Charles Merrill made eight or ten trips over Atzerodt’s escape route. Merrill to Joseph Holt, September 4, 1865, in M-619, 458:508; A public meeting in Bryantown resolved to cooperate with Wells. National Intelligencer, April 27, 1865, 2. Wells to Joseph H. Taylor, April 28, 1865, in M-619, 458:418; The officers who went with Baker were Capt. Francis M. Baker (no relation to the detectives) and Lt. Peter McNaughton. William N. Walton, of the New York Herald, went along to the Garrett farm, and reported the trip in the May 4 edition. Lieutenant Dana was sent by Burnett. RG 393 (2), entry 6709, p. 29, National Archives.
Washington Evening Star, July 7, 1865. Ford’s fire: Nashville Colored Tennessean, May 6, 1865, 3. Ford eventually got $100,000 for the theater, which opened as a three-story office building late in 1865. Someone proposed to make Ford’s Theatre a public lecture hall. National Intelligencer, June 27, 1865, 2. It would be hurriedly converted, and its myriad uses included space for the Army Medical Museum, which housed specimens from both Lincoln and Booth.
Virginia Lomax, The Old Capitol and Its Inmates, 67. Mrs. Lomax was there at this time. Ford’s two unpublished memoranda are in the John T. Ford Papers, MS 371, Maryland Historical Society. For the record, he and others noted the kindness of Superintendent William P. Wood, who allowed most prisoners to upgrade their furniture and food beyond what he could supply. As a friend of Mary Surratt’s family, Wood was ordered to keep some distance from his most notorious female prisoner. William P. Wood to Mrs. Franklin Rives, March 8, 1899, in Blair Rives Collection, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress. My thanks to Gayle Harris for spotting this.
McPhail in LAS 2:962. Smoot later said that they were indeed in on the plot, and that Bateman destroyed Booth’s boat on hearing of the assassination. Smoot in Ft. Smith Times, May 6, 1904; Parr in LAS 5:530. In an 1898 newspaper interview, Surratt said that he met Booth through a letter of introduction written by a friend. He did not identify the friend. The Washington Post, April 3, 1898.
Young: LAS 1:105; Burnett’s KGC theory: LAS 7:211. The Frankfurt consul, William W. Murphy, sent back a copy of the Gothaisches Tageblatt of May 9, which notified the citizens of Thuringen that one of their own was a strong suspect in the Lincoln conspiracy. Baron von Berlepsch remembered Frederick’s nephew, Ernest Hartmann Richter, as “a very ill-principled scoundrel and a notorious thief,” but this was actually a cousin of the man in custody. Consular dispatches no. 470, dated May 17, and no. 474, dated May 31, in Record Group 59, microcopy M-161, National Archives.
Junius Booth and Sleeper Clarke arrests: M-598, reel 110, records of the Old Capitol Prison; Joseph Booth in M-345, reel 30. Joe Booth was questioned and released, per Stanton’s orders. M-473, 89:369. When a business partner inquired into Clarke’s case on May 19, Holt endorsed the letter: “I have no knowledge of any testimony implicating John S. Clarke.” He was released. T. J. Campbell to J. B. Fry, RG 110, entry 38, National Archives; RG 393 (4), entry 2139, book 1; Saulsbury case: Thomas M. Wenie to J. R. Kenly, in LAS 2:220, and to James A. Hardie, RG 393 (1), entry 2347, old book 17:236. For more on Blackburn, see Nancy Disher Baird, Luke Pryor Blackburn, Physician, Governor, Reformer (Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky, 1979).
The Booth note quotes a passage from Macbeth III.iv in which Lady Macbeth says that giving food does not constitute good hospitality in itself. The note, now lost, was produced and read by Thomas T. Eckert at the impeachment hearings. Impeachment of the President (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1867), 677.
Forty marines were assigned to guard duty, with two placed over each prisoner at a time. They served under Capt. Frank Munroe, brother of Seaton Munroe, and Sergeants Joseph Hartley and John Peddicord; The order from Gustavus V. Fox to Montgomery is in a bound volume of telegrams published in M-149, reel 80, page 385. A subsequent telegram orders a ball and chain for Powell. Hoods are described in a National Park Service Textile Laboratory memorandum, May 29, 1990. The originals are in the collection of the Smithsonian Institution. Spangler and Arnold had the same experience with the hoods. See Spangler’s unpublished manuscript in the John T. Ford Papers, MS 371, Maryland Historical Society, and the Philadelphia Evening Telegraph, June 24, 1869; Also Arnold, Memoirs, 56–57; Eisenschiml, 176; Yossi Silverman, handcuff expert and collector, provided the Dr. Lilly story in e-mail correspondence with the author, January 2003.
