+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Assassination (/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Sarah Slater's death certificate (/thread-2733.html)
Pages: 1 2
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - SSlater - 11-06-2015 06:03 PM
John Fazio I apologize - I misspelled John. How will I ever live it down. John . I never botch "Sarah". I will write it a hundred times.
JOHN
JOHN
JOHN
jojn OOPS!
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - L Verge - 11-06-2015 06:57 PM
I have qualms about Lafayette Baker's book (not to mention the man himself!) and its veracity -- and even the question as to how much of it he even composed. I know that Mike Kauffman used to refer to it being ghost-written for Baker and that Baker himself couldn't recognize a lie from the truth.
Anyone out there know enough about this super snoop to pass historical judgment on him? I can believe John Stanton's theory on Sarah being the "little man," but would trust it even more if it were corroborated anywhere else but in Baker's book.
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - SSlater - 11-06-2015 08:41 PM
(11-06-2015 06:57 PM)L Verge Wrote: I have qualms about Lafayette Baker's book (not to mention the man himself!) and its veracity -- and even the question as to how much of it he even composed. I know that Mike Kauffman used to refer to it being ghost-written for Baker and that Baker himself couldn't recognize a lie from the truth.
Anyone out there know enough about this super snoop to pass historical judgment on him? I can believe John Stanton's theory on Sarah being the "little man," but would trust it even more if it were corroborated anywhere else but in Baker's book.
Laurie. That's a fair deal. I did a small search on the subject and it seems that every thing Baker used, really happened, but it was his agents who wrote the stories. Nothing more than "reporting their day's work". In most cases he would allow them to sign their initials, but not their names. I guess he wanted the readers to think he was everywhere, doing everything. In a few cases I was able to match the initials to a Man. ( That's not a positive ID). He also may have been trying to protect their identity. It may have protected some from retaliation. Maybe, when I finish Harney, I'll dig up Baker. THAT would be a notable "Find". Back to Baker. Allowing the agents to write the reports, gave them an opportunity to embellish it, all they wanted.
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - Gene C - 11-07-2015 08:28 AM
Jacob Mogelever's book about Baker, "Death To Traders" is an interesting read. Copyright in 1960. It doesn't have a bibliography, but much of his information about Baker comes from manuscripts and unpublished letters held in the Baker family. Before the days of internet, Mogelever and his brother wrote more than 1,200 letters seeking information for their book.
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - John Fazio - 11-07-2015 10:38 AM
SSlater, Laurie, et al.:
A few comments:
1. Your comments suggest that Booth and Surratt were no longer working with a common purpose, if they had ever done so. My view is that that conclusion is inconsistent with their prior history together (the recruitment of Atzerodt, the Jack Cade affair, the Gautier's restaurant meeting, etc.), inconsistent with Surratt stopping in New York to see Booth on his way to Montreal (April 4), inconsistent with Booth's notifying Surratt in Montreal that "our" plans had changed and that Surratt was to return to Washington "immediately", inconsistent with Surratt telegraphing Booth in New York from Elmira and learning that he had already left for Washington, and inconsistent with Ste. Marie's Affidavit in which he said that Surratt had told him that he and Booth had killed Lincoln, "the n-----'s friend".
2. My understanding is that Gen E. G. Lee was sent to Canada as a replacement for Jacob Thompson, because the Confederate leadership, especially Benjamin, was thoroughly dissatisfied with Thompson's performance as head of the Canadian Cabinet, especially as it related to terror plots and the Northwest Confederacy conspiracy. I know nothing of a plan to create a new Confederate army. There may be something to it, but it strikes me as unrealistic. At this stage, another army, even if it could be created, offered no hope for the Confederacy, but multiple assassinations did.
3. I read J. Marshall Crawford as saying that Harney was captured on the 9th, not the 10th. The difference is important, because the earlier date provides more time for Booth to be notified of the failure of the mission and for him to notify Surratt, which he did, the beginning of the week (probably the 10th, Monday).
4. If Atzerodt was told by Booth on the 8th that if he, Booth, didn't get Lincoln quick, the New York crowd would, it suggests that Booth had already made up his mind to kill, indeed that he had long since intended it, rather than deciding to do it at a later date.
