John Surratt's real parents?

[HerbS]

I also think that - Johnson, Stanton and others were somehow involved in the conspiracy to assassinate Lincoln!

---

Stanton had to CYA!

[Eva Elisabeth]

(03-07-2015 09:10 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Eva, I am posting the entire article:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

THE SURRATT CASE,

A True Statement of Facts concerning this Notable

Case.

By Rev. J. A. Walter. Read before the United States
Catholic Historical Society, May 25th, 1891.

Among the open letters of last April number of the
"Century," I find one referring to the priest who attended
Mrs. Mary E. Surratt. As I am the priest alluded to in this
article, I must positively deny that I prohibited Mrs. Surratt
from asserting her innocence. I thought of answering this
letter at once, but as I had an article prepared years ago on
the Surratt case, in which I had determined to make public
my statement of this notable case, I deemed it best to defer
the answer till the present time.

The object of this article is to make manifest the truth
in this case and thus vindicate the innocence of Mary E.
Surratt.

It may be asked, why this delay of twenty-five years?
The answer is a simple one. It takes time for people to lay
aside prejudices, so that they may form a just judgment on
a question of this character. The whole country was con-
vulsed with horror at the assassination of its Chief Ruler,
and the people had run mad with excitement. Time alone
could quiet the deep feeling embittered against every one
who might have been suspected of having anything to do
with the crime. Amidst all this excitement, I had deter-
mined in my own mind to wait twenty-five years before I
would give to the public a clear and full statement

The public mind has had time to quiet down and men
can now calmly listen to reason. Very few persons at this
date believe that Mary E. Surratt knew anything about the
plot to assassinate the President

Now as to the facts of the case— President Lincoln was
assassinated at Ford's Theatre, Tenth near F Street, North-
west, on the 14th of April (Good Friday) about 10 o'clock P.
M. John Wilkes Booth was his murderer. It was, in my
opinion, the act of an insane man and no friend to the South.
This I said on the next day to several friends, stating that
it was my firm belief that it was the work of a madman, and
was concocted within the past twenty-four hours. I felt
convinced that if the parties had reflected on what they pro-
posed doing, the act would never have been consummated.

Mary E. Surratt, whose name has been associated with
this awful tragedy, was a quiet amiable lady. She had re-
moved from the country a few months previous to the murder
of the President, resided on H near Sixth Street, Northwest,
and was in St. Patrick's parish. I was not acquainted with
her and never spoke to her until the eve of her execution.
I received a letter from her dated Sunday, April 23rd, 1865,
asking me to come and see her. She was then in Carroll
Prison. I went on Tuesday morning, April 25th, but she
had been removed to the Penitentiary, and I was told by
those in authority at Carroll Prison that no one would be
allowed to see her. On Wednesday, July 5th, 1865, I learned
that the trial was over. On Thursday at 10 o'clock A, M., I
went to the War Department and asked Col. Hardie for a
pass to visit Mrs, Surratt, who had requested me to visit her
when in Carroll Prison some three months previous. Col,
Hardie told me that Secretary Stanton was not in and asked
me if I was in a hurry about it ; I told him I was not. He
then replied that he would let me have a pass in a few hours.
When I returned home, and whilst at dinner, an orderly
came with a pass signed by Col. Hardie. I gave the usual
receipt for the same, and going to the door with the orderly
I remarked to him that I had read all the evidence of this
trial, and, as regards Mrs. Surratt, there was not evidence
enough to hang a cat ; besides, you cannot make me believe
that a Catholic woman would go to Communion on Holy
Thursday and be guilty of murder on Good Friday. Short-
ly after the orderly had left, Mr. John F. Callan and Mr. Hollohan, a boarder at Mrs. Surratt's house, called and in-
formed ipe that the execution of Mrs, Surratt was to take
place next day. To act so hastily in a matter of this kind
was certainly strange on the part of the Government. Whilst
talking to these two gentlemen, Col. Hardie came in and
seemed much excited ; I requested him to walk into the
parlor, leaving the two gentlemen standing in the hall. He
then said to me "Father Walter, the remarks you made to
that young man," meaning the orderly who brought me the
pass, " have made a deep impression on him ; I was afraid
that the pass I sent you would not answer, so I have brought
you one from Sec. Stanton, but I want you to promise me
that you will not say anything about the innocence of Mrs.
Surratt." I replied coolly and deliberately "You wish me to
promise that I shall say nothing in regard to the innocence
of Mrs. Surratt. Do you know the relation existing between
a pastor and his flock ? I will defend the character of the
poorest woman in my parish at the risk of my life. Thank
God I do not know what fear is, I fear neither man nor
devil, but God alone. You wish to seal my lips ; I wish you
to understand that I was bom a freeman and will die one.
I know where all this comes from, it comes from your Sec-
retary of War, whom a Congressman in my breakfast room
two weeks ago, called a brute. Of course I cannot let Mrs.
Surratt die without the sacraments, so if I must say yes, I
say yes." He then gave me the pass signed by Secretary
Stanton. This was about 2,30 P. M., Thursday, July, 1865.
That afternoon I went to see Mrs. Surratt to make arrange-
ments to give her Communion next morning. I also called
to see the President, having Annie, Mrs. Surratt's daughter
with me. On entering the gate at the President's house I
met Hon. Thomas Florence, ex-member of Congress from
Pennsylvania. He remarked, "Father Walter, you and I are
on the same errand of mercy. The President must not allow
this woman to be hanged." We went into the Executive
Mansion and up stairs to a room next to the one occupied by
the President, Andrew Johnson. There I met Col. Mussey
Secretary of the President, Preston King and one other
person. I requested Col. Mussey to go in and ask the Presi-
dent if he would see me. He returned and said the President
would not see me. Again, at my request, Col. Mussey went
in telling the President that I would not detain him five
minutes. This was denied me. I made another attempt,
and told (^ol. Mussey to say to the President that I did not
ask for pardon or commutation of sentence, but asked ten
days reprieve to prepare Mrs. Surratt for eternity. This
reasonable request was also refused. Annie, Mrs. Surratt's
daughter, was in like manner refused an interview with
President Johnson. The President sent me word to go to
Judge Holt. I went with Annie to see this man, but it was
perfectly useless. He had no more feeling for the poor
daughter than a piece of stone ; he referred her to the
President. The poor child, with eyes streaming with tears,
was left without any s)sympathy from this cold, heartless man.
I said to her "Come Annie, it is battledoor and shuttlecock,
the President sends you to Holt and Holt sends you to the
President." This was Thursday afternoon, the day before
the execution. On the following morning I went at seven
o'clock, carrying with me the Holy Communion which I gave
to Mrs. Surratt in her cell. I remained with her until the
time of her execution, which was about 2.30 P. M. I can
never forget the scene witnessed on that sad occasion. Poor
Mrs, Surratt had been sick for several weeks and was quite
feeble, she was lying on a mattrass laid on the bare brick
floor of her cell. Certainly this was not the way in which to
treat the vilest convict just before execution. While I was
trying to comfort this poor good soul, her daughter had just
returned from another unsuccessful attempt to see the Presi-
dent ; she addressed her mother in these words : " Mother
are you resigned? Her mother replied, "Yes, my child."
Again she spofce "Father speak to mother and ask her if she
is resigned." Her mother replied, "Annie, my child, this is
no place for you, go to your room." Without a word this
dear child, with broken sobs, left the cell and retired to one
of the rooms in the Penitentiary, Shortly before the hour
of her execution, Mrs. Surratt was brought out of her cell
and was sitting on a chair at the doorway. It was at this
time that she made clearly and distinctly the solemn dec-
laration of her innocence. She said to me in the presence
of several officers "Father I wish to say something," "Well
what is it my child ?'* "That 1 am innocent" were her exact
words. My reply was, "You may say so if you wish, but it
will do no good." These words were uttered whilst she
stood on the verge of eternity, and were the last confession
of an innocent woman.

