“No.  She finally came out (but I cannot be determined about it, that she said shooting irons), and asked me in relation to them.”  The question was then asked, “Can you swear on your oath, that Mrs. Surratt mentioned the words ‘shooting irons’ to you at all?” A.—­“I am very positive she did.”  Q. __ “Are you certain?” A.—­“I am very positive that she named shooting irons on both occasions.  Not so positive as to the first as I am about the last.”

Here comes in the plea of “reasonable doubt.”  If the witness himself is not absolutely positive as to what occurred, and as to the conversation that took place, how can the jury assume to act upon it as they would upon a matter personally concerning themselves?

On this occasion of Mrs. Surratt’s visit to Uniontown, three days before the assassination, where she met Lloyd, and where this conversation occurred between them, at a time when Lloyd was, by presumption, sober and not intoxicated, he declares definitely before the commission that he is unable to recollect the conversation, or parts of it, with distinctness.  But on the fourteenth of April, and at a time when, as testified by his sister-in-law, he was more than ordinarily affected by intoxicating drink,—­and Captain Gwynn, James Lusby, Knott, the barkeeper, and others, corroborate the testimony as to his absolute inebriation—­ he attests that he positively remembers that Mrs. Surratt said to him, “’Mr. Lloyd, I want you to have those shooting irons ready.  That a person would call for them.’  That was the language she made use of, and she gave me this other thing to give to whoever called.”

In connection with the fact that Lloyd cannot swear positively that Mrs. Surratt mentioned “shooting irons” to him at Uniontown, bear in mind the fact that Weichmann sat in the buggy on the same seat with Mrs. Surratt, and he swears that he heard nothing about “shooting irons.”  Would not the quick ears of Weichmann have heard the remark had it been made?

The gentlemen of the commission will please recollect that these statements were rendered by a man addicted to excessive use of intoxicating liquors; that he was even inordinately drunk at the time referred to; that he had voluntarily complicated himself in the concealment of the arms by John H. Surratt and his friends; that he was in a state of maudlin terror when arrested and when forced to confess; that for two days he maintained denial of all knowledge that Booth and Herold had been at his house; and that at last, and in the condition referred to, he was coerced by threats to confess, and into a weak and common effort to exculpate himself by the accusation of another and by statements of conversation already cited.  Notwithstanding his utter denial of all knowledge of Booth and Herold having called at his house, it afterward appears, by his own testimony, that immediately Herold commanded him (Lloyd) “For God’s sake, make haste and get those things,” he comprehended what “things” were indicated, without definition, and brought forth both carbines and whisky.  He testifies that John H. Surratt had told him, when depositing the weapons in concealment in his house, that they would soon be called for, but did not instruct him, it seems, by whom they would be demanded.