Mr. F. W. Seward to Mr. King.
No. 35.]
Department of State,
Washington,
May 21, 1866.
Sir: Your despatch of the 23d ultimo, No. 53,
was duly received, and a copy of so much of it as relates to John H.
Surratt was promptly communicated to the Secretary of War. Enclosed I
transmit a copy of a letter from him upon the
[Page 131]
subject, together with a communication from the
Judge Advocate General, to whom your report was referred by the
Secretary of War. You are instructed to obtain, if possible, pursuant to
General Holt’s suggestions, the full statement verified by oath of St.
Marie.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
F. W. SEWARD, Acting
Secretary.
Rufus King, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
Mr Stanton to Mr. F. W. Seward.
War Department,
Washington City,
May 19, 1866.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge yours
of the 17th, accompanying a report of the United States minister at
Rome, in relation to John H. Surratt. That report was referred to
the Judge Advocate General, who returns it to this department with a
recommendation, a copy of which is herewith enclosed. I would
respectfully ask that it may be transmitted to Mr. King, with
instructions in conformity with General Holt’s recommendation.
Your obedient servant,
Hon. F. W. Seward,
Acting Secretary of State, &c., &c.,
&c.
[Untitled]
Bureau of Military Justice,
Washington,
May 19, 1866.
Respectfully returned.
It is recommended that the American minister at Rome be urged to
procure without delay, if possible, a full statement of John H.
Surratt’s confession to H. de St. Marie, verified by oath, which
could probably be obtained through assurances that St. Marie should
in no manner be compromised thereby. This man, there is reason to
believe, is the same referred to by one of the witnesses on the
trial of the assassins of the President. He was represented to have
been engaged in school-teaching in Maryland, at a village called
Ellangowan, in the year 1853. Afterwards he came to Washington, and
was for a short time employed by Father Wiget. He stated that he had
come from Montreal, Canada, where he had sold his farm, the proceeds
of which he had lost in this country. He spoke French, Italian, and
English fluently, and was known as Henry de St. Marie. The American
minister has no doubt caught the sound of his name imperfectly, and
has in consequence written it “B” instead of de St. Marie.
The particulars above given will make it easy to ascertain if this is
the person mentioned in the despatch to the Secretary of State. If
he is, it is believed that it can be shown here that he is a man of
character and entitled to credit in his statements. It may be added
that in this despatch the American minister has slightly mistaken
Surratt’s name. It is not John S., as he supposes, but John H.
J. HOLT, Judge Advocate
General.