When the time arrived for the execution, she was carried
to the scaffold by two soldiers, because she was too weak
even to stand on her feet. On the scaffold she asked them not
to let her fall. All the religious services had been per-
formed in her cell, so as to save her from being too much
exposed to the public gaze. At the signal the trap fell ; I
looked over the platform and saw that she had died without
a struggle. I went immediately to see Annie and try to give
her some consolation. When I told her that it was all over
she gave way to her intense feelings, but one word was suf-
ficient to calm her.

I had left my carriage within the walls of the Peniten-
tiary when I first came before the execution, but when I
went to look for it, it was not to be found. I asked General
Hartranft, ex-Governor of Pennsylvania, who had charge of
the execution, to let me have a conveyance in order to take
Annie, Mrs. Surratt's daughter, home. He immediately or-
dered an ambulai^ce, and with Annie and a friend, I left the
enclosure. I found my carriage outside and transferred
Annie with her friend to it and then drove to Mrs. Surratt's
house on H Street near Sixth Northwest. I would here state
that General Hancock was simply commander of tne Military
Division comprising the District of Columbia, and General
Hartranft was the officer in charge and^superintended every-
thing. Shortly after the execution of Mrs, Surratt, an article
appeared in the New York Tribune accusing Secretary Stan-
ton of refusing me a pass to visit Mrs, Surratt, unless I
would promise to say nothing regarding her innocence. It
seems that at this time Horace Greeley and Secretary Stanton were not on good terms. Mr. Forney, Editor of the
Philadelphia Press and Washington Chronicle, denied the
charge that Secretary Stanton had refused me a pass on
terms as stated above. Two reporters of the Tribune called
on me to ascertain the truth of the matter ; I told them
what had occurred between Col. Hardie and myself in re-
lation to the pass. Of course they drew their own con-
clusions from what I told them. I said to them that I
wished to have nothing to do with the quarrel. The next
day they published verbatim what had passed between Col.
Hardie and myself. Col. Hardie thought proper to write
an article in the "National Intelligencer," calling me some
harsh names and saying I was not a proper . person to have
attended Mrs. Surratt. I paid no attention to this article,
but attended to my duties just as if nothing had happened.
Some friends met me on Pennsylvania Avenue on the morn-
ing of the publication and asked me what I was going to do
about the article. I simply told them that I would do
nothing ; if Horace Greeley and Col. Forney chose to quar-
rel in their newspaper, they might just fight it out among
themselves. Evidently someone at the War Department
must have been alarmed, for Major General Hancock was
telegraphed to go and see Archbishop Spalding, so as to
prevent me from asserting the innocence of Mrs. Surratt.
I received a telegram from the Archbishop's Secretary,
asking me to keep quiet and saying that the Archbishop
would write me a letter by the evening mail. The letter
came. It was no order, but simply a request that I should
keep quiet in regard to the innocence of Mrs. Surratt. My
answer was, that what he requested was hard to comply with,
but I would try to do so. Archbishop Spalding told General
Hancock that he also believed Mrs. Surratt was an innocent
woman. At the present time I think there are few persons
in this country who are not of the same opinion. Let any
one quietly and calmly sift the evidence given in this trial
and the same conclusion will be reached. Let us examine
this evidence.

