Conspiracy trial for the murder of the president
Yüklə 2,75 Mb.
|
[461] A. It has been good, I believe. Q. Do you know whether Mr. Thomas had information before the arrest of Dr. Mudd, of the reward offered for the arrest of the assassins and their accomplices? A. I think I saw him with an advertisement something to that effect. Q. When?
A. The Tuesday after the assassination of the President, as well as I recollect. Q. You saw him with an advertisement offering a reward for the assassins and their accomplices? A. I think so. Q. Where was that? A. At Mount Pleasant. Q. In what shape was the advertisement? What was it in? A. In a paper. Q. A handbill, or a newspaper? A. A handbill.
A. At Gallant Green, Charles County, Md. Q. Are you acquainted with Daniel J. Thomas, who has been one of the witnesses for the prosecution in this case? A. I am.
Q. How long have you known him? A. From childhood. Q. Do you know what his general reputation is, in the community in which he lives, for veracity? A. Very bad. Q. From your knowledge of his general reputation for veracity, would you believe him under oath? A. No, sir: I do not think I could. [462] Q. Has he been a loyal man throughout this war? A. I do not know any thing to the contrary as to his politics. Q. Do you know whether he was loyal in the beginning of the war? A. I do not. Q. What was his reputation as to that? A. His reputation was not very good, as far as I know, for any thing. Q. Are you acquainted with Dr. Samuel Mudd? A. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you known him? A. I have known him from childhood. Q. Do you know what his reputation has been as a citizen? A. Very good, as far as I have known: I have never known any thing against him. Q. Have you ever known of his being engaged in any way in aiding the Rebellion? A. No, sir. Q. Have you been a Union man throughout the war? A. Yes, sir. Frank Ward, a witness called for the accused, Samuel A. Mudd, being duly sworn, testified as follows:— By Mr. Ewing: Q. Where do you live? A. At Horse Head, Prince George’s County, Md. Q. Are you acquainted with Daniel J. Thomas, who has been one of the witnesses for the prosecution? A. I am.
Q. How long have you known him? A. I do not know exactly how long, but ever since I was a boy. Q. Are you acquainted with his general reputation, in the community in which he lives, for veracity? A. Yes, sir. Q. What is it?
Q. Has he been a loyal man throughout the war? A. He is first one thing, and then another, generally; sometimes Union, and sometimes disloyal. Q. Unstable as to his politics? A. He is sometimes one thing, and sometimes another. It is generally so understood. I cannot say positively. Q. Do you know whom he supported for the Presidency at the last election? A. I have understood that he voted for McClellan.
The Witness. I did not see him vote. I do not live in his county. Q. [By Mr. Ewing.] Have you been a loyal man through the war? A. I have tried to be so. By the Court: Q. Did you vote for McClellan? A. I did. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham: Q. Did you vote for Harris for Congress? A. I am not positive about that: I am not certain. Q. Is it doubtful? A. I do not recollect whether I voted for him or not. By the Court: Q. Did you not rejoice at the success of the rebels at the first battle of Bull Run? A. No: I did not do that. By Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett: Q. You said that Daniel J. Thomas’s reputation for truth was not very good: will you state to the Court the name of any person you heard speak of his veracity before this trial? A. I do not know any one particularly. It is a general thing. [464] Q. If it is a general thing, can you not give us some one of that general number, any man in that entire community, who, before this trial, said one word in reference to Mr. Thomas’s veracity? I want you to name a man. A. I think I have heard the Ormes speak about it. Q. When did you hear them say it? and what did you hear them say? A. I do not know particularly, exactly. Q. Did you hear them say any thing about his truth? A. I have never taken a minute of any thing of the kind. Q. Have you any recollection now of hearing them say any thing about it? A. No more than I have heard them talking in conversation; and they would say they would not believe him, or something like that. Q. Did you hear them say that before this trial? A. I do not know particularly about that. Q. We want you to state particularly what you know. Did you hear them say that, or not? A. I do not know that I heard them particularly. Q. If you did not hear them, whom did you hear say that? or did you hear any person say any thing about it before this trial? or is it only an opinion you have gathered from the rumors that come to that neighborhood, and the opposition that has been raised against him during this trial? A. I do not know any thing more than what I have generally heard. Q. You cannot name a man in that entire community that you heard say a word about his truth before this trial? No answer. Q. How far do you live from Mr. Thomas? A. About two miles. Q. You are unable to name a single man? A. I do not know of any particular person I can positively name. Q. You cannot say positively whom you have heard say any thing about it, so as to tell us who it was?
