A. I think it was Wednesday, the 22d of November, 1865. Q. You said you had told him before that, that the proclamation had been withdrawn? A. I did not say that; I said that I had seen such a report. Q. Where had you seen it? A. I do not recollect now. Q. How long did you stay in Paris? A. Six months. Q. What did you do there? A. I gave lessons in English to a French family. Q. Did you ever see Surratt after you left Liverpool? A. No, and I only saw him on two occasions at Liverpool, and the first time there were witnesses present. Q. You never saw him after that? A. Never until yesterday. Q. Where did you go from Paris? A. I travelled there through the United Kingdom. Q. Of what? A. Great Britain; through Ireland and Scotland. I also travelled through Spain. Q. Did you get any means from the confederacy to travel upon ? A. No, sir, I never received anything from the confederacy; hardly my pay. Q. When did you come back to the United States ? A. I came to the United States about six weeks ago. Q. When was the last time you had been in the United States prior to six weeks ago ? A. The last time was about February 13, 1865. Q. Then from February, 1865, you had not been in the United States until a few weeks ago? A. Not until a few weeks ago. Q. Had you been in the confederate States ? A. There are no confederate States. Q. Where had you been? A. I had been in Canada, with the exception of the time I was in Europe. Q In what ship did you return ? A. In the China. Q. Who was the captain? A. I forget his name, Q. Where did you land? A. At Halifax. Q. You went with some priest, did you not say ? A. This priest lives about fifteen miles out from Quebec. Q. At what place? A. St. Michel de Bellechasse? Q. What is the name of the priest. A. I hope you will not require me to answer that. It cannot possibly have anything to do with this case. It is out of respect to the good cure's feelings that I prefer not to mention the name. Q. You are not in any occupation, I understand, ex ceept writing at present. A. Not at present Q. You mean the person you have lived with is a real person? A. One could hardly live with a myth. I have told you that I lived with a curate of the Catholic church. Q. You are not a curate? A. No, sir. They sometimes admit laymen to their association when they are of a respectable character. Q. Has your family been with you all the time? A. No, sir. Q. Have they been with you any of the time? A. I have corresponded with them. Q. I ask whether any of your family have been with you any of the time? A. No, sir. Q. Were your family abroad with you? A. No, sir. It was as much as I could do to support myself. Q. Did your family go abroad with you? A. No, sir. Q. Did you see them abroad? A. No, sir. Q. Did you see any of them? A. No, sir. Q. When did you last see them? A. I saw my wife shortly after she was imprisoned here in Washington. A. It was during the progress of the war. They took her prisoner on board the Mary Washington, and kept her there, at the navy yard, for three or four days. While she was imprisoned there an infant child died. Q. When was that? A. The second year of the war. Q. When since? A. I saw her once in Baltimore, when I was there on a mission. Q. When was that? A. I do not remember. Q. About when? A. About 1863, I think. Q. Have you ever seen her since? A. No, sir. Q. You have spoken of your children. How often have you seen them? A. She brought my children to see me when she underwent the risk to meet me in Lower Canada. A. No, sir, not yet; I have been waiting on this case day by day. Q. How long have you now been in Washington? A. About six weeks, I think. Q Have you been furnishing any evidence in this case? A. I made my affidavit myself last spring when Mr. Surratt was first arrested. Q. Were you summoned here? A. No, sir; I volunteered to come and tell what I knew. I wrote to Mr. Bradley in advance, before he had had any communication with me, and told him about what I could prove. I was induced to do this by reading McMillan's affidavit, published in the " Times" of December 11. Q. You had talked with the counsel before McMillan was cross-examined? A. Oh, certainly, I had made my affidavit last spring, stating then the same facts that I have stated here. By Mr. BRADLEY : Q. You say you were not summoned. Didn't you have a summons served upon you? A. Yes, sir, at Ogdensburg; a summons, or something of that sort. Q. Do I understand you to say that you wrote down in this diary the answers of Dr. McMillan at the time they were given to you! A. Oh no, sir; I made notes of the persons I met on the voyage, and of the conversations I had had with them on the several days. For instance, I would write, “ Talked with Dr. McMillan to-day, on such a subjet." That is all. The general scope of the conversation. I would remember, because as I was writing this book I took particular pains to remember all that was stated. Q. When you were asked the substance of that conversation, did I understard you to say that you referred to the diary, and could state exactly what he did say ! A. No, sir Q. How do you remember! A. Because it is entered on the diary here-the day on which I formed his acquaintance, the day I talked with Eim, sendering the diary to the district audrey) Here is the book, it is quite at your service if you desire to look at it. Mr. MERRICK objected to giving the dary to the District Attorney, as it was something that was not at all in evidence. Q. When did you make the entries of the conversation you had with Dr. M&VIA=! A. I made the entries at the time of the lates that are there recorded day by day. Some are in pencil and some ariik. Here's one of November third. which I wrote = pencil on the rill of the steamer in 1865, while Mr. McMil Q. What inferral would elapse between the conversation with Dr. McMillan and the entry