Mrs. Surratt's guilt could only be in consequence of her son John H. Surratt's guilt She was concerned in the con-
spiracy to murder President Lincoln only in as much as he
was one of the conspirators. Now, John H. Surratt had
nothing whatever to do with the conspiracy to murder
President Lincoln ; in fact, he knew nothing about it. He
came to Washington on the 4th of April, took supper at
home, changed his clothes and left for Elmira the next
morning. The testimony of Susan Jackson, Mrs. Surratt's
servant, was correct as to facts, but she mistook the date, say-
ing it was April 14th. It was ten days previous to the 14th
of April. It is strange that the hotel register in Elmira
could not be found : someone had made away with it.
Whoever it was, he did not know that John H. Surratt had
telegraphed to New York to know where Booth was. I saw
the Telegraph register in Mr. Bradley's office on which his
name, John Harrison, the name he assumed, appears on the
date April 14th. If he were one of the conspirators, he cer-
tainly ought to know where the chief conspirator, Booth,[was,
and it was his business to have been on hand in Washington
and not in Elmira, New York, some 400 miles distant.
When he read the account of the assassination of President
Lincoln on the morning of April 15th, he was utterly as-
tounded when he saw his name in connection with the plot
and supposed it must have been done by some parties of
whom he had no knowledge. He immediately left for
Canada and remained concealed there several months. He
has been accused of deserting his poor mother. This is not
true. He sent a person to Washington, furnished him the
means, and was ready to give himself up in her defense.
This friend saw the counsel of his mother. They advised
the friend to return and tell John H. Surratt to remain in
Canada, for there was no danger that his mother would be
convicted. Everyone knows that had he qovoq to Washing-
ton, he would have been placed in the dock with the other
prisoners and condemned with them. Prudence and common
sense demanded the course he followed. Now John H.
Surratt being in Elmira, how was he to be transported these
400 miles so as to be in Washington in time for the assassination of the President? Mr. DuBarry, Master of Transpor-
tation of the Northern Central Railroad, proved that there
were no trains running on that day by which he could
possibly have reached Washington.

Again ; a handkerchief of John H. Surratt's was found
in a car going North after the 14th of April, and this fact
was adduced as evidence that he was escaping from Wash-
ington on his way to Canada. This handkerchief was lost
by Mr. Hollohan, who boarded at Mrs. Surratt's, and it had
by mistake, been placed in his bureau drawer. He was on
his way to Canada with Detective McDevitt to try to find
Surratt and lost it out of his pocket.

Again ; two soldiers going down H Street and passing
Mrs. Surratt's house, swore that Mrs. Surratt put her head
out of the window and asked what was the matter. But
during the trial of John H. Surratt it was in evidence that
Mrs. Frederica Lambert, and not Mrs. Surratt, was the lady
who talked to these soldiers. Mrs. Surratt's house was on
H Street, between Sixth and Seventh, Mrs. Lambert's resi-
dence was on the same street but a square below. Both
houses had high porches, hence the mistake.

At the trial of Mrs. Surratt, Mrs. Lambert was not
aware of this evidence being given in the trial, but read it
in the papers when John H. Surratt's trial was going on.
She mentioned this fact to her son, who is a very worthy
lawyer of Washington. He advised het not to say anything
about it, but she insisted that it was her duty to make known
the facts to the lawyers, Br^adley and Merrick, who were de-
fending John H. Surratt. This she did, and her evidence
will be found in his trial.

Again ; John T. Ford testified that no one knew that
the President was to be at the theatre before twelve o'clock
yet Mrs. Surratt had ordered a carriage at ten o'clock (two
hours previous) to take her to Surrattsville. She went down
toere to attend some business in connection with her hus-
band's estate. She was coming out of the house about two
o'clock in the afternoon when she met Booth, who requested
her to take two packages wrapped in newspaper, one containing a bottle of whiskey and the other a spy-glass, and
give them to Mr. Lloyd at Surrattsville. She went down to
this place, did not see Lloyd, but gave the packages to his
sister-in-law. What this poor lady did anyone would have
done, without suspecting that any harm was intended : she
thought she was simply doing an act of kindness and
nothing more. The fact of her ordering her carriage at ten
o'clock shows that it had no connection whatever with the
assassination of the President.

Every trivial circumstance was brought forward as posi-
tive evidence of guilt, when there was not the slightest
ground for such a conclusion. I am convinced that if Presi-
dent Johnson had given me a hearing on the day preceding
the execution, he would not only have saved the life of an
innocent woman, but would have prevented a blot that will
forever remain as a stigma on the Government of these
United States.

This would have given ample time to examine the evi-
dence on which she was convicted and this examination
would have proved her innocence.

J. A. WALTER.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, Roger (- you didn't type all that to copy, did you???)!!!

I'm a bit in a hurry and just skimmed the text, but "Father I wish to say something," "Well what is it my child ?" "That I am innocent" is too vague to convince me (I will explain later).

Rick - "We were a nation at war" is a good point in general (but doesn't apply to the above question whether she was guilty before God, the sixth commandment doesn't read "thou shall not kill unless your country is at war"). However, if the country is at war with itself does it mean that the laws and punishment for presidental assassination didn't/don't apply anymore? In other words, were/are you allowed to murder your president in a CW? (Do you know what I mean? Right now I lack the time for better wording.)

[L Verge]

In a vain attempt to verify something that I read regarding Fr. Bernadine Wiget's thoughts, I stumbled across the following quote attributed to Abraham Lincoln. No date, no source, no nothing. Does anyone recall ever having seen it? I will admit that it was part of an anti-Jesuit diatribe.

