Secret Lincoln Assassination Papers?
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
collection of papers pertaining to the Lincoln assassination were
sealed for 75 years. Every 75 years a vote comes up, and each time it
is voted that the papers remain sealed. Presumably groups of
politicians see these papers once every 75 years and no one else does.
1. Is there any truth to this story?
2. If so, when will the latest 75 years be up?
Thanks very much for any enlightenment.
Cori
Jane Margaret Laight
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 05:08:51 -0400, cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote
> (in article <1154077731....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>):
>
> "Author Emmanuel Hertz wrote that a few years before the death of Robert
> Lincoln, the president's son, a Mr Young went to visit him at his home in
> Manchester, Vermont. He found Lincoln in a room, surrounded by a number of
> large boxes and with many papers scattered about the floor, and with the
> ashes of many burnt papers visible in the fireplace. Young asked Lincoln what
> he was doing, and Lincoln replied that he was destroying some of the private
> papers and letters to his father. Young remonstrated with Lincoln saying no
> one had any right to destroy such papers, Lincoln least of all. Lincoln
> replied that he did not intend to continue his destruction but the papers he
> was destroying contained the documentary evidence of the treason of a member
> of Lincoln's Cabinet and he thought it was best for all that such evidence be
> destroyed... Young called in a Dr Nicholas Butler who persuaded Lincoln to
> desist in his act of destruction. The material saved was deposited in the
> Library of Congress and sealed until 1947. (preface to The Hidden Lincoln by
> Emanuel Hertz, Viking Press, New York, 1938, quoted in The Man who Killed
> Lincoln, Stern, p 406 et al). The inference here is clearly that the a loyal
> member of the Cabinet was Johnson. Stern expected that come 1947 "we shall
> find out who it was that sat on the cabinet table betraying the President and
> the people he served. Perhaps we shall even be able to trace some connection
> to the men who shared with John Wilkes Booth the responsibility for the
> murder of Abraham Lincoln." I asked the Library of Congress the following
> questions in relation to the above: Were such papers made public in 1947?
> Did they contain any material that showed a traitor in the Lincoln cabinet,
> in particular Andrew Johnson? Is there evidence that Robert Lincoln destroyed
> incriminating documents referring to a traitor? At the time of writing I had
> not received a reply. However, Roscoe claims that the papers were made public
> in 1947, but failed to reveal anything of a dramatic nature, adding that if
> Mr Young's story was as stated then Robert Lincoln must have consigned the
> incriminating evidence to the flames. (p 533)"
> (http://www.jfklink.com/articles/AbeAndJFK.html)
>
> According to http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/alhtml/alcyber.html, they were
> indeed made available in 1947 and are available online.
>
> The incomparable Ms. Laight can probably provide more detail.
"Incomparable" now, is it? Wow. And I didn't think that you cared so
much--gee, I am truly flattered....
But yes, here is more detail, at least what I have been able to find at
short notice--this actually would require an article or a monograph in
itself--but away we go...
Firstly to answer Cori's questions:
1. Probably Not.
2. N/A.
And detail--this story has enough truth in it to hold some water, but
on closer examination, in my opinion, it is part of the many myths
around Old Abe. Firstly, a look at the source will be instructive.
Emanuel Hertz was a Wall Street lawyer, perennial (and unsuccessful)
Republican candidate for offices from Congress to ward leader, and a
devoted collector and amateur historian of Lincolniana. He was a
skilled writer and a dramatic public speaker and, in his writings on
Lincoln personified the theme of the movie "The Man Who Shot Liberty
Valence"--"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." Hertz
collected truckloads of trivia and anecdotes on Lincoln of varying
accuracy, most of which eventually made it into print. Subsequent
scholarship has shown that, at best, a lot of what Hertz proffered as
fact, was not much more than a good story.
