How I see John Surratt.

[Steve]

(08-20-2018 02:31 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I have a very hard time trusting most of the testimony given by Dr. Lewis Joseph Archibald McMillan. Just as the feds had tried to taint testimony in the 1865 trial, I suspect they did the same with young John's trial. They still were out to get the Confederacy, so they had no qualms throwing in perjured testimony.

The best modern source that I know on John Surratt, Jr. is John Surratt: Rebel, Lincoln Conspirator, Fugitive by Frederick Hatch (2016 by McFarland). Fred is a very detail-oriented researcher, but his final text is easy to follow despite the details. I take much the same stand on McMillan that he does -- things just don't stand to reason.

First, McMillan was the surgeon on the ship (S.S. Peruvian) that took Surratt from Quebec to Liverpool (with a brief stop in Londonderry, Ireland). Supposedly the doctor had been asked to look out for "Mr. McCarty" several days earlier by one of Surratt's Catholic protectors in Canada, Fr. LaPierre, before Surratt and McMillan traveled down the St. Lawrence River in order to transfer to the Peruvian and head across the Atlantic. Why would a young man like Surratt, who had been so good at undercover work for two years, blow it now by sharing some very dangerous information -- supposedly even disclosing that he had been financed by the Confederacy's Secretary of State and that he was currently carrying tens of thousands of dollars with him? Why in the world would a fugitive with a price on his head tell anyone that? Pretty dumb, and Surratt was no dummy.

As for hard-hearted Sarah Slater, I cannot see her as a blatant murderess. I doubt that she even knew what most of the dispatches were that she had carried during the war (except maybe the ones that saved the St. Albans Raiders). As McMillan describes the so-called murder of the Yankees, I question why Surratt and Slater would even need to shoot them. What reason, other than a lust for blood, would cause undercover agents to shoot folks who were on foot and likely unarmed while the agents are onboard a moving platform rail car? And, the car was being propelled by a team of black men who would certainly be inclined to tell the first people they saw about such a murder.

Personally, I feel that McMillan had had two years of reading all details published in regards to a variety of aspects about the assassination and then was coached by the prosecution yet again as to what to say in order to get the one remaining "conspirator" punished. That's my version, and I'm sticking to it.

To end this epistle, I'm quoting from Fred's book, especially from a letter that Henry J. Wilding, the Vice Consul for the U.S. in Liverpool wrote in a letter to Seward on September 27, 1865, announcing Surratt was in Liverpool:

"Sir: Yesterday, information was given me that Surratt, one of the persons implicated in the conspiracy to murder Mr. Lincoln, was in Liverpool, or expected there within a day or two. I took the affidavit of the person who gave me the information, and transmitted it to Mr. Adams, and I herewith transmit a copy:

[McMillan] "described himself as a passenger, but I have ascertained that he is the ship's surgeon. He expects a letter or a visit from Surratt in a day or two, and has promised to acquaint me with his, Surratt's, location.

"Should there really be anything in it, and a warrant be obtained for Surratt's apprehension, we should scarcely get him delivered up without other evidence that we can obtain here, we should have to ask his remand until you could send us the necessary evidence.

"Very respectfully, I am, Sir, your obedient servant. Signature

Fred follows up by noting Wilding's expression of doubt regarding McMillan's trustworthiness. The word "remand" that he uses in the letter means to have a suspect arrested to await trial. Wilding obviously thought that the doctor's affidavit was not sufficient to satisfy the British authorities. U.S. authorities obviously thought the same because William Hunter, acting for the recovering Seward, replied that they agreed not to arrest Surratt at that time.

Is there any biographical information on Dr. Louis McMillan? All I can find is his 1834 baptism record from Rigauld, Quebec and an 1871 census record of him living in Rigauld with a wife named Mary-Louise and two daughters, Maud and Bertha, under the age of 3. If we know more about his life and whereabouts we can see if there were questions about his honesty/character raised later in his life.

Oh and it looks like McMillan ran for (but lost) a seat in the Quebec Assembly in 1892:

https://archive.org/stream/cihm_07902#page/n17

(There's a brief biography of his opponent on Wikipedia if anybody cares:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufus_Nelson_England
)