President Abraham Lincoln said: “This [Ed.: American Civil] war would never have been possible without the sinister influence of the JESUITS. We owe it to POPERY that we now see our land reddened with the blood of her noblest sons. Though there were great differences of opinion between the South and the North on the question of slavery, neither Jeff Davis [Ed.: President of the Confederate States of America] nor anyone of the leading men of the Confederacy would have dared to attack the North, had they not relied on the promises of the JESUITS, that under the mask of Democracy, the money and arms of the Roman Catholic, even the arms of France, were at their disposal if they would attack us.”

Maryland was the Land of the Jesuits at the time that the war broke out, and the church owned quite a few prosperous plantations that were worked under slave labor. Dr. Mudd was a Jesuit, and I believe that Fr. Wiget once headed St. Ignatius Parish in Charles County - one of the plantation-holding parishes. I have always sort of dismissed the power of the Catholic Church in Rome at that time because of the political warfare that was threatening the Vatican and Pius IX. Should I reconsider?

---

(03-07-2015 10:40 AM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  

(03-07-2015 09:10 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Eva, I am posting the entire article:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

THE SURRATT CASE,

A True Statement of Facts concerning this Notable

Case.

By Rev. J. A. Walter. Read before the United States
Catholic Historical Society, May 25th, 1891.

Among the open letters of last April number of the
"Century," I find one referring to the priest who attended
Mrs. Mary E. Surratt. As I am the priest alluded to in this
article, I must positively deny that I prohibited Mrs. Surratt
from asserting her innocence. I thought of answering this
letter at once, but as I had an article prepared years ago on
the Surratt case, in which I had determined to make public
my statement of this notable case, I deemed it best to defer
the answer till the present time.

The object of this article is to make manifest the truth
in this case and thus vindicate the innocence of Mary E.
Surratt.

It may be asked, why this delay of twenty-five years?
The answer is a simple one. It takes time for people to lay
aside prejudices, so that they may form a just judgment on
a question of this character. The whole country was con-
vulsed with horror at the assassination of its Chief Ruler,
and the people had run mad with excitement. Time alone
could quiet the deep feeling embittered against every one
who might have been suspected of having anything to do
with the crime. Amidst all this excitement, I had deter-
mined in my own mind to wait twenty-five years before I
would give to the public a clear and full statement

The public mind has had time to quiet down and men
can now calmly listen to reason. Very few persons at this
date believe that Mary E. Surratt knew anything about the
plot to assassinate the President

Now as to the facts of the case— President Lincoln was
assassinated at Ford's Theatre, Tenth near F Street, North-
west, on the 14th of April (Good Friday) about 10 o'clock P.
M. John Wilkes Booth was his murderer. It was, in my
opinion, the act of an insane man and no friend to the South.
This I said on the next day to several friends, stating that
it was my firm belief that it was the work of a madman, and
was concocted within the past twenty-four hours. I felt
convinced that if the parties had reflected on what they pro-
posed doing, the act would never have been consummated.

