Herold and Surratt

[John Fazio]

(11-05-2013 05:15 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  I agree, John. As I have said before, I do not know where John Surratt was on April 14. All I have said is that many books say he was in Elmira and simply dismiss the Washington evidence. Personally I think there is sufficient Washington evidence to take a good look at it. Obviously the trail of evidence leads either to Elmira or to Washington - I think we should look at both trails. What I wonder about is the prosecution's strategy at the trial. They spent a good deal of time and effort trying to prove to the jury Surratt was in Washington. Let's pretend they were successful. Would it have mattered? If Surratt were in Washington that night but committed no crime that was provable would that have made a huge difference in the way the jury voted? Certainly it would have in the 1865 trial; but would the same be true in 1867 with a civilian court? I guess what I am asking is did the prosecution really advance its case by spending so much time on Surratt's whereabouts on the 14th?

Roger:

Agreed all around. I don't know where he was either. Nobody does, with certainty. There are persuasive arguments both ways. I lean to Washington, but many others, who are fine thinkers and researchers (e.g. Laurie, Jampoler, Kauffman), lean to Elmira. You ask an excellent question, as to whether or not it would have mattered if the prosecution had successfully put him in Washington. From this distance, I would say "no", because of the composition of the jury (8 Southerners, 4 Northerners) and the requirement of unanimity for conviction, but at that time and place, Pierrepont, Carrington and their co-counsel obviously felt it would have, so that is the route they took. The bottom line is that he got away with murder, I am convinced, because I am convinced that he was not only a conspirator, but that he was its co-leader with the half-mad , hyperactive and dreadfully immature actor. That role is reflected in Ste. Marie's Affidavit, quoting him as saying "We have killed Lincoln, the n.....s friend."

John

---

(11-04-2013 06:32 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Some historians have speculated that Surratt was sent to take out Grant at some point along the general's route, but Booth did not learn of the Grants' departure until he saw them en route to the train station. He would have to have been in very quick contact with Surratt in order for him to get to the station, purchase tickets, and hop on board. I have wondered how thoroughly Grant's train was searched once he received word that the president had been shot. He had to be traveling with guards who would have acted quickly to protect the general.

There is still the evidence of the hotel registries, receipts from Elmira, and eyewitness accounts as well as railroad schedules and, if I remember correctly, reports of flooding along one of the rail lines that created scheduling problems. With everything happening so quickly after the fall of Richmond and Lee's surrender, I just don't see Surratt hanging around D.C. to see what Booth was going to attempt next.

Laurie:

I agree that the hotel registries (including the one that mysteriously disappeared), the receipts and the five witnesses present a major problem for the Surratt-in-Washington people, but I am still troubled by your last line, because it suggests that Booth and Surratt were not acting in concert, whereas, in my judgment, virtually all the evidence we have shows that they were, from the moment they met. Recall the boardinghouse meetings, Booth's close relationship with Surratt's mother, the Jack Cade affair, the Gautier's meeting, the Campbell Hospital episode, Surratt's closeness to Dr. Mudd, who in turn was close to Booth, and Surratt's presence at the St. Lawrence Hall (Powell's and Herold's too). Further, Surratt's activities as a courier for Benjamin must have been related to Booth's conspiracy. Did Surratt and Booth not go to New York after the Campbell Hospital "failure"? Did Surratt not stop in New York to see Booth on his way to Montreal? Did Booth not contact him when he was in Montreal? Did Surratt not telegraph Booth from Elmira? These were not separate and loose cannons; they were two barrels of the same shotgun.

John