Breaking a leg

[Dave Taylor]

That's right I'm opening up the can of worms again!

First, a quick review:

Roger posted Michael Kauffman's article from the Blue and Gray laying out his theory regarding Booth's broken leg here.

John Elliott expanded on the ideas here.

I debated the idea that John Lloyd was told Booth broke his leg when his horse fell here.

While Kauffman uses the statements of David Herold and Dr. Mudd to support his theory, given the fact that they were co-conspirators who both tried to play ignorant of Booth's crime, nothing they said under examination can be taken at face value. Neither Dr. Mudd or Davy Herold could admit that Booth broke his leg while jumping to the stage after shooting the president, without implicating their knowledge of the events. Putting these statements aside, one major pro in Kauffman's theory are the statements of Thomas Davis, a farmhand on Mudd's farm. Davis noted that Booth's horse was, "lame in her front leg she was very lame before taken out of the stable" and had a "piece of skin off on the inside of the front left foreleg about as big as a silver quarter". This injury could be a result of Booth's horse falling, or perhaps the result of being ridden hard through rough, scratchy terrain.

I have always been on the fence about the two theories. To me, it always seemed to come down to when we wanted to believe Booth. Either we believe Booth through the words of Dr. Mudd and Davy Herold, or we believe what Booth wrote in his diary. There is an inherent unreliability with both. Dr. Mudd and Davy Herold both played dumb of Booth's crime when giving their statements to avoid further incrimination. Booth himself wrote in exaggerated statements in his diary. Forced between these two, believing Booth's own words seemed the lesser of two evils.

Recently, I have stumbled across a new aspect to the debate, which makes me cast more doubt on my previously held belief. I have a problem rectifying these telegrams (1 & 2, 3) describing Booth breaking his leg at the theatre.

Two of the telegrams are from Col. William Wood, who would later be in charge of Mary Surratt, Dr. Mudd and many witnesses and suspects in the Old Capital Prison. He writes in the morning of April 23rd, the following:

"There is no doubt but that Booth broke one of the bones in his leg in the jump on the stage of the theatre immediately after the murder."

Later the same day he sends the following:

"The assassins changed horses. Herold was riding the bay mare obtained from Pumphrey's Stable, and it may be possible that she fell or threw off Booth and broke his leg. However, I believe as I have written this morning."

The 3rd telegram, sent at 8 pm on April 23rd is from Major John Waite, who, like William Wood, is forwarding information gleaned from Brytantown. It says, in part:

"Booth fractured a bone of his leg in jumping upon the stage, not by falling near Bryantown."

My problem with these telegrams is this, from where did the soldiers get their information? Booth was still on the run and no one had read his diary when these telegrams were written. Therefore, Wood and Waite could not have gotten their information from Booth's writings. What's more, the 2 out of the 3 telegrams mentioned the idea that Booth fell off of his horse, though they dismissed this. The only person at Bryantown at the time who could have told the soldiers such specific details of Booth's broken leg would have been Dr. Mudd. Yet Dr. Mudd never admitted to any knowledge of the assassination over his entire life, let alone in the early days of the investigation. His statements in Bryantown on the 21st recount the idea that Booth broke his leg from a fall off a horse. Had Mudd admitted that the man who showed up at his house broke his leg when he jumped from the box after shooting Lincoln, he would have been certainly executed for not turning in the man he knew to be Lincoln's assassin.

The way I see it, the language of William Wood's telegrams show that he was under the impression that Booth broke his leg when he jumped to the stage, even though he had no evidence for it. In fact, the lines, "it may be possible that she fell or threw off Booth and broke his leg. However, I believe as I have written this morning," demonstrates that he ignored evidence to the contrary to his opinion and continued to support his idea without merit. The subsequent telegram from Waite must have been influenced by Wood's assertions, even though they were unfounded.

I honestly don't know how to take these telegrams. While they don't technically weaken or support either of the theories, I believe that they demonstrate the danger of sticking to a belief even when faced with contrary evidence. The fact is, there was no reliable way for Wood and Waite to know Booth broke his leg in jumping from the stage. With the exception of Booth's diary, there is no reliable way for us to know either. A collection of evidence, a deal of it noticeably circumstantial mind you, does support the idea of Booth falling from his horse. The amount of evidence seems to be in favor of Kauffman's theory, but it still seems to come down to whether or not we believe Booth's word. Due to this, I’m sure the debate will always exist.