Mary E. Surratt, whose name has been associated with
this awful tragedy, was a quiet amiable lady. She had re-
moved from the country a few months previous to the murder
of the President, resided on H near Sixth Street, Northwest,
and was in St. Patrick's parish. I was not acquainted with
her and never spoke to her until the eve of her execution.
I received a letter from her dated Sunday, April 23rd, 1865,
asking me to come and see her. She was then in Carroll
Prison. I went on Tuesday morning, April 25th, but she
had been removed to the Penitentiary, and I was told by
those in authority at Carroll Prison that no one would be
allowed to see her. On Wednesday, July 5th, 1865, I learned
that the trial was over. On Thursday at 10 o'clock A, M., I
went to the War Department and asked Col. Hardie for a
pass to visit Mrs, Surratt, who had requested me to visit her
when in Carroll Prison some three months previous. Col,
Hardie told me that Secretary Stanton was not in and asked
me if I was in a hurry about it ; I told him I was not. He
then replied that he would let me have a pass in a few hours.
When I returned home, and whilst at dinner, an orderly
came with a pass signed by Col. Hardie. I gave the usual
receipt for the same, and going to the door with the orderly
I remarked to him that I had read all the evidence of this
trial, and, as regards Mrs. Surratt, there was not evidence
enough to hang a cat ; besides, you cannot make me believe
that a Catholic woman would go to Communion on Holy
Thursday and be guilty of murder on Good Friday. Short-
ly after the orderly had left, Mr. John F. Callan and Mr. Hollohan, a boarder at Mrs. Surratt's house, called and in-
formed ipe that the execution of Mrs, Surratt was to take
place next day. To act so hastily in a matter of this kind
was certainly strange on the part of the Government. Whilst
talking to these two gentlemen, Col. Hardie came in and
seemed much excited ; I requested him to walk into the
parlor, leaving the two gentlemen standing in the hall. He
then said to me "Father Walter, the remarks you made to
that young man," meaning the orderly who brought me the
pass, " have made a deep impression on him ; I was afraid
that the pass I sent you would not answer, so I have brought
you one from Sec. Stanton, but I want you to promise me
that you will not say anything about the innocence of Mrs.
Surratt." I replied coolly and deliberately "You wish me to
promise that I shall say nothing in regard to the innocence
of Mrs. Surratt. Do you know the relation existing between
a pastor and his flock ? I will defend the character of the
poorest woman in my parish at the risk of my life. Thank
God I do not know what fear is, I fear neither man nor
devil, but God alone. You wish to seal my lips ; I wish you
to understand that I was bom a freeman and will die one.
I know where all this comes from, it comes from your Sec-
retary of War, whom a Congressman in my breakfast room
two weeks ago, called a brute. Of course I cannot let Mrs.
Surratt die without the sacraments, so if I must say yes, I
say yes." He then gave me the pass signed by Secretary
Stanton. This was about 2,30 P. M., Thursday, July, 1865.
That afternoon I went to see Mrs. Surratt to make arrange-
ments to give her Communion next morning. I also called
to see the President, having Annie, Mrs. Surratt's daughter
with me. On entering the gate at the President's house I
met Hon. Thomas Florence, ex-member of Congress from
Pennsylvania. He remarked, "Father Walter, you and I are
on the same errand of mercy. The President must not allow
this woman to be hanged." We went into the Executive
Mansion and up stairs to a room next to the one occupied by
the President, Andrew Johnson. There I met Col. Mussey
Secretary of the President, Preston King and one other
person. I requested Col. Mussey to go in and ask the Presi-
dent if he would see me. He returned and said the President
would not see me. Again, at my request, Col. Mussey went
in telling the President that I would not detain him five
minutes. This was denied me. I made another attempt,
and told (^ol. Mussey to say to the President that I did not
ask for pardon or commutation of sentence, but asked ten
days reprieve to prepare Mrs. Surratt for eternity. This
reasonable request was also refused. Annie, Mrs. Surratt's
daughter, was in like manner refused an interview with
President Johnson. The President sent me word to go to
Judge Holt. I went with Annie to see this man, but it was
perfectly useless. He had no more feeling for the poor
daughter than a piece of stone ; he referred her to the
President. The poor child, with eyes streaming with tears,
was left without any s)sympathy from this cold, heartless man.
I said to her "Come Annie, it is battledoor and shuttlecock,
the President sends you to Holt and Holt sends you to the
President." This was Thursday afternoon, the day before
the execution. On the following morning I went at seven
o'clock, carrying with me the Holy Communion which I gave
to Mrs. Surratt in her cell. I remained with her until the
time of her execution, which was about 2.30 P. M. I can
never forget the scene witnessed on that sad occasion. Poor
Mrs, Surratt had been sick for several weeks and was quite
feeble, she was lying on a mattrass laid on the bare brick
floor of her cell. Certainly this was not the way in which to
treat the vilest convict just before execution. While I was
trying to comfort this poor good soul, her daughter had just
returned from another unsuccessful attempt to see the Presi-
dent ; she addressed her mother in these words : " Mother
are you resigned? Her mother replied, "Yes, my child."
Again she spofce "Father speak to mother and ask her if she
is resigned." Her mother replied, "Annie, my child, this is
no place for you, go to your room." Without a word this
dear child, with broken sobs, left the cell and retired to one
of the rooms in the Penitentiary, Shortly before the hour
of her execution, Mrs. Surratt was brought out of her cell
and was sitting on a chair at the doorway. It was at this
time that she made clearly and distinctly the solemn dec-
laration of her innocence. She said to me in the presence
of several officers "Father I wish to say something," "Well
what is it my child ?'* "That 1 am innocent" were her exact
words. My reply was, "You may say so if you wish, but it
will do no good." These words were uttered whilst she
stood on the verge of eternity, and were the last confession
of an innocent woman.

When the time arrived for the execution, she was carried
to the scaffold by two soldiers, because she was too weak
even to stand on her feet. On the scaffold she asked them not
to let her fall. All the religious services had been per-
formed in her cell, so as to save her from being too much
exposed to the public gaze. At the signal the trap fell ; I
looked over the platform and saw that she had died without
a struggle. I went immediately to see Annie and try to give
her some consolation. When I told her that it was all over
she gave way to her intense feelings, but one word was suf-
ficient to calm her.

I had left my carriage within the walls of the Peniten-
tiary when I first came before the execution, but when I
went to look for it, it was not to be found. I asked General
Hartranft, ex-Governor of Pennsylvania, who had charge of
the execution, to let me have a conveyance in order to take
Annie, Mrs. Surratt's daughter, home. He immediately or-
dered an ambulai^ce, and with Annie and a friend, I left the
enclosure. I found my carriage outside and transferred
Annie with her friend to it and then drove to Mrs. Surratt's
house on H Street near Sixth Northwest. I would here state
that General Hancock was simply commander of tne Military
Division comprising the District of Columbia, and General
Hartranft was the officer in charge and^superintended every-
thing. Shortly after the execution of Mrs, Surratt, an article
appeared in the New York Tribune accusing Secretary Stan-
ton of refusing me a pass to visit Mrs, Surratt, unless I
would promise to say nothing regarding her innocence. It
seems that at this time Horace Greeley and Secretary Stanton were not on good terms. Mr. Forney, Editor of the
Philadelphia Press and Washington Chronicle, denied the
charge that Secretary Stanton had refused me a pass on
terms as stated above. Two reporters of the Tribune called
on me to ascertain the truth of the matter ; I told them
what had occurred between Col. Hardie and myself in re-
lation to the pass. Of course they drew their own con-
clusions from what I told them. I said to them that I
wished to have nothing to do with the quarrel. The next
day they published verbatim what had passed between Col.
Hardie and myself. Col. Hardie thought proper to write
an article in the "National Intelligencer," calling me some
harsh names and saying I was not a proper . person to have
attended Mrs. Surratt. I paid no attention to this article,
but attended to my duties just as if nothing had happened.
Some friends met me on Pennsylvania Avenue on the morn-
ing of the publication and asked me what I was going to do
about the article. I simply told them that I would do
nothing ; if Horace Greeley and Col. Forney chose to quar-
rel in their newspaper, they might just fight it out among
themselves. Evidently someone at the War Department
must have been alarmed, for Major General Hancock was
telegraphed to go and see Archbishop Spalding, so as to
prevent me from asserting the innocence of Mrs. Surratt.
I received a telegram from the Archbishop's Secretary,
asking me to keep quiet and saying that the Archbishop
would write me a letter by the evening mail. The letter
came. It was no order, but simply a request that I should
keep quiet in regard to the innocence of Mrs. Surratt. My
answer was, that what he requested was hard to comply with,
but I would try to do so. Archbishop Spalding told General
Hancock that he also believed Mrs. Surratt was an innocent
woman. At the present time I think there are few persons
in this country who are not of the same opinion. Let any
one quietly and calmly sift the evidence given in this trial
and the same conclusion will be reached. Let us examine
this evidence.

