Harney, and his Story

[John Fazio]

(12-14-2016 08:19 PM)Dave Taylor Wrote:  I do not discuss Harney when I give the escape route tour. Although it is hard to believe, the 12 hours go by really fast and I usually have barely enough time to get in all the important stuff about Booth and his plot. There's just not enough time to get into the other plots against Lincoln.

I also think it's likely a matter of personal preference. I, personally, have yet to be convinced that the Confederate government had any real involvement with John Wilkes Booth. In this way Harney and Booth are not really connected other than their shared goal of assassination, in my mind. I openly discuss the few connections that Booth had with the Confederacy (his trip to Montreal, John Surratt's life as a courier, etc.) but I am always honest with the bus group that there is no smoking gun between the two.

Dave:

With respect, have you read my book yet? If you haven't I suggest that you do so. Apart from just finding it an interesting read on a subject of mutual interest, you may be persuaded to change your view about Confederate government involvement in the assassination and the attempted assassinations that occurred on April 14. The book has had some fine reviews, you may know. One fellow, described only as an "Amazon Customer" and being totally unknown to me, described it as "...probably the best (book) on the market on the American Civil War." Joseph Truglio of Civil War News said that ""I found every page an adventure". And Ed Steers said that the book "...puts Booth's plan to decapitate the Union front and center." Further, twenty-six of the 28 Amazon reviews give it 5 stars. If you have read it, and still feel as you do on the issue, please tell me why. You say that in your view the Confederate government had no "real" involvement with Booth. Please tell me what involvement it had, in your view, other than "real" involvement. You say you openly discuss with your tourists the "few connections" that Booth had with the Confederate government, specifying his trip to Montreal and Surratt's "life as a courier". There were, however, at least three trips to Montreal in 1864 (March, April and October, the second and third for 10-12 days each) and as for Surratt, he was more than just a courier, he was Benjamin's courier. This fact is stated categorically by Eli Evans, Benjamin's biographer, and confirmed by one of Surratt's biographers. Ste. Marie swore in an affidavit that Surratt made weekly trips to Richmond. Well, if Surratt was Booth's right hand and he made weekly trips to Richmond as Benjamin's courier, isn't it reasonable to conclude that Benjamin knew all about Booth and his team and what they were doing and not doing? Similarly, Thomas Harbin was known to be close to Booth; they met both before and after the assassination. After the assassination, Harbin left the country for 5 years. When he returned, he reminisced about his work as a Secret Service agent and, among other things, said he reported directly to Davis. Isn't it therefore reasonable to conclude that Davis too knew all about Booth and his team, etc., from Harbin and well as from Benjamin through Surratt? Well, if these two leaders knew all about Booth, etc., and if Booth were really intent on kidnapping rather than killing, and if they knew that kidnapping would do them no good at all (as top Confederate agent Thomas Nelson Conrad said, "...even a child could conclude in the light of subsequent events that the move would have accomplished no tangible good to the Confederacy"), then why didn't they stop him?

Further, we know that Blackburn attempted to kill Lincoln with "infected shirts", a scheme that was positively known to Davis and therefore Benjamin, per the letter of Kensey Johns Stewart.

Further, consider Powell's statement that Federal prosecutors "did not have the one half of them" (i.e. conspirators). Do you suppose that a conspiracy of such breadth could have been carried out without the knowledge of the Confederate government?

Further, consider Powell's statement that it was his impression that arrangements had been made with others for the same disposition as he was to make of Seward.

Further, consider the Union agent's letter from Paris, quoting the Confederate agent "Johnston" to the effect that if everything had gone according to plan, 15 Yankees would be dead. Do you suppose a conspiracy of such breadth could have been carried out without the knowledge of the Confederate government and Secret Service?

Further, consider that Ste. Marie swore in an affidavit that Surratt admitted to him (in Italy) his and Booth's complicity in the murder of Lincoln, but would not say whether or not Davis was involved, which is as good as an affirmative answer because it means he knows and if he knew him to be innocent, he would simply have said so.

I am, of course, only touching the tip of the iceberg. One needs to read the entire book. It is saying too much to say that as a tour guide, you "owe" it to your tourists to familiarize yourself with the arguments favoring Confederate government complicity--you don't "owe" anyone anything-- but it is fair to say that it would be at least desirable. After all, it isn't only I making the case, it is also Tidwell, Hall, Gaddy, Hanchett, Current, Sears and Winkler, at least, and perhaps, by now, even Steers. Not to mention Bingham and the other Judge Advocate Generals, the Commissioners and the Boutwell Committee at the time of the trial.

Thanks.

John