Q. You cannot state a man? A. I cannot state positively.
A. I have heard as much before as I have since. Q. Before the war? A. It has been several years. I do not know particularly whether it was before or since the war. Daniel W. Hawkins, a witness called for the accused, Samuel A. Mudd, being duly sworn, testified as follows:— By Mr. Ewing: Q. Where do you live? A. I live about four miles and a half from Bryantown, in Charles County. Q. Are you acquainted with Daniel J. Thomas, who has been a witness for the prosecution? A. I am very well acquainted with him. Q. How long have you known him? A. I have known him for about ten or fifteen years; a very long time. Q. Do you know what his general reputation is, in the community in which he lives, for veracity? A. His general reputation is not very good. Q. From your knowledge of his general reputation for veracity, would you believe him under oath? A. If I were a juror or a judge, I should think it very unsafe to convict on his evidence. I should have very serious doubts about his oath. Q. Are you acquainted with Dr. George Mudd? A. I am very well acquainted with him. Q. What is his reputation, in the community in which he lives, as a loyal man?
Q. What has been your attitude towards the Government during the war? A. I have been strictly loyal. Q. Have you been a supporter of the Government in its war measures? A. I have, from the very beginning. Q. State what your profession is. A. I am a lawyer.
A. Yes, sir; I was. Q. State whether or not you were present at the time the arrest of Payne was made at Mrs. Surratt’s house that evening. A. Yes, sir; I was. Q. You had seen Payne at Mrs. Surratt’s house under the name of Wood, had you not? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you recognize him at that time as being the person whom you had seen there before? A. I did not recognize him until we were taken to General Augur’s office. Then I recognized him when the skull-cap was removed from his head. Q. I understand you to state that you did not recognize him at the house? A. No, sir; I did not recognize him. I was sitting on the sofa at the time he came in. Q. You did not recognize him at General Augur’s office until the shirt-sleeve had been removed from his head? A. No, sir. Q. State to the Court whether or not you have been obliged, even in the daytime, to thread a needle for Mrs. Surratt?
Q. Was that because she could not see to do it herself? A. Yes, sir. Q. You have never known her to read or sew by gaslight? A. No, sir: I have never seen her read or sew by gaslight.
A. Yes, sir: I got acquainted with him, after I was arrested, at Carroll Prison. Q. Did you ever see him before? A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever see or hear of his being at Mrs. Surratt’s house during your stay? A. No, sir: I never heard his name mentioned, nor heard of his being at the house. Cross-examined by Assistant Judge Advocate Burnett: Q. When you went up to General Augur’s headquarters, were you all taken there together,—you, Mrs. Surratt, and Miss Surratt? A. Yes, sir: Mrs. Surratt; and Miss Surratt, and her niece and myself, were taken to the office. Q. Did you all remain together in one room then at General Augur’s headquarters? A. No, sir: Mrs. Surratt was taken into the other room. Q. Was Payne in the room where you were, or where Mrs. Surratt was? A. He was down there behind the railing. Only Miss Surratt, and her niece, Miss Jenkins, and myself were in the room. Q. Were Mrs. Surratt, her daughter, and yourself in the room
A. Only the time that Miss Surratt gave way to her feelings about her brother. Then Mrs. Surratt came in. Q. Was not that giving way to her feelings about her brother at the time some one suggested that this man Payne was John H. Surratt? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did not she and her mother then exclaim, at that time, that they had never seen or heard tell of that man before? A. If they did, I do not remember hearing them say it. Q. Do you not remember that it was stated there at that time that they had never seen or heard tell of that man before, and that he was certainly not a Surratt? A. Yes, sir: I remember her saying that that was not John Surratt. Q. Did she not also add at the time that she did not know him, and had never seen him? A. I never heard her utter those words. Q. Any thing of that import at that time and place? A. No, sir: I never heard her say it. Q. Were you there all the time that Payne was present at that time? A. Yes, sir; until we were taken into another room, after Miss Surratt gave way to her feelings about her brother. Q. At the time Payne was arrested, were you in the hall at any time when Mrs. Surratt came out there to Payne in the hall? A. No, sir: I was sitting in the parlor on the sofa. Q. You did not see her when she was called out of the parlor to see Payne? A. No: I did not know that she was called out. Q. You did not hear what passed in the hall at that time? A. No, sir. Q. Give to the Court exactly what Miss Surratt or Mrs. Surratt did say at General Augur’s headquarters about Payne being a Surratt. A. I remember that Miss Surratt remarked, at the time, that that [469] ugly man was not her brother; that she thought whoever called him so was no gentleman. Q. Had he his cap off at that time? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did she or did she not at that time deny that she ever knew him, or had ever seen him? A. No: I do not remember hearing her say that. Q. She simply denied that he was a Surratt? A. That he was John Surratt. Q. You do not know what occurred in the hall of the house while Payne was present? A. No: I do not remember whether the officers called Mrs. Surratt out or not. I remained in the parlor at that time.
