RE: Porter & Comstock
(02-05-2016 03:35 PM)John Fazio Wrote: (02-02-2016 05:34 PM)JosephARose Wrote: (02-02-2016 09:58 AM)John Fazio Wrote: (02-02-2016 09:15 AM)RJNorton Wrote: John, I think you are right about Porter not being present in the carriage. I was confused because I think I originally saw the incident described in Porter's reminiscences.
In Campaigning With Grant, Porter writes:
"About half-past three o'clock the wife of General Rucker called with her carriage to take the party to the Baltimore and Ohio railroad-station. It was a two-seated top-carriage. Mrs. Grant sat with Mrs. Rucker on the back seat. The general, with true republican simplicity, sat on the front seat with the driver. Before they had gone far along Pennsylvania Avenue, a horseman who was riding in the same direction passed them, and as he did so peered into the carriage. When Mrs. Grant caught sight of his face she remarked to the general: " That is the same man who sat down at the lunch-table near me. I don't like his looks." Before they reached the station the horseman turned and rode back toward them, and again gazed at them intently. This time he attracted the attention of the general, who regarded the man's movements as singular, but made light of the matter so as to allay Mrs. Grant's apprehensions."
Roger:
Excellent. That nails it down. I never read that book. I will add it to my list, which now has about as many entries as our local phone book.
John
To preface my remarks, I am not well-versed about Lincoln's assassination, but approach the subject as a Grant biographer.
Julia's Memoirs (pgs 155-57) tell how she was approached in her rooms by a curious messenger. Then four suspicious men, one of whom looked like the messenger, watched her eat lunch. Another of the four later rode past the Grants, who were in Mrs. Rucker's carriage, and glared at them. After General Grant left Julia in Burlington, New Jersey, early the next day, she received a note from the would-be assassin. In Young's Around the World with General Grant (2:356), Grant stated that he had "learned afterward that the horseman was Booth."
Even if Grant's testimony was given before he learned this, why wouldn't Grant have testified about the would-be assassin's note and the plot to take his life, as it bore a very probable connection to Lincoln's assassination? Why wouldn't Julia confirm the possible identities of the men who watched her eat lunch, as their presence at the restaurant would be germane to any investigation of the events of that day?
Mr. Rose:
I would like to suggest that the answer to your queston is: Grant's testimony as to Booth's menacing him and Julia in the carriage would not have been relevant to the prosecution's case. Booth was not on trial. Similarly, testimony as to the letter received was also irrelevant, inasmuch as the writer did not identify himself/herself and, further, even Grant said that he could not vouch for its authenticity, i.e. that it might have been written by a crank. Julia could have identified Herold as her mid-day visitor, true, but how would that have helped the prosecution? They had as much evidence as they needed to convict Herold and the other minnows; what they really wanted was evidence to implicate the sharks, i.e. the unindicted co-conspirators (the Confederate leadership and the operatives in Canada), whom they were sure were complicit in the great crime. Julia's testimony about Herold would not have helped in this regard. Furthermore, Julia would not wish to sully herself with too close an association with the unseemly business of trying assassins. The General, however, did testify, but he didn't have much to say about anything other than an 1863 meeting with Jacob Thompson.
I hope this helps.
John
John,
Thank you very much for the response. If anyone else also has ideas, I would like to hear them. I've made an assertion in my book about this, but I'm willing to change it, if the evidence shows it to be wrong.
Joe
|
Search
Member List
Calendar
Help