I would suspect that most professional and talented amateur historians
would pretty much take most of what anything Hertz had to say about
Lincoln with a grain of salt--particularly, as has been pointed out, in
his writings (and cut-and-paste jobs, also) he very rarely provided the
source of his anecdotal evidence. This Robert Todd Lincoln story is
really suspect--Mr Hertz doesn't further identify "Mr Young"; the "Dr
Butler" in the story would probably be Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler,
president of Columbia U and Robert's good friend, so that portion of
the story could possibly ring true--but there is no evidence that
Robert destroyed anything related to the assassination--the whole of
his collection in the Library of Congress is well over twenty thousand
pieces of assorted ephermera, so one would figure that unless Hay and
Nicolay (or someone else) had collated and chronologized all the stuff
in the collection. it's likely that if Robert was looking for anything
in particular, it would have taken him a very long time to find it..
The person Jim refers to as "Stern" is a fellow named Phillip Van Doren
Stern, a newspaperman, novelist, science fiction writer and jackleg
historian, whose short story "The Greatest Gift" went to Hollywood and
was turned into Frank Capra's "It's A Wonderful Life"--if he only
stayed with that, we would have been much better off. However, he also
was also a Civil War buff and published a number of books (of varying
quality) on such topics as Edgar Allan Poe, Robert E. Lee; the
Confederate Navy; the Confederate Secret Service; John Wilkes Booth and
the like. Stern's magnum opus (for our purposes) was "The Life and
Writings of Abraham Lincoln", which wasn't too bad; although a prolific
writer, to my understanding, Stern was not a discerning researcher, and
often would take stories based on questionable provenance at face
value.
The best I can figure out was that both Hertz and Stern were wrong
here. Talking it out with some smart people (and some folks at the
Library of Congress) the best I can come up with runs as follows: there
were likely contemporary rumors about whether John Wilkes Booth and his
happy crew of morons (or that shadowy group supposedly controlling
Booth & Co) were aided in their attempt to destroy the government by
someone in the Lincoln Administration--that has never been proven,
although names--Stanton, Gideon Welles, etc.--have been named for some
time. However, it is known that Lincoln friend and ally Associate
Justice of the Supreme Court David Davis, who was asked by Robert
Lincoln to handle the administration of the estate, came to Washington,
gathered up Lincoln's personal and business papers, and then (as he
later wrote) "My distinct recollection is that all the papers of public
importance were retained by Mr. Stanton & either deposited in the War
or State Depts. I think copies were furnished me & handed to Mr.
Nicolay who packed them together with Mr. Lincoln's private papers in
secure boxes. These boxes were sent by the Secy of War under guard to
Bloomington Illinois, my residence & are now in the vault of the
National Bank of Bloomington. They are sealed & when they will be
opened & examined has not yet been determined." (David Davis to Edward
McPherson, June 22, 1866, in McPherson papers, Library of Congress).
It appears that both Judge Davis and Robert Lincoln believed that there
were papers "concerning the Administration" that were in a confused
state" and the contents "would be considered damaging to men now
living" (RT Lincoln letter dated June 6, 1865) that were included with
Abe's effects; however, the papers first went to Lincon's private
secretaries Hay and Nicolay to use as source material for their
biography of Lincoln, and then after they died the papers were in the
State Department offices, then back to Robert Lincoln, who, after
carrying them around from his safety deposit box in a Chicago bank to
his Vermont home, donated them to the Library of Congress in 1919; four
years later, he deeded them over to the Library, requesting that they
not made available to the public until twenty-years after his death (or
July 26, 1947). The whole story is here:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/alhtml/alprov.html
So there could be something to that story--it's possible that Robert
Lincoln thought so--but whether he would have been culling through what
papers were in the collection is doubtful. Besides, so many other
hands had been through it before he got hold of it, anything could have
happened. Judge Davis, if he was so inclined, could have taken out
incriminating evidence. So could Stanton. Lincoln's secretaries Hay
and Nicolay, who would have been in a position to have suspicions based
on fact, could have easily hidden, destroyed, or suppressed whatever
information they didn't want in their book on Lincoln--indeed, before
the Lincoln Papers were made available to the public, the Library of
Congress had to get some papers known to be part of the collection from
Nicolay's estate; the old man had kept them and his heirs had to give
them up.