5. As for the "liars", please see pp. 357-363 of Decapitating.
6. Of course Elmira is in New York, but recall the rest of Ste. Marie's Affidavit as to what Surratt had told him: He said that Surratt had told him that at the time of the assassination, he was in New York prepared to fly, which means, of course, that he knew what was coming, not that it came as a surprise to him. That, in turn, means that he and Booth were still working with a common purpose, does it not?
7. If Ste. Marie told the truth in his Affidavit, then he lied on the stand in Surratt's trial, when he said that Surratt had told him he was in Washington on the 14th and left that night, by train, in disguise. If that was a lie, are we not compelled to conclude that his counsel, Pierrepont, Carrington, et al., knowingly used perjured testimony? Do you think they would do that?
John
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - L Verge - 11-07-2015 10:52 AM
(11-07-2015 08:28 AM)Gene C Wrote: Jacob Mogelever's book about Baker, "Death To Traders" is an interesting read. Copyright in 1960. It doesn't have a bibliography, but much of his information about Baker comes from manuscripts and unpublished letters held in the Baker family. Before the days of internet, Mogelever and his brother wrote more than 1,200 letters seeking information for their book.
I agree, Gene. Actually Death to Traitors is one of the higher books on my list.
(11-07-2015 10:38 AM)John Fazio Wrote: SSlater, Laurie, et al.:
A few comments:
1. Your comments suggest that Booth and Surratt were no longer working with a common purpose, if they had ever done so. My view is that that conclusion is inconsistent with their prior history together (the recruitment of Atzerodt, the Jack Cade affair, the Gautier's restaurant meeting, etc.), inconsistent with Surratt stopping in New York to see Booth on his way to Montreal (April 4), inconsistent with Booth's notifying Surratt in Montreal that "our" plans had changed and that Surratt was to return to Washington "immediately", inconsistent with Surratt telegraphing Booth in New York from Elmira and learning that he had already left for Washington, and inconsistent with Ste. Marie's Affidavit in which he said that Surratt had told him that he and Booth had killed Lincoln, "the n-----'s friend".
2. My understanding is that Gen E. G. Lee was sent to Canada as a replacement for Jacob Thompson, because the Confederate leadership, especially Benjamin, was thoroughly dissatisfied with Thompson's performance as head of the Canadian Cabinet, especially as it related to terror plots and the Northwest Confederacy conspiracy. I know nothing of a plan to create a new Confederate army. There may be something to it, but it strikes me as unrealistic. At this stage, another army, even if it could be created, offered no hope for the Confederacy, but multiple assassinations did.
3. I read J. Marshall Crawford as saying that Harney was captured on the 9th, not the 10th. The difference is important, because the earlier date provides more time for Booth to be notified of the failure of the mission and for him to notify Surratt, which he did, the beginning of the week (probably the 10th, Monday).
4. If Atzerodt was told by Booth on the 8th that if he, Booth, didn't get Lincoln quick, the New York crowd would, it suggests that Booth had already made up his mind to kill, indeed that he had long since intended it, rather than deciding to do it at a later date.
5. As for the "liars", please see pp. 357-363 of Decapitating.
6. Of course Elmira is in New York, but recall the rest of Ste. Marie's Affidavit as to what Surratt had told him: He said that Surratt had told him that at the time of the assassination, he was in New York prepared to fly, which means, of course, that he knew what was coming, not that it came as a surprise to him. That, in turn, means that he and Booth were still working with a common purpose, does it not?
7. If Ste. Marie told the truth in his Affidavit, then he lied on the stand in Surratt's trial, when he said that Surratt had told him he was in Washington on the 14th and left that night, by train, in disguise. If that was a lie, are we not compelled to conclude that his counsel, Pierrepont, Carrington, et al., knowingly used perjured testimony? Do you think they would do that?
John
Boy, John, trying to fight you and this nasty, lingering cold at the same time is the pits!
While Surratt was under control of (and following orders from) his controllers in the Confederacy, he should never have kept Booth very far from his attention because his ties to that loose cannon were too well-known. When Booth exploded, the flying shrapnel was going to head in several directions - including Surratt's and the Confederate hierarchy's. I'd be ready "to fly" at a moment's notice also. That's not working at a common purpose; that's having the good sense to practice self-preservation!
I think assassination had always been Plan B in Booth's head, and Surratt knew it.
