Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

HerbS · 09-07-2015, 06:43 PM

Thanks Laurie,I am so fortunate to have taken Constitutional History and Law in college!

L Verge · 09-07-2015, 06:54 PM

Somewhere, Ste. Marie makes reference to leaving D.C. because of problems with Mr. Weichmann. Does anyone know what the problem was?

In an above post, Pamela comments to Susan, "I don't know why the envelopes were in his room and neither do you." I suspect that we could eliminate 'the envelopes' and make a general statement about much of what is said and inferred about Louis J. Weichmann. There are too many elements of his association with the Surratts and the crime of the century that are not known for certain. I see his role as one based on theory either way. The preponderance of scholarly research to-date, however, generally casts a lot of doubt on his veracity. Pamela, you certainly have a tough row to hoe, in my opinion, if you intend to prove Weichmann completely above board.

Susan Higginbotham · 09-07-2015, 07:22 PM

(09-07-2015 05:50 PM)Pamela Wrote:
(09-07-2015 05:01 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote: Does this sound like a man who would conspire to kidnap the President?

"I had almost forgotten to tell you that I called on your friend. Mr. Wm. Underwood, at the Carver Hospital. He has nearly recovered from his wound, though it has not yet quite healed. He intended going home in a week or two, and perhaps he may be there now, as it has been over a week since I saw him.

"Have you heard from your Uncle James [a Union soldier] lately ? There has been some very hard fighting out West recently, and you know, Cousin Bell, that the foe has very little regard where he directs his bullets. May God preserve him, and grant that he may see the end of this unholy war without harm."

Yet the writer of this letter (and other quite charming letters), John Surratt, certainly did plot to kidnap the President, and perhaps worse than that.

I think that under the right (or perhaps more aptly, wrong) circumstances, particularly in wartime, just about anybody is capable of anything.

I can't claim as a proven fact that Weichmann supplied John Surratt with confidential information, but I think it's possible that he did. Gilbert Raynor, the clerk whose statement you kindly pointed me to, did mention that Surratt visited Weichmann at work and that Weichmann boasted of ways he could make a large sum of money, and Colonel Foster mentioned "large quanties of envelopes, with the official frank of the office of the Commissary General of Prisoners," being found in the room Weichmann and Surratt shared. Maybe two or three envelopes were used by Weichmann as bookmarks, but large quantities?

Yes, his letter does sound consistent with someone who could conspire against the President. He talked about bullets, and an unholy war, compared to Weichmann who talked about sunshine, courage, a romantic village, complements of the season, influential acquaintances, succeeding through his exertions and writing in French. If you don't see the difference, I do.

Here's a letter to Ste. Marie written at the same time:

Dear sir,

I received a letter from Mr. Wiechmann yesterday, stating your intention to leave Texas by the first of May. I spoke to Mr. Hill about a teacher. He said he wanted one and was willing to have you as our teacher, but he could not build a schoolhouse for some time.

If you have made up your mind to go S---- I can send you all safely. Do not have the least doubt of it. Times are better than they were. All you have to do is let me know the day you will be in Washington, and I will meet you. You can carry a hand trunk with you.

There will not be the least difficulty, only perhaps you will have to remain among us some two or three weeks. Still, we can easily make the time pass agreeably. I suppose "Texas" looks as dreary as possible. My kindest regards to Father Mahoney. Do not fail to come to Washington.

Your friend,
J. Harrison Surratt

This is a letter written by a hardened blockade runner boasting about his skills. Texas isn't romantic, it's dreary. He isn't encouraging Ste Marie to obtain a respectable position by his own exertions, perhaps aided by influential friends; he told him there was no job available and encouraged him to head south, and presumably join the Confederacy. This difference between the two men is distinct, at least to me.

I haven't read anywhere that Weichmann was questioned about the envelopes although I presume he was. Louis was teaching himself phonography at home with daily lessons, considered to be incredibly difficult to do by Pittman. Perhaps Weichmann took some work home with him, rather than stay late and miss meals that his board paid for. I don't know why the envelopes were in his room and neither do you. To you it suggests something dark, to me something conscientious. Weichmann did answer to the money making comment. Have you read it in The Evidence?

Since Colonel Foster wrote in his report mentioning the envelopes that "It seems extremely improbable that Wiechmann was ignorant of the entire plot, if he was not an accomplice," I'd say that the envelopes suggested something dark (or at least suspicious) to him. And at this distance his opinion would seem to count as much or more than mine or yours. (I must say, though, that a franked government envelope strikes me as a good place to carry clandestine correspondence--if I were a courier and my friend and roommate offered to bring some home, I'd be most appreciative.)

Speaking of going South, didn't Weichmann acknowledge wanting to go to Richmond to study for the priesthood? That sounds like an odd choice for someone whose loyalties were firmly with the North, especially given the hardships of living in the South at that time.

I don't dislike Weichmann, by the way. But I just can't view him as an abject innocent.

Pamela · (This post was last modified: 09-07-2015 08:59 PM by Pamela.)

(09-07-2015 06:54 PM)L Verge Wrote: Somewhere, Ste. Marie makes reference to leaving D.C. because of problems with Mr. Weichmann. Does anyone know what the problem was?

In an above post, Pamela comments to Susan, "I don't know why the envelopes were in his room and neither do you." I suspect that we could eliminate 'the envelopes' and make a general statement about much of what is said and inferred about Louis J. Weichmann. There are too many elements of his association with the Surratts and the crime of the century that are not known for certain. I see his role as one based on theory either way. The preponderance of scholarly research to-date, however, generally casts a lot of doubt on his veracity. Pamela, you certainly have a tough row to hoe, in my opinion, if you intend to prove Weichmann completely above board.