So this is just one of those many stories surrounding old Honest Abe.
and Jim, I damn sure hope you're happy
The Incomparable Miss Laight
Jane Margaret Laight
Bad Jim wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 18:55:42 -0400, Jane Margaret Laight wrote
> (in article <1154127342.8...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>):
>
> [snip]
> >
> > "Incomparable" now, is it? Wow. And I didn't think that you cared so
> > much--gee, I am truly flattered....
>
>
> [snip]
>
> > the best I can come up with runs as follows: there were likely
> > contemporary rumors about whether John Wilkes Booth and his happy crew of
> > morons (or that shadowy group supposedly controlling Booth & Co) were
> > aided in their attempt to destroy the government by someone in the Lincoln
> > Administration--that has never been proven, although names--Stanton,
> > Gideon Welles, etc.--have been named for some time.
>
> ohara who knows it was a Confederate plot.
>
> [snip]
>
> > and Jim, I damn sure hope you're happy
>
>
> > The Incomparable Miss Laight
>
> Indeed.
>
> --
> Bad Jim
fair enough, then; you're welcome.
JML
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
> > Well, we can dispel _that_ rumor right now on no less an authority that ray
> > ohara who knows it was a Confederate plot.
The Incomparable Miss Laight
Not sure if this is serious or sarcastic as I don't know who Mr. O'Hara
is, but thanks for the answers. I was aware that Robert Lincoln burned
personal papers of his father's but didn't know about the official
papers. Some historians feel he lived a few more years than he should
have, from their perspective, long enough to do some real damage. What
you described seems pretty far from the sort of government conspiracy I
remembered my teacher describing, of a select group of privileged
individuals keeping explosive information from the public, and of this
occurring every 75 years! Assuming the papers were originally sealed
in 1865, another group would have had to meet in 1940 and deem them too
controversial to see light of day till 2015! What in the WORLD could
be so bad that anyone living in the year 2015 would start a riot about
it, all those years later?
Of course, keep in mind this was a 30-year-old memory gleaned from a
teacher of history who was hardly much of an authority in the first
place. I remember two other things he said, one about the Whitman
Massacre, that "Marcus Whitman was warned" and stayed only because he
was "so arrogant as to think those Indians would never dare attack
him." Years later, when I wrote a book on the subject, I could have
told that teacher a very different story, the details of which I took
great care to make clear in the book in case any others had the same
notions.
The other person he had it in for was Eleanor Roosevelt. I forget what
he even said against her, but one day he was holding forth and a girl
who was known as one of the class smart alecks said, "Could you do
better?" This still affords me a good laugh all these years later.
Cori
Jane Margaret Laight
Bad Jim wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 17:17:49 -0400, cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote
> (in article <1154207869.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>):
>
> > Jane Margaret Laight wrote:
> >
> >>> Well, we can dispel _that_ rumor right now on no less an authority that ray
> >>> ohara who knows it was a Confederate plot.
> >
> > The Incomparable Miss Laight
>
>
> You have the attribution wrong. It was I who wrote that. Miss Laight is too
> refined to indulge in ray baiting.
>
> --
> Bad Jim
"refined"? Moi?
You sure do turn my head, suh!
JML
wondering now whether she should get a hoop skirt or not
Lynn
Bad Jim wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:19:24 -0400, Jane Margaret Laight wrote
> (in article <1154225964.5...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>):
> wears ;-)
>
> --
> Bad Jim
Careful, Jane, this fellow is really smooth. :-)
I do agree with him that you are special, however.
Lynn
Jane Margaret Laight
jeez--thanks
and as to Rose Greenhow's dress--well, be careful what you wish for...
