Post Reply 
No need to question this Lincoln conspirator’s guilt
05-23-2016, 10:07 PM
Post: #37
RE: No need to question this Lincoln conspirator’s guilt
(05-23-2016 12:58 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  I think I made it pretty clear why I thought he could have felt guilty. Here's an example involving much less extreme circumstances: I complain about bad service in a restaurant, and I later find out that the waitress lost her job and has been evicted from her house because she could not pay the rent after losing her job. I would feel guilty, even though I was perfectly justified in complaining about bad service. (Before you jump on me for this, this is purely an example. I'm really quite easygoing about such things.) I think most decent people would feel some guilt about giving testimony that sent someone that they had been close to the gallows, even if their testimony was entirely truthful.

As for what I think Weichmann was untruthful about, I'm simply not convinced that he was unaware of John Surratt's clandestine activities, or that he did not provide him with any of the information he sought.

For Weichmann's searching for approval, his letter to Bingham is certainly a good example: "You, more than any man alive to-day, are aware of the meed of praise to which I am entitled for the sacrifices I made and for the work I did in connection with that great trial of 1865. I am writing the history of that affair now and will have it published some day, either during my life time, or after my death. It will be written from the strict stand point of loyalty and truth. I have always felt that I would like to have some brief expression from you in writing as to what you think of the manner in which I performed my duty to the country and of the reward to which I am entitled in the estimation of all good people. As a matter of justice to me, will you not send me a kind letter expressing your views in that regard?"

What would you call summoning Creighton to his deathbed and writing that "he wished the people of this country to understand that in the great trial, and while on the witness stand, he told the truth and nothing but the truth" if not a final search for validation and approval?

And don't forget the Oldroyd book, for which Weichmann contributed the chapter on himself. In his correspondence with Oldroyd, he wrote on August 18, 1901, "I am pleased to hear that your book will place me all right in the minds of the public. That is what I desire above all else."

BTW, I'm actually quite sympathetic to Weichmann. He was a young man placed in a horrible position. And as a researcher I can't dislike anyone who saved future generations hours of deciphering handwriting by adopting the new technology of the typewriter.

So you are walking back your "consumed by guilt" comment to "could have felt guilty" and justifying it with a false equivalency in the waitress story. Got it.

I don't agree that the letter to Bingham you cite demonstrates Weichmann's searching for approval, at least not in the way you suggest. Through his life, Weichmann was slandered in the news by "journalists" at least every year around the anniversary of the conspiracy trial and executions. He rarely or never responded but decided he needed to set the record straight in his book for historical posterity. I think he was smart to ask for statements in his behalf from important figures from the trial because they carried more weight than if he just defended himself, although he did an effective job of that.

I think he believed that a deathbed statement carried weight, and he was conscious of the years of slander against his good name.

Here's an article that appeared in newspapers nationwide, July 17, 1885:

"Old Story Revived
Louis J. Weichmann has been appointed to the civil service board in Philadelphia. The appointment took place in the same week with the anniversary of the hanging. Twenty years ago Tuesday, the 7th inst. (?) of Mrs. Surratt and the other conspirators in the assassination of President Lincoln. Weichmann was the witnessupon whose testimonyMrs. Surratt was convicted. He had been a theological student with John Surratt in 1859: boarded with the Surratts while a clerkm in the war department, and was treated like a brother and son. He met Booth the same day John Surratt did, being introduced by Dr. Mudd. With Surratt and Atzerodt he went to Ford's theater to hear Booth as pescara in the 'Apostate'. Payne, the fellow who stabbed Secretary Seward, was a guest of Weichman's at the Surratt house, and it was at his request that Payne was harbored in the house. The two occupied the same room and slept in the same bed. The first night Payne was there Weichmann went down to the kitchen, got supper for him, and took it up to his bedroom. Weichmann used to go to church regularly with Mrs. Surratt, being as she was, a devout Catholic. It was Weichmann who drove Mrs. Surratt to Surrattsville the day of the assassination, when the carbines were taken there for Booth and Herold. The lawyers and the public were generally a good deal puzzled by Weichmann's testimony, whether he was a detective watching the Surratts or a badly frightened coward and conspirator. Weichmann has never said anything additional about the conspiracy, although he had the opportunity a few years ago when Mr. Clampitt, one of the attorneys for Mrs. Surratt, accused him in the pages of North American review, of deliberately swearing away a woman's life."

"I desire to thank you, sir, for your testimony on behalf of my murdered father." "Who are you, sonny? " asked I. "My name is Tad Lincoln," was his answer.
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 - Pamela - 05-23-2016 10:07 PM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)