Those Booth Horses Again -

[Rick Smith]

(04-18-2014 02:54 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  Kossuth, was a good friend of George N. Sanders - Booth's spy handler.

That is interesting. I believe that both Kossuth & Sanders were involved in various European revolutions in 1848. Is this correct?

[SSlater]

The answer to this debate is to list what each person said - just the way they said it - no interpretation - no "corrections" - (Booth said; Mudd said; Herold said: Wild Bill said: Laurie said: etc.) and let the reader pick the one he likes, if he doesn't have another one of his own. Could it be that Booth is the liar? Would you expect him to tell anyone, especially Mudd, "I broke my leg when I jumped from the box after I shot the President". come on--- He lied , whatever he said. The whole point of research is to develop what YOU WANT TO THINK. Don't bother to try to convince others to think as you do. Let the debate continue, but don't to PROVE someone else is wrong - that's the way they understand the event. (Of course, you know that I am right - but I ain't talking)

[JMadonna]

(04-18-2014 03:06 PM)Rick Smith Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 02:54 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  Kossuth, was a good friend of George N. Sanders - Booth's spy handler.

That is interesting. I believe that both Kossuth & Sanders were involved in various European revolutions in 1848. Is this correct?

In many ways he was a mentor to Sanders

[L Verge]

And it drives me crazy that more attention isn't paid to Sanders. He was a piece of work and quite capable of planning revolts and assassinations.

[wsanto]

(04-18-2014 07:30 AM)Rick Smith Wrote:  Bill C,

You mention the following in a previous post:

"I never said Thomas Jones stated that Mudd admitted the horse fall was a lie but that in his (Jones') book he gives his opinion the horse-fall story was a lie concocted by Mudd for cover."

I cannot find anywhere in Jones' book where he gives his opinion that the horse fall story was a lie concocted by Dr. Mudd. The following is all that I can find regarding the horse fall:

"Booth knew the doctor, having met him and had visited at his house when in the country about eighteen months before the assassination. The statement he made to the doctor was that his horse had fallen and hurt him. Both he and Herold entered the house and the doctor, assisted by his kind-hearted wife, who had arisen for the purpose, proceeded to examine and dress the fracture. The fugitives remained there until the following evening. How much they told Dr. Mudd beyond the fact that they wished to cross the river to Virginia is not known."

Although there is no question in my mind that Jones wrote his book in such a way as to protect others, there is nothing here to indicate that Jones is giving his opinion that Mudd concocted a story, only a statement recorded by Jones.

Possibly I am missing something.[/i]

Rick,

I briefly reviewed Jones' book and I believe you are correct. My characterization of Mudd is incorrect. Jones does not give an opinion of Mudd with regard to the horse fall. Jones does state as a matter of fact that Booth broke his leg at Ford's and later states Herold and Booth told Mudd Booth broke his leg in a horse fall. I guess I was reading between the lines that Jones felt this was a lie concocted for cover.

Jones goes on to state that Booth told Cox how he broke his leg but doesn't say what Booth told him. Again I infer that Jones believes that Booth told Cox he broke his leg in the leap since this was what Jones mentions earlier, as a matter of fact.

Why Jones thought the matter of the broken leg was settled as matter of fact is debatable. Dave Taylor commented on this in another thread and dismissed it as Jones just relating the common held belief in the 1890s that Booth broke his leg at Ford's.

My belief is Jones knew from his interaction with Booth where the injury occurred or, at least, what Booth was telling those he trusted what occurred.

Harbin is also on record I believe stating Booth told him he broke his leg at Ford's. Of course this was after Booth made his diary entry and, if lying there, would probably continue the lie to Harbin

[Rick Smith]

(04-18-2014 08:37 PM)wsanto Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 07:30 AM)Rick Smith Wrote:  Bill C,

You mention the following in a previous post:

"I never said Thomas Jones stated that Mudd admitted the horse fall was a lie but that in his (Jones') book he gives his opinion the horse-fall story was a lie concocted by Mudd for cover."

I cannot find anywhere in Jones' book where he gives his opinion that the horse fall story was a lie concocted by Dr. Mudd. The following is all that I can find regarding the horse fall:

"Booth knew the doctor, having met him and had visited at his house when in the country about eighteen months before the assassination. The statement he made to the doctor was that his horse had fallen and hurt him. Both he and Herold entered the house and the doctor, assisted by his kind-hearted wife, who had arisen for the purpose, proceeded to examine and dress the fracture. The fugitives remained there until the following evening. How much they told Dr. Mudd beyond the fact that they wished to cross the river to Virginia is not known."

Although there is no question in my mind that Jones wrote his book in such a way as to protect others, there is nothing here to indicate that Jones is giving his opinion that Mudd concocted a story, only a statement recorded by Jones.

Possibly I am missing something.[/i]

Rick,

I briefly reviewed Jones' book and I believe you are correct. My characterization of Mudd is incorrect. Jones does not give an opinion of Mudd with regard to the horse fall. Jones does state as a matter of fact that Booth broke his leg at Ford's and later states Herold and Booth told Mudd Booth broke his leg in a horse fall. I guess I was reading between the lines that Jones felt this was a lie concocted for cover.

Jones goes on to state that Booth told Cox how he broke his leg but doesn't say what Booth told him. Again I infer that Jones believes that Booth told Cox he broke his leg in the leap since this was what Jones mentions earlier, as a matter of fact.