Mrs. Surratt's guilt could only be in consequence of her son John H. Surratt's guilt She was concerned in the con-
spiracy to murder President Lincoln only in as much as he
was one of the conspirators. Now, John H. Surratt had
nothing whatever to do with the conspiracy to murder
President Lincoln ; in fact, he knew nothing about it. He
came to Washington on the 4th of April, took supper at
home, changed his clothes and left for Elmira the next
morning. The testimony of Susan Jackson, Mrs. Surratt's
servant, was correct as to facts, but she mistook the date, say-
ing it was April 14th. It was ten days previous to the 14th
of April. It is strange that the hotel register in Elmira
could not be found : someone had made away with it.
Whoever it was, he did not know that John H. Surratt had
telegraphed to New York to know where Booth was. I saw
the Telegraph register in Mr. Bradley's office on which his
name, John Harrison, the name he assumed, appears on the
date April 14th. If he were one of the conspirators, he cer-
tainly ought to know where the chief conspirator, Booth,[was,
and it was his business to have been on hand in Washington
and not in Elmira, New York, some 400 miles distant.
When he read the account of the assassination of President
Lincoln on the morning of April 15th, he was utterly as-
tounded when he saw his name in connection with the plot
and supposed it must have been done by some parties of
whom he had no knowledge. He immediately left for
Canada and remained concealed there several months. He
has been accused of deserting his poor mother. This is not
true. He sent a person to Washington, furnished him the
means, and was ready to give himself up in her defense.
This friend saw the counsel of his mother. They advised
the friend to return and tell John H. Surratt to remain in
Canada, for there was no danger that his mother would be
convicted. Everyone knows that had he qovoq to Washing-
ton, he would have been placed in the dock with the other
prisoners and condemned with them. Prudence and common
sense demanded the course he followed. Now John H.
Surratt being in Elmira, how was he to be transported these
400 miles so as to be in Washington in time for the assassination of the President? Mr. DuBarry, Master of Transpor-
tation of the Northern Central Railroad, proved that there
were no trains running on that day by which he could
possibly have reached Washington.

Again ; a handkerchief of John H. Surratt's was found
in a car going North after the 14th of April, and this fact
was adduced as evidence that he was escaping from Wash-
ington on his way to Canada. This handkerchief was lost
by Mr. Hollohan, who boarded at Mrs. Surratt's, and it had
by mistake, been placed in his bureau drawer. He was on
his way to Canada with Detective McDevitt to try to find
Surratt and lost it out of his pocket.

Again ; two soldiers going down H Street and passing
Mrs. Surratt's house, swore that Mrs. Surratt put her head
out of the window and asked what was the matter. But
during the trial of John H. Surratt it was in evidence that
Mrs. Frederica Lambert, and not Mrs. Surratt, was the lady
who talked to these soldiers. Mrs. Surratt's house was on
H Street, between Sixth and Seventh, Mrs. Lambert's resi-
dence was on the same street but a square below. Both
houses had high porches, hence the mistake.

At the trial of Mrs. Surratt, Mrs. Lambert was not
aware of this evidence being given in the trial, but read it
in the papers when John H. Surratt's trial was going on.
She mentioned this fact to her son, who is a very worthy
lawyer of Washington. He advised het not to say anything
about it, but she insisted that it was her duty to make known
the facts to the lawyers, Br^adley and Merrick, who were de-
fending John H. Surratt. This she did, and her evidence
will be found in his trial.

Again ; John T. Ford testified that no one knew that
the President was to be at the theatre before twelve o'clock
yet Mrs. Surratt had ordered a carriage at ten o'clock (two
hours previous) to take her to Surrattsville. She went down
toere to attend some business in connection with her hus-
band's estate. She was coming out of the house about two
o'clock in the afternoon when she met Booth, who requested
her to take two packages wrapped in newspaper, one containing a bottle of whiskey and the other a spy-glass, and
give them to Mr. Lloyd at Surrattsville. She went down to
this place, did not see Lloyd, but gave the packages to his
sister-in-law. What this poor lady did anyone would have
done, without suspecting that any harm was intended : she
thought she was simply doing an act of kindness and
nothing more. The fact of her ordering her carriage at ten
o'clock shows that it had no connection whatever with the
assassination of the President.

Every trivial circumstance was brought forward as posi-
tive evidence of guilt, when there was not the slightest
ground for such a conclusion. I am convinced that if Presi-
dent Johnson had given me a hearing on the day preceding
the execution, he would not only have saved the life of an
innocent woman, but would have prevented a blot that will
forever remain as a stigma on the Government of these
United States.