A. On Eighth Street east, in Washington City. Q. How far from the Navy-Yard bridge? A. About a quarter of a mile. Q. How far from the Navy-Yard gate? A. A few yards. I do not suppose it is a hundred yards. Q. Is that on the route from the city to the bridge? A. Not the direct route; but it is one that is very much used. Q. How long have you lived there? A. Eighteen years. Q. Are you acquainted with the prisoner Dr. Samuel Mudd? A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever hear him spoken of in your house? A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever hear your brother speak of him at all? A. No, sir; never. Mrs. Mary E. Nelson, a witness called for the accused, Samuel A. Mudd, being duly sworn, testified as follows:— [470] By Mr. Ewing: Q. Are you a sister of David E. Herold, one of the accused? A. I am.
Q. Did you ever hear him speak of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd? A. No, sir; not to my knowledge. Q. Have you ever heard Dr. Samuel A. Mudd’s name mentioned in your family at all? A. No, sir; not until his arrest. William J. Watson, a witness called for the accused, Samuel A. Mudd, being duly sworn, testified as follows:— By Mr. Ewing: Q. Where do you live? A. I live in the Eighth Election District of Prince George’s County, Md. Q. Are you acquainted with Daniel J. Thomas, one of the witnesses for the prosecution? A. Not very intimately acquainted. Q. Were you present in your door-yard near Horse Head, on last Fast Day, the 1st of June, with John R. Richardson, Benjamin Naylor, George Lynch, Lemuel Watson, and Daniel J. Thomas? A. I was. Q. Will you state what he then said to you, if any thing, as to having been a witness in Dr. Mudd’s case, and being entitled to a reward? A. I think, if my memory serves me right, he said, that, if Dr. Mudd was convicted upon his testimony, he would then have given conclusive evidence that he gave the information that led to the detection of the conspirator. Q. Did he say any thing as to a reward? A. He said that he thought that his portion of the reward ought to be $10,000, and asked me if I would not, as the best loyal man in Prince George’s County, give him a certificate of how much I thought he ought to be entitled to. [471] Cross-examined by Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham: Q. What did you tell him that he ought to receive as his portion? A. I told him I did not think he was entitled to any portion of the reward, and would give him no certificate. Q. What did he say in reply to that? A. I then appealed to his conscience in the most powerful manner, and asked him if he believed himself that he was entitled to the reward? Q. What did he say to that? A. I did this three times, and he waived the question every time by saying that Daniel Hawkins said he was entitled to it. That is what I understood him to say. Q. Is that what he said? A. Yes, to the best of my knowledge and belief. He did not say that Daniel Hawkins told him he was entitled to the reward, but that Daniel Hawkins told somebody else that he was entitled to the reward. Q. Are you Daniel Hawkins, or was somebody else Daniel Hawkins? A. Daniel Hawkins lives in Charles County; a young lawyer at the bar in Port Tobacco. He has testified here to-day, I believe, in this case. Q. And that is all that Dan. Thomas said? A. That is all that I heard him say. He then, I think, asked Mr. Benjamin J. Naylor if he did not mention to him and Arthur D. Gibbons, before the killing of the President, the language that Dr. Mudd had used to him. Mr. Naylor said that he had never done it before or after. Q. Did not Thomas wind it all up by saying that he would not have that man swear to a lie for $10,000? A. When I was appealing to his conscience in regard to the matter, Mr. James Richards, the magistrate in the neighborhood, rode up; and my brother, Joseph L. Watson, or Lemuel Watson, as he is called, appealed to him, saying, “There is a contest going on here between Billy and Daniel: you are a magistrate, and I want you to decide it between them.” [472] Q. Please answer my question: Did Thomas say at that time, to any of the parties, “I would not have you for $10,000 swear to a lie.” The Witness. Let me go on, if it please your Honor. Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham. Go on in your own way. The Witness. Mr. Richards said: “Lem., let us say that he entitled to $20,000 of the reward.” Mr. Thomas then said, “No, sir: I would not have either of you gentlemen swear false, though, by your doing so, it would give me $20,000.” That is what I understood. By Mr. Ewing: Q. Did Mr. Richards offer to take a false oath for Mr. Thomas? A. No, sir; he did not. I think Mr. Richards was joking. I am confident of that. Mr. Richards, I think, is a good Union man, and I think he was joking with Mr. Thomas. I will say for Mr. Richards, that he has always acted with me; and he has been of great benefit to me in getting along with the elections. By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham: Q. Do you not consider that Daniel J. Thomas is entitled to belief on his oath? A. I have no reasons bearing on my mind to offer to this Court why