Something to thhink about.

[John Fazio]

(07-04-2016 07:57 PM)SSlater Wrote:  I do not understand what is going on. Did I do something wrong?

I readily admit that I never read Stelnick. I remember clearly, about the time he was active. and posting often, and when he got nasty with Laurie. Do you think I would buy his book ?- no way! I find it difficult to change from that position.

Everything in the post was discussed this week,, in this forum. There are concepts that still need further clarification - but that where I hope to get.

I'd prefer to drop the subject, rather than use Stelnick for an answer, or to continue in this unacceptable manner.

Slater:

I don't think you did anything wrong. You merely told of an account that had come to your attention, which might have some truth to it, though I'm not sure what you found to be "ridiculous".

I read the April 16, 1987, article from the Orlando Sentinel, which appears to deal with the same account. While we have to acknowledge the possibility of veracity, historians do not deal in possibilities, but probabilities. With that as the standard, the account must be rejected, principally because its source is so tenuous. It came from a 70-year old retired postmaster (Sears)who obtained much of his information from one Stratford St. Clair Story, one of the alleged special agent's sons. It was repeated in a 1931 biography of one H. H. Duncan written by Duncan's brother-in-law Edwin Peet. So we have at least five sources of information --Story (the alleged agent), his son Stratford, Sears, Duncan and Peet. The likelihood of error creeping into the account, from so many retellings, is therefore quite high.

Furthermore, the substance of the story (apart from its pedigree) is inconsistent with other information we have. Powell's role as a spy with Story is unlikely, as is the alleged meeting of the two of them with Booth in Barnum's. The evidence is strong, rather, that Powell, a Mosby Ranger, was dispatched to join Booth's conspiracy on March 14 and met Booth and the other conspirators at Gautier's on the 15th. Richard's said he was "behind" the presidential box, but then "jumped through the front of the box to get to Booth"? Was he an acrobat? Nowhere else--not even from Richards himself--is there anything like this story. He failed to stop Booth but found his Bowie knife on the floor of the box. Nonsense; Booth still had his knife when he crossed the stage.

The only part of the story that has some plausibility is Hogan's delivering a verbal order to Booth not to kill Lincoln, because I believe strongly that Booth was already under orders to do so. But if it happened, it happened before the Harney mission, not on the night of the assassination, as alleged in the article. In my view, the failure of the Harney mission was Booth's green light to execute the contingency plan and to notify Surratt to return to Washington forthwith. That scenario has some meat to it; the rest is too weak to take seriously.

John