+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Assassination (/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? (/thread-785.html)
John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - scldrgnfly - 03-31-2013 11:18 PM
My great-grandmother was a cousin of John Lloyd's and my great-aunt actually went to live with John and Mary in DC after they moved back to the city. I have been looking for a picture of John for Laurie Verge for a long time, in addition to satisfying my own curiosity about John's relationship with my great-grandmother and her brothers and sisters and other cousins.
While, so far, I am out of luck on finding a picture of John Minchin Lloyd, I have been able to piece together quite a bit of information about him and his relationships in the Lloyd/ Edwards' families, in addition to the Offutt's and Mahormey/Mahoney/Mahomey's - both in Maryland (Allen's Fresh/St. Mary's/Charles/Prince George/Montgomery counties/DC/Georgetown). I think I understand why he had a relatively close relationship with my great-grandmother. I also found out some interesting background information on his time as a Roundsman (Constable) in DC. All of it comes from pretty reputable sources in print.
There is something that I do find rather interesting in comparing the situation of the exclusion of the Samuel Mudd photo from the first grouping of conspirators' photos because the printer was trying to keep his photo private for the sake of the family (Is this correct? I just read this recently). Both the Lloyd's and the Edwards' sides of my family have photograph's of so many of our family, and yet, there seem to be none of John or Mary. This seems quite odd to me, especially since, I know they were not ostracized, but loved, and I know there were several, relatively close, family members that lived less than a block or two from each other, in addition to those who actually resided with John and Mary after the Civil War in their DC home.
So here is my question prefaced by a Charles Baudelaire quote you have no doubt heard before, "...the devil's best trick is to persuade you that he doesn't exist." While not making public a photograph of an alleged conspirator/witness to protect family members in the 1860's might be a common/ethical practice, there is an even more conspiratorial possibility. What if he was more important than we all thought and the possible explanation for the absence of even a sketched image made at the tribunal, is the possibility that he would not wish to be identifiable to anyone that might be able to link him to any covert activity in relation to the Civil War and espionage. Dr. Mudd's photo eventually was made public, but at first it wasn't, presumably to protect his family at first (I am checking on that source).
Also, for the 10 years he was a Roundsman in DC (1851-1862?), he was not a heavy drinker. Mrs. Offutt testified that it was only in the past 4 months (I think?) that he had started drinking heavily. There is no evidence that he ever drank like that before or after, nor did he come from a family that did so. Not to mention, while he came from a farming family, for the most part, they were well-educated business people, many going to Georgetown University, even the prep school, Princeton, Yale and George Mason, with several doctors and Lawyers. John's father was quite a businessman before his untimely death and while John had a brother, he did not survive to inherit. My great-great grandfather and his brother were the boys' guardians and they both had children of the same age, so he was raised within a very close family that had nurtured him through his tragedies (mother, father, guardian uncle (my great-great grandfather) and my g-g's younger brother (drowning accident) and then his own brother dying young.
Funny thing, besides marriage ties to the Queen's, Cox's, Mattingly's, etc., my great grandparent's had quite a few business dealings with William Stone and Henry C. Mathews---the fellow with the store in Georgetown where Atzerodt pawned/sold his gun (I even have a cousin that married a Richter). ...BUT... I know how crazy coincidences can be with McPhail's employment of Atzerodt's brother-in-law and brother.
Here is another tidbit you may or may not know, I found it REALLY curious that John bought a cemetery plot at Mt. Olivet cemetery in 1865. Was he worried about needing it at that time? However, John and Mary evidently had several children that died young and a 3 year-old from Piscatway (Rd.?) was buried at Mt. Olivet in December, 1865,. Could this be their child in the plot he purchased in 1865?
I also thought it pretty unusual that Mrs. Offutt was at the Tavern the 14th and not Mary Lloyd who was at her mother's 30 miles away (? and/or with the Lloyd Fam-John's other guardian uncle Thomas-Allen's Freside m the fact that a wife can't testify against her husband, it really made me wonder if the real reason for her "absence" is she might not have been able to handle the pressure of the week's busy activities. Just thinking now, though, is it possible, that knowing his wife couldn't testify against him in court, John felt he needed a corroborating witness for his defense that COULD testify for him, in case he needed it. We know how it appears that Herold went to plant the evidence of Booth's coat with map and Canadian bank book in Atzerodt's Kirkwood room. Could John have assessed accurately just what kind of people with whom he was dealing?
