Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-11-12

| Ing some things in the publication calcu-
| lated to place him in false position.
Fzndy JOhnsOn's Reply to Judge Holt.
Ex-President johnson has addressed a
| communication to the Washington ChrOni-
| Gle in reply to that of Judge Holt, pub
| lished in the same paper in August last, on
| the subject of the execution of Mrs. Sur
raft as one of the assassins of President
Lincoln. After reviewing the evidence adj
| duced by Judge Holt, johnson says, in his
search for testimony, that Holt succeeded
| in discovering only one witness who said
he saw the record of the case, with the
petition attached, in the Presidents Office.
| This witness is Hon. James Speed,
then Attorney General, who is
undoubtedly mistaken in his state
ments, for as already shown the find
ings and sentences of the court were sub
mitted on the 9TH of July, he and l being
alone, and were then and there approved by
| the Executive and taken by the Judge Ad-
vocate General TO the War Department,
where ON the same afternoon the order to
carry them into effect was issued. Mr..
| Speed doubtless saw the record, but it must
have been in the Department of War, and
not in the Executive Office. The record Of
| the court was submitted to me by Judge
Holt in the afternoon of the fifth
| day of July, 1866. Instead of entering the
Executive Mansion in the usual way, he
gained admission by the private or family
entrance to the Executive Office. The eX-
| animation of the papers took place in the
library and he and were alone present.
Sentences of the court in the cases of Har-
| old, Atzerott and Payne were considered in
the order named and then the case of Mrs.
SuITatt. In acting upon her case no
| recommendation for a Communication of her
| punishment was mentioned or submitted
| to me, but the question of her sex which
has already been adverted to and discussed
| by the newspaper columns, presented itself,
and was commented upon both by Judge
| Holt and myself with peculiar force and
solemnity. He urged the fact that the
| criminal was a woman was in itself no eX
cuse or palliation; that when woman I'M
seXed herself and entered the arena of
| crime, it was rather an aggavation than a
| mitigation of offense; that the law was not
made to punish men only, but all, without
regard TO sex. who violated its pro-
visions; that to discriminate in favor
of Mrs. SuITatt and against Harold,
Atzerot and Payne, who were sentenced by
the same court and at the same time to
suffer the penalty of death, would be to Of
| fer premium to the female sex to engage
in crime, and bride the principal actors in
its commission; THAT since the rebellion
| began in some portions of the country,
| females had been prominent in aiding and
abetting traitors, and he thought the time
had come when it was absolutely neces-
SaTy in case so clearly and conclusively
established, to set an example which would
s.,l l. a
only in favor of the approval of the
sentence, but its execution at the
earliest practicable day. Upon the
termination Ofour consultation, Judge Holt
wrote the order approving the sentence Of
the court, | affixed my name to it, and roll
ing up the papers he took his leave, carry
ing the record with him and departing as
he had come, through the family or private
entrance. From the above statement it
| will be noted, the papers were not submit
ted in the usual way by the Secretary of
War, but brought to the President by the
Judge Advocate General, under, of course,
the instructions of Mr.. Stanton. This,
doubtless, was done to save time and
hasten the execution, and evinces
the spirit which animated Judge Holt
during the entire proceedings. Who
Ndli bOtA'b llldJ IL iilo liltlO VI
Judge Bingham had been attached to a pc
titiOn signed by five members of the Court,
and the prayer had been brought to the at
tention of the President, such an applica-
ton would have been duly weighed by the
Executive before final action in the prem
| iSeS.
Mr.. johnson says, in conclusion, it being
absolutely certain, if the petition was at
tached to the original record before it was
submitted to the President, it is not to be
| found in the printed record authorized by
Judge Hall and certified to by Col. Burnett,
special Judge Advocate of the commission,
the question arises which of the two is
authentic and genuine? If the record in
possession of the Judge Advocate General
is true then that is false which he has
given to the public. If, on the other hand,
the record published with his official sane
ton is true, then that in his bureau
is false necessarily.
Judge Holt is at liberty to accept either
alternative, and to escape as he may the
inevitable conclusion that he did not only
fail to submit the petition to the President,
but suppressed and withheld it from the
official history Of the most important trial
| in the annals of the nation.