Why Jones thought the matter of the broken leg was settled as matter of fact is debatable. Dave Taylor commented on this in another thread and dismissed it as Jones just relating the common held belief in the 1890s that Booth broke his leg at Ford's.

My belief is Jones knew from his interaction with Booth where the injury occurred or, at least, what Booth was telling those he trusted what occurred.

Harbin is also on record I believe stating Booth told him he broke his leg at Ford's. Of course this was after Booth made his diary entry and, if lying there, would probably continue the lie to Harbin

Bill,

No worries. All the little details are fascinating & I think, important.

Jones & Harbin are particular favorites of mine.

You are right in believing that Jones may have inferred certain things between the lines in his book. His book, I believe, is a masterpiece of truths, half truths and misleading statements.

He was still doing his job as Chief Confederate Signal Officer when he wrote of his experiences and part of that job was to say little or nothing of real details and to protect those he worked with and who were under his control.

He was good at his job. I think he was just great.

Happy Easter,

Rick

[JMadonna]

(04-18-2014 06:25 PM)L Verge Wrote:  And it drives me crazy that more attention isn't paid to Sanders. He was a piece of work and quite capable of planning revolts and assassinations.

Just for the sake of your sanity I devote a great deal of ink to Sanders in my new manuscript.

[Wild Bill]

I spend several chapters in Last Confederate Heroes on Sanders and his conversations with Booth. You may see them as good or bad fiction but they are straight from a half dozen historical articles and Haines massive study and are accurate depictions of Sanders' revolutionary views, many straight out of the European Revolutions of 1848. The only piece of fiction (yo, Laurie) was Sanders' recruitment of Nettie Slater and Charles Dunham to clean up Booth's connections with the Confederacy in the last two chapters of the book.

[RJNorton]

(04-19-2014 07:34 AM)Wild Bill Wrote:  I spend several chapters in Last Confederate Heroes...

For anyone who does not have Bill's book and would like to have it today... here's one way. I have Amazon's free Kindle on my computer and was able to download LCH from the Amazon website. You can download the Amazon Kindle for free from the Amazon website.

[BettyO]

Agreed, Roger!

Bill's Last Confederate Heroes is the best written novel on the assassination I've ever read.... the settings, verbiage, everything is wonderfully accurate to the Victorian era as well as the historic research. Please don't miss this one....

You can also download the free Barnes and Noble app for Nook for your PC and read it on that as well. It is available in both Nook and Kindle formats.

[L Verge]

Bill, once you "sanitized" your first edition of LCH, I have had no qualms about recommending it - so no digs needed. My comment about Sanders was made to support more work being needed on that unstable man. You and now Jerry are some of the few other than the Come Retribution trio that even acknowledge the man may have had something to do with the Lincoln conspiracy. I think he had his hands in a lot of piles of dirt back then.

Now, I'm going back to the campfire about Booth's hat and throw another log on the fire. This is strictly a thought off the top of my head to see what becomes of it, but what is the possibility that Booth grabbed Peanuts Burrough's hat as he dashed away? We know that Peanuts said Booth struck him (on the forehead?). Could it have been done in the process of snatching the hat?

By all accounts (none of them proven, to my knowledge), Peanuts is always portrayed as somewhat slow-witted. In the pandemonium that broke out as more and more people piled out of the theater and into the back alley, maybe he didn't even realize he was missing his hat. He might have chalked it up later to having had it knocked off his head by the crowd and trampled underfoot.

Booth knew that he needed a hat in order to blend in at some point. It was readily available sitting on top of Peanut's head and probably nearly level with the mounted Booth's arm. It was easier to get than riding about six blocks to the boardinghouse and taking a chance of having others see and hear him and then cutting across more streets to get to the bridge.

OK, Ready. Aim. Fire!

[J. Beckert]

That's a great thought and it's been hiding in plain sight ever since! It makes perfect sense.

[JMadonna]

IMO Peanut John's testimony is devastating to the broken leg on stage claim. Although I will conceded you can support yourself with a broken fibula, having suffered the injury there is no way you can walk let alone run without limping. John's testimony gives no indication that Booth was suffering any physical distress whatsoever. In this case the absence of evidence is indeed evidence of absence.

Now you are asking us to believe that Booth mounted the horse with a broken leg, kicked at Peanut with his right stole his hat and still managed to control a recalcitrant horse at the same time? But to put the topper on, Peanut who witnessed all this failed to notice that Booth stole his hat?

Lent is over Laurie, you may resume drinking but in moderation only.

[L Verge]

That is exactly what I am proposing, Jerry, and now that it's Easter, you can cut the sarcasm. Good scholars don't operate that way. I realize that any suggestion I make will be cast off by you because it might threaten your premise. I learned that several years ago. But it's not going to stop me from my theories either.

Peanuts was as caught off guard as anyone in the audience. He had no idea what had just happened and why Booth was in such a hurry. In the flash of a moment, one does not always remember what just happened. I have had a necklace slip off me and I never realized it until I was home and started to remove it. None of us can know what we would have done that night or what we would remember seeing. I suspect that many of us would have bounded up the aisles in retreat to the lobby and Tenth Street for self-preservation. And then, we would have talked long and hard about what we "did to help in stopping Lincoln's killer..."

[Gene C]

Not that it matters, but do we know Booth was wearing his hat in the theater? During that time period, would a gentleman wear his hat indoors? Perhaps Booth left his hat with the horse? I was thinking of Dave Taylor's video, derringer in one hand and knife in the other. No hat.