:)
Blushing Jane
Jane Margaret Laight
Bad Jim wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 23:54:47 -0400, Lynn wrote
> (in article <1154231686.9...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>):
>
> >
> > Bad Jim wrote:
> >> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:19:24 -0400, Jane Margaret Laight wrote
> >> (in article <1154225964.5...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>):
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Bad Jim wrote:
> >>>> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 17:17:49 -0400, cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote
> >>>> (in article <1154207869.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>):
> >>>>
> >>>>> Jane Margaret Laight wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Well, we can dispel _that_ rumor right now on no less an authority
> >>>>>>> that ray ohara who knows it was a Confederate plot.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Incomparable Miss Laight
> >>>>
> >>>> [snip]
> >>>>
> >>>> You have the attribution wrong. It was I who wrote that. Miss Laight is
> >>>> too refined to indulge in ray baiting .
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Bad Jim
> >>>
> >>> "refined"? Moi?
> >>>
> >>> You sure do turn my head, suh!
> >>>
> >>> JML
> >>> wondering now whether she should get a hoop skirt or not
> >>>
> >>
> >> I am sure you would look elegant in it. Perhaps like the one Rose Greenhow
> >> wears ;-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bad Jim
> >
> > Careful, Jane, this fellow is really smooth. :-)
>
> fear from this Southern Gentleman.
>
> --
> Bad Jim
thanks for confirming that, but believe me, I wasn't worried. As we say
in North Carolina, "breeding will out."
Glad to see someone hasn't forgotten their home training; your momma
should be proud. :)
Best to all.
Jane M
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
http://home.att.net/~rjnorton/Lincoln74.html
Then, the government didn't tell the truth immediately about
everything, such as the man shot in the barn not being John Wilkes
Booth, which gave rise to rumors that Booth lived for years afterwards,
when he was likely killed a short time later, but they couldn't admit
it, having already "killed" him.
Jesse James, Billy the Kid, Anastasia--people turning up claiming to be
them seem always ultimately disproven. Wonder if any of these survival
stories turn out to be real? The "Booth mummy" has gone into hiding,
so can't be tested against living Booth descendants.
Cori
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 04:27:36 -0400, cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote
> (in article <1154420856.5...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>):
>
> > Then, the government didn't tell the truth immediately about
> > everything, such as the man shot in the barn not being John Wilkes
> > Booth
>
It's common knowledge that the man shot in the barn didn't resemble
Booth, who was so well-known he was unlikely to be mistaken for anyone
else. The physician who examined the body and was well-acquainted with
Booth was forced to sign a paper claiming the tall, sandy-haired,
freckled man with no broken leg shot in the barn was the short,
dark-haired, clear-skinned Booth, who had broken his leg not two weeks
before. This gave rise to the story that Booth escaped entirely.
About four years later, a body was turned over to the Booth family
which they accepted as Booth. This body was identified by the family
dentist. It would seem Booth was caught shortly after they shot the
other man, but they had to stick to their official story.
> BTW, did you know that the Union Trooper who shot Booth had previously
> castrated himself with scissors so that he wouldn't be tempted? Eeeeeuuuuuu!
> --
> Bad Jim
No, I didn't know that and could probably have lived without knowing
it. Not sure I even want to know your source for that!
Cori
Rambler III
<cmashiel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1154456491....@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Bad Jim wrote:
[snip, ouch!; snip, ouch!]
> It's common knowledge that the man shot in the barn didn't
> resemble...
[snip, ouch!; snip, ouch!]
>> BTW, did you know that the Union Trooper who shot Booth had
>> previously
>> castrated himself with scissors so that he wouldn't be tempted?
>> Eeeeeuuuuuu!
>> --
>> Bad Jim
>
> No, I didn't know that and could probably have lived without knowing
> it. Not sure I even want to know your source for that!
>
> Cori
>
I'll hesitate snipping in future.
Jane Margaret Laight
Bad Jim wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 14:21:31 -0400, cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote
> (in article <1154456491....@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>):
>
> > Bad Jim wrote:
> >> On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 04:27:36 -0400, cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote
> >> (in article <1154420856.5...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>):
> >>
> >>> Then, the government didn't tell the truth immediately about
> >>> everything, such as the man shot in the barn not being John Wilkes
> >>> Booth
> >>
> >> Where did you get this "fact"?
