Year: 1865

found IN his room were not the weapons
which he habitualy carried-but nothing
has been brought forward to sustain the IN
ference that they belonged to another or the
conspirators 1t has been proved that At
zerott is a coward. and another fact against
him is that he does not deny he was one of
the conspiraJors. having repeatedly sought
to be put Oh lae witnesses stand Tor the
government. :,


The defense of O'Laughlin viii n ell
probability prove successful. The testimony
which indicted him as the intruder at Secrs-
tary Stanton house on the night OF April
l4th. has been contradicted by an abb so
complete and impregnabe that probably the
Judge Advocate will acknowledge Its unde-
niable force IN his summing up. and aoan-
don this part of the case. . LaughlIn
came 70 Washington on Thursday, April Is,
with party of Baltimore friends, on an or
dnary convivial excursion. 1t is not provet
that he saw Booth during the time his
whereabouts every moment OF the night OF
the murder is accounted for, anG the balance
OF probability Is decidedly in favor of his
knowing nothing of tae assassination until
the shot was fired. O'Laughlin did not de-
ny his participation in the plot to kidnap the
President, in which Booth ideas first took
form. He was intimate with Booth from
childhood, the boys having been neighbors
ana SctlDOlIllaIeS III liz SafS
himself up willingly to the officers who came
in search of him a day after the murder.


Edward Spangler, the scene -shlfter at
Ford's theatre, has made a vigorous defense.
The defense has proved satisfactorily that
Spangler did not, as alleged, hold the door
open for Booths fight and close 1t in the
face of the pursuer; that the Forcing open
OF the locks on the doors of the private box
es at Ford 5 theatre was done Innocently,
some time before the murder; that the pas
sage way behind the scene was always kept
clear by rule of the establishment; that
Booth repeatedly during the winter hired
and himself occupied the box in which he
killed the President. and that glmbletw was
found in his valise with which he might
have bored the whole through the door;
that the rope found in Spangler's possession
might have been used in his favorite amuse-
ment of crab fishing, or in his business at
the theatre; and that Spangler himself Il
known as a good-natured, kind, willing,
hard drinking fellow, employed occasionally
by Booth as a sort of hostler and errand
runner, but not the man to be trusted with
great deeds for good or evil.


The counsel for Samuel Arnold has been
content to accept his case as the prosecution
left it, and very few witnesses have been
brought forward for his defense. The pris-
oner does not deny that he was partner IN
Booths conspiracy up to the 9th March;
the government docs not claim that he had
ANYTHING to do with 1t after that date. The
question for the court to consider Is merely
the proper sentence to be awarded TO his
precise measure OF guilt.


The case of DR. Mudd is the most COM
plica ted of ALL He has proved that the har-
boring at his house persons IN rebel uniform
was in 1861, when all Maryland was IN Ter
ment, not in 1861, and that John Surratt
was not among them that ne did not say
early in March that the President. Cabinet
and all the Union men IN Maryland would
be killed within six-weeks; that he did not
visit Booth In Washington on the Sd Of
March, or Mrs. Surratt during the winter.
All these assertions, although positively
sworn TO by witnesses for the prosecution,
NAV be regarded as effectually disapproYed.
In regard TO Booth visit at Bryantown IN
November, the defense has proved that ne
professed TO be looking at investments in
land, brought regular letters Of introduction,
and was introduced TO DIR. Aludd In the most
natural nj casual manner. The statement
of Weichman, that Mudd and Booth were
In conference in Washington, In January, IS
the main point about which doubt clusters.
1t cannot be considered as disproved, nor
can we reconcile with It's truth the positive
testimony that the Doctor was not away
from his home In January The register Of
the Pennsylvania House, where, according to
Weichman story. Mudd was staying at tho
time, does not contain his name, and Is thus
negative evidence in his favor. It seems
not impossible that Weichman's memory
is at fault, and that the interview took place
during Mudd' visit on the 23d of Decem-
ber-although his time even then appears
fully accounted for. \ great point in the
Doctors favor is made by the evidence of
several Witnesses that he spoke on Sunday
of the presence OF two suspicious persons
at his house OF the previous day, urged the
raising of a home guard TO scour the coun-
try. and himself conveyed to the authorities
the first information they obtained as to
Booths flight and the impo. tant fact of his
fractured limb.


a RICH petroleum worker, gaunt as a