Post Reply 
No need to question this Lincoln conspirator’s guilt
05-08-2016, 10:21 AM (This post was last modified: 05-08-2016 10:52 AM by L Verge.)
Post: #10
RE: No need to question this Lincoln conspirator’s guilt
(05-08-2016 04:17 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  
(05-07-2016 09:36 PM)L Verge Wrote:  
(05-07-2016 08:30 PM)Gene C Wrote:  Some people think that Mary Surratt was infatuated with Booth, and that caused her to make some poor decisions.

Which reminds me of a song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfSZARFUvnM

Those of you who have read things I have written (including a chapter in the new Lincoln Assassination Riddle) know that I was raised in a family that believed Mrs. Surratt was guilty. I have issues as to whether or not she knew that the plan had changed to assassination, but I do believe vicarious liability ties her to the conspiracy.

However, I do not believe she was infatuated with Booth. She was faithful to the Confederate cause and protecting her son after the fact.


Laurie:

"I have issues as to whether or not she knew that the plan had changed to assassination..." I gather that you were not persuaded by my arguments last month. Do you suppose that she was described by Weichmann as "very nervous, agitated and restless" that Friday night, and by Smoot as "in a state of feverish excitement", because she anticipated a kidnapping? She knew that whatever was going to happen that night would happen at the theater. Do you believe that she believed that Booth could successfully kidnap Lincoln at the theater and get him to Surrattsville, with such certainty that she would tell Llloyd to have the "shooting irons" ready, that "there will be parties here tonight who will call for them"? Harris and Bingham mocked the whole idea of kidnapping, even causing everyone in the courtroom to burst out laughing (including Arnold himself) when Arnold's role was described to the Commissioners, namely to receive, bundle and carry away the 6' 4" Lincoln as he was lowered from the 12 foot box. What was deserving of mockery then is deserving of mockery now, which means that her certainty, and therefore Booth's certainty, that parties would be at Surattsville that night to call for the shooting irons, precludes a belief in kidnapping, which leaves no conclusion other than the fact that she knew Lincoln would be murdered that night. Now are you persuaded?

John

Have I missed something in fifty years? Where is the evidence that she knew something was going to happen at the theater that night??? At the theater is the key point. Are we being asked yet again to "assume" that Booth told her of his exact plans?

(05-08-2016 08:38 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  
(05-08-2016 08:03 AM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  When I get a moment, I'll look at the transcript myself, but who was it who described Arnold's role?

I am not sure about the trial, but it's in Arnold's confession in Edwards and Steers:

"Then commenced the plan. Each had his part to perform. First I was to rush in the box and seize the President whilst Atzerodt “alias” Port Tobacco and J. Wilkes Booth were to handcuff him and lower him on the stage whilst Mosby was to catch him and hold him until we all got down. Surratt and unknown to be on the other side of Bridge to facilitate escape, afterwards changed to Mosby and Booth to catch him in box throw him down to me on stage, O’Laughlen and unknown to put gas out."

This is online here.

Those were the plans for the original scheme to kidnap as well as a similar one to hijack the presidential carriage. Was Mrs. Surratt ever told about the true (and sudden) plan to murder on April 14?

(05-08-2016 08:51 AM)Gene C Wrote:  Booth is able to get others involved in his plot with promises of money, fame and glory.
So what is Mary's motivation? What motivates a 43 year old widowed woman?
Could it be, even in part, the attention of a young, famous, good looking gentleman who trusts her and seems to take her into his confidence?

Is she so dedicated to the southern cause that she puts it ahead of her own family, especially Anna?
Is she so confident that she believes her involvement will never be discovered, or that it is inconsequential to the federal government?
Is she oblivious to the consequences to herself, her son, and to Anna of her involvement with Booth, even seeing Booth on the day of the murder and doing his bidding?

I think it has been mentioned that one of the reasons Mary moves to Washington is for Anna's benefit, and Mary at 43 is not over the hill.
Now that Lee has surrendered, the war is basically over. Is her patriotism to the "lost cause" what drives her, or is it something else? My previous post was half made in jest, but what causes Mary to through caution to the wind; now?
When is old enough to know better suppose to kick in?

First, Mary was only 41 when Booth entered her life (b. May or June of 1823). She was badly in debt (since hubby's death in 1862); she had one of the wealthiest families in Maryland snapping at her heels to be paid for their land (dating back to the negotiations in 1852); she had the carpenter who built Surratt House in 1852 dogging her to complete the payments to him; she had numerous merchants and others seeking payment for debts owed them.

Maryland life as she knew it was going down the tubes very quickly with the abolishing of slavery, making her original source of income (tobacco farming) in danger. She had no real male help to work the farm. Two women alone at a crossroads with Union patrols still raiding the countryside and contraband in the area as well as an infamous guerrilla Boyle made Surrattsville dangerous - as well as lonely for Anna, who was missing the better side of life as she entered her 20s. There was a perfectly good townhouse - bought and paid for in 1853 - waiting in D.C. Turning it into a boardinghouse would be a perfectly acceptable way to earn money and be safe at the same time.

She was a mother whose two sons were deeply involved with the Confederacy - one that she had not heard from throughout the war and another that she could not depend on because of his Confederate duties. She was also known to have given aid to a variety of young Southern agents in the hopes that the South might rally.

Was she pleased to have a well-known gentleman enter her doors? Probably, but more from the standpoint at first of her having an eligible daughter, and it was her beloved son who introduced Booth to her. Wouldn't she help a friend of her son - especially after she learned that the son was in trouble? Reporting Booth would also turn her son in to the authorities.

I'm sorry, but that old canard about Mary being infatuated with Booth and willing to do his bidding just doesn't cut it with me. I guess my Southern upbringing and the knowledge of how much the Civil War changed the life for many a woman makes me more inclined to see a more duty-bound side of Mary Surratt.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
RE: No need to question this Lincoln conspirator’s guilt - L Verge - 05-08-2016 10:21 AM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)