New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-07-20
THE TRIAL OF SURRATT.
THE EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENSE NOT FIN
ISIIED.

THE EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENSE NOT FIN
IsIED.
7 TO THE TRrSrSN
WASHINGTON. July 19-The trial of John ii.
suratt was resumed this morning in the Criminal Court
Judge Fisher presiding. Mr. Bradley said that one
or two witnesses instead Of coming themselves mad sent
certified copies Of timetables, showing that in April
1865, train on the New-YOrk Central Railroad left
Albany at a. IN, and reached syracuse at 100 p m
The train left Syracuse at $780, and arrived at Canaan
Mp Pierrcnont agreed that the timetables should be
admitted i'm evidence but he wOud not agree thab the
trains actually run at the time specified in the absence
Mr. Merrek said that before going further in the
be desired 10 call the attention OF ne Cot 70 an author
mission of the Webster House register at Canandagna
He then referred to decision In 18th Howards " s
by defendant admitted in evidence To SHOW where
the defendant was on a day stated - -,
Judge Fisher did not deem the cases analogous Let
ters we're never admitted unless they bore postmark
and the fact Of mailing the letter was evidence Oh ns
presence Of the party at te place OF TIN Webster House
register 1t will be remembered, was ruled out because
there proof that IL was actually written upon INC
day indicated upon the face Of the register. 81
The examination of witnesses proceeded very SLOW hs
morning and 1T IL o'clock Judge Fsher suSseseu 'h'O
the counsel proceed with the trial.
Mr. Bradley said that OF the witnesses walted TOT
terda the principal one was Father Que e
Since the Court adjourned yesterday the delehse nnI
witness for whom they had been looking The gentle
man referred 70 was man of responsibility and charac
fer and the defense expected to prove by him that Sur
raft was at the Brainerd House, Emra on April H. 1863
As the witness arrived from NeW-1OIk Whtte h
lad been teegraphed for and Mr. Boucher was examined
the defense would close under the ruling OF the Court
Much evidence that the defense proposed 10 onef was
Mr. Merrick said that the time had now arrived when
all original evidence IN and the prosecution cOud
not now offer rebuttal any evidence which might nave
been offered I'm chief and lie would therefore move
the Court TO strike from the record some evidence tlat
did not appear 10 be connected WITH me case AZ issue
fluf
to the alleged murder OF Union soldiers escaping from
Rebel prisons. and TO the Due letter He moved that
Mr. PierrepOnt said he would not discuss the CUES
ton Of striking out this testimony. as there were matters
that would vet be connected lie could not agree with
Mr. Merrck 20 what could be admitted in evidence IN
rebuta The defense attempted To prove that SuIatt
Emra, and II would be proper for the prosecution
offer original evidence to show that he was not tete
The prosecution had shown Srratt was at the theater
the night Of the murder, but 1t was not absolutely
necessary TO show that fact.
Mr. Merrick argued that it was necessary to show sur
rats presence the theaer and proceeding 10 ds'
cuss that point when Mr. Darlington suggested that the
only question before the Court was as to the elimination
Of certain testimony He thought the matters asked 70
he stricken out had been connected. hut no doubted
whether This the proper time to discuss that
1t best to wait until al the evidence was ~ When
IL discussed he would show that the proper connec-
ton had been made. IN, NIL,
Witness testified that he had very large experience IN
examining and c3mpaihs IAN
10 AtzerOdt, was in the same handwriting as the letter
written TO Weichman by AzcTOdt: did not think Booths
4
writing 1911. ~,
CrosS-ern,ninsd Ly Mr. PerrepOnt-Wtness did not
think the Seby letter written III natural hand; NC
did not profess to be an expert, nor had be aue ~
practce TO compare handwriting his experience han
| been more in the way OF the decypnerng OF hand
writing ,-,-,-
Mr. PrrrepOnt asked that the testimony he stricken
out as the witness did not profess tobe an expert
Judge Fisher ruled the testimony out
Mr. Bradley suggested that the prosecution go on win
fhe understanding that the defense be allowed TO put IN
the evidence OF the witnesses they shall arrive In
| given time. $500 - ,, =,
but would I've agreeable TO the Court II the prosecution
had no objection. II matter, however, Tor the
| counsel TO decide between themselves.
Mr. Darlington said the prosecution would certainly
have 10 hold the defense the rule they bad ap
piled 10 the United states in this case similar pr0po
son had been made by the prosecution az another stage
OF the which the cefense hau refused, anu they
! must now abide by it, 4,
The Court SAID that the defense must close their testi
mOny IL the Court had 10 sit by candle light This wa
the fifth sixth week of the trial. and there was grea
| deal OF delay -, -.
MIR Merrck desired to know what decision the Court
Judge Fisher said nc would hold the matter over ana
the meantime he would review the question, and II no
! connecting the prisoner, would rule II out.
Mr. Merrck said he thought the question ought 10 On
dposed of before the final argument OF the sg
geste9 by the gentleman the other side They nae
made many statements about this magical chalp OK eN
dence but he could not IT, though lac had heard
| Tatlc very often.
MI PierrcpOnt said 10 was only an ordinary iron chan
! tina all there was In IL.
! Mr.. Byddey-Ies but there are several Inks 10 u
! forged To IL yet.
AZ ii:iO a. M the Court took a until tomorrow
| morning. at 10 o'clock.