Martha Edwards Smith
This is just a small sampling of what I have discovered and only a few of my questions about John M. Lloyd. I have a lot more about others, too.
For instance, don't you wonder about Payne's mysterious late night call the night of the assassination...was his get up with the pick axe a code for "the deed is done," or was he willing to risk his life to battle it out with the arresting officers to help Mrs. Surratt and her tenants escape. Also, for her dramatic oath that she didn't know this man, in the manner she expressed it indicate her complicity in the conspiracy right away, since how would she know to be so vehement, if she did not know he did anything wrong.
Just wondering what you might think?
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - BettyO - 04-01-2013 04:55 AM
Welcome to our Forum!
Your information on Lloyd sounds wonderful! He is a somewhat shadowy individual - but that's what makes him facinating! It could be that there are extant photos of John Lloyd, but others in the family don't want to divulge it. This was the case with some of the Powell family photos - little did anyone know that there was a baby photo of Lewis Powell, as well as boyhood photos until I did a little digging.
I for one would be very interested in seeing what Mr.Lloyd looked like as well as hearing more of his facinating history. What you have written here is grand!
As to why young (Powell) was "disguised" as a ditch digger when he went to Mrs. Surratt's is anyone's guess. It is my understanding that he utilized the disguise in order to make his way to Mrs. Surratt's house in order to obtain a night's rest, a meal, some clothing (most importantly, a hat!) and then make his way to the train station in order to go to Baltimore. At least this was what he told Dr. Gillette, his spiritual advisor in the death cell. Of course, Mrs. Surratt knew Powell. He had boarded at her house for three days, eaten at her table, been entertained in her parlor. She knew the boy's voice, I'm sure - if not his size. While she may not have known of his involvement in what transpired at Seward's House, she did know his involvement in the kidnap plot and affiliation with Booth and therefore was going to deny knowning the youth. Powell, himself however, would chivelrously would deny her involvement in anything until his death.
By the way, did you see the movie The Conspirator a few years ago? The character of John Lloyd was my favorite!
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - RJNorton - 04-01-2013 04:57 AM
Welcome to the forum, Martha. Like you, I have been curious about the lack of a photo for John Lloyd. Can't we consider him a conspirator? I believe the tavern he rented was a known Confederate safe house when he leased it from Mary Surratt in 1864. Wouldn't she have explained to him what he was leasing? Wouldn't she have wanted to lease it to someone sympathetic to the Confederate cause? After the failed kidnapping attempt, David Herold and John Surratt (plus Atzerodt?) went to the tavern to hide two carbines, a monkey wrench, and some rope. Surely there must have been conversation between Lloyd and Surratt as to why these items needed to be hidden. Doesn't the fact that Lloyd accepted these items to be hidden make him part of the conspiracy? I mean he could have gone to the police in March and told them of this suspicious activity; perhaps it's a stretch to assume he could have saved Lincoln's life, but who knows what might have happened. Plus I think he misled the investigators who interviewed him right after the assassination.
P.S. Betty, I agree! The gentleman who played John Lloyd in "The Conspirator" was terrific.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - J. Beckert - 04-01-2013 05:31 AM
My thoughts are the same as yours, Roger. I can't see Mary renting the tavern, a know hotbed of Confederate underground activity, to someone who was not sympathetic to the cause. Lloyd was told by Booth that they'd assassinated the President and Sect'y of State and did not originally divulge that to the authorities. I think he was eventually truthful in his testimony, but by that time I think he was trying to distance himself.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - BettyO - 04-01-2013 05:43 AM
I also agree! Mary of course, knew that her tavern was a Confederate mail drop -and of course involved in clandestine Confederate actions. So she had to know that Lloyd had the very same sentiments. Like Weichmann, Lloyd was attempting to deflect blame from himself, just as Joe and Roger have said.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - Thomas Thorne - 04-01-2013 06:34 AM
Welcome to our forum,Martha
I believe that John Lloyd played a far more important role in the proceedings than we may ever know. I agree the Surratts were hardly likely to turn over a Confederate safe house to someone who was not fully sympathetic to the cause and would not carry out the duties associated with running such an establishment. As has been stated, the fact they hid weapons at Surratt House is a testament to their trust in Lloyd's fidelity.