in your diary! H. I have fast all you that I made this entry in his presence. Is allows and I wanten down; beren i Q. When Did you make these other entries ? He gave me Q. And you re able now to state from these entries the conversation that you had with him! A NAS, 1 bi an sie dr. Ivcembered the substance. I have made pices at £ferent times af tàS MAINE. ▲ W2&is a very arresting subject and I have a very retentive A. I have abstracts here-little short notes. I have been accustomed to preach from notes, and therefore it is only necessary for me to put down a few odd notes, and I can always connect them afterwards. Q. And under these circumstances you now undertake to state the conversation you had with Dr. McMillan at that time? A. I do, because I have repeated them over often to different persons from that time to this. I have repeated the substance of the conversation to the curate, and others with whom I have lived, and to others, as also my suspicions as to the integrity of his motives towards Mr. Surratt. By Mr. BRADLEY: Q. At what time did you receive your pardon from the President? A. I took the oath of allegiance to the United States in Paris, before Mr. John Hay, about or nearly a year ago. Q. What time did you receive your pardon? A Last month, I think. Q. Last week? A. That would be last month, wouldn't it? Q. Up to that time did you or not consider it unsafe for you to come into the United States? A. Yes, sir; I remained quiet and did not appear on the streets publicly. By Mr. MERRICK: Q. You were going to state in the cross-examination that you had expressed some hard sentiments towards Surratt on ship-board because of his not coming on here when his mother was in such danger, and that McMillan had defended him. Will you now please state what you were going to say, but were stopped from saying? A. I stated to Dr. McMillan that when John Surratt first arrived in Montreal I believed him to be as innocent as other gentlemen whose names had been associated with him in a proclamation that was issued, because this proclamation was issued before any proof could have been given here on the subject. Though 1 believed him innocent, yet, as he had neglected to follow the advice Father LaPierre and I had extended-which was that he should go to Washington and tell all he knew-I felt more like giving him up than protecting him. He says: "You do the fellow injustice there, because he was in so secluded a place that he knew nothing of the progress of the case, and was sedulously kept in ignorance of it by the gentlemen who surrounded him, who kept saying: 'Everything is going on well. You know your mother is innocent; they cannot murder her; and she will be finally saved, if you keep quiet.'' QI understood you to say, in reply to a question by the counsel, asking about your sympathies, that they were no longer with the rebels, because there was no rebellion. A. I so understand it. I took the oath of allegiance last fall in Paris before Major Hay. Q. And you acquiesce in the present condition, and claim to be a loyal citizen? A. I so regard myself, and trust to do my duty to the Constitution. Q. Something further was said to you in regard to the infidel sentiments expressed by Dr. McMillan in your conversation. What was said about that matter? A. He certainly expressed doubts as to the future existence of the soul, because my argument was to this effect: "You medical men are so apt to be scientific; you are so accustomed to chopping up the human body, and to destroy it by chemical analysis, that you think it is all gas. I think this is rather a weakness of the medical profession." Q. What did he say? A. He did not withdraw his opinions as to what he had expressed about the future of the soul. By Mr. PIERREPONT: Q. Did Dr. McMillan state to you what you have just now repeated in rela tion to Surratt's concealment ? A. Yes, sir. Q. He said it when and where? A. He spoke on that subject very often. After two years lapse of time I cannot pretend to localize-to state what particular part of the ship it was said on. Q. It was said on the steamer while crossing the ocean? A. Yes, sir. Q. You are sure of that? A. Yes, sir. Q. You have been asked about your pardon; won't you tell us when you got your pardon? A. It is dated the 4th of June, and was given to me the 3d, 4th or 5th of July. Q. Given to you on the morning of the 4th of July, wasn't it? A. Yes, sir; it was a very happy omen. Q. Who gave it to you! A. The counsel for the defence. Mr. BRADLEY, Sr. My son gave it to you, didn't he? A. Yes, sir. Q. Who obtained it? A. I made my own affidavit and wrote my own letter to the President, requesting Mr. Bradley, as he went into town, to present it to his excellency. Mr. BRADLEY, Sr. Which I did. Q. When? since you came here to testify in this case? A. Yes, sir. The court here took a recess for half an hour. AFTERNOON SESSION. LEWIS J. CARLAND, recalled by the defence. By Mr. MERRICK: Q. State to the jury whether or not you know Louis J. Weichmann. A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you take a walk in company with Louis J. Weichmann and Mr. Brophy, in the spring or summer of 1865! A. I took a walk with Mr. Weichmann, and we called on Mr. Brophy. He introduced me to Mr. Brophy on that walk. Q. And was that after the time that he had testified before the military commission! A. Yes, sir, after the testimony had closed. Q. Did Mr. Weichmann state to you in that conversation that he was very much troubled in his conscience about the testimony he had given at that trial! A. He did. He wished me to go with him to St. Aloysius church, as he said he wished to make a confession; that his mind was so bardened with what he had done, that he had no peace. Q. Did he say to you that he was going to confession to relieve his conscience? A. Yes, sir: he did. |