The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-07-17
THIRD EDITIO N
THE TRIAL OF JOHN H. SURRATT.


rait was resumed this morning in the Criminal Court
MT BIsdey T ussa-when the Court adjourned
yesIerosy pIoposiu9n vas made 70 10 rSa n G n
the conspiracy He admitted that the paper could nVt
show that Surratt was not in the conspiracy but II
was clearly admissible when offered by the defense;
when any evidence was oGe5ed e was fSS I,.1S i6S
jury TO determine the weight OF the evidence. IL
from TACT offered it must 90 70 tue jury IL Is
eHoeedinsly difficult TO ascertain whether any posi-
tive rule Of law the admissbility OF testt-
mony, and he had therefore hunted up no authorl.
upon the issue which the jury Is now trying, AID in
The sbsgnSe % Of any positive rule Of exclusion must
u is for the prosecution to show it. This
manufactured the proof but m is the declaration OF
the party made at the very act, aud II is as much
moment Of the transaction II Is the concerted plan,
signed by the actors Immediately preceding action
and they go from the table and commit the which
"a prosecution has shown aud proved The prosecu-
tense now desire 70 prove he agreement to execute
would suppose that the prisoner assisted in fabri-
ealing the proof -. ..-
coDBpirator to murder the Presldent9 aud the
other, whether he was an actor In the murder2 and
these totally distinct questions, The charge here
attempts to fix the prisoner engaging in the murder
question is, whether there conspiracy to kill,
and that Is the gist Of the inquiry here Who were
conspiracy is question for inquiry. Ordinarily,
is secret, ana IL Is TO he proved by Cr
cumstantal evidences for If It made public then
the conspiracy would be exploded,
was Conspiracy: they say they date the conspiracy
from 1893 until It's culmlnationl and they say that
was proved by Weichman's testimony It they have
spiracy he (Weichman) testihes to. had Terminated
and failed in March, 1885; after that time, they never
ness, and It Is therefore a question for the
became Of that conspiracy IN March. f6ey have
2Ierea TO prove that Surratt was here on Apri IA,
spracy. and the defense meet that by Offering the
agreement OF the consplrators and by showing that
secution has produced Booths diary to, show that
the defense then be precuded from offering the
agreement TO murder, In which the name of the
afy %So the deed
he ce sae reason
nd 0d G e NO rue 81 & Tny ISys Re
that elementary writers argued that crcumstantal
proof was better than positive proof but writer
b tier than positive written proof Here was
a contract that would never have oeen entered into
except by men VINE had lost their reason, madmen
parallel Il was not not Kept in their ana ID Sc @
offered tht mselv asactihce for what they deemed
tonsr could not participate aud i is due not only TO
the but to the ot6er thSt nave0s en-
be brought out, and this paper cannot be excluded
erethe prisoners own act it could not be offered n
evidence but L is the act OF the consprators to the
ni,ssibty Of this evidence is for the Court M The
pracy question for u&y How he he to spf
that he was not q conspirator except by the
inst conspiracy which was to abduct. cutminated on
6reught The parties together again and the effort
now is to fix The prisoner with another conspiracy,
Writing 10 this Writing he prisoner was uU1 not IA
failure Of hs n & ne ts
nglon and enter into another. Here is that other
pSry and he Sr Bradley, could see mo- rue n4 shat
Mr. Darlington said he did not deem it necessary
to say much against the admission Of this testimony
offer paper said to be copy one VIII CHI had been
written by one Booth who was not witness. IL was
destroy ed that and i was nOthipg but hearsay eyi
did not suppose for moment the court would enter
In regard to the unjust imputation cast upon honor
pie men, that the tried at the had
time and in the proper manner All who WE'RE c9
demned by the Military Commission met a deserved
eounty tSst saTra the
his Government, and who deserted his mother and by
| flight bad admitted his guilt
Mr.. Merrick, interrupting asked Mr.. Darlington
what authority he was questioning? He supposed
Mr Carrington said he understood these feeble at
tempts az wit II was to create laughter and the
clusion, Mr.. Darlington argued that the testimony
Judge Fisher ruled that the testimony was mad
mssi5e It might g have been the 70 very object OF the
| conspiracy by getting up this argument.
Mr.. Matthews was recalled and cross-examined by
| MIR. Pierrepont-Wttness was born in the United
States during the Rebellion the witness sympathized
with the Union side and preferred that the Rebellion
that time confidence in the Legislature. but had not
much confidence In it means of reunlting the
| country CA paper was exhibted,) Witness was ex-
amined by Colonel Porter, and the examn alton was
| taken down; at that examination witness did
not say anything about the letter. possibly he might
have said that the day witness saw Booth horse
back the last time witness him: witness ,esti.
| fed that Booth had had presented witness with q
box, but that several days before the interview
alluded TO- witness might have been asked when he
Booth, and might have replied, day or
| two before the assassination; witness saw
! Booth last the stage of the theatre
the night OF the assassination saw him last before
| that on horseback on the avenue; don't remember
that witness said on the examination alluded that
the last time he bad seen Booth day two be.
that he had Booth that day, he afraid he
| might become involved in the matter.
| The BROCK CAsR-HRARING BEFORE U. S.
| COMMISSIONERS SMTrH.-A further hearing was
| had to-day in the case OF Edward Brock, who
is charged with conniving at the execution of a
| false and fraudulent bond by which the pay
| ment OF the Internal Revenue tax or duty on
| distilled spirits should be evaded, and for the
! purpose of Withdrawing distilled spirits from a
| bonded warehouse.
| John Miller sworn--I am Revenue Agent, and have
| been since last August or September know defen-