John's Surratt's failure at the 1870 Rockville and other lectures to mention much less denounce Lloyd's testimony is telling. Too much emphasis is placed on the feeling that Weichmann betrayed a quasi maternal relationship. Weichmann was denounced as a liar at both the trials and the lectures and John Surratt threw in some personal insults as well;"he couldn't ride and he couldn't shoot."
Yet Lloyd's testimony against Mary Surratt telling of overt acts on the very day of the the assassination and 3 days earlier was depicted at the trials as merely the acts of a befuddled drunk. John Surratt never even mentioned the name of the man whose testimony was primarily responsible for sending his mother to her death.
I believe Surratt thought it extremely dangerous to cast aspersions against Lloyd in the manner he dealt with Weichmann. The latter could not further damage the Surratts. John Lloyd was very much alive in 1870 and we can only speculate what he might have revealed if provoked by John Surratt.
Tom
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - jonathan - 04-01-2013 09:42 AM
I agree that John Lloyd is one of those fascinating assassination characters, probably in particular because not too much is known about him. I heartily encourage all research to dig up some goodies on his life. I also agree that he almost had to have known more than he let on. As others have mentioned, Mary Surratt surely would have been careful who she rented to. Seems to me, the only realistic possibilities would have been that she rented to a) someone who knew what was going on and approved/helped, b) someone who wasn't bright enough to figure any of it out, or c) someone who knew but was too scared to blow the whistle. In that list, b and c are too risky, leaving me to believe that Lloyd must have had at least a general idea that some fairly serious shenanigans were going on. And Mary had to have known that he was not a risk to go to the authorities.
Concerning Stephen Root, the actor who played Lloyd in The Conspirator, he's been in tons of stuff over the years, and he's one of those guys who is almost always fantastic. One of my favorite parts he's done was that of the blind radio station guy in O Brother, Where Art Thou? ("Boys, that was some mihty find 'a pickin and 'a singin'. I tell you what, you come on in here, you (tap tap tap), you sign these papers here I'm gone give ya…ten dollah apiece.") That's a movie that I know some of us here just love, and as I always do when I get a chance, I recommend it to anybody who hasn't seen it. Maybe I'll watch it tonight.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - wsanto - 04-01-2013 09:48 AM
I believe Lloyd was more involved to the extent that he was willing to help the cause, hide the guns, lie to investigators, and do whatever else was requested of him. Although he probably did not know the full extent of the plot against Lincoln and probably did not know Lincoln would be assassinated that night. Of course if Mary knew of the assassination and trusted Lloyd, she may have told him of the plans the afternoon of the assassination.
I also believe Stanton, believing Lloyd to be an abetter to the crime and escape, made the decision to grant him immunity from prosecution because Stanton wanted Mary to hang and he needed Lloyd's testimony to condemn her.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - scldrgnfly - 04-01-2013 09:52 AM
Thank you so much everyone! I am still not home to get back to the rest of my research. That said, here's a few things I think are important to note. One, that there is a strong element of "honor" involved when a group of conspirators come together to "hatch" the plan. Each one must consider the risks and realize for it to work, each one is on his own if caught, and must do whatever it takes to achieve the ultimate goal. Everything must be focused on that goal, even if some of them have to be thrown under the bus to achieve it. The point is to achieve the goal with the least collateral damage.
Obviously, at first you try to save everyone by throwing investigators off the track, but if that doesn't work, you have to try to save the most important elements of the plan...to keep it going...on track.
Also, I don't know about you guys, but I still kick myself for things I did in the sixth grade (Lol!)! I seriously doubt, as honorable as the history books make us think that mind of the 19th century individual was, that it was that easy to just drop the swords and go back to the plowshares. Ha! Ha! I was a Northerner planted in the South in the late 1960's and I KNOW it wasn't easy.
So did the conspirators still have work to do? Or...was there a massive deck of cards that could fall, if somehow the hemorrhagecouldn't be stopped, regardless of the immediate cost? As a mother and child myself, John Surratt's evasive behavior with the help of priests and Jesuits mystifies me.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - L Verge - 04-01-2013 11:22 AM
Martha, we have been in touch for quite a few years now, and your research on Lloyd is about the best there is. I think we all agree that Lloyd was at least on the fringes of what was going on. I wish that I could implant your opening paragraph in the post immediately above this. There are certain members of this forum and others who have yet to understand the element of "honor" among those who set out to do something to protect their way of life. Right or wrong, they did what they thought was right.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - scldrgnfly - 04-01-2013 12:44 PM
While I am making my way home,thank you Laurie and Betty so much for your kind comments!