This would have given ample time to examine the evi-
dence on which she was convicted and this examination
would have proved her innocence.

J. A. WALTER.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, Roger (- you didn't type all that to copy, did you???)!!!

I'm a bit in a hurry and just skimmed the text, but "Father I wish to say something," "Well what is it my child ?" "That I am innocent" is too vague to convince me (I will explain later).

Rick - "We were a nation at war" is a good point in general (but doesn't apply to the above question whether she was guilty before God, the sixth commandment doesn't read "thou shall not kill unless your country is at war"). However, if the country is at war with itself does it mean that the laws and punishment for presidental assassination didn't/don't apply anymore? In other words, were/are you allowed to murder your president in a CW? (Do you know what I mean? Right now I lack the time for better wording.)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Mary's comment, "I am innocent" had more words to it. I have heard it used in conjunction with, "I did not know what they intended to do."

[HerbS]

The Jesuits were well educated,and a different breed of cat.Didn't they set out as explorers and hoped they could grab some people and land in thier quest for control of others?

[Thomas Thorne]

Re the quote cited by Laurie about the Catholic Church in the Civil War.

At first I thought the writer was Charles Chiniquy,ex priest and Lincoln law client who wrote about the president expressing fears of assassination by "crafty Jesuits."

As the entire quote Chiniquy put into Lincoln's mouth,truth notwithstanding,was 19th century prolixitive prose at its worst,so unlike Lincoln lean and spare use of English,I don't think Laurie's writer was Chiniquy as this unknown person wrote in a style that was closer to Lincoln's. The "arms of France" is a good one.

I am aware of Confederate expectation and Union dread of intervention By Britain and France . I am unaware of any Confederate belief in intervention by the Vatican. As the Pope was up to his ears with dealing with the House of Savoy over Italian unification, AL did not lose any sleep over what the Pope might do. And who precisely were the wealthy Catholics-and how many wealthy Catholics were there -who would lavish their money on the Confederacy because of their religious beliefs?
Tom

[RJNorton]

The Chiniquy quote which Laurie mentioned is in the Fehrenbachers' book. The Fehrenbachers provide a sampling of Chiniquy quotes, all of which they give an "F" for authenticity (lowest grade possible on their scale).

Eva, yes, I did copy and paste the article - took less than a minute.

[LincolnToddFan]

[Would abduction have been acceptable from the religious (Catholic) point of view in your opinion?]// quote

Eva, the short answer is NO. Depriving a person of their liberty via abduction is an assault/violation upon them. That is absolutely not only a sin, it's a crime.

Thanks MUCH Roger, for posting all that information. There are other various statements I've read in the many, many years I've been reading Lincoln assassination books.

Laurie, thank you for the information about Kate Larsen. Can I tell you all something? Two or three days ago before I came here and read the comments of Eva, Thomas Thorne, Roger, Herb and now the info from Ms. Larsen I was 100% convinced that Mrs. Surratt didn't know about the murder conspiracy. Now you all have planted the seed of doubt in my mind. After some thought, of course it is plausible for deeply religious people to commit the sin of blasphemy at the portal of death. Just consider the religiously devout Muslims of Sept 11, 2001. I have read the unbearable transcripts of the cockpit voice recorders on those doomed flights. They were literally singing praises to Allah as they killed their victims and ultimately themselves.

I just don't know.

ETA: Rick, I am one of the ones who struggle to see the actions of JWB as an act of war. The war was OVER, and he knew it.("Our Cause being lost..something drastic must be done") quoted from his diary. The murder of Abraham Lincoln by Booth was, in my mind, nothing more or less than an act of revenge. "The South is AVENGED!" was one the things some members of the audience at Ford's heard Booth say as he ran off the stage after the shooting.

Booth felt that AL was a usurper, unworthy of the office of the Presidency. He was personally offended by his "low, coarse humor" as I read him describe it somewhere. By killing the man, he acted as judge, jury and executioner to eliminate a person that he felt a very personal antipathy toward.

[STS Lincolnite]

(03-07-2015 01:57 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  The Chiniquy quote which Laurie mentioned is in the Fehrenbachers' book. The Fehrenbachers provide a sampling of Chiniquy quotes, all of which they give an "F" for authenticity (lowest grade possible on their scale).

Thanks Roger. I was sure this was one of the spurious "Lincoln quotes" penned by Chiniquy. I am not familiar with any credible Lincoln writings or quotes in which he blamed any foreign influences for the problem of slavery and Civil War. He felt these were of America's own making.

[HerbS]

Thanks for being in doubt.Doubt is always ok with me!

[STS Lincolnite]

(03-07-2015 09:59 AM)Gene C Wrote:  Ouch. I think Stanton provided the strong leadership and direction the country needed immediately following Lincoln's assassination. I can't think of a better person to be in control at that time. It certainly wasn't Johnson.

I agree Gene. 150 years later it is easy to criticize Stanton and focus on missteps he may have made. But he was operating in uncharted territory. How well could anyone really have been expected to do in the chaotic time following the assassination?

As has been discussed in another thread, in 1865 there were rules for presidential succession if a President died but not for what occured in a case of presidential incapacitation. With Lincoln clinging to life (not yet dead, but unresponsive) Johnson could not be sworn in as President. It would have made sense to people of the time that a member of the cabinet would be in charge so as to follow through with the President's policies until such time as he recovered or until he died and the vice president was sworn in as President. Vice-presidents were not really involved in governing at that time and were almost an afterthought. Seward would have been the obvious choice to assume control but he too was incapacitated. Someone had to step up to the plate and lead, and Stanton did. Even after Johnson was sworn in, he, by choice, seems to have deferred to Stanton regarding military and security matters. It doesn't seem like an overt power grab on Stanton's part (not that he minded wielding power I'm sure.)

