Was Stanton a murder target?

[John Fazio]

(11-05-2016 05:00 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(11-01-2016 01:49 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  To do only what he most probably did: case out Stanton's home, to get the lay of the land and to find out, if possible, Stanton's and Grant's planned whereabouts the following evening. (How did Booth know Grant would be at Stanton's home that night? He had sources inside the Federal government, probably including the White House.

John, I am fascinated by the possibility that Booth knew Grant would be at the Stantons' reception because there were sources either in the government or White House that told him. If it were the White House, can you possibly name a suspect? Did someone close to Lincoln meet with Booth and tell him? I am intrigued by that possibility. A mole in the White House?

(Was there a purpose to the Stantons' reception? Was it held specifically to honor Grant? If so, then Booth may not have needed "inside" information.)

Roger:

Grant and Julia were guests of honor at Stanton's home on the 13th, joined by dozens of War Department employees. Knowledge of their presence there might have come to Booth from his inside sources or from a public announcement. Either way, I regard it as a near certainty that there was treachery in the Federal government and, most likely, in the Executive Mansion (White House) itself. Tidwell, Hall and Gaddy refer to "Booth's intelligence system" working perfectly with respect to the president's and Mrs. Lincoln's theater party, which, they say, Booth learned of long before Mary's request to reserve the presidential box was received by James R. Ford at 10:30 in the morning of the 14th. Frederick A. Demond, a guard on the Maryland side of the Navy Yard Bridge, wrote a series of letters, late in the 19th century and early in the 20th, which strongly suggest treachery at the bridge, which enabled Booth and Herold to cross after hours and without a pass. Demond's accounts have been challenged because of inconsistencies, but in my opinion there is enough consistency to conclude that there was indeed treachery at the bridge. Stringfellow wrote about a mission he undertook in Washington in March, 1865, at Davis's behest, in which, he said, he was in contact with an officer occupying an important position about Lincoln and that he made this officer a proposition. Mills believes the officer was Parker. I doubt it, but must at least acknowledge the possibility. According to Roscoe, Robert Lincoln allegedly had documentary evidence of treason committed by a member of his father's cabinet. Jacob Thompson said he would not write his memoirs because there was still one man in Congress, in 1883, who enjoyed the confidence of the Federal government at the same time he was aiding the Confederacy during the war. Jacob Thompson also said that "many...prominent men in the North would be utterly ruined and destroyed if the many papers in his possession fell into the hands of the enemy". Remember, too, the many Copperheads whom Mary Lincoln excoriated and the many radical Republicans whom Nicolay said were secretly gleeful when Lincoln was gone. The octopus had many tentacles and any one of them was capable of feeding Booth information as to the president's and other Federal leaders' whereabouts at any given time and arranging for safe passage of the fugitives across the bridge. See also pp. 368-371 of Decapitating.

John