Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1868-09-25
Trial Of John H. Surratt.
FIRST DAY.

Trial Of John H. Surratt.
FIRST DAY.
WAsH1NGToN, Sept. 21.-The case of Sur
ratt was called this morning before Judge
Wylie, in the Criminal Court. The counsel
On both sides appeared as before. The Dis
trct Attorney announced his readiness to
proceed with the conspiracy indictment, hav-
ing decided to enter motion for nolle prose-
qui in the murder indictment. He filed a
letter from the Attorney General, approving
this course The motion for nolle prosequs
was entered, and the case was then called on
the conspiracy indictment.
The defence expressed their surprise, as
they had come prepared to try the murder
Indictment. They asked postponement until
to make special plea.
The Judge assented to postponement of
the case until tomorrow.
SECOND DAY.
Sept. 22.-When the Court convened this
morning the defence. having withdrawn the
plea of not guilty, entered special plea,
pleading the Amnesty Proclamation of July
4th, 1868. The proclamation is made part
of the plea, which closes with the following
language: s.and the said John H. Surratt, in
fact, further saith he is not under presentment
in any court of the United States having
competent jurisdiction, upon a charge of trea-
son or any other felony. By reason of which
said proclamation the said John H. Surratt
prays the Court here he may be discharged
from the said premises on the said indictment
specified"
To this special plea the prosecution demur:
Gent in law, because the proclamation there
in set forth, bearing date July 4th, 1868, ex-
cepts therefrom such person or persons as may
be under presentment or indictment in any
court of the United States having competent
upon charge Of treason or other
felony; and because said plea does not show
that said defendant was not under indictment
or presentment as aforesaid at the time said
proclamation was made: and because the
proclamation set forth 10 said plea does not
apply to or affect the offence and offences
charged and set forth in said Indictment and
because the same is in other respects INSULT
Gent, informal and of no effect in law"
The plea and demurrer having been filed,
the issue was joined, and it being clear that
the argument would consume the entire day,
the jury was discharged until tomorrow
morning, and the argument was entered into.
The points upon which the whole question
turned we're: First, whether the accused be-
longed to class especially excepted as being
under indictment. Second, whether the pri-
soner at the bar, being under indictment for
murder at the date of the issuance of the AM
nesty Proclamation, is excluded from the ben
efts of the same. Third, whether the defen-
dant must, in his plea, state specifically that
he is not within the excepted classes mention
ed in the proclamation. Fourth, do the
words "other felony" in the proclamation re-
fer to all felonies or to those only connected
with the rebellion? Fifth, did the President
intend pardon to all persons not in the excep-
ted classes, or only to those who actually COM
mitted treason, or who went over to and uni
ted with the enemies of the United States p
Sixth, are the offences charged in the pend
ing indictment felonies in legal contempla-
ton !?
These points were not argued in the order
named, but were all embraced in the issue
They involved incidentally other questions,
such as whether the plea of the accused that
he is not under indictment now, does not by
implication convey the admission on his part
that be was under indictment at the date of
the Amnesty Proclamation. The whole ques-
ton is one of great importance to very large
class of people, involving as it does the first
judicial construction and Interpretation of the
of July 4th, for this is the first
instance in which it has been pleaded in a
court of justice. The Interpretation here
given must stand as the correct Interpretation
until reversed by a higher judicial authority,
and the decision will 60 far to aid in deter
mining in other courts exactly what class of
individuals are entitled to be benefited under
the proclamation. The counsel on both sides
seemed fully impressed with the responsible
ty of the case, and hence the arguments, so
far as they went, were very elaborate and ex-
haustive; aud were withal unusually interest
ing, because the lawyers say they cannot find
a parallel case in any of the books. District
Attorney Darlington led off in the discussion,
and was followed by Messrs. Bradley and
Merrick for the defence Pending the speech
Of the latter the court adjourned until to-mor-
row morning. The discussion and the deliv-
cry of the opinion of the Court will probably
occupy all the time of the Court tomorrow
Cor. Bait. Sun.
THIRD DAY.
:. Sept. 2S.-Upon the reopening Of the Court
this morning, Mr.. Merrck resumed his argu-
ment in support Of his special plea, and was
followed by Mr. Riddle in favor of the de-
nurrer. In deciding the question, Judge
Wvlie. in Substance. nraintainad that the Of