** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO

** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - Printable Version

+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Assassination (/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO (/thread-957.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - wsanto - 06-17-2013 11:02 AM

(06-10-2013 09:06 PM)John E. Wrote: Hi folks,

Yes, its my belief that James A. Wardell never existed and was a fictional character completely made up. I don't believe Mark Katz made the story up but I do believe he may have falsely attributed it to Osborn Oldroyd.

Barry suggested that the name James A. Wardell may be an anagram for something else. I came up with a few things but always ended up with leftover letters. Have at it folks! See what you can come up with.

John,

The name James Wardell was not an uncommon name in the 1860s. That's just based on brief on-line search of Ohio census records. In fact there is a James Wardell in the 1860 census living in Carrol (sp), Ohio who was 22 years old.

Probably not the guy, but who knows?

I guess the starting presumtion must be that he did exist and the letter quoted in Katz's book is not a fabrication.

How is it that you went about disproving he existed and/or the letter was genuine? If he was a fiction created by Ollroyd or Katz, what do you think their motive was for fabricating evidence that supported a photo had been taken?

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - Laurie Verge - 06-17-2013 11:40 AM

So far, two, very thorough researchers have yet to find "the" James Wardell with ties to such a letter -- Mike Kauffman and John Elliott. That puts a fly in the ointment, IMO.

Surratt House had dealings with Mr. Katz. He was very dedicated to his subject of photography, but I would question his status as a researcher outside of that field. I would also suspect that any assassination researcher who wanted to point the finger of guilt at Edwin McMasters Stanton would be inclined to accept such "evidence" as the mysterious Wardell letter as genuine. Again, just my opinion.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - John E. - 06-17-2013 11:51 AM

(06-17-2013 11:02 AM)wsanto Wrote:
(06-10-2013 09:06 PM)John E. Wrote: Hi folks,

Yes, its my belief that James A. Wardell never existed and was a fictional character completely made up. I don't believe Mark Katz made the story up but I do believe he may have falsely attributed it to Osborn Oldroyd.

Barry suggested that the name James A. Wardell may be an anagram for something else. I came up with a few things but always ended up with leftover letters. Have at it folks! See what you can come up with.

John,

The name James Wardell was not an uncommon name in the 1860s. That's just based on brief on-line search of Ohio census records. In fact there is a James Wardell in the 1860 census living in Carrol (sp), Ohio who was 22 years old.

Probably not the guy, but who knows?

I guess the starting presumtion must be that he did exist and the letter quoted in Katz's book is not a fabrication.

How is it that you went about disproving he existed and/or the letter was genuine? If he was a fiction created by Ollroyd or Katz, what do you think their motive was for fabricating evidence that supported a photo had been taken?

Hi Wsanto,

Barry and I will be selling a supplement documenting the Gardner article as well as providing supporting evidence. We are having it proofread right now and hope to have it available in the next couple of weeks.

We don't prove that James A. Wardell did not exist, but we do state that the name wasn't registered in the Washington DC area with the national census at the time it should have been. We also point out at least 4 potential "red-flags" or errors in the account.

As for motive in putting it in one's book, I think Katz did it to help move product. I also don't believe a word about Oldroyd having anything to do with it. That was also a fabrication.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - wsanto - 06-18-2013 09:19 AM

Quote:Barry and I will be selling a supplement documenting the Gardner article as well as providing supporting evidence. We are having it proofread right now and hope to have it available in the next couple of weeks.

We don't prove that James A. Wardell did not exist, but we do state that the name wasn't registered in the Washington DC area with the national census at the time it should have been. We also point out at least 4 potential "red-flags" or errors in the account.

As for motive in putting it in one's book, I think Katz did it to help move product. I also don't believe a word about Oldroyd having anything to do with it. That was also a fabrication.

Thanks John. How does one go about purchasing these supplements?

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - Dave Taylor - 06-26-2013 03:04 PM

One thing I noticed while looking through Harper's Weekly today, was the distinct lack of "Photographed by Gardner" caption below the engraving of the autopsy. Here is the page with the autopsy engraving on it, and the page facing it:

[Image: harpers-weekly-may-13-page.jpg]

On the facing page is an engraving of Boston Corbett along with another engraving of the Bakers and Conger planning the capture of Booth. On the page with the autopsy is an engraving of Booth's last moments with the barn on fire.

The two engravings on the facing page have these captions:

[Image: corbett-caption.jpg]

Notice they both give credit to the photographer they copied from.

The drawing of Booth in the barn logically has no credit line seeing as there were no photographers present to take a picture of this sort:

[Image: booths-capture-caption.jpg]

The engraving of the Booth autopsy also does not credit a photographer.

[Image: autopsy-caption.jpg]

Perhaps this lack of a photographer credit on the autopsy engraving is because, like the drawing of Booth in the barn above it, this engraving is just the product of an illustrator's mind?

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - J. Beckert - 06-26-2013 04:37 PM

A product of his mind or of what he actually observed. Even if a photo was taken, no one got the chance to work off it, as it was, according to the old story, spirited off to War Dept. Headquarters and never seen again.

