The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1873-11-22

eminent has replied tnat IL Is I'LL PRESS
ed with a sense of responsibility, and
has promised to show its disapproba-
ton of the proceedings. Feelings OF
sympathy and friendship for our gov
eminent are expressed.
It is quite evident that this affair is
not over. We will hear more OF it
hereafter.
The reader may not be familiar
with the controversy going on be-
tween ex-President Andrew johnson
and Judge Advocate General Joseph
Holt, but he can not have forgotten
the circumstances out of which the
quarrel grew. 1t was concerning the
responsibility for the execution of
Mrs. Surratt for completely in the con-
spiracy for the assassination of Pres
ident Lincoln. It is very evident
that public sentiments has somewhat
changed within the eight years that
have transpired since that sad TRACE
dy, and it is not calculated to add to
the popularity of any man to assert
that he was responsible for the hang
ing of this old woman, of whom it is
| now asserted that she was innocent
of the crime for which she suffered
death. But be that as it may, neither
johnson nor Holt display any pride
in having it to say they were connect
ed with the affair.
When the papers in the case of the
conspirators were made up to be sent
to President Johnson for his approval
they were accompanied by a MEM
orial signed by p majority of the Off
GERS composing the court recommend
ing Mrs. Surratt to executive clemen-
cy on account of her age and sex.
Some time after her execution it was
asserted by Johnson's enemies that
he had refused SO hear this petition,
whereupon certain of his friends claim
ed that it had never been presented
to him. This was virtually saying
that Judge Holt had withheld it.
A few months since Judge Holt
came out in very long letter, which
was published all over the country,
averring in the strongest and most
emphatic terms that he didin person
present this paper to President john
son at the same time that he submit
ted the record of the proceedings and
that he called Mr.. Johnson's especial
attention to the recommendation of
the officers of the court for clemency
in the case of Mrs. Surratt. He even
detailed the conversation which took
/ place when the matter was presented.
He brought also what circumstan-
tiaI evidence he could obtain to sup
port his assertion.
Mr.. johnson has for some time
been preparing his reply, and the day
before yesterday it was given to the
public in the columns of the DAILY
Chronicle of this city. I will not
weary my reader with the details OF
this letter. In tone it is gentlemanly;
| in fact, superior to that of Mr.. Hollis
communication. The gist of the
whole controversy is narrowed down
to question of veracity between
the two men. Mr.. Holt says he pre-
sented the paper in question to the
President. Mr.. johnson says he did
not. Either one or the other of the
gentlemen is mistaken, or one or the
other has lied about it.
| Near the conclusion of Mr.. John
sons letter a telling point is made.
He calls attention to the fact that this
recommendation by members of the
court does not appear in the publish
ed record of the proceedings of the
| trial and execution, although the re-
| port was published under the super
intendency of an officer of the Blu
reau of Military Justice, designated
by Judge Holt, and that this subordi-
nate has certified to it's authenticity
He inquiries why this important pa
| per was omitted, and asks if the
omission was owing toanything Judge
| Holt may have had to do with it.
Yesterday morning our eommu-
nifty was startled by the announce
ment that M. Bestor, member of the
firm of Riggs and Co., bankers, had