[L Verge]

Even old Southern me is a defender of Stanton. He was the logical one (even if Seward had been able) to take the reins because he held a lot of sway with the military - the best means for holding things under control. I really don't care about his personality quirks. He served this country well in its time of need -- certainly much better than some very high officials today are doing.

As for Booth's motives for killing Mr. Lincoln, I understand those too. I would gladly take a derringer to Jihadi John and his ilk today. And I guess that puts me on a hit list somewhere. Of course, I'm going to have to take lessons from Joe Beckert and Wes Harris first because I have never held a real gun in my hands in my entire life.

[Eva Elisabeth]

I absolutely agree with Gene, Scott, and Laurie on Stanton!

[Rick Smith]

(03-07-2015 02:18 PM)LincolnToddFan Wrote:  [Would abduction have been acceptable from the religious (Catholic) point of view in your opinion?]// quote

Eva, the short answer is NO. Depriving a person of their liberty via abduction is an assault/violation upon them. That is absolutely not only a sin, it's a crime.

Thanks MUCH Roger, for posting all that information. There are other various statements I've read in the many, many years I've been reading Lincoln assassination books.

Laurie, thank you for the information about Kate Larsen. Can I tell you all something? Two or three days ago before I came here and read the comments of Eva, Thomas Thorne, Roger, Herb and now the info from Ms. Larsen I was 100% convinced that Mrs. Surratt didn't know about the murder conspiracy. Now you all have planted the seed of doubt in my mind. After some thought, of course it is plausible for deeply religious people to commit the sin of blasphemy at the portal of death. Just consider the religiously devout Muslims of Sept 11, 2001. I have read the unbearable transcripts of the cockpit voice recorders on those doomed flights. They were literally singing praises to Allah as they killed their victims and ultimately themselves.

I just don't know.

ETA: Rick, I am one of the ones who struggle to see the actions of JWB as an act of war. The war was OVER, and he knew it.("Our Cause being lost..something drastic must be done") quoted from his diary. The murder of Abraham Lincoln by Booth was, in my mind, nothing more or less than an act of revenge. "The South is AVENGED!" was one the things some members of the audience at Ford's heard Booth say as he ran off the stage after the shooting.

Booth felt that AL was a usurper, unworthy of the office of the Presidency. He was personally offended by his "low, coarse humor" as I read him describe it somewhere. By killing the man, he acted as judge, jury and executioner to eliminate a person that he felt a very personal antipathy toward.

Toia, The main thesis of "Come Retribution", by William Tidwell, James Hall & David Gaddy, is that Lincoln was killed as retribution for the two failed attempts on the life of Jefferson Davis and that Booth served as the blunt end of the operation.

Rick

[Eva Elisabeth]

(03-07-2015 02:18 PM)LincolnToddFan Wrote:  Would abduction have been acceptable from the religious (Catholic) point of view in your opinion? -

Eva, the short answer is NO. Depriving a person of their liberty via abduction is an assault/violation upon them. That is absolutely not only a sin, it's a crime.

Thanks, Toia, I think so, too. Thus and re: "Father I wish to say something," "Well what is it my child?" "That I am innocent" - innocence to me from the religious as well as from the legal point of view (as pointed out by Ed Steers in "Blood on the Moon") would mean total innocence, i.e. that she didn't know anything and believed the shooting irons and field glasses were intended for fox hunting. I can hardly believe that (she wouldn't have needed Weichmann praying for her intentions) and even though Laurie recalled she added to the "I did not know what they intended to do" this doesn't necessarily mean she knew nothing - it could just mean she didn't know of the change from abduction to assassination (but abduction would have been a senseless action and risk after Appomattox - why still support such?)

Now, if she knew of or sensed more than nothing - whether abduction or assassination - she must have been aware of that those shooting irons were intended to be used for killing human life during the exercise of that political plot, and the actual use of them would be most likely since the (whatever) action was against the government (that she must have somehow sensed, too). By delivering the message and field glass IMO she actively participated in executing the plot and "undersigned" her agreement, thus to facing the respective punishment the law provided. A German proverb says "Ignorance doesn't prevent from punishment". Even if she was naive, sorry, she must have been aware that such is not a children's game and men have been hanged for less. So I think even if she believed in "only" abduction going on she was still guilty - ESPECIALLY if she was such a devout beliver (a sin and crime, as Toia, too, said). As I see it, a devout believer wouldn't have assisted (even if "only" by delivering messages or field glasses) in ANY plot and crime that uses weapons against humans or even threatens to do or that deprives a person of his/her liberty .

And thus I also think (assume) she was as guilty as Atzerodt who strenuously expressed he did not want to participate in murder (as she might have to) but saw himself sort of in Booth's hands and was too cowardish to go to the police and confess instead of drinking, which would most likely have saved him (and Lincoln).


[Just to add - for all goes "from what I know/have learned so far". Also that I find her guilty and responsible for her fate (i.e. that she must have been aware of the possibility fatal punishment the law provides doesn't mean that I personally think it was right to execute her (as to execute anyone- I've already said since I highly respect the Sixth Commandment I am opposed to the death penalty) - but that is an entirely different topic.]

[L Verge]

In case you haven't guessed it, I am someone who likes to have the last word in an argument. John Wilkes Booth intended to have the last shot in a horrible war...