I wonder if reporters and sketch artists were present.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - L Verge - 06-26-2013 05:16 PM

I would bet that there were quite a few reporters being held at bay either on or near the docks of the Navy Yard. They saw the Gardners go on board, knew the body was there, and assumed that the photographers were taking pictures of it. They reported to the sketch artists, who did their rendition. Is this the only known engraving of the supposed autopsy? I have never seen any other.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - SSlater - 06-26-2013 05:38 PM

I have not been following this thread, so I am way out there,but I found a James Wardell in Georgetown from 1860 to 1870 +/-. He shows up in the City Directory, but that's all I know.
For your amusement see http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ history-archaeology/documenting-the -death- of- an-assassin.html. It's a piece where the Smithsonian talks to the Archives on this same subject. (They don't know anymore that we do)

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - SSlater - 06-26-2013 08:00 PM

Supper was ready as I finished that last post, but I need to add: since the Wardell guy was a detective, you will never find a story on him. His life depended on obscurity. I am assuming that he did exist, and did circulate in those government circles, probably worked for Baker. (Notice , he said he gave the pics , to Baker.) Baker never allowed his men to be "honored", except "Trane". We don't know if that was his real name. I know of another man he claimed was his best detective, and believe it or not, he was a Confederate spy. He was the inside man that Conrad put into his office. I need to write that up. The only way we will find Wardell, will be if he admits his activity, himself.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - John E. - 06-26-2013 10:47 PM

(06-26-2013 03:04 PM)Dave Taylor Wrote: One thing I noticed while looking through Harper's Weekly today, was the distinct lack of "Photographed by Gardner" caption below the engraving of the autopsy. Here is the page with the autopsy engraving on it, and the page facing it:

On the facing page is an engraving of Boston Corbett along with another engraving of the Bakers and Conger planning the capture of Booth. On the page with the autopsy is an engraving of Booth's last moments with the barn on fire.

The two engravings on the facing page have these captions:

Notice they both give credit to the photographer they copied from.

The drawing of Booth in the barn logically has no credit line seeing as there were no photographers present to take a picture of this sort:

The engraving of the Booth autopsy also does not credit a photographer.

Perhaps this lack of a photographer credit on the autopsy engraving is because, like the drawing of Booth in the barn above it, this engraving is just the product of an illustrator's mind?

Great observation, and one of the key points we make in our supplement. You'll see Gardner's name credited next to the illustrations of the executions as well.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - John E. - 06-27-2013 02:53 PM

Just as a follow-up, here is an execution illustration that appeared in Harper's Weekly. Gardner's name is credited as the photographer.

[Image: gml8.jpg]

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - BettyO - 06-27-2013 03:44 PM

Here is another view from Harpers - I own an original of this one as well....it says emphatically (see red box) - Photographed by Gardner -

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - wsanto - 06-27-2013 09:15 PM

(06-26-2013 05:38 PM)SSlater Wrote: I have not been following this thread, so I am way out there,but I found a James Wardell in Georgetown from 1860 to 1870 +/-. He shows up in the City Directory, but that's all I know.
For your amusement see http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ history-archaeology/documenting-the -death- of- an-assassin.html. It's a piece where the Smithsonian talks to the Archives on this same subject. (They don't know anymore that we do)

I guess that could be the guy or just another James Wardell. We will have to wait for John's supplement to read his argument that Wardell was a fiction.

Of course if Wardell did exist and his account can be believed then that would be evidence to contradict Gardiner's claim that no photo was ever taken.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - SSlater - 06-27-2013 09:54 PM

More on James Wardell. As we all know, the detective force in Washington in 1865 was augmented by qualified people brought to Washington by Lafayette Baker, and others, to catch smugglers, deserters, counterfeiters, etc. particularly in the Assassination era. With that in mind, James Wardell may have come to Washington on "special" duty. Therefore, I hunted around for candidates named Wardell. I found one good lead - James Wardell, working in the Detective Bureau of the Police Dept. in New Haven, CT. At the moment I can't figure out how to track him, and I am working on a Update of the Sarah Slater's story. If anyone can take a whack at this job, your efforts would be appreciated.

RE: ** NEW DISCOVERY REGARDING BOOTH AUTOPSY PHOTO - John E. - 06-27-2013 10:32 PM

The more logical path may be to search for a James A. Wardell that worked for the Alexandria, VA police department in the 1890's. There is no record of him living in the Washington area or Alexandria when *per Mark Katz* he wrote the letter to Oldroyd. If you can find him, you clear the first hurdle.

Next, (assuming he existed) you need to read his letter and make sure its as accurate as possible. As we all know, many people who were associated in some way with the assassination, inflated their involvement in one way or another to make for a better story. Does his story make sense with what is known for certain? My first thought was that Wardell's story didn't add up. My second thought, after some searching, was that the story was made up.

I believe searching for Wardell is a wild-goose chase but I encourage anyone so inclined to go for it.

(06-18-2013 09:19 AM)wsanto Wrote:
Quote:Barry and I will be selling a supplement documenting the Gardner article as well as providing supporting evidence. We are having it proofread right now and hope to have it available in the next couple of weeks.

We don't prove that James A. Wardell did not exist, but we do state that the name wasn't registered in the Washington DC area with the national census at the time it should have been. We also point out at least 4 potential "red-flags" or errors in the account.

As for motive in putting it in one's book, I think Katz did it to help move product. I also don't believe a word about Oldroyd having anything to do with it. That was also a fabrication.

Thanks John. How does one go about purchasing these supplements?

It will be available directly through Barry and I or possibly through the Surratt Society. It should be available within the next 3 weeks.