+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Assassination (/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Presidential Assassins (/thread-451.html)
RE: Presidential Assassins - Gene C - 10-30-2012 09:26 AM
I do not have a medical background, but it sounds to me like President Taylors death could have been caused by appendicitis.
RE: Presidential Assassins - Tom Emery - 10-31-2012 01:15 PM
Guess I started a good discussion on this, eh?
I agree with the earlier posts that Booth was not a loser, or anything like that. I also agree that Booth "was at the top of his game" in his profession. He was one of the most famous men in America thanks to his acting skills, and for good reason. He was hardly a fringe person, or a social outcast.
I still question his sanity, although that topic is certainly up for grabs. But like I said in my first post, I think what really sets him apart is that he was not like the other three (known) Presidential assassins. Not to simplify it, but Booth seemingly had it all -- fame, professional respect, plenty of money, good looks, etc. The other three were social misfits in so many ways.
A disclaimer -- I did not mean to neglect other intended assassins, such as the ones that tried to take out Ford, Reagan, Theodore Roosevelt, etc. Like many of you, I'm also intrigued by the Zachary Taylor mystery. I only tried to focus on known assassins who got the job done, so to speak.
One more thing -- the fate of the four known assassins shows how little regard we have for Presidential assassins in American society. Booth was reviled by many in both the North and South, which is interesting because the South was still at war with the North (Lee's surrender didn't end things; there were surrenders of armies throughout the spring), and since many in the North were divided on Lincoln.
Guiteau was laughed at by pretty much everyone, and his trial was a quick one. After Czolgosz' execution, sulfuric acid was poured over his body in the grave, mainly to get rid of him as quickly as possible. His trial was also a fast one. Oswald's grave has been defaced many times, and his family has been scorned.
We don't take kindly to Presidential assassins in America. For all of our faults, our society tends not to kill its leaders, and I think our democratic process also trumps all; if you don't like someone, you have the chance to vote them out, not kill them.
RE: Presidential Assassins - Laurie Verge - 10-31-2012 02:12 PM
Just a little note as to Booth being "the insane actor:" James O. Hall once pondered with me as to whether or not that was a title hung on him by the Confederacy in order to distance themselves from being part of the plot.
RE: Presidential Assassins - JMadonna - 10-31-2012 02:37 PM
(10-31-2012 02:12 PM)Laurie Verge Wrote: Just a little note as to Booth being "the insane actor:" James O. Hall once pondered with me as to whether or not that was a title hung on him by the Confederacy in order to distance themselves from being part of the plot.
What was the conclusion?
RE: Presidential Assassins - Laurie Verge - 10-31-2012 02:49 PM
We both suspected (couldn't prove) that it was highly likely. We still play those kinds of political games and denials today, don't we?
RE: Presidential Assassins - Tom Emery - 11-02-2012 09:00 AM
Whether this relates to the discussion or not is debatable, but I've always been intrigued by another angle of these assassinations.
If memory serves me right, the Lincoln casket was opened for the final time on Sept. 26, 1901. That would have been only 12 days after the death of William McKinley.
I've wondered if that was on the minds of those present when the Lincoln casket was opened that last time. The idea of opening a casket seems gruesome, but it certainly makes sense; the casket had been opened so many times, there was the Nov. 1876 plot to steal the body, etc.
But I've wondered if there was a sense of the recent McKinley assassination as well, since it would have been so fresh in their minds. I'm NOT saying that was a reason to open the casket; it was just an irony that the opening and the assassination were so close.
I'm glad to be a part of this symposium, and I've had a great time with it. Hopefully, I'll get to meet some of you in person at some point!
RE: Presidential Assassins - RJNorton - 11-02-2012 09:28 AM
I have a .pdf file of an article by Dorothy Meserve Kunhardt in the February 15, 1963, edition of Life magazine that deals with the exhumation. Click here.
![[Image: lifecover.jpg]](http://rogerjnorton.com/lifecover.jpg)
RE: Presidential Assassins - Jim Garrett - 11-02-2012 06:34 PM
(11-02-2012 09:00 AM)Tom Emery Wrote: Whether this relates to the discussion or not is debatable, but I've always been intrigued by another angle of these assassinations.Welcome Tom. Roger has put together a great group here. I feel lucky to be a participant in such a top notch group.......except Rich Smyth.
If memory serves me right, the Lincoln casket was opened for the final time on Sept. 26, 1901. That would have been only 12 days after the death of William McKinley.
I've wondered if that was on the minds of those present when the Lincoln casket was opened that last time. The idea of opening a casket seems gruesome, but it certainly makes sense; the casket had been opened so many times, there was the Nov. 1876 plot to steal the body, etc.