I can't wait to post some more meatier tidbits.
In the meantime, referring to my ?'s about Powell's appearance at the boarding house on the night of April 17th, and why I wondered if he wasn't trying to offer Mary and her guests a means of escape "casually" holding the pick axe innocuously on his shoulder, in addition to his being a powerful man, wouldn't there have been signs that there were military people there? The carriage might not have been there yet, but wouldn't there have been extra army horses there or extra soldiers standing around outside?
Almost as if he came offering assistance and by her oath, she was telling him to stand down? Why would he insert himself into a situation of almost certain capture? Was he really that much out of his element and lost?
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - BettyO - 04-01-2013 01:30 PM
Thanks ever so much, we're glad that you've joined us!
RE: Powell - As far as is known, the carriage was parked aways down the street - and the streets (or at least H street as far as I know - anyone else's guess?) was unlit by gas at that time. It was somewhat overcast so it must have been quite dark except for a few lamps in windows where folk had stayed up late. It was about 11 - 11:30 PM when Powell came down the street. Apparently he did not see the carriage in the darkness nor the soldier standing hidden under the front porch. He was also extremely weary, having not slept or eaten adequately for about 3 days. Add to that the fact that he probably had a slight concussion from being thrown from his horse and you've got a mix of things.... I don't really think that he was lost (he sure found his way back to the boarding house) but feel more or less that he was pretty much "out of it" and resigned to his fate, as he told Dr. Gillette the night before he died.
And...Jonathan - I LOVE O'Brother - and didn't really recognize "Lloyd!" It's definitely a "Must See!" I even have the soundtrack as well as the DVD....For those who don't know, O' Brother Where Art Thou is a "Southern Odyssey"; a comedy based on Homers Odyssey -- you've got to see this movie! It's a Southern Classic! Now that I know "Lloyd" is in it, I'll have to check it out again!
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - Jim Page - 04-01-2013 03:03 PM
(04-01-2013 01:30 PM)BettyO Wrote: I LOVE O'Brother . . .
Betty, did you notice, in Lincoln, the fellow who played political operative Richard Schell was Tim Blake Nelson, who had played Delmar in O Brother, Where Art Thou?
--Jim
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - scldrgnfly - 04-01-2013 03:17 PM
What great information, Betty! I forgot to mention how much I love "O Brother Where Art Thou!" The music is positively incredible! Earl Stanley is so wonderful, too!
Also, I truly think what Laurie said about the fact that while we may think of Lincoln's assassination as an horrendous affair, that sacrificed one of our greatest presidents. It was not only during war, but it was after The Emancipation Proclamation (January 1, 1863, which was a very good thing, and long overdue), but it was tantamount to an Executive Order by Lincoln himself- not Congress....following the public's outcry to end the war in 1862, Lincoln called for 300,000 more draftees to be filled by quotas from all states and The District of Columbia.
It sounds from much of the testimony, people's true feelings really couldn't be masked after that and from just those two acts, I would imagine people began to look at Lincoln as the source of their immediate pain.
Notwithstanding a way of life without slavery had to become reality, and States Rights truly took a hit, who can look at the Brady photos, and others, consider the way of infantry battle and want to part with 300,000 of their loved ones in such a manner.
RE: John Minchin Lloyd - Who was he...really? - RJNorton - 04-01-2013 03:56 PM
Does anyone know if detective John Atzerodt had suspicions about his brother before the assassination? I just checked American Brutus regarding the stashing of weapons at Lloyd's, and Mike Kauffman writes that John Atzerodt was at Lloyd's having a drink at the same time as Surratt, Herold, and George Atzerodt arrived with the carbines, rope, etc.
J. Atzerodt was in the area looking for deserters. The two brothers then had a drink together at Lloyd's. After J. Atzerodt departed, the "stuff" was brought inside to be hidden. It would seem to me that J. Atzerodt might have wondered why his brother was having a drink in that location. Also, if J. Atzerodt was in the habit of stopping by for a drink, it would have been easy for Lloyd (if he had the inkling) to mention to J. Atzerodt that carbines, etc. had been stashed there by his brother and friends. Obviously, Lloyd kept quiet about that.