> >
> > It's common knowledge that the man shot in the barn didn't resemble
> > Booth, who was so well-known he was unlikely to be mistaken for anyone
> > else. The physician who examined the body and was well-acquainted with
> > Booth was forced to sign a paper claiming the tall, sandy-haired,
> > freckled man with no broken leg shot in the barn was the short,
> > dark-haired, clear-skinned Booth, who had broken his leg not two weeks
> > before. This gave rise to the story that Booth escaped entirely.
> > About four years later, a body was turned over to the Booth family
> > which they accepted as Booth. This body was identified by the family
> > dentist. It would seem Booth was caught shortly after they shot the
> > other man, but they had to stick to their official story.
>
> Wikipedia, which is as common as one can get, says: "Some believe that Booth
> escaped the tobacco barn at Garrett's farm, with a look-alike double agent
> named James William Boyd dying in his place, and the government going to
> great pains to cover up the blunder. These theories remain unproven and are
> regarded by most historians as having no substance."
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wilkes_Booth)
>
> Nor does Kauffman mention it in "American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the
> Lincoln Conspiracies", and he goes into considerable detail describing the
> shooting in the flaming barn, Doctor Urquart's examination at the scene, how
> Booth was identified, Booth's suffering throughout the night before dying,
> the deathwatch, and all the witnesses who were there, all supported by
> extensive references and notes. You should really read it if you are
> interested.
>
> As far as the broken leg, he didn't break it leaping to the stage but in a
> riding accident during his flight. It was a relatively minor fracture of the
> small bone, causing swelling only. The report that he broke it leaping from
> the stage was due to a misreading of his diary by the soldiers who killed him
> and passed it on to the newspapers.
Well, there was a story that Booth did escape--the story goes that one
John St. Helen shows up in Granbury TX about 1870 and tends bar, runs a
general store, tries to farm, gets drunk quite a bit, quotes
Shaksepeare a lot, seems to have a lot of money even though he has
quite aproblem making a living and just muddles around for a few years
until he suddenly vanishes, but not until a lawyer named Finis L. Bates
hears St Helen in a delirium brought on by what was thought to be a
terminal illness supposedly say that he was John Wilkes Booth. In
1903, Bates, now in Memphis, hears the story that a fellow named David
E. George in Enid OK kills himself with a does of prussic acid or some
type of fast-acting poison, and that some folks said George, when he
was drunk or delirious, or both, called himself John Wilkes Booth.
Bates buys a train ticket from Memphis to Enid, shows up at the funeral
and says that yes, David E George is the same fellow I knew thirty-odd
years before as John St. Helen, and since he said that he was John
Wiles Booth, ergo, he must be John Wilkes Booth. Who knows? The only
provable facts are that there was a David E. George in Enid, and there
was someone calling himself John St. Helen in Hood County, Texas, but
no one else (other than Bates) ever heard either one of those fellers
say (sober, drunk, delirious, or whatever) that George/St. Helen was
John Wilkes Booth. There is plenty of stuff on the web about this.
Frankly, if I was John Wilkes Booth, and had the money, I wouldn't go
to Texas, and exile--I would be in Paris, France and take my chances.
>
> >
> >> BTW, did you know that the Union Trooper who shot Booth had previously
> >> castrated himself with scissors so that he wouldn't be tempted?
> >> Eeeeeuuuuuu!
> >> --
> >> Bad Jim
> >
> > No, I didn't know that and could probably have lived without knowing
> > it. Not sure I even want to know your source for that!
>
> The trooper who shot Booth was Sgt. Boston Corbett. The source is the book I
> mentioned above:
>
> [Avert your gaze, Miss Laight]
careful there, Jimmy lad--once you get an idea of what I have seen in
my checkered career, you yourself may have to avert your gaze, old son.