Why do I have a lingering thought in my head about a plan to turn certain Canadian provinces into a Northern Confederacy (along the lines of what the KGC had planned in Central and South America years earlier)? Getting Southern forces into Canada (even if escaped prisoners of war) was a goal? Maybe this is just my cough syrup talking...
Finally, if anyone tried to keep score as to how many liars were involved in this story from 1862-1870, I think we would soon see that poor soul running and screaming down the steps of the National Archives in no time.
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - John Fazio - 11-07-2015 02:18 PM
(11-07-2015 10:52 AM)L Verge Wrote:(11-07-2015 08:28 AM)Gene C Wrote: Jacob Mogelever's book about Baker, "Death To Traders" is an interesting read. Copyright in 1960. It doesn't have a bibliography, but much of his information about Baker comes from manuscripts and unpublished letters held in the Baker family. Before the days of internet, Mogelever and his brother wrote more than 1,200 letters seeking information for their book.
I agree, Gene. Actually Death to Traitors is one of the higher books on my list.
(11-07-2015 10:38 AM)John Fazio Wrote: SSlater, Laurie, et al.:
A few comments:
1. Your comments suggest that Booth and Surratt were no longer working with a common purpose, if they had ever done so. My view is that that conclusion is inconsistent with their prior history together (the recruitment of Atzerodt, the Jack Cade affair, the Gautier's restaurant meeting, etc.), inconsistent with Surratt stopping in New York to see Booth on his way to Montreal (April 4), inconsistent with Booth's notifying Surratt in Montreal that "our" plans had changed and that Surratt was to return to Washington "immediately", inconsistent with Surratt telegraphing Booth in New York from Elmira and learning that he had already left for Washington, and inconsistent with Ste. Marie's Affidavit in which he said that Surratt had told him that he and Booth had killed Lincoln, "the n-----'s friend".
2. My understanding is that Gen E. G. Lee was sent to Canada as a replacement for Jacob Thompson, because the Confederate leadership, especially Benjamin, was thoroughly dissatisfied with Thompson's performance as head of the Canadian Cabinet, especially as it related to terror plots and the Northwest Confederacy conspiracy. I know nothing of a plan to create a new Confederate army. There may be something to it, but it strikes me as unrealistic. At this stage, another army, even if it could be created, offered no hope for the Confederacy, but multiple assassinations did.
3. I read J. Marshall Crawford as saying that Harney was captured on the 9th, not the 10th. The difference is important, because the earlier date provides more time for Booth to be notified of the failure of the mission and for him to notify Surratt, which he did, the beginning of the week (probably the 10th, Monday).
4. If Atzerodt was told by Booth on the 8th that if he, Booth, didn't get Lincoln quick, the New York crowd would, it suggests that Booth had already made up his mind to kill, indeed that he had long since intended it, rather than deciding to do it at a later date.
5. As for the "liars", please see pp. 357-363 of Decapitating.
6. Of course Elmira is in New York, but recall the rest of Ste. Marie's Affidavit as to what Surratt had told him: He said that Surratt had told him that at the time of the assassination, he was in New York prepared to fly, which means, of course, that he knew what was coming, not that it came as a surprise to him. That, in turn, means that he and Booth were still working with a common purpose, does it not?
7. If Ste. Marie told the truth in his Affidavit, then he lied on the stand in Surratt's trial, when he said that Surratt had told him he was in Washington on the 14th and left that night, by train, in disguise. If that was a lie, are we not compelled to conclude that his counsel, Pierrepont, Carrington, et al., knowingly used perjured testimony? Do you think they would do that?
John
Boy, John, trying to fight you and this nasty, lingering cold at the same time is the pits!
While Surratt was under control of (and following orders from) his controllers in the Confederacy, he should never have kept Booth very far from his attention because his ties to that loose cannon were too well-known. When Booth exploded, the flying shrapnel was going to head in several directions - including Surratt's and the Confederate hierarchy's. I'd be ready "to fly" at a moment's notice also. That's not working at a common purpose; that's having the good sense to practice self-preservation!
I think assassination had always been Plan B in Booth's head, and Surratt knew it.
Why do I have a lingering thought in my head about a plan to turn certain Canadian provinces into a Northern Confederacy (along the lines of what the KGC had planned in Central and South America years earlier)? Getting Southern forces into Canada (even if escaped prisoners of war) was a goal? Maybe this is just my cough syrup talking...