Weichmann anecdote is from James R. Ford, “Recollections of Carroll Prison,” unpublished manuscript in the John T. Ford Papers, MS 371, Maryland Historical Society. James J. Gifford also heard a guard threaten Weichmann. Surratt Trial, 820.
The prisoners were kept in the cell block built for women inmates. Michael W. Kauffman, “Fort Lesley J. McNair and the Lincoln Conspirators,” Lincoln Herald 80 (Winter 1978): 176; Stanton’s orders, as well as the list of prisoners transferred, are in Stanton Papers, vol. 43, 101–2; The Keyport was identified in the log of the Saugus, RG 24. Hancock was also ordered to take charge of Mary Surratt at this time, but she was not transferred over from the Old Capitol until the following day. Dr. George Loring Porter, “How Booth’s Body Was Hidden,” Columbian Magazine (April 1911): 65. My thanks to Dr. Porter’s great-great-granddaughter, Marcia Maloney.
Eighty defendants: Chicago Tribune, May 4, 1865; The law admitting non-white testimony was passed on July 2, 1864; 13 Stat. 351; Only Maine allowed a defendant to testify in his own behalf, and they passed the law on March 25, 1864; 1864 Maine Acts. 214, Chapter 280. A similar federal statute was passed in 1878 (20 Stat. 30). A brief history of this rule is given in DeLuna v. U.S. 308 F2d. 140, 150–51, and 324 F2d. 375. For the history of plea bargaining, see Albert W. Alschuler, “Plea Bargaining and Its History,” in Crime and Justice in America (Westport: Meckler, 1978), 2:3–45 and Mark H. Haller, “Plea Bargaining: The Nineteenth Century,” ibid., 188–94.
Atzerodt lied: Robert Murray in LAS 5:263. An item in the Baltimore American, January 19, 1869, is termed a “confession,” but it is only a memorandum in the style and manner of those written by Foster. Atzerodt’s proffer is now in the collection of Floyd E. Risvold; Wells’s promise was mentioned in the Evening Star, July 7, 1865, 2; The New York conspirators planned to gain access to the White House, then blow it up during an “entertainment” they had staged for the president. In Come Retribution, this is transformed into a Confederate plot whose chief operative, Thomas Harney, was captured en route to Washington. It is worth noting that the War Department did nothing to prosecute Harney, who was still in custody, or Thomas Green, whose house was supposed to have been used in this scheme. They almost certainly looked into Atzerodt’s story; Powell checked out: Martha Murray in Poore, 1:470; The statements attributed to Atzerodt are in LAS 3:597, and 3:536 (Foster’s report); National Intelligencer, July 9, 1865 (Wood’s report); Baltimore American, January 19, 1869; and Surratt Courier (October 1980). The original statement, taken by William M. Runkel, has never surfaced. See M-619, 455:854.
Olcott on Chester: LAS 5:492; The Weichmann interrogation was described by the witness himself in A True History, 224, and Surratt Trial, 398. Mudd was actually taken to the penitentiary on May 4, and not immediately after this interview, as Weichmann claimed. See Hartranft log, 9; Capt. M. A. Clancy, of Ingraham’s staff, recommended no action against Mudd. Both draft indictments omitted Mudd’s name. The first omitted John Surratt and included João Celestino. The revised draft reversed that. Joseph Holt Papers, 93:7023, 7028. Mary Surratt in LAS 6:170–200; Olcott’s report in LAS 5:495; Fitzpatrick in LAS 5:403, 410.
For examples of case summaries, see Foster’s report in LAS 4:08 and Olcott’s in LAS 5:492; Stanton to Edward Carrington in M-473, 89:389. Stanton in M-473, 89:284–85; Hardie’s apology is in the Hardie Papers, Library of Congress.
Johnson’s proclamation is in 13 Stat. 756; Clippings of the Montreal newspapers are in the Hagley Museum and Library, Wilmington, Delaware; Thompson in the New York Tribune, May 22, 1865, 5
Collier’s name is on the original order, in Stanton’s hand, but
never appeared in print. Stanton Papers, reel 9, Library of Congress. “In Memoriam: Frederick Hill Collier,” MOLLUS pamphlet. My thanks to Roger D. Hunt. Comstock believed the accused should be tried in civilian court, and General Kautz was upset that the assignment in Washington would further delay his wedding in Ohio. General Porter kept his reasons to himself. Cyrus Ballou Comstock diary, May 9 entry, Library of Congress; August V. Kautz Papers, Library of Congress; Special Orders No. 216, copied into O.R. II:8, 696.
