New-York tribune., 1867-07-26

operation, he Nfr Bradey could not what that was
Intended to rebut Rebutting evidence wac such eyi
evidence would not be admitted IN the Testimony In
chief Tho accused is here TO answer tho charge Of ur
mHrder could be proven herc and yet 1t is attempted 70
show show that snrratt, was engaged IN conspr-
the telegraph Office open in order 70 SHOW
c0Innmumcatl0n between Einhra and Washington, alof
fix surratts presence here the lath OF April and de-
bring surTatt here from Pmiro on The 1s ar6
matter of mpOssibility TO have Brought lnllore
and he fr Bradley was willing now 10 submit this cass
without offering any surebutting proof But It was.to
show that SuTratt here, thatb Telegraph be-
used: and this he argued was plainly legtmate Both
gentlemen the prosecutonsay tat April 3surrats
In Emira aidHf he there they were bound
Of that day 1t must be f1iy shown that the prisaaSr
here, or that he within reasonable distance Snd
given evidence to show ta Che prisoner could not nave
got here and they cannot now offer evidence in robua
for it part OF their argued that the prsoners
presence here should be proven they failed TO an
chief they cannot prove the fact now. Watevcztsa
rmation of the original case cannot be given aseydenca
Mr. ficrrepont roso 70 reply
Mr.. McrFG said he believed the defense hadthe closa
OF this argument.
Mr., PisTepont said he did net propose to make a
speech They had expected to prove that suIratt was in
Rew-York on Arh l5 theyYere going 10 prove that by
pext train, but challenge thrown out by Che de-
tense to close the case the prosecution accepted the
1f. Br0dte3, sr-we agree Sir We are now willing TO
submit the case without argument The case solosed
n.
sired TO make statement III yindeaon OF MF IS. B.
Magic II was necessary to supply gnGs ier Che wit
10 honor Mr. Nagle's draft on him.
Mr.. Anrrick-We wall now submit The case without
Mr. Carrington said that in of SO much import
ance, lie could not consent to such q course.
Judge Fisher asked what became OF the point about
which there had been 50 much argument9
Mr.. Merrick said it went over with all tho rest of the
Judge Fisher said it was point ofsome importance.
and ntmaed that he was not now prepared 10 decdoie
Mir. Mcrrck asked what Tnlc prevailed as 70 the
speeches, and whether each side was entitled TO two
speeches.
Nj MerPic then asked whether, IL tho defense docned
toargue the question to teury the speech OF one OF the
gentlemen on the other side would not close the'caset
Mr. CATipgton said as TINS was case Oh gIei inp0ts, pot
t4nce dd had occupied some tlloe, tue counsel Wooo
Alter som6 further discussion Mr. Merrick said that the
agreement would be withdrawn unless tho case was con
sdorOd estiIeiy closed. Their proposition had been 70
submt the without further argument ana lct II so u
Nj Plorrcpont said he had not so understood 1t; he
understood the evidence only was closed. 80
It then appeared that counsel bad misunderstood the
agreement and the case was reopened ana the CAdlha-
Judge Fisher said he would decide upon the points
Bs Ro5eyf, s,SSp, ard cg,ni,ed by Mr. Pie,repont-wss
In Elmra in June, 1866; Mr. Joseph Carroll aftaor,
he saw suTatt Carroll did not say he could not
Identify the prisoner; thero was ne converse
Afert was in NewYOrl, and that was the way he
he got at Surats presence there; don't think Lie made
JOHN d. Browlng strorn and eramined by I1 Pierre
pOntAm clerk ia the office OF the ComnlsslonerGe
efal of Prisoners
CuesfioH-Do you know If any Confederate prisoners
were confined at Elmira on April II, 1865
Mr. Bradley objected, was not expressive TO any
thing brought out by the defense.
Mr. PcrIepOnt said il for the purpose OF showing
that there were then there 5000 odd prisoners.
Judge Fisher could what this was in reply 70,
unless to the testimony of Gen Lee which was ruled ont
by tine Court.
The objection was sustained.
number OF witnesses were here introduced. and testt
fed that John Lees reputation for veraeity was unques'
toned.
O'Clock tomorrow.