:)
>
> "He was born Thomas H. Corbett in London, but moved to the United States at
> an early age...[after his wife and child died], Corbett fell into a profound
> depression. He eventually drifted up to New England and underwent a
> spiritual awakening. Renaming himself Boston Corbett, for the city of his
> rebirth, he grew his hair and beard in the fashion of Jesus Christ and
> dedicated himself to a pious existence in the service of God. Of his
> sincerity, he left no room for doubt. He once encountered a couple of
> prostitutes, and resolved to put himself above their temptations. Returning
> to his room, he cut off his testicles with a pair of scissors, and spent two
> weeks recovering at Massachusetts General Hospital."
>
> Now I ask you: does this sound like a man who would lie about shooting Booth?
To cut old Boston a break, you have to note that he was trained and
worked as a hatter--and back then, most hatters worked with felt (used
to make fancy hats) soaked in mercury (Hg), and constant exposure to
mercury exposed the hatter to mercury poisoning, which would affect the
nervous system. Boston was considered as crazy by virtually every one
he met, but he seems to have been one of the few Union prisoners to get
through Andersonville in pretty good shape. After the end of the Woah,
Corbett left Camden, N.J. to go to Kansas where he lived in a hole in
the ground for years--he was then named Assistant Doorkeeper of the
Kansas State House of Representatives, for which he thanked the folks
by trying to shoot the place up with a .44-40 Colt, or so goes the
story. He escaped from the Kansas State Home for the Insane in Topeka,
stopped bya friend's house about thirty miles away, stayed for a few
days, and then rode off into oblivion. He told his friend that he was
going to Mexico, but there is some evidence that he went to a town
named Hinckley MN where he stayed until his death in a huge forest
fire. No further comments.
JML :)
> --
> Bad Jim
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
> Well, if it's "common knowledge", not many people know of it....
> Nor does Kauffman mention it in "American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the
> Lincoln Conspiracies", and he goes into considerable detail describing the
> shooting in the flaming barn, Doctor Urquart's examination at the scene, how
> Booth was identified, Booth's suffering throughout the night before dying,
> the deathwatch, and all the witnesses who were there, all supported by
> extensive references and notes. You should really read it if you are
> interested.
>
> As far as the broken leg, he didn't break it leaping to the stage but in a
> riding accident during his flight.
Okay, I was wrong about the cadaver having no broken leg.
http://members.aol.com/RVSNorton/Lincoln40.html It was Dr. Frederick
May, who, on first seeing the body, said, "There is no resemblance in
that corpse to Booth nor can I believe it to be him." On further
examination, he did find a scar on the neck from where he had performed
surgery on Booth. He also clearly described a broken leg. Years
later, he wrote that the actor's appearance had altered completely in
death, but the scar made for positive identification.
The other details: different height, sandy hair, and freckles on the
corpse, are from a report I've seen in a couple of places, once here
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0277127/ and once on "Unsolved Mysteries."
The "Unsolved Mysteries" segment was said to be not very accurate, as
the man conjectured to have died in Booth's place is known to have died
two years later.
The story went that another man was sent to retrieve papers Booth left
in the barn. The troopers surrounding it couldn't see in too well and
it was not until getting him outside that they realized they shot the
wrong man. They then said, "OOPS!" and to cover their mistake, Dr. May
was forced by coercion to say the corpse was that of Booth when he knew
darn well it wasn't. It seems his initial remark on not recognizing
the body as being Booth fueled conspiracy rumors.
It wasn't much help that the body was not displayed for public viewing
(Why? It wasn't considered gruesome for the public to view Abe
Lincoln's remains) and that more positive identification was not made
by co-conspirators, family members, or others who knew Booth better,
rather than people who had just met him a few times or knew him from
photographs.
Cori
Jane Margaret Laight
Bad Jim wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 01:13:48 -0400, Jane Margaret Laight wrote
> (in article <1154495628.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>):
>
> > once you get an idea of what I have seen in
> > my checkered career
>
hey--i"m what they call versatile--I play chess too
JML
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
started? People who were present at the scene don't seem to mention
Booth trying to disguise himself in this manner.
