted we; never was In
blac guard aud mumbled some other thing, when !
took him by the collar he undertook to resist he did
me liar upon the subject we speaking of do
not remember having convel sation with MCMILLAN
in Dr. Erskines Oice in 1854 be the quarrel with
,al do not remember conversing with MCMILLAN in
Or. Erskine's office don't remember conversation
sCription; don't remember that Mcmillan spoke to
bout money due In DR. Erskines Office inv ater
loo: don't remember Mcmillan telling me that the
church would not trust the money TO me, and that
was the reason why he demanded the money; went
TO shettard from ST. Lboe Q, and e the latter plact
Wednesday evening April %. 1885: he ca n'
with Joseph Dutillew was In bed, but heard them
come IN chrE when surratt came he was not dis
| guised.