I would not: therefore I must say, I would. Q. Would you believe him on his oath? A. I would. Q. He has as good a reputation for truth as most of his neighbors down there? A. I should not think he had as good a reputation for truth as most of the neighbors. Mr. Ewing objected to this course of examination as improper. It was not legitimate cross-examination. The witness had been subpœnaed by the Government, and, at the consent of the Judge Advocate, was called by the accused as to a single point, with the understanding that he should be treated as a witness for the accused only to that one point. [473] The Judge Advocate (while not yielding the point that the line of examination being indulged in was improper) stated that he would agree now to take this witness as one for the prosecution; and the witness was accordingly examined for the prosecution in rebuttal, as follows:— By Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham: Q. Are you acquainted with Daniel J. Thomas and with the general reputation in which he is held, in the neighborhood, for truth? A. I was never much acquainted with the man until 1863. Q. You lived in his neighborhood? A. Not immediately. Q. How near? A. I suppose, about four or five miles off. He lives in Charles County, and I live in Prince George’s. Q. How long have you lived so near? A. He was born where he now lives, I think; and I have lived in the neighborhood where I now live ever since I was born; and that has been fifty-three years, going on fifty-four now. Q. From his general reputation for truth in the neighborhood in which he lives, is he entitled to be believed upon his oath? A. I do not know what kind of reputation he does bear in Charles County; and in my county he does not come often, or never did until 1863, after the battle of Gettysburg. Q. It is not confined to county lines; it is confined to the neighborhood in which a man lives; and that may embrace half a dozen counties. A. I do not know what the people of Charles County may think about his reputation. Q. I am asking you for his reputation in your neighborhood, which is his neighborhood. A. They speak evil of him around there. Q. And some speak well of him? A. Some speak well of him. They say he tells a good many lies; but I think people tell him as many lies as he tells them. [474] Q. Do you know what people generally say in the neighborhood about his character for truth, for and against him? A. They generally say that his character for truth is bad. I know they generally say so. Q. Do you know that some say it is good? A. Some say it is good. Q. I ask you your opinion whether you consider, from all you hear of his reputation there, that his character for truth is such that he is entitled to be believed on oath? A. I believe that he is; because if he was to come here and say he was not qualified, I should have to say that half the men around there are not qualified. By Mr. Ewing: Q. Are you able to say that you know what Mr. Thomas’s general reputation is, in the community in which he lives, for truth? A. I think I have stated that it is not good for truth in speaking; but I think he lies more in self-praise, to make the people think a great deal of him, than in any other way. I have never heard of Mr. Thomas telling a lie that would make a difference between man and man. I have known of no quarrels to be kicked up in my neighborhood about any thing Mr. Thomas has told from one man to another. John T. Ford recalled for the accused, Edward Spangler. By Mr. Ewing: Q. How long have you known the accused, Edward Spangler? [475] A. Nearly four years, I think. Q. Was he in your employ through that time? A. Most of that time. Q. State what his character is for peace and good-nature and kindness. A. He was always regarded as a very good-natured, kind, willing man. His only fault was occasionally participating in drinking liquor more than he should have done,—disposed to drink at times,—not so as to make him vicious, but more to unfit him to work. Q. Is he a quarrelsome man? A. I never knew him to be but in one quarrel since he has been in my employ; and that was through drink. Q. Was he faithful in attending to his duties? A. Very; a good efficient drudge; always willing to do any thing: I never found him unwilling. Q. Was he a man that was trusted with the confidence of others? A. I should think not to any extent. He had no self-respect. He was not one who had many associates. He usually slept in the theatre,—a man who rarely slept in a bed. I judged by that. Q. A harmless man? A. Very harmless,—always esteemed so, I think, by all the company around the theatre,—often the subject of sport and fun; but never, except on one occasion, did I know him to be engaged in a quarrel. Q. How was he as to his politics? Was he a man of intense feeling? A. I never knew any thing of his political sentiments in this city. In Baltimore, he was known to be a member of the American Order. Q. Was he a man of intense partisan or political feeling? A. I never heard an expression of political sentiment from him.
A. I never met him, except in Carroll Prison. Yüklə 2,75 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|