But I've wondered if there was a sense of the recent McKinley assassination as well, since it would have been so fresh in their minds. I'm NOT saying that was a reason to open the casket; it was just an irony that the opening and the assassination were so close.
I'm glad to be a part of this symposium, and I've had a great time with it. Hopefully, I'll get to meet some of you in person at some point!
RE: Presidential Assassins - BettyO - 11-02-2012 07:05 PM
Great article, Roger! Thanks ever so very much --
I have one question. What with all of these wonderful photos of the exhumation, I wonder WHY they didn't actually photograph Lincoln's body?! Wouldn't that have been a wonderful, earth shattering occasion! There WAS no Stanton around to prohibit such a thing.....I 'm just curious as to why they didn't do that....
Anyone have any idea?
RE: Presidential Assassins - Jim Garrett - 11-02-2012 07:12 PM
You know Betty, it seems that by the turn of the century, there were alot fewer photographs of the deceased. Do you think that people viewed the deceased differently than they had a generation earlier?
Along the same line, were photographs taken when they exhumed Jesse James or Old Rough N Ready?
RE: Presidential Assassins - LincolnMan - 11-02-2012 08:32 PM
Great question Betty. I assume that considering all Robert Lincoln went through to protect the "Lincoln legacy" and the very body of Lincoln, himself-it would have been considered very "bad form?"
RE: Presidential Assassins - Gene C - 11-02-2012 10:35 PM
(11-02-2012 07:05 PM)BettyO Wrote: I have one question. What with all of these wonderful photos of the exhumation, I wonder WHY they didn't actually photograph Lincoln's body?! .I 'm just curious as to why they didn't do that....
Anyone have any idea?
Respect! It would be disrespectful to take photo's of the president's decomposing body.
RE: Presidential Assassins - RJNorton - 11-03-2012 04:23 AM
Is something out there? I have received several letters on this topic. Here are a couple of examples:
This one is from July 29, 2002:
Dear Mr. Norton,
I'm 60 years old now. When I was a teenager in high school (about 1957 or so) I read an intriguing article about Abraham Lincoln's exumation in a medical journal (JAMA ?) in my father's medical office. It contained a very clear photograph of Abraham Lincoln in a coffin - very close-up, staight-on, extremely clear full-face shot. The caption or some adjacent text remarked how little physical deterioration was evident at the exhumation. I was amazed at the clarity of the photo, which was printed in approximately 2" tall x 1.5" wide and showed Lincoln clearly lying in a coffin.
I've searched online for a copy of that photo - only to read that no such picture exists. So there is a bit of a mystery here. If you research the popular medical journals that MD's subscribed to in the late 1950's, you should be able to find the picture I'm describing. I'd recommend starting with Journal of the American Medical Association, c. 1954-60. If you cannot find it in JAMA and there were any competiting monthly magazines or journals that were similarly thick (about 3/8 inch or so) they should be checked.
I suppose the photo I saw might be the one recently published in a book. But that book photo was taken soon after the assasination - not at the 1901 exhumation. What struck me about the photo in the my dad's medical journal, was that the text made it clear it was taken at the time of exumation. I was shocked at that, not only because the photo looked so normal, but because the accompanying text was my first knowledge of his exhumation.
------------------------------------------
This one I received on February 14, 2005:
"i just received the 1963 issue of life magazine that has pictures of the Lincoln exhumation. i remember reading about and seeing a picture of his exhumation when in about the late fifties i think. i know i saw a picture that is exactly as described in the life magazine article where it is said that he had mold growing on his suit. i have told people this and no one believes me but i know i saw that picture. it was a side shot of his face and chest from the right side and you could see little mold plants on his suit. i thought that for sure the picture was in the life magazine so i bought it from a site that sells old life magazines but that picture is not in there. have you ever seen such a picture and where is it? i know what i saw but not where to find it."
RE: Presidential Assassins - JMadonna - 11-03-2012 07:21 AM
(11-02-2012 07:05 PM)BettyO Wrote: Great article, Roger! Thanks ever so very much --
I have one question. What with all of these wonderful photos of the exhumation, I wonder WHY they didn't actually photograph Lincoln's body?! Wouldn't that have been a wonderful, earth shattering occasion! There WAS no Stanton around to prohibit such a thing.....I 'm just curious as to why they didn't do that....
Anyone have any idea?
Since they were doing it against Robert's instructions my guess is they didn't want him PO'd . Besides a picture would just start a new controversy. "Experts" looking at the photo would disagree with the eyewitnesses (eg. Crazy Otto E. )
RE: Presidential Assassins - J. Beckert - 11-03-2012 08:50 AM
I think I saw a photo of Pres. Taylor during his 20th. century post mortem. Does anyone else remember that? It was on a documentary about the exhumation. I remember he also looked remarkably preserved. I've search the net, but came up blank.