The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-09-28
THE DAILY NEWS.
THE SURRAFT CASE.

THE SUHhAxI OASGs
rFy END OF THE TRIAI-PLEADNas UNDER THE
STATUTE OF OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES OF coUN-
sEr-F1NAL DECISION OF JUDGE wYLrE-pIs-
CHARGE OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OF An
OTHER INDICTMENT.
: The Washington correspondent Of the Balti-
more Sun, writing on the 24th instant, gives
the following account of the close of the famous
s,irrast trial, already reported by telegraph:
The curratt case took an unexpected turn TO-
div, which resulted finally in the discharge OF
The accused. When the court aoJoufnea yes,
terday siernoon the tSanoS ease + was " well
dsrstood that Judge Wylie would, IN the e3er-
ciaa of a mercrful judicial discretion, .glve the
Safenca en- opoI tunity to 60 to trial OF the gem
e.si ;ssne under plea of "not guilty." before
finally entering Judgment that would otherwise
have followed the sustaining OF the demurrer
to the special plea. But the public evidently
attendance was therefore larger than 1t had
been during the week.
When court opened Judge Wyie gave the
counsel for the accused an opportunity to enter
q ples Of not guilty, and go to trial. Mr. Mer-
rick on behalf Of the accused, declined the
profer, and rested the issue upon tne oemnr aa
rer of the prosecution to the special plea, and
plead the statute OF limitations. 1t is we'll
Settled legal principle that q demurrer to Q
plea virtually sets up that the pleadlngs are all
-eerreet. at every stage of the case. Ii, there
fore. there is any defect at any stage, tnoush
&c be at the very commencement OF the SUIT,
and such defect can be shown, the entire pro-
.oeedines are ritiated. Mr.. Merrick, therefore,
rested his case upon the 107th section of the
act Of April 3Oth, 1880, which is as follows:
= l.:,sNo person or persons shall be prosecuted,
tried or punished for treason, or other capital
offence aforesad twilful murder or forgery ex-
.cepted j. unless the indictment for the same
shall be teund tbyzE grand jury within three
{ years next after the treason or capital offence
aforesaid shall be done OF committed; nor shall
ANY person be- prosecuted, tried or punished
fur any offence not capital, nor TOR any tne or
forfeiture under any penal statute, unless the
Indictment or information Tor the same shall
be found OF instituted within two years from
the time Of committing the offence, or reoeiv-
inc the fine or forfeiture aforesaid; provided
that nothing herein contained shall extend to
I Eafiy person or persons fleeing from justice"
= fins turn or affsirs took the prosecution
scofnpiesaly by surprise, and the proposition
was fully ar9ued on both sides, and legal deci-
sions wers quoted. 60. < ~ a. !,
u
case, said that In thee1ercise OF mercy he had
mot er5ered final judgment upon the demurrer,
because in that event there was nothing left to
do except TO pass sentence on the prisoner.
Trfis point IN relation to the statute OF hmita.
tions, to which the attention OF the court had
now been called for the first time, was one OF
cSTeat importance in deciding upon the demur-
,Tar. The indictment in this case contains i've
ieveraL counts, and the offences; charged there
lin are alleged TO have been committed in the
,1nonths of &arch and April, 1855. To this
indictment the accused entered the reueraI
plea Of not guilty IN. June, 1855, and that pea
remained Of record until this adjourned term
counsel asked leave to withdraw the general
plea Of not guilty, and to enter, as q special
plea. tha amnesty proclamation Of the Presl-
dent. The court considered that the accused
had never before had the opportunity Of plead
ing the pardon, and therefore gave permls-
mon for the Withdrawal Of one plea and the
,aptering OF another. The government demur- Sa
cause OF substantial defect, and not be-
toause Of sn informahty. Now another ground
of objection is presented, that the Indictment
was found two years after the offences charged
had been committed.
Indictment in charging the crime makes
no ayermenbt that the accused was at any tune
a af1yitiye' from jus6ce.' That is fatal to the
argument Of the prosecution now made, that
the accused Wss q fugitive; unless it is found,
as had been slso argued, thatit was necessary
by rule of law to plead the benefit of the statute
ofhmitati Ins by special plea.
iJudee NWyhe then proceeded to show that the
latter argument was not good, and that it was
not NECESSARY to plead the statute by special
plea, He knew Of no court where that position
Of the government had ever been sustained.
He took it to be settled law that the defendant
might take advantage Of that statute by de-
murrer or any other form. In passing upon Q
question Of this character, Judge Wylle SAID
and it was not now too late for the defence to
tale advantage Of this statute. he was
strengthened in his decision blythe decision OF
Judge Holt in Gen. Dyer's case. In that case
Judge Holt declined to order committee OF
inquiry, although it was requested BY party
because the offence was barred by this
very statute Of limitations. In this case, as 1t
now stood, he was deciding upon the whole re- |
cord, and was constrained to say that judgment |
must be entered for the defendant, and that
ends the prosecution.
As soon as the decision was announced, DIS
trict Attorney Carlngton rose to address the |
court. but was interrupted by Mr.. Merrick,
who asked that the Judgment just given be en-
tered OF record, and that the prisoner be dis.
charged. That order was made, when Surratt
WAS Quietly congratulated by friends present,
and Immediately left the court room in COM |
pany with Mr.. j. II. Bradley, Jr., Wnlle Mr.
Merrick proceeded to gather up his books and
Tr. Darlington, after consultation with his
associate counsel, asked the Judge to certify |
his5 decision to. the Supreme Court in banc. |
Judge Wylie replied that he was not in the
habit Of certifying his decisions, and reminded
M. Darlington that he had right to appeal,
and could exercise that right.
Mr.. Carrington, who seemed to pc utterly
the court to renew Surratt's bail, stating that
las would frame an Indictment which would
meet an objections, by setting forth that Sur
ratt was fugitive from justice. He said that
the court should take this step upon the assur-
ance of the prosecutor that another indictment
would be framed.
Judge Wyiie declined, and replied. substan- |
tiafN, that Mr. Carrington could have the ac-
cuse5 realrested by making oath before ma |
glstfate in the proper way. This was but
special term Of court, and no grand jury was
in session.. When the grand jury met another
could be made if it was deemed
ADVISABLE The court had no JUDICIAL knowl-
edge whether Surratt was absent from the
country or not. so far as the court knew iu- |
dicially, and so far as it appeared upon the re-
cord as now made up, Surratt might have been
in this city all the time. The court has no night
to know anything Of the case except so far as
it appeared upon the record.
:. Mr. Darlington was about to say something
further when the Judge reminded him that
the case had been decided, and he ordered
the special term Of the court to be adjourntd