Cori
Jane Margaret Laight
Hi Cori--
This story first appeared in Finis Bates' 1908 book--the complete title
was "The Escape and Suicide of John Wilkes Booth"; supposedly, among
the folks with Booth and Herold at the Garrett Farm was a plantation
overseer named Ruddy (freckles! Sandy hair! Right!)who had been
dispatched to the Garrett Farm along with Herold to gather up Booth's
effects and was caught by Union troops.
And to get back to the original question of this thread, Bates also
said that Andrew Johnson was the actual leader of the conspiracy--not
Wilkes Booth. He proffered no real proof to support his assertion.
Jane
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
Thanks for clearing this up. I wonder why these false stories are
believed and circulated so much.
Cori
Rambler III
<cmashiel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1154943100.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Ever hear of Roswell, crop circles, Pat Robertson, or that 9/11 was a
Bush conspiracy?
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
> Ever hear of Roswell, crop circles, Pat Robertson, or that 9/11 was a
> Bush conspiracy?
Most good rumors have enough truth in them to at least raise doubts as
to the real facts. It would seem that with Booth, a more positive
identification, such as enlisting family members right away and showing
the body to the public, would have really helped matters.
Cori
Jane Margaret Laight
Hindsight is always 20-20--you have to remember that Lincoln's
assassination was the first one of its kind, and no one really knew how
to handle it. In reading about it all, one is left with the impression
that no one had any real idea as to what to do, and things just fell
into place. As with Booth, all of his family members--none of whom were
involved with the conspiracy or had any idea as to what he did or why,
were either placed under surveillance by federal or local authorities,
or were actually thrown in jail. I would suggest Eleanor Ruggles' book,
"Prince of Players", a biography of Wilkes' brother Edwin as a source
to get the feel of those days and its impact on the Booth family, all
of whom would be dogged to their graves with the mark of Cain placed on
them by Wilkes' "One Mad Act", as one of his sisters called it.
JML
cmashiel...@hotmail.com
> As with Booth, all of his family members--none of whom were
> involved with the conspiracy or had any idea as to what he did or why,
> were either placed under surveillance by federal or local authorities,
> or were actually thrown in jail. I would suggest Eleanor Ruggles' book,
> "Prince of Players", a biography of Wilkes' brother Edwin as a source
> to get the feel of those days and its impact on the Booth family, all
> of whom would be dogged to their graves with the mark of Cain placed on
> them by Wilkes' "One Mad Act", as one of his sisters called it.
>
> JML
Thanks for answering one of my questions. I knew that family members
of more recent assassins, or even those rumored to be involved in
important political assassinations, were harassed, and wondered if the
same had happened to the Booth family.
This book http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/evaleg.html looks to be worth
having. Does anyone have a copy?
Cori
DELONGPREBUM
cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Bad Jim wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 04:27:36 -0400, cmashiel...@hotmail.com wrote
> > (in article <1154420856.5...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>):
> >
> > > Then, the government didn't tell the truth immediately about
> > > everything, such as the man shot in the barn not being John Wilkes
> > > Booth
> >
> > Where did you get this "fact"?
>
> It's common knowledge that the man shot in the barn didn't resemble
> Booth, who was so well-known he was unlikely to be mistaken for anyone
> else.
BULLSHIT !!!!
The physician who examined the body and was well-acquainted with
> Booth was forced to sign a paper claiming the tall, sandy-haired,
> freckled man with no broken leg shot in the barn was the short,
> dark-haired, clear-skinned Booth, who had broken his leg not two weeks
> before.
BULLSHIT!!!!!
This gave rise to the story that Booth escaped entirely.
> About four years later, a body was turned over to the Booth family
> which they accepted as Booth. This body was identified by the family
> dentist. It would seem Booth was caught shortly after they shot the
> other man, but they had to stick to their official story.
BULLSHIT!!!!
DELONGPREBUM
***
You people are INSANE with your bullshit.
Watch out, the Black Helicopters are coming to get you!
DELONGPREBUM
_____
And deservedly so, those Southern bastard Southerners!