Benn Pitman described the recording process in a letter to Holt, November 22, 1873, in Holt Papers, 67:259. They actually used Benn Pitman’s American variant of his brother’s system. Charges in Poore, 1:14–19. The names of Harper and Young were supplied by a witness who later proved to be a fraud. These men may not have existed. General Hartranft read the charges to each prisoner just before the commission met (Hartranft log, 16). Holt’s recommendation was recalled by Spangler in the Philadelphia Evening Telegraph, June 24, 1869; The published rules said nothing about secrecy, but limited attendance to those with passes, and specified that testimony could be published only at the discretion of the Judge Advocate General. Benn Pitman, The Assassination of President Lincoln and the Trial of the Conspirators (Cincinnati: Moore, Wilstach, and Baldwin, 1865), 21.
William E. Doster, Lincoln and Episodes of the Civil War (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1915), 257 (hereinafter Doster).
Chapter 17: “Nothing short of a miracle can save their lives”
Alfred C. Gibson recollections, from the Civil War Library and Museum, Philadelphia. Thanks to Steven J. Wright. Clement Clay Papers in the Perkins Library, Duke University; O.R. I:49 (2) 733.
Von Steinacker in Poore, 1:20–25; Montgomery in Poore, 3:84; Merritt in ibid., 98–100, 103. Recall that John Yates Beall was hanged in February 1865, for piracy on Lake Erie. His mythical connection to Booth was probably asserted first at this time, and it survived for many years. In reality, Booth was not related to Beall and had not attended the University of Virginia with him as some people claimed. Though the two might have crossed paths in Beall’s hometown of Charlestown, it is unlikely they ever knew each other at all.
Godfrey J. Hyams claimed to have been involved in the yellow fever plot. Poore, 2:409; A newspaper ad from the Selma, Alabama, Dispatch was traced to George W. Gayle, a former federal prosecutor, who told investigators he was only joking. Gayle was brought first to Washington, then to Hilton Head, South Carolina, as a prisoner. He was supposed to stand trial at Fort Pulaski, near Savannah, but was released without trial a year later. Stanton Papers, Reel 9, 43:140, O.R. I:49 (2) 922; The New York Times, April 10, 1875. The ad itself is in LAS 15:557; Grant and Comstock’s visit to Johnson is in the Comstock Diary, May 12 entry.
Department of Washington forces were said to be 26,056 men at the most recent count. O.R. II:5, 506; April 13 orders: O.R. III:5, 509; Stop asking for passes: RG 393 (1), entry 5375, 22:228; Lincoln’s note in Basler, Complete Works, 8:410; Stanton’s report: O.R. III:5, 532; The assassination law was passed in August 1965: U.S. Code, Title 18, Chapter 84, Section 1751, 79 Stat. 580, plus later amendments.
Johnson in Poore, 1:54; Johnson’s apologists insist he was there only to plead to the jurisdiction, but in the passage quoted above he said he was there to do everything that the evidence would justify. Pitman to Holt, in Holt Papers, 93:7036, Library of Congress; Cazauran had a long-standing feud with the Booths, and had recently caused trouble for Blanche DeBar and others. See the Brooklyn Eagle, April 23, 1913.
Defendant descriptions are from clippings in the Lincoln Obsequies Scrapbook, Library of Congress; Courtroom crowding: Benjamin B. French Diary, June 18 entry, Library of Congress; Some writers have claimed that the defendants were not allowed to speak privately with their attorneys, but this was not so. General Hartranft was ordered to be present during these meetings, but not within hearing distance. Hartranft suggested they have attorney conferences in the courtroom instead of the cells. Hartranft log, 28.
Harris case: RG 153, Records of the Judge Advocate General, case MM1957. He was charged with a violation of the 56th article of war, not “the laws of war.” Frederick Stone was one of Harris’s attorneys, and his appearance for Mudd and Herold was delayed until the end of the first trial.
Conover in Poore, 3:116–17, 120–21, 141.
Kennedy’s guess: LAS 3:843; Ethan Allen Hitchcock to Elizabeth Peabody, June 11 and June 29, 1865, in the Massachusetts Historical Society; General Hitchcock believed that Powell was Dan Murray Lee, a son of Admiral Smith Lee. He took a personal interest in the issue, and eventually tracked down the Powell family near Live Oak, Florida, to confirm the story that came out. See Ethan Allen Hitchcock Papers, Library of Congress. Windson in LAS 3:104; The War Department spelled his name “Payne” because they believed he was one of the Kentucky Paynes. RG 110, entry 38; Doster, 264–65; Powell’s two brothers had not actually been killed, but he believed they had (see chapter 9, note 23). Entries from the family Bible in the possession of Jewell Powell Fillmon.
