Year: 1865




the voice of the people inThose midst I am
living, viii not for moment, come from
whom it may, locate such sspersions on my
moral character: I am glad it is made
now, butt repeat, there is not one word Of
truth in the construction which has been
gwen 70 the opinion already referred
TO- l have it not BY me, but I remember
substantially what it is. The convention
to form Lew constitution for the State
was called under authority of an act Of the
Legislature Of Maryland, and under that
slOne. The proceedings were TO be sub
mitted to the legal voters of the State. The
convention thought they were authorized
to impose, not only on the authority %
vote, what was not imposed by the existing
constitution and laws, but that they had q
right to sdmit to vote those who were pro-
hibited from voting by such constitution
and laws; and I said, in company with
the whole bar throughout the Union, theS
to that extent they had usurped tb..s au-
thority under which alone they wers an
thOriEsd to meet, and that s.s for their pro
ceedings, they were , nullity. They had
prescribed an osisL, and my opinions said
or was INTENDED to say that to take that
oath voluntarily was no craven submission
to usutPed authority, butwas necessary in
order 20 enable the citizens 10 protect
their rights under their constitution,
and there was no harm in tsking
the oath which the convention had no au-
thority to impose. make il as no reilee-
tion upon any member Of this Court, when
say that upon questions of that deserip-
tion l am az least as able TO form a cor
rect opinion as the gentlemen around
this table. l am here at the instance Of that
lady, (pointing 70 Mrs. Surratt,) whom
nevers saw or heard of until yesterday, she
being Maryland lady, protesting her in
nocence- / am here, also, because I deem
it right and due to the character of the pro-
fession to which belong, and which is not
inferior TO that of which you are members,
that she should not go uadefsnded. I
was TO do it voluntarily, and without COM
pensation. The law prohibits me from re-
ceiving compensation, but if it had not, IN
derstanding her condition, I should not





ability to make compensation. am Volun-
teering to do what evidence will satisfy mo
in doing for this lady, who is now being
tried for her life. My detestatiOn Of one
concerned in this nefarious plot, carried out
with such iondish malice, is as great as that
of any member of this Court. lam not
here to protect any one after evidence is
heard and they are proved to be guilty
not even her. viii any honorable member
of this Court, who has thought it proper or
considered il hisdutY 70 make this objection.
or the President, who said if honorable
members had not made it, he should have
done so-wiu they understand that amnot
pleading here for anything personal TO my
self? 1 stand too firmly settled in my own
conviction Of honor, and in sense of duty,
public and private, to be alarmed at
any individual opinion that may be ex-
pressed here. I ask the Court 10 decide,
and have doubt they will decide, as seemE
best to them, and if it shall be such decis-
lou as the President of the Court feels in
clined to make, can take care OF myselfin
the iuture.


GENERAL HARRIS SPEAKS.


Brigsdisr General Harris said trust il
is not necessary should assure you, nor
the gentleman 70 whom feel it nay duty
TO object as counsel in this court, that 1
should desire above all things not to do in
justice to any man. Neither, hope, need I
assure you that in doing what feel it my
duty to do, I have not been influenced by
any personal considerations. Though 1
never had the pleasure of an acquaintanc0
with the gentleman TO whom I object, I
have known him long as an eminent public
man of eur country, Of whom I must say
that my Impressions have been of very
favorable character; but in regard to the
matter Of objection, if my recollection
serve me right, I must contend it is well
founded. II is due TO the gentleman that
should say l made this objection simply
from a recollection of this letter, which I
read perhaps nearly year ago, and Of the
effects of that letter upon the vote of that
State. Now, if I understand the remark Of
that gentleman in explanation of this
thing, can't say they remOVe the difficult
ty from my mind. At least I understood
him to say the doctrine he hsd taught the
people of fhis State, that because the conVen-
ton had proved and required taking the
oath as a qualification to the right of suf-
frage, which was unconstitutional and il
legal in his opinion, therefore it had
no moral binding force, aud that people
might take it and then go and vote without
any regard to the matter. If that does not
Justify my conclusion, I confess I am unable
to understand the English language. Now
does the gentleman understand Ia I re-
gard to his ability to decide alegsl question,
l do not intend to enter into a controversy
He remarked rather boastingly TO the Court
that he was as well able as any member Of
the Court TO judge of any legal point. But
this is not point Of law. 1t is a question Of
ethics, of morality, of the sanctity Of an oath
| voluntarily taken, which understand he
| thought his people might set aside, IS haV-
/ ing no force, bsesuse the convention had
trsnscended its authority and done some-
/ thing it had no right to do, and consequent
ly that they might voluntarily take this
oath, to entitle them 10 go and vote, with
| out cOnAluerlng II 70 n1fo any plnuAnB
force; and am much mistaken in the his
tory of those days, and in the effect Of that
opinion upon that State, if it was not 50
considered by a large number who cast
their suffrage under the ethical doctrine
taught 10 them by the gentleman against
whom have objected. But as I was about
to remark, would be sorry to do injustice
10 the gentleman, or any other man, and
having made my objections simply from
my recollection Of this letter, it is perhaps
due 10 the gentleman, and TO the members
Of this court, that the letter should be sub
mitted to the scrutiny of the court. may
be wrong, and, ifsO, none can be more ready
than myself TO acknowledge that fact.


ME. JoHSsoS's REPLY.


Mr.. johnson replied: do not intend y


make an extended reply 10 the gentleman'i


remarks Is to my bOssting about my com


potency to decide any legal question. Th'


peutlernan ia mistaken said 1 was q


competent as any of the members Of thi