+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Assassination (/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Construction at the Wok N Roll (/thread-371.html)
Pages: 1 2
RE: Construction at the Wok N Roll - L Verge - 09-29-2012 05:53 PM
The fact that it is in the last vestiges of D.C.'s Chinatown is what has sparked the regrowth and is also protecting the building. Washington's first Chinatown was very close to the U.S. Capitol, but it got pushed back sometime in the late-1800s or early-1900s. I doubt that anyone will tackle moving or destroying what's left of the revitalized area now that our society treasures cultural diversity more.
Our town's Chinese neighborhood will never rival New York's or San Francisco's, however. It is small and mainly commercial (as in restaurants).
RE: Construction at the Wok N Roll - Jim Garrett - 09-29-2012 07:36 PM
I hope Laurie agrees with me in that I feel that if the Penn's Quarter section in Washington did not become Chinatown, the chance would have been good that the Surratt boarding house may not be here today. The developement of the downtown area largely ignored the Chinatown area. While developers like Oliver T. Carr were busy buying up commercial real estate in the downtown corridors from Pennsylvania Ave to F St., the immigrant and 1st generation American owners of these Chinatown properties put a cultural value on their neighborhood that the properties just plain weren't for sale.
While Chinatown in Washington is very small, it has a vibrant culture, and if you look down the facades of H St, most of the buildings on the block date to the 1800s. Without the Chinese culture, that block might have gone the way of many other blocks in downtown D.C. Just look at 10th St between F and E streets. The only three buildings from 1865 on that block are Ford's, the Petersen House, and the house next to Petersen's.
RE: Construction at the Wok N Roll - John Fazio - 10-10-2012 10:38 AM
(09-26-2012 08:57 AM)Laurie Verge Wrote: John Surratt, Sr. acquired the H Street property in a complicated land deal back in 1853. They rented it out to government employees, a music teacher, etc. until Mrs. Surratt decided to give up the Surrattsville property in 1864, and move into the city to earn income as a boardinghouse keeper and also for secuirty -- and largely because Maryland freed the slaves on November 1, 1864. She was settled into 541 H Street in Decemberof 1864.
It appears that Mrs. Surratt never owned the house, however. Her husband died in 1862 without a will; and in those days, a widow could not inherit. Both the Surrattsville property and the D.C. property went to the children. When John, Jr. got heavily involved with Booth, he signed over his one-third ownership to his mother. If he got caught doing Confederate business, any property that he owned would be confiscated by the federal government.
After her mother's execution, Anna was faced with dealing with the estate until brother Isaac returned from the Confederate army. Bills had mounted up during the war and continued after the war; and by 1869, all Surratt property was sold off by court orders. I believe I'm correct that even that did not satisfy all the debts.
Laurie:
The argument that Mary moved into the boarding house for economic reasons is certainly persuasive (death of husband; son's loss of position as postmaster; emancipation of her slaves). But the argument that she was instructed to do so because of Booth's conspiracy also has merit. Chamlee wrote that she could easily have rented rooms in the boarding house without moving there, because of a shortage of living space during the war. Larson wrote that the expense of furnishing ten rooms must have been substantial, though she may have had help in this regard from her superiors. It must be observed that the time of her move (November 1 and December 1, 1864) is the same time that Booth came into their lives. A central meeting place in Washington was desirable, though Arnold and O'Laughlen appear to have been there only once (March 17, in connection with the Campbell Hospital thing). John Surratt later confessed that his underground activities increased after the move. In addition, a letter from John to Weichmann appears to support this view. In any case, it wasn't long before Confederate operatives of every stripe were buzzing in and out of the house at all hours of the day and night. Booth, Atzerodt, Powell and Herold came often. These were the four who, with Mary, were directly involved in the plot to murder, rather than "kidnap". The truth is probably that economic hardship was a major factor, but that the Confederate leadership also had a hand in it.
John
RE: Construction at the Wok N Roll - Laurie Verge - 10-10-2012 11:18 AM
John,
Your speculation may very well be accurate, and that premise was discussed with me by Hall, Tidwell, and Brennan. However, they never found documentation. On the other hand, documentation that the Surrattsville property served as a Confederate safe house was found in Confederate reports dating to the third quarter of 1864 (note that Mr. Surratt had died in the summer of 1862). It would be wonderful to find something similar regarding the D.C. home.
The only time you will get me to bristle on the subject is if you state (as some have done) that Booth or the Confederacy BOUGHT the house and established Mrs. Surratt in it as part of the plotting. As stated above, it had been owned by her husband since 1853, and rented out to others (Chamlee should have checked this). As for furnishing the house, there may have already been furniture there - provided for the boarders during the time that her husband was alive and not yet badly in debt. OR, more likely, most of the furniture from the ten-room Surrattsville home may have been moved to the city home.
Without documentation of some sort, I doubt we will ever know the real reason for her move. However, strictly from my personal perspective: By November 1, 1864, as my slaves were freed and I had no funds to hire them on as laborers - and as I surveyed a few hundred acres of land that would lay fallow without their services - and mentally cursed my two sons for being away and of little or no help - and realized that my nearest neighbor was a quarter-mile away - and that contraband, ragtags, and who knows what else were traipsing around at all hours - I would be inclined to throw up my hands in disgust and move into a safe neighborhood in the city.
And, saving the best for last, the best evidence that we have is that John Surratt, Jr. did not meet John Wilkes Booth until the afternoon of December 23, 1864, when Dr. Mudd made the introductions. The Surratts had already made their move and were well established by that time at 541 H Street. Now, as to the house being a layover for Confederate agents, it did conveniently become one - and the Surrattsville property seems to have remained one also under John Lloyd's care. How many of those Confederate agents were involved in the Lincoln plots is debatable.