Prisoner descriptions are from clippings in the Lincoln Obsequies Scrapbook, Library of Congress; Constipation and pulse: Dr. James C. Hall in Poore, 3:544; Weeping was noted by Rev. A. D. Gillette, clipping in the Lincoln Obsequies Scrapbook; Junius Booth letter to Edwin, dated October 20, 1862, at The Players; Joe Booth interrogation by General Dix, May 12, 1865, in M-345, reel 30, National Archives; Allen D. Spiegel and Merrill S. Spiegel, “William H. Seward and the Insanity Plea in 1846,” American Journal of Forensic Psychiatry 19 (1998): 5–26; Dr. Isaac Ray, A Treatise on the Medical Jurisprudence of Insanity (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1853). My thanks to Dr. Allen D. Spiegel for information and guidance on Civil War–era insanity cases; Doster on insanity: Poore, 3:76–77.
Barnes in LAS 14:222–23.
Motive for attacking Seward: Poore, 1:15; Frederick Hatch, “The Seward Problem,” Journal of the Lincoln Assassination 16 (August 2002): 25; Succession law: 1 Stat. 240, most of which was repealed in 2 Stat. 295 (March 25, 1804); Under laws existing in 1865, the office of president would have fallen to the president pro tempore of the Senate, Lafayette S. Foster, of Connecticut.
Benn Pitman, “Some Facts of the Assassination Trial,” unpublished manuscript in the Jerome B. Howard Shorthand Collection, New York Public Library; “Special treatment” pertained to Dr. Mudd being allowed to sit outside the prisoners’ dock, which Hartranft explained by saying the dock was already full by the time Mudd was brought into the room (Hartranft log, 62, 20–21); Powell was caught playing with the iron ball, and Hartranft had it removed. Ibid., 49. Spangler in New York Tribune, quoted in an unidentified clipping; Stanton to Hancock, June 19, 1865, in Stanton Papers, reel 10, Library of Congress; Doster, 276; transfer of Mrs. Surratt: Hartranft log, 9, 70–71; Mrs. Surratt’s condition was “diagnosed” recently by Dr. William Coyle, a longtime member of the Surratt Society. Spangler in Philadelphia Evening Telegraph, June 24, 1869; Adjournment in LAS 14:294; Dr. George Loring Porter examined the prisoners twice every day, and his recommendations for lighter treatment were always granted. See Porter, report of June 20, 1865, in Stanton Papers, reel 10, Library of Congress, and Mary Walker Porter, The Surgeon in Charge (Concord, NH: Rumford Press, 1949).
Request for witnesses: Poore, 3:517; Holt had often discharged prisoners for such “fatal defects” as a failure to swear in a commission member in the presence of the accused. See Gayla M. Koerting, “The Trial of Henry Wirz and Nineteenth Century Military Law” (Ph.D. dissertation, Kent State University, 1995), 41. This work is full of useful insights on Holt and his operation of the Bureau of Military Justice. Attorneys allowed: 1 Stat. 118. Prosecutors working both sides: 6th Article of War, in 2 Stat. 360; Benet, 245–51; DeHart, 308–14; Coppee, 20–21, 56–59. All three prosecutors held military rank: Holt was a brigadier general, Bingham a major, and Burnett a brevet lieutenant colonel. When the U.S. Supreme Court finally held that the right to counsel in a capital case was also binding on state courts, they ba
sed their decision on the Fourteenth Amendment, which was written, ironically, by John A. Bingham. Powell v. Arizona, 287 U.S. 45. Bingham’s authorship of the due process clause is examined in Bernice R. Hasin, “John A. Bingham and Due Process” (master’s thesis, California State University, Long Beach, 1976).
DeHart 288–89, 364–65; Benet 353–54; Cox in LAS 14:675, 708; Ewing in LAS 14:235–36. Holt’s response in LAS 14:242–43; Habeas Corpus Act of 1863, section 2 in 12 Stat. 755. The convoluted wording allows for argument about the meaning, but Congress certainly intended to force the secretary of state, or the secretary of war, to turn over non-political prisoners to the courts. Failure to do so could result in the secretary’s imprisonment.
Holt in Poore, 2:542; Cox in Poore, 3:347; Ewing quoted in Poore, 3:342; Bingham in Poore, 3:345; Cox quoted in Poore, 3:346–47; Bingham response in Poore, 3:352; A transcript of the letter appears in Poore, 3:271.
Jenkins in Poore, 3:387; Holohan in Poore, 3:369; Howell in Poore, 2:342, 347; Cipher machine: Dana in Poore, 2:56; Burnett quoted in Poore, 3:373; Wallace-Aiken exchange in Poore, 2:177.
American Brutus Page 64