Finally, if anyone tried to keep score as to how many liars were involved in this story from 1862-1870, I think we would soon see that poor soul running and screaming down the steps of the National Archives in no time.
Laurie:
I don't hate too many things in life, but I DO hate colds. Therefore, you have nothing but sympathy from me. Please take care of your cold and give no further thought to this Surratt business. Your comments are well taken anyway.
John
RE: Reply To John F. - SSlater - 11-07-2015 09:47 PM
I don't have time to answer all your comments, right now, and I don't want it to appear as a long diatribe. Unfortunately, I do not have my files here with me, for cites. (They are in boxes. in a barn, in another county.) But I'll get started. I'll do my best.
Booth and Surratt may have been predictable - at one time, but in the late-March/early-April time frame - the gloves were off. Huge changes were occurring, and Booth and Surratt had little contact. Sarah was in Montreal, Surratt was in Washington, Booth was in New York. Montreal asked Surratt to meet Sarah in NY. Surratt couldn't make it (why?). Booth brought her to D.C. and Surratt took over. He took her to the Potomac, but didn't want to go to Richmond (why?), but the "hired escort". couldn't or wouldn't go, Surratt took her. Does this sound like they were working for a "common purpose"? NO! But we now know _they were. We don't know what was going on, But I'll bet you a dime to a dollar, the problem was Harney's mission. (I'm on my own now - no cites). The "mission" hadn't started yet, but YOU KNOW, Richmond was working on it. It is very possible that Richmond directed Surratt to bring Sarah down, so they could bring Surratt up to date. Canada didn't have to be "brought in" at this stage.
After April 1 -( Back to cites)Harney is on his way to D.C. via Gordonsville, then to Mosby. Surratt and Sarah are off to Canada. Booth was in a hotel with some Broad, but Surratt stopped in N.Y to Check things out with Booth - no Booth - on to Canada.
Time passes, Surratt is in Canada, Sarah is there to. I guess Booth is back in NY. Harney gets captured. OOPS! Plans Change. Booth doesn't know what to do , msg to Surratt HELP! COME HOME IMMEDIATELY! (It might be that Booth got news of Harney's failure.
Booth was deeply involved in Harney's Mission and knew of its progress.
Every day now, every person is in a different town and Messages are going in every direction.
At this time, Gen. E.G. Lee has his his own plans. (I doubt that Canada had any knowledge on Harney) ( Why would they?) Surratt and Sarah are lolling around with nothing to do. Lee needs skilled "eyes " to go to Elmira" Off they go.
S'all for tonight, I just got a phone call. New assignment. I'll get back on this. JOHN
RE: Reply To John F. - L Verge - 11-08-2015 12:41 PM
(11-07-2015 09:47 PM)SSlater Wrote: I don't have time to answer all your comments, right now, and I don't want it to appear as a long diatribe. Unfortunately, I do not have my files here with me, for cites. (They are in boxes. in a barn, in another county.) But I'll get started. I'll do my best.
Booth and Surratt may have been predictable - at one time, but in the late-March/early-April time frame - the gloves were off. Huge changes were occurring, and Booth and Surratt had little contact. Sarah was in Montreal, Surratt was in Washington, Booth was in New York. Montreal asked Surratt to meet Sarah in NY. Surratt couldn't make it (why?). Booth brought her to D.C. and Surratt took over. He took her to the Potomac, but didn't want to go to Richmond (why?), but the "hired escort". couldn't or wouldn't go, Surratt took her. Does this sound like they were working for a "common purpose"? NO! But we now know _they were. We don't know what was going on, But I'll bet you a dime to a dollar, the problem was Harney's mission. (I'm on my own now - no cites). The "mission" hadn't started yet, but YOU KNOW, Richmond was working on it. It is very possible that Richmond directed Surratt to bring Sarah down, so they could bring Surratt up to date. Canada didn't have to be "brought in" at this stage.
After April 1 -( Back to cites)Harney is on his way to D.C. via Gordonsville, then to Mosby. Surratt and Sarah are off to Canada. Booth was in a hotel with some Broad, but Surratt stopped in N.Y to Check things out with Booth - no Booth - on to Canada.
