Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1868-06-22
THE SURRATT CASE!
DISCHARGED ON FIRST INDICTMENT.
CASE POSTPONED.
PRISONER ADMITTED TO BAIL.

case OF John Il. Surratt was taken up.
At half-paat ten o'clock the prisoner was
brought into court, and took seat back OF his
counsel He looked very pale and thin, but
was calm and collected in manner.
After the adoption Of certain rules in regard
to persons to be admitted within the bar, the
Court asked Mr.. Darlington if he was ready to
proceed in the case of Surratt?
The District Attorney replied in the affirma-
tive. Cd
The oult-Arraign tie prisoner.
Mr.. Bradley-We wish to have the prisoner
tried under the first indictment, and not under
any subsequent Indictment.
The Court-That is not the question at pre-
sent. Let the prisoner plead.
The indictment, covering eighteen pages OF
law cap, was then read by the clerk, Mr.. Mid
dleton, the prisoner in the meanwhile standing
up.
At its conclusion Mr.. Middleton said, "What
say you, are you guilty or not guilty.
The prisoner replied firmly, ''Not guilty
There were present OF counsel for the prose
cution District Attorney Darlington and Assis-
tant District Attorney Wilson; and for the de-
fence Messrs. r. T. Merrick, j, Ell. Bradley,
jr., with j. Fl. Bradley, ST., asadVlsory counsel.
The counsel on both sides protested them
selves ready for trial.
Mr. Merrick said the prisoner was tried
nearly two years ago for murder, and nothing
further has been done in the matter until late
ly. The District Attorney week or two ago
agreed to try the case on the old Indictment
Since that indictment new one has been
found, Of which nothing was said when the
day for trial was fixed. The counsel for de-
fence came into court ready to try the case un-
der the first Indictment. If the Government
intended to try that Indictment let them do SO
or dismiss it. ...
Mr.. Carringtou said that two indictments
had been found by the grand jury, and they
had perfect right to find as many as to them
seemed suitable. He, as the attorney for the
Government, had the right to dictate the order
in which the Indictment should be tried. He
wished to 20 to trial on the second. The SC.
cond charged lesser crime than the first, and
the defence ought not to object.
Judge Wylie said the Court was disposed TO
allow the District Attorney to take up the in
dctments in the order he might elect. How
ever this second indictment was not found
when the day was fixed for trial; and, another
thing, he did not see why th. District Attor-
ney wished to try Surratt for lesser crime, if
he intended afterwards to try TO hang him on
another Indictment. ...
Mr. Darlington said he was not now ready to
90 to trial on the Indictment for murder. His
most important witness was absent. .
The Court remarked that if the prosecution
intended to try the prisoner for murder and
wero not ready now, it would be unjust to keep
him longer in JAIL The accused had already
had one trial before one of the best juries ever
impanneled, and he did not sec how he could
refuse the prisoners right to bail.
Mr.. Merrick said he wished either to have a
trial now, or that final disposition should be
made of the case. The prisoner had been tried
the prisoner had been to great expense in OBJ
tanning witnesses, and his incarceration had
been long and painful.
He did not wish to force trial when the
District Attorney was not ready, but he thought
the circumstances demanded that the case be
now finally disposed of. The admitting Of the
prisoner to bail would not do him justice. II
the prisoner was discharged under the first the
second would be hanging over his head. The
fact was that the second was framed to meet
the difficulties of the first. 1t was doubtful
whether the Government ever intended to try
Surratt again on the first Indictment. lie
hoped that the court would not permit a citi.
zen of the Republic to be hampered in such
network Of injustice-onc Indictment with q
trap open ready to catch him if the other
missed.
Mr.. Darlington again claimed that he had O
discretion as to which indictment should be
tried first ..:.4.
Mr. Merrick asked if the District Attorney
expected to get his witness here, and if he did
not know as much about his inability to 60 to
trial when the day was fixed as he did now.
The District Attorney made no reply.
The Court said thorc was n reason why the
first indictment should be tried first, for if a
man was hung he could not we'll be punis he'd
further, in this world at least.
Mr.. Merrick again asked Mr. Darlington to
state under his official oath and in writing the
reasons why he was unable to 60 to trial under
the first Indictment.
After short time spent in preparation
Mr.. Darlington presented a written statement
of the reasons why he was not ready to proceed
with the trial they being that he has reason to
believe that two Of the witnesses are secreting
themselves and avoiding service Of the process
of this court, and that one Or more persons are
now engaged in pursuit of them; that the