When historical assessments of Weichmann's involvement or lack of involvement in the conspiracy is based on what Surratt and Booth said, and is repeated over and over again accompanied with snarky and suggestive innuendo, that's a poor reflection on those historians when it comes to Weichmann, no matter what their credentials are. Michael Schein's sources listed are Isacsson and Moore. What information did they dig up on Weichmann? How about nothing! Those are sources? And Professor George talked about self preservation? Is that history or philosophy? I haven't come across much scholarly research on Weichmann, certainly little to none by Ewald, who wrote a lot of nonsense and tabloid fodder. Chris Ritter, geesh. And he hasn't sent me the article that he claimed would answer my questions or told me if he enjoyed watching Louis's niece in the Munsters, lol. Has your librarian found Joseph Abel's 6 page article yet?

(09-07-2015 08:29 PM)Pamela Wrote:
(09-07-2015 06:54 PM)L Verge Wrote: Somewhere, Ste. Marie makes reference to leaving D.C. because of problems with Mr. Weichmann. Does anyone know what the problem was?

In an above post, Pamela comments to Susan, "I don't know why the envelopes were in his room and neither do you." I suspect that we could eliminate 'the envelopes' and make a general statement about much of what is said and inferred about Louis J. Weichmann. There are too many elements of his association with the Surratts and the crime of the century that are not known for certain. I see his role as one based on theory either way. The preponderance of scholarly research to-date, however, generally casts a lot of doubt on his veracity. Pamela, you certainly have a tough row to hoe, in my opinion, if you intend to prove Weichmann completely above board.

When historical assessments of Weichmann's involvement or lack of involvement in the conspiracy is based on what Surratt and Booth said, and is repeated over and over again accompanied with snarky and suggestive innuendo, that's a poor reflection on those historians when it comes to Weichmann, no matter what their credentials are. Michael Schein's sources listed are Isacsson and Moore. What information did they dig up on Weichmann? How about nothing! Those are sources? And Professor George talked about self preservation? Is that history or philosophy? I haven't come across much scholarly research on Weichmann, certainly little to none by Ewald, who wrote a lot of nonsense and tabloid fodder. Chris Ritter, geesh. And he hasn't sent me the article that he claimed would answer my questions or told me if he enjoyed watching Louis's niece in the Munsters, lol. Has your librarian found Joseph Abel's 6 page article yet?

I believe Ste Marie mentioned that he didn't agree with Weichmann and so he left with no notice. He showed up with no notice as well. Interestingly, Ste Marie, age 41, dropped dead on a street in Philadelphia in 1874, while Louis was living there, penniless, and was buried in a paupers' cemetery.

(09-07-2015 07:22 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:
(09-07-2015 05:50 PM)Pamela Wrote:
(09-07-2015 05:01 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote: Does this sound like a man who would conspire to kidnap the President?

"I had almost forgotten to tell you that I called on your friend. Mr. Wm. Underwood, at the Carver Hospital. He has nearly recovered from his wound, though it has not yet quite healed. He intended going home in a week or two, and perhaps he may be there now, as it has been over a week since I saw him.

"Have you heard from your Uncle James [a Union soldier] lately ? There has been some very hard fighting out West recently, and you know, Cousin Bell, that the foe has very little regard where he directs his bullets. May God preserve him, and grant that he may see the end of this unholy war without harm."

Yet the writer of this letter (and other quite charming letters), John Surratt, certainly did plot to kidnap the President, and perhaps worse than that.

I think that under the right (or perhaps more aptly, wrong) circumstances, particularly in wartime, just about anybody is capable of anything.

I can't claim as a proven fact that Weichmann supplied John Surratt with confidential information, but I think it's possible that he did. Gilbert Raynor, the clerk whose statement you kindly pointed me to, did mention that Surratt visited Weichmann at work and that Weichmann boasted of ways he could make a large sum of money, and Colonel Foster mentioned "large quanties of envelopes, with the official frank of the office of the Commissary General of Prisoners," being found in the room Weichmann and Surratt shared. Maybe two or three envelopes were used by Weichmann as bookmarks, but large quantities?

Yes, his letter does sound consistent with someone who could conspire against the President. He talked about bullets, and an unholy war, compared to Weichmann who talked about sunshine, courage, a romantic village, complements of the season, influential acquaintances, succeeding through his exertions and writing in French. If you don't see the difference, I do.

Here's a letter to Ste. Marie written at the same time:

Dear sir,

I received a letter from Mr. Wiechmann yesterday, stating your intention to leave Texas by the first of May. I spoke to Mr. Hill about a teacher. He said he wanted one and was willing to have you as our teacher, but he could not build a schoolhouse for some time.

If you have made up your mind to go S---- I can send you all safely. Do not have the least doubt of it. Times are better than they were. All you have to do is let me know the day you will be in Washington, and I will meet you. You can carry a hand trunk with you.

There will not be the least difficulty, only perhaps you will have to remain among us some two or three weeks. Still, we can easily make the time pass agreeably. I suppose "Texas" looks as dreary as possible. My kindest regards to Father Mahoney. Do not fail to come to Washington.

Your friend,
J. Harrison Surratt

This is a letter written by a hardened blockade runner boasting about his skills. Texas isn't romantic, it's dreary. He isn't encouraging Ste Marie to obtain a respectable position by his own exertions, perhaps aided by influential friends; he told him there was no job available and encouraged him to head south, and presumably join the Confederacy. This difference between the two men is distinct, at least to me.