Time passes, Surratt is in Canada, Sarah is there to. I guess Booth is back in NY. Harney gets captured. OOPS! Plans Change. Booth doesn't know what to do , msg to Surratt HELP! COME HOME IMMEDIATELY! (It might be that Booth got news of Harney's failure.
Booth was deeply involved in Harney's Mission and knew of its progress.
Every day now, every person is in a different town and Messages are going in every direction.
At this time, Gen. E.G. Lee has his his own plans. (I doubt that Canada had any knowledge on Harney) ( Why would they?) Surratt and Sarah are lolling around with nothing to do. Lee needs skilled "eyes " to go to Elmira" Off they go.
S'all for tonight, I just got a phone call. New assignment. I'll get back on this. JOHN
Wasn't the transport agent who could not escort Sarah to Richmond Gus Howell, who was arrested at Surratt's Tavern at the end of March? His arrest was another worry to add to the pile at this point because it might indicate that the Feds knew more about things than the Confeds were giving them credit for.
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - RJNorton - 11-08-2015 02:51 PM
I am curious to know if Rev. Stephen Cameron ever gave more information on Sarah Slater. I have looked and cannot find anything he said about her other than the one-word description John S. used in an old post. I am thinking Cameron must have said more than this. Many thanks!
RE: Reply To John F. - SSlater - 11-08-2015 10:43 PM
(11-08-2015 12:41 PM)L Verge Wrote:Laurie. You are right, thank you for your help. Then there was that "Unfamiliar Agent - Mr.Berry, there too. He drove he horses back to D.C. I had the right people there, but I mixed up their jobs.(11-07-2015 09:47 PM)SSlater Wrote: I don't have time to answer all your comments, right now, and I don't want it to appear as a long diatribe. Unfortunately, I do not have my files here with me, for cites. (They are in boxes. in a barn, in another county.) But I'll get started. I'll do my best.
Booth and Surratt may have been predictable - at one time, but in the late-March/early-April time frame - the gloves were off. Huge changes were occurring, and Booth and Surratt had little contact. Sarah was in Montreal, Surratt was in Washington, Booth was in New York. Montreal asked Surratt to meet Sarah in NY. Surratt couldn't make it (why?). Booth brought her to D.C. and Surratt took over. He took her to the Potomac, but didn't want to go to Richmond (why?), but the "hired escort". couldn't or wouldn't go, Surratt took her. Does this sound like they were working for a "common purpose"? NO! But we now know _they were. We don't know what was going on, But I'll bet you a dime to a dollar, the problem was Harney's mission. (I'm on my own now - no cites). The "mission" hadn't started yet, but YOU KNOW, Richmond was working on it. It is very possible that Richmond directed Surratt to bring Sarah down, so they could bring Surratt up to date. Canada didn't have to be "brought in" at this stage.
After April 1 -( Back to cites)Harney is on his way to D.C. via Gordonsville, then to Mosby. Surratt and Sarah are off to Canada. Booth was in a hotel with some Broad, but Surratt stopped in N.Y to Check things out with Booth - no Booth - on to Canada.
Time passes, Surratt is in Canada, Sarah is there to. I guess Booth is back in NY. Harney gets captured. OOPS! Plans Change. Booth doesn't know what to do , msg to Surratt HELP! COME HOME IMMEDIATELY! (It might be that Booth got news of Harney's failure.
Booth was deeply involved in Harney's Mission and knew of its progress.
Every day now, every person is in a different town and Messages are going in every direction.
At this time, Gen. E.G. Lee has his his own plans. (I doubt that Canada had any knowledge on Harney) ( Why would they?) Surratt and Sarah are lolling around with nothing to do. Lee needs skilled "eyes " to go to Elmira" Off they go.
S'all for tonight, I just got a phone call. New assignment. I'll get back on this. JOHN
Wasn't the transport agent who could not escort Sarah to Richmond Gus Howell, who was arrested at Surratt's Tavern at the end of March? His arrest was another worry to add to the pile at this point because it might indicate that the Feds knew more about things than the Confeds were giving them credit for.
RE: Sarah Slater's death certificate - L Verge - 11-09-2015 08:09 AM
I think the second "agent" was not really an agent. David Barry had been a friend of John Surratt, Sr. since childhood, and I think he was called into service. Mr. Barry's son and Anna Surratt had been an item before young Barry headed to war.