I haven't read anywhere that Weichmann was questioned about the envelopes although I presume he was. Louis was teaching himself phonography at home with daily lessons, considered to be incredibly difficult to do by Pittman. Perhaps Weichmann took some work home with him, rather than stay late and miss meals that his board paid for. I don't know why the envelopes were in his room and neither do you. To you it suggests something dark, to me something conscientious. Weichmann did answer to the money making comment. Have you read it in The Evidence?

Since Colonel Foster wrote in his report mentioning the envelopes that "It seems extremely improbable that Wiechmann was ignorant of the entire plot, if he was not an accomplice," I'd say that the envelopes suggested something dark (or at least suspicious) to him. And at this distance his opinion would seem to count as much or more than mine or yours. (I must say, though, that a franked government envelope strikes me as a good place to carry clandestine correspondence--if I were a courier and my friend and roommate offered to bring some home, I'd be most appreciative.)

Speaking of going South, didn't Weichmann acknowledge wanting to go to Richmond to study for the priesthood? That sounds like an odd choice for someone whose loyalties were firmly with the North, especially given the hardships of living in the South at that time.

I don't dislike Weichmann, by the way. But I just can't view him as an abject innocent.

I don't know if Weichmann was an "abject innocent" or not; I just want some solid proof that he was knowingly involved in the conspiracy. Even Surratt said he wasn't, just that he gave him the run of the War Dept at night and gave him dispatches. None of the conspirators said Weichmann was part of the conspiracy, and they had an ax to grind with him. I've never been a spy so I don't know if it would have been wise to carry stolen dispatches in official envelopes or not. Why not just stuff a dispatch in your coat pocket? The bishop who had the authority to approve of where he studied was located in Richmond. Louis said he was approved to resume his studies in Baltimore, but I think (just speculation based on his writings, although I think he made some mention of this) he wanted to continue his studies with a pastor and didn't want to return to school. Perhaps since he had been a school principal for a year, clerked for another year, and continued his studies on his own, he felt he would be going backward to return to school. He mentioned that several of his friends finished their education with pastors. And school costs money.

Why would Foster have been suspicious of Weichmann? He lived in the boarding house, shared a bed with John Surratt, took Mrs Surratt to deliver her shooting irons messages, got a telegraph from Booth, ran back and forth with messages to the conspirators, had a fake mustache and a cipher in his trunk--oh, yeah, that's why.

Gene C · 09-08-2015, 03:36 PM

I like Weichmann. A reasonably intelligent young man, thrown into circumstances way beyond his control, living in a house with people he trusted, who he thought were his friends, but were involved in the crime of the century. I think he really liked Mrs. Surratt, a substitute mother figure. I don't remember his testimony having much to it that would convict her. It was always left to some one else's testimony. He might confirm it, might lead you down the path to her being guilty, but he never gives you quite enough to convict her. That's left for someone else.

We see movies and read books about people like this. People surrounded by sinister activities, who right at the end figure everything out and save the day. Weichmann didn't figure things out until it was to late.
But neither did Anna. She probably made the comment that was more damaging to her mother than anything Louis said.

He reminds me of the little brother or sister who wants to tag along and play with the older, more experienced kids. When it comes to picking sides to play a game, they can play, you just you don't them on your side. When your doing something you shouldn't, they want to join in with you, but you know they will turn around and tattle on you. He's a good kid, you just can't trust him with a big secret. And he's a bit naive. To me, that's Weichmann. I think I just described myself growing up with two older sisters. Undecided

He has an important role in history, and he probably with the help of others, looked upon himself as somewhat of a hero. History didn't quite treat him that way for very long.

RJNorton · 09-08-2015, 05:26 PM

(08-28-2015 03:06 PM)Pamela Wrote: Booth and the Surratts also stole the Father Menu letter and either Booth or Surratt commissioned the phony Clara letter to compromise Weichmann.

I had the text of the "Clara letter" in my files - thank you to Mike Kauffman who sent it to me in 2006.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NY Feby 15, 1865

Yr hurried note Mr. Weichmann just before your return ^ from Philada ^ to W City ^ Jany 7th^ gave promise of one of your ever welcome “lengthy” letters which has not as yet reached me. I hope you could not possibly have been offended by any part of my reply on Jany 9th, which I suppose our mutual friend Mr. S --- tt found in same envelop with his little note. How sorry I should be to have anything disturb the disinterested friendship existing between us. Mr. Weichmann -- I regretted to hear of any annoyances to you that gave so little leisure & caused yr trip to Philda. Is it all “sunshine” again with you, & how did you enjoy yr trip to Baltimore end of Jany? Will you please write to me directly & explain why Mr. S has not been to NY or if he is still at Home. I have often thought of you lately, and sincerely hope yr prospects are fair for gaining the heart you seemed to covet. You see I understood your affectionate remark about Mr. S --- tt & the conclusion, “I love him, indeed I do, & his _____ too.” Now I hope you wont mind telling me if your suit is favored. I will promise to keep it a profound secret, so ‘do tell.’ You know none would rejoice more sincerely than I over any event you desired. Allow me to congratulate you on yr apointment abroad. Do you pass through Philda or N Y ^ in July^ to embark? Will you oblige me by an immediate reply to this, especially about Mr. S --- tt, for I shall bid adieu to N Y on the 21st inst. & desire yr reply on 20th if possible. Now before you read the next page promise yrself not to tell anyone. [next p.] I expect to pass through W. City n the 23rd or 24th, ^P.M> ^ & if you will ony write in reply to all my questions the hour this reaches you, I promise to send you a line on arrival to inform you where to find me. The Dr. & Mrs. R dont know yet if we shall be at Willard’s or elsewhere, or I would tell you now; however you can find out even if yr letter dont come, but I should prefer the answer requested. I shall probably leave again on 25th & dont wish a word of this spoken of. Will you oblige me by sending information of the health of my Uncle & his family. I have not written him of my visit, but shall arrange to see him if ‘all’s well.’ We will talk over :surprising” him. I hope you will bring dear Miss S --- tt with you to call on me. I could love her for yr sake & her brother’s; two of my best kindest, and most sincere W. City friends.
Watch the papers for name of R in “arrivals” on 23rd. I hope our friendly relation obviates the necessity of apology for addressing you without an unanswered letter to reply to. The distance that will separate us after our possible interview on the 23rd or 24th will be far greater than ever before, we shall no longer be able to correspond, though the ties of friendship will ever remain unchanged, I hope & feel it will be so if you are willing.
May yr future be all you wish. I know & feel Miss S --- tt is worthy of you, & they are all favorably disposed towards you I believe. Give my kindest regards to all friends. Love to Cousin L & Mrs. D & Mrs. M----r’s family.
The early reply I ask will be esteemed a great favor. Hoping your health is improving, I am as ever

Most sincerely yr Friend
Clara

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Also, Susan posted the text of the Father Menu letter over a year ago. Credit to Susan for this!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

St Charles College
March 29, 1865

Dear Friend,

Your last letter relieved me from great anxiety, for I was not sure to have guessed well. Why do you not speak more fully? Again in the letter I have just had the honor of receiving from you, you speak in a obscure way of Mr. Surratt, as if he were a rebel; could you not have said openly what is the perilous trip point which he is soon to depart? What is that last? What is the meaning of that restrictive? Between us there should be no secret. For speaking of little Dalton, you speak of his condition as being truly deplorable, in what sense? Is it in the personal welfare, or in the spiritual? Or in both? His brother at Charlotte Hall cannot do much at present for his support; but I hope he will soon be ordained, and will not, when ordained, forget the only relation he has upon earth. I have not the wisdom of Solomon to guess his role, my faculty of understanding is rather bland than sharp; therefore if you wish me to comprehend your reticence's, you must provide me, if you can, with quite sharper visions.

As to the conditions which, you say, Mr. Dubruel joined to your admission, I think there is no need for you to be uneasy, for next September Richmond will be able to communicate with Baltimore, and therefore your Bishop will arrange the matter himself with the auspices of Baltimore.

The draft has not yet taken place at Ellicott Mills, and consequently I know not yet what will become of me. In case I am drafted, I will have recourse to your influence with the Government to obtain my exemption.

As you go next year to Philosophy, you will be pleased to hear who are those who will be with you or who may be with you in the same class. They are now in my first Latin Class; their names are J. Duffey, Galvin, McPaul, Moran, Morris, Mullin, Noonan, W. O'Brien, O'Connor, besides those others who you do not know; I do not mention Shoffey, who has left us some weeks ago on account of headache, and by neuralgia. Nor do I speak of Clarke. Dear Clarke lost his mother last year, and finds himself quite destitute, perhaps as mostly of pity as Dalton. He was working on a farm lately in the neighborhood of St. Charles, but with his incapacity and unfitness for such a work and the fear of being drafted made him fly lately. I do not know where.

You recommend me to pray for you in one of my masses. I have already told you that I pray for you in every one; it is not for the sake of making a compliment or filling up a letter I mentioned it; it is the truth. You may unite your intentions to mine at five o'clock and twenty-five minutes, it is then I present your needs to Almighty God.

My best regards to Mr. Surratt, if he is not gone already on his trip. Our College will be in jubilee this week, and we all hope to gain the grace of it next Saturday.

Your Most Devoted Friend in J.C.

J. B. Menu

(From The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence, ed. by Edwards and Steers)

L Verge · (This post was last modified: 09-08-2015 05:44 PM by L Verge.)

I don't think anyone who has posted here in response to Pamela can be judged as either liking or disliking Weichmann. I can agree with you, Gene, that I have compared him many times to the child who is ignored at recess. That personality trait, however, should not be what we judge his actions on related to the assassination. His flip-flopping as related by others is what confuses the issue, in my mind. I am always reminded of a statement that I saw given by William Wood of the Old Capitol. Wood was certainly no angel, but he was clever and cunning and outspoken -- and he certainly spent enough time around Louis to make a judgment call. His description of Louis Weichmann was, "He is a lying son-of-a-*****."

Pamela - We do have the copies of the Abel interview ready as well as the paper by Fr. Isacsson. As I stated earlier, our new librarian has only been on duty for three weeks and is part-time, but she was able to find the material quickly. We charge 25-cents per page for copies to non-members of the Surratt Society, and the two papers total twenty-two pages. With $2.00 postage added, your total copy fee will be $7.50. You may either phone in your credit card information (301-868-1121) or send check or money order to the museum at 9118 Brandywine Road, Clinton, MD 20735, and we will send the packet right away.

I believe you will find the Joseph Abel interview disappointing because it is 99% a rehashing of the Lincoln assassination story. Fr.. Isacsson's work is more interesting, albeit more analytical that judgmental. I did remember being interested in some questionable history about why Weichmann did not go any further in seeking a priesthood. Many records at St. Charles College were destroyed in a 1911 fire; however, another old-time friend and researcher, Pep Martin, was able to get the Sulpician Fathers to say that "Weichmann's conduct was classified as not being totally satisfactory." Perhaps his departure from the seminary (right at the time that John Surratt left) was not completely voluntary?

Mention is also made of Weichmann writing to Father John B. Menu at St. Charles, probably to inquire about readmission. Menu did write to the regional superior of the Sulpicians in September of 1863, mildly recommending Louis for readmission. He stated that Weichmann had considerable talents, but that his conduct was not satisfactory, especially near the end of his term at St. Charles. He also stated that the president of St. Charles did not recommend Weichmann. There is even a hint that Louis might "turn to something bad" if rejected. He was being reconsidered when the assassination came. His testimony at the trial and some reference to material concerning his life style that had been revealed at the trial evidently did him in as far as the ecclesiastical leaders were concerned.

Isacsson brings forth citations and credits work done by Martin, John T. Ford, Lloyd Lewis (who interviewed Weichmann's sisters), Victor Mason, Esther Dittlinger (Anderson native), Joseph Abel, Mary Lanell, Father John Costello, and of course, Msgrs. Mulcahey and Conroy. Brophy's indictment points are mentioned, as are GATH's interview with Weichmann and Oldroyd's allowing Weichmann to write his own chapter in Oldroyd's classic. Lincoln scholar Richard Sloan discovered this and has incorporated it into a scenario of Weichmann meeting Oldroyd, which has been performed at a Surratt Society conference as well as other venues over the years.

Isacsson also credits the well-balanced articles produced by Dr. Joseph George and the discovery of Louis's marriage in an Episcopal Church in 1870 - and what appears to be his desertion of said wife within ten years, leaving her to take in boarders. It is suggested that his marrying outside of his denomination and then his separation or abandonment speak to his likely problems with his faith. Coupled with his church rejecting him for further study to become a priest, and the accusations launched by Catholics and others about his treatment of Mary Surratt may account for his complete rejection of the Church until on his deathbed (even when his brother was the parish priest). Talk about a tormented life.

If any members of this forum would like a copy of Isacsson's work, please contact me. Members pay 15-cents per page for copies (total would be $4.75) - see above for costs for non-members.

I am going to sign-off of the Weichmann topic for awhile by recommending further reading by Pamela and others who find Weichmann worthy of further study. Start with American Brutus and continue with Blood on the Moon, and An American Tragedy. I believe that you will find a common pattern emerge based on years of research. I do not wish to continue with one person's bashing of reputable historians based solely on personal interpretation.

Susan Higginbotham · 09-08-2015, 07:44 PM

(09-08-2015 05:26 PM)RJNorton Wrote:
(08-28-2015 03:06 PM)Pamela Wrote: Booth and the Surratts also stole the Father Menu letter and either Booth or Surratt commissioned the phony Clara letter to compromise Weichmann.

I had the text of the "Clara letter" in my files - thank you to Mike Kauffman who sent it to me in 2006.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NY Feby 15, 1865

Yr hurried note Mr. Weichmann just before your return ^ from Philada ^ to W City ^ Jany 7th^ gave promise of one of your ever welcome “lengthy” letters which has not as yet reached me. I hope you could not possibly have been offended by any part of my reply on Jany 9th, which I suppose our mutual friend Mr. S --- tt found in same envelop with his little note. How sorry I should be to have anything disturb the disinterested friendship existing between us. Mr. Weichmann -- I regretted to hear of any annoyances to you that gave so little leisure & caused yr trip to Philda. Is it all “sunshine” again with you, & how did you enjoy yr trip to Baltimore end of Jany? Will you please write to me directly & explain why Mr. S has not been to NY or if he is still at Home. I have often thought of you lately, and sincerely hope yr prospects are fair for gaining the heart you seemed to covet. You see I understood your affectionate remark about Mr. S --- tt & the conclusion, “I love him, indeed I do, & his _____ too.” Now I hope you wont mind telling me if your suit is favored. I will promise to keep it a profound secret, so ‘do tell.’ You know none would rejoice more sincerely than I over any event you desired. Allow me to congratulate you on yr apointment abroad. Do you pass through Philda or N Y ^ in July^ to embark? Will you oblige me by an immediate reply to this, especially about Mr. S --- tt, for I shall bid adieu to N Y on the 21st inst. & desire yr reply on 20th if possible. Now before you read the next page promise yrself not to tell anyone. [next p.] I expect to pass through W. City n the 23rd or 24th, ^P.M> ^ & if you will ony write in reply to all my questions the hour this reaches you, I promise to send you a line on arrival to inform you where to find me. The Dr. & Mrs. R dont know yet if we shall be at Willard’s or elsewhere, or I would tell you now; however you can find out even if yr letter dont come, but I should prefer the answer requested. I shall probably leave again on 25th & dont wish a word of this spoken of. Will you oblige me by sending information of the health of my Uncle & his family. I have not written him of my visit, but shall arrange to see him if ‘all’s well.’ We will talk over :surprising” him. I hope you will bring dear Miss S --- tt with you to call on me. I could love her for yr sake & her brother’s; two of my best kindest, and most sincere W. City friends.
Watch the papers for name of R in “arrivals” on 23rd. I hope our friendly relation obviates the necessity of apology for addressing you without an unanswered letter to reply to. The distance that will separate us after our possible interview on the 23rd or 24th will be far greater than ever before, we shall no longer be able to correspond, though the ties of friendship will ever remain unchanged, I hope & feel it will be so if you are willing.
May yr future be all you wish. I know & feel Miss S --- tt is worthy of you, & they are all favorably disposed towards you I believe. Give my kindest regards to all friends. Love to Cousin L & Mrs. D & Mrs. M----r’s family.
The early reply I ask will be esteemed a great favor. Hoping your health is improving, I am as ever

Most sincerely yr Friend
Clara

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Also, Susan posted the text of the Father Menu letter over a year ago. Credit to Susan for this!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

St Charles College
March 29, 1865

Dear Friend,

Your last letter relieved me from great anxiety, for I was not sure to have guessed well. Why do you not speak more fully? Again in the letter I have just had the honor of receiving from you, you speak in a obscure way of Mr. Surratt, as if he were a rebel; could you not have said openly what is the perilous trip point which he is soon to depart? What is that last? What is the meaning of that restrictive? Between us there should be no secret. For speaking of little Dalton, you speak of his condition as being truly deplorable, in what sense? Is it in the personal welfare, or in the spiritual? Or in both? His brother at Charlotte Hall cannot do much at present for his support; but I hope he will soon be ordained, and will not, when ordained, forget the only relation he has upon earth. I have not the wisdom of Solomon to guess his role, my faculty of understanding is rather bland than sharp; therefore if you wish me to comprehend your reticence's, you must provide me, if you can, with quite sharper visions.

As to the conditions which, you say, Mr. Dubruel joined to your admission, I think there is no need for you to be uneasy, for next September Richmond will be able to communicate with Baltimore, and therefore your Bishop will arrange the matter himself with the auspices of Baltimore.

The draft has not yet taken place at Ellicott Mills, and consequently I know not yet what will become of me. In case I am drafted, I will have recourse to your influence with the Government to obtain my exemption.

As you go next year to Philosophy, you will be pleased to hear who are those who will be with you or who may be with you in the same class. They are now in my first Latin Class; their names are J. Duffey, Galvin, McPaul, Moran, Morris, Mullin, Noonan, W. O'Brien, O'Connor, besides those others who you do not know; I do not mention Shoffey, who has left us some weeks ago on account of headache, and by neuralgia. Nor do I speak of Clarke. Dear Clarke lost his mother last year, and finds himself quite destitute, perhaps as mostly of pity as Dalton. He was working on a farm lately in the neighborhood of St. Charles, but with his incapacity and unfitness for such a work and the fear of being drafted made him fly lately. I do not know where.

You recommend me to pray for you in one of my masses. I have already told you that I pray for you in every one; it is not for the sake of making a compliment or filling up a letter I mentioned it; it is the truth. You may unite your intentions to mine at five o'clock and twenty-five minutes, it is then I present your needs to Almighty God.

My best regards to Mr. Surratt, if he is not gone already on his trip. Our College will be in jubilee this week, and we all hope to gain the grace of it next Saturday.

Your Most Devoted Friend in J.C.

J. B. Menu

(From The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence, ed. by Edwards and Steers)

I need to correct the date of the Menu letter to March 19, 1865--my typograhical error.

I read that "Clara" had been identified as Clara Pix Ritter. I saw that there's an article about her in the 2007 Prologue, a publication of the National Archives, but the only site that has it for download is behind a paywall--anyone know if it's worth reading?

L Verge · (This post was last modified: 09-08-2015 08:56 PM by L Verge.)

(09-08-2015 07:44 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:
(09-08-2015 05:26 PM)RJNorton Wrote:
(08-28-2015 03:06 PM)Pamela Wrote: Booth and the Surratts also stole the Father Menu letter and either Booth or Surratt commissioned the phony Clara letter to compromise Weichmann.

I had the text of the "Clara letter" in my files - thank you to Mike Kauffman who sent it to me in 2006.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NY Feby 15, 1865

Yr hurried note Mr. Weichmann just before your return ^ from Philada ^ to W City ^ Jany 7th^ gave promise of one of your ever welcome “lengthy” letters which has not as yet reached me. I hope you could not possibly have been offended by any part of my reply on Jany 9th, which I suppose our mutual friend Mr. S --- tt found in same envelop with his little note. How sorry I should be to have anything disturb the disinterested friendship existing between us. Mr. Weichmann -- I regretted to hear of any annoyances to you that gave so little leisure & caused yr trip to Philda. Is it all “sunshine” again with you, & how did you enjoy yr trip to Baltimore end of Jany? Will you please write to me directly & explain why Mr. S has not been to NY or if he is still at Home. I have often thought of you lately, and sincerely hope yr prospects are fair for gaining the heart you seemed to covet. You see I understood your affectionate remark about Mr. S --- tt & the conclusion, “I love him, indeed I do, & his _____ too.” Now I hope you wont mind telling me if your suit is favored. I will promise to keep it a profound secret, so ‘do tell.’ You know none would rejoice more sincerely than I over any event you desired. Allow me to congratulate you on yr apointment abroad. Do you pass through Philda or N Y ^ in July^ to embark? Will you oblige me by an immediate reply to this, especially about Mr. S --- tt, for I shall bid adieu to N Y on the 21st inst. & desire yr reply on 20th if possible. Now before you read the next page promise yrself not to tell anyone. [next p.] I expect to pass through W. City n the 23rd or 24th, ^P.M> ^ & if you will ony write in reply to all my questions the hour this reaches you, I promise to send you a line on arrival to inform you where to find me. The Dr. & Mrs. R dont know yet if we shall be at Willard’s or elsewhere, or I would tell you now; however you can find out even if yr letter dont come, but I should prefer the answer requested. I shall probably leave again on 25th & dont wish a word of this spoken of. Will you oblige me by sending information of the health of my Uncle & his family. I have not written him of my visit, but shall arrange to see him if ‘all’s well.’ We will talk over :surprising” him. I hope you will bring dear Miss S --- tt with you to call on me. I could love her for yr sake & her brother’s; two of my best kindest, and most sincere W. City friends.
Watch the papers for name of R in “arrivals” on 23rd. I hope our friendly relation obviates the necessity of apology for addressing you without an unanswered letter to reply to. The distance that will separate us after our possible interview on the 23rd or 24th will be far greater than ever before, we shall no longer be able to correspond, though the ties of friendship will ever remain unchanged, I hope & feel it will be so if you are willing.
May yr future be all you wish. I know & feel Miss S --- tt is worthy of you, & they are all favorably disposed towards you I believe. Give my kindest regards to all friends. Love to Cousin L & Mrs. D & Mrs. M----r’s family.
The early reply I ask will be esteemed a great favor. Hoping your health is improving, I am as ever

Most sincerely yr Friend
Clara

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Also, Susan posted the text of the Father Menu letter over a year ago. Credit to Susan for this!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

St Charles College
March 29, 1865

Dear Friend,

Your last letter relieved me from great anxiety, for I was not sure to have guessed well. Why do you not speak more fully? Again in the letter I have just had the honor of receiving from you, you speak in a obscure way of Mr. Surratt, as if he were a rebel; could you not have said openly what is the perilous trip point which he is soon to depart? What is that last? What is the meaning of that restrictive? Between us there should be no secret. For speaking of little Dalton, you speak of his condition as being truly deplorable, in what sense? Is it in the personal welfare, or in the spiritual? Or in both? His brother at Charlotte Hall cannot do much at present for his support; but I hope he will soon be ordained, and will not, when ordained, forget the only relation he has upon earth. I have not the wisdom of Solomon to guess his role, my faculty of understanding is rather bland than sharp; therefore if you wish me to comprehend your reticence's, you must provide me, if you can, with quite sharper visions.

As to the conditions which, you say, Mr. Dubruel joined to your admission, I think there is no need for you to be uneasy, for next September Richmond will be able to communicate with Baltimore, and therefore your Bishop will arrange the matter himself with the auspices of Baltimore.

The draft has not yet taken place at Ellicott Mills, and consequently I know not yet what will become of me. In case I am drafted, I will have recourse to your influence with the Government to obtain my exemption.

As you go next year to Philosophy, you will be pleased to hear who are those who will be with you or who may be with you in the same class. They are now in my first Latin Class; their names are J. Duffey, Galvin, McPaul, Moran, Morris, Mullin, Noonan, W. O'Brien, O'Connor, besides those others who you do not know; I do not mention Shoffey, who has left us some weeks ago on account of headache, and by neuralgia. Nor do I speak of Clarke. Dear Clarke lost his mother last year, and finds himself quite destitute, perhaps as mostly of pity as Dalton. He was working on a farm lately in the neighborhood of St. Charles, but with his incapacity and unfitness for such a work and the fear of being drafted made him fly lately. I do not know where.

You recommend me to pray for you in one of my masses. I have already told you that I pray for you in every one; it is not for the sake of making a compliment or filling up a letter I mentioned it; it is the truth. You may unite your intentions to mine at five o'clock and twenty-five minutes, it is then I present your needs to Almighty God.

My best regards to Mr. Surratt, if he is not gone already on his trip. Our College will be in jubilee this week, and we all hope to gain the grace of it next Saturday.

Your Most Devoted Friend in J.C.

J. B. Menu

(From The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence, ed. by Edwards and Steers)

I need to correct the date of the Menu letter to March 19, 1865--my typograhical error.

I read that "Clara" had been identified as Clara Pix Ritter. I saw that there's an article about her in the 2007 Prologue, a publication of the National Archives, but the only site that has it for download is behind a paywall--anyone know if it's worth reading?

I remember that name for some reason - back to the files.

Susan - Found this, but it doesn't say who Clara was linked to: A Love Note and the Lincoln Assassination After President Lincoln's assassination, Clara Pix Ritter was briefly imprisoned for a connection to the alleged conspirators. Henry T. Ritter's love note to his wife was intercepted by a guard.(Source: Record Group 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records)

Susan Higginbotham · 09-08-2015, 10:12 PM

(09-08-2015 08:06 PM)L Verge Wrote:
(09-08-2015 07:44 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:
(09-08-2015 05:26 PM)RJNorton Wrote:
(08-28-2015 03:06 PM)Pamela Wrote: Booth and the Surratts also stole the Father Menu letter and either Booth or Surratt commissioned the phony Clara letter to compromise Weichmann.

I had the text of the "Clara letter" in my files - thank you to Mike Kauffman who sent it to me in 2006.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NY Feby 15, 1865

Yr hurried note Mr. Weichmann just before your return ^ from Philada ^ to W City ^ Jany 7th^ gave promise of one of your ever welcome “lengthy” letters which has not as yet reached me. I hope you could not possibly have been offended by any part of my reply on Jany 9th, which I suppose our mutual friend Mr. S --- tt found in same envelop with his little note. How sorry I should be to have anything disturb the disinterested friendship existing between us. Mr. Weichmann -- I regretted to hear of any annoyances to you that gave so little leisure & caused yr trip to Philda. Is it all “sunshine” again with you, & how did you enjoy yr trip to Baltimore end of Jany? Will you please write to me directly & explain why Mr. S has not been to NY or if he is still at Home. I have often thought of you lately, and sincerely hope yr prospects are fair for gaining the heart you seemed to covet. You see I understood your affectionate remark about Mr. S --- tt & the conclusion, “I love him, indeed I do, & his _____ too.” Now I hope you wont mind telling me if your suit is favored. I will promise to keep it a profound secret, so ‘do tell.’ You know none would rejoice more sincerely than I over any event you desired. Allow me to congratulate you on yr apointment abroad. Do you pass through Philda or N Y ^ in July^ to embark? Will you oblige me by an immediate reply to this, especially about Mr. S --- tt, for I shall bid adieu to N Y on the 21st inst. & desire yr reply on 20th if possible. Now before you read the next page promise yrself not to tell anyone. [next p.] I expect to pass through W. City n the 23rd or 24th, ^P.M> ^ & if you will ony write in reply to all my questions the hour this reaches you, I promise to send you a line on arrival to inform you where to find me. The Dr. & Mrs. R dont know yet if we shall be at Willard’s or elsewhere, or I would tell you now; however you can find out even if yr letter dont come, but I should prefer the answer requested. I shall probably leave again on 25th & dont wish a word of this spoken of. Will you oblige me by sending information of the health of my Uncle & his family. I have not written him of my visit, but shall arrange to see him if ‘all’s well.’ We will talk over :surprising” him. I hope you will bring dear Miss S --- tt with you to call on me. I could love her for yr sake & her brother’s; two of my best kindest, and most sincere W. City friends.
Watch the papers for name of R in “arrivals” on 23rd. I hope our friendly relation obviates the necessity of apology for addressing you without an unanswered letter to reply to. The distance that will separate us after our possible interview on the 23rd or 24th will be far greater than ever before, we shall no longer be able to correspond, though the ties of friendship will ever remain unchanged, I hope & feel it will be so if you are willing.
May yr future be all you wish. I know & feel Miss S --- tt is worthy of you, & they are all favorably disposed towards you I believe. Give my kindest regards to all friends. Love to Cousin L & Mrs. D & Mrs. M----r’s family.
The early reply I ask will be esteemed a great favor. Hoping your health is improving, I am as ever

Most sincerely yr Friend
Clara

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Also, Susan posted the text of the Father Menu letter over a year ago. Credit to Susan for this!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

St Charles College
March 29, 1865

Dear Friend,

Your last letter relieved me from great anxiety, for I was not sure to have guessed well. Why do you not speak more fully? Again in the letter I have just had the honor of receiving from you, you speak in a obscure way of Mr. Surratt, as if he were a rebel; could you not have said openly what is the perilous trip point which he is soon to depart? What is that last? What is the meaning of that restrictive? Between us there should be no secret. For speaking of little Dalton, you speak of his condition as being truly deplorable, in what sense? Is it in the personal welfare, or in the spiritual? Or in both? His brother at Charlotte Hall cannot do much at present for his support; but I hope he will soon be ordained, and will not, when ordained, forget the only relation he has upon earth. I have not the wisdom of Solomon to guess his role, my faculty of understanding is rather bland than sharp; therefore if you wish me to comprehend your reticence's, you must provide me, if you can, with quite sharper visions.

As to the conditions which, you say, Mr. Dubruel joined to your admission, I think there is no need for you to be uneasy, for next September Richmond will be able to communicate with Baltimore, and therefore your Bishop will arrange the matter himself with the auspices of Baltimore.

The draft has not yet taken place at Ellicott Mills, and consequently I know not yet what will become of me. In case I am drafted, I will have recourse to your influence with the Government to obtain my exemption.

As you go next year to Philosophy, you will be pleased to hear who are those who will be with you or who may be with you in the same class. They are now in my first Latin Class; their names are J. Duffey, Galvin, McPaul, Moran, Morris, Mullin, Noonan, W. O'Brien, O'Connor, besides those others who you do not know; I do not mention Shoffey, who has left us some weeks ago on account of headache, and by neuralgia. Nor do I speak of Clarke. Dear Clarke lost his mother last year, and finds himself quite destitute, perhaps as mostly of pity as Dalton. He was working on a farm lately in the neighborhood of St. Charles, but with his incapacity and unfitness for such a work and the fear of being drafted made him fly lately. I do not know where.

You recommend me to pray for you in one of my masses. I have already told you that I pray for you in every one; it is not for the sake of making a compliment or filling up a letter I mentioned it; it is the truth. You may unite your intentions to mine at five o'clock and twenty-five minutes, it is then I present your needs to Almighty God.

My best regards to Mr. Surratt, if he is not gone already on his trip. Our College will be in jubilee this week, and we all hope to gain the grace of it next Saturday.

Your Most Devoted Friend in J.C.

J. B. Menu

(From The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence, ed. by Edwards and Steers)

I need to correct the date of the Menu letter to March 19, 1865--my typograhical error.

I read that "Clara" had been identified as Clara Pix Ritter. I saw that there's an article about her in the 2007 Prologue, a publication of the National Archives, but the only site that has it for download is behind a paywall--anyone know if it's worth reading?

I remember that name for some reason - back to the files.

Susan - Found this, but it doesn't say who Clara was linked to: A Love Note and the Lincoln Assassination After President Lincoln's assassination, Clara Pix Ritter was briefly imprisoned for a connection to the alleged conspirators. Henry T. Ritter's love note to his wife was intercepted by a guard.(Source: Record Group 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records)

Thanks!

Pamela · 09-08-2015, 10:43 PM

(09-08-2015 05:36 PM)L Verge Wrote: I don't think anyone who has posted here in response to Pamela can be judged as either liking or disliking Weichmann. I can agree with you, Gene, that I have compared him many times to the child who is ignored at recess. That personality trait, however, should not be what we judge his actions on related to the assassination. His flip-flopping as related by others is what confuses the issue, in my mind. I am always reminded of a statement that I saw given by William Wood of the Old Capitol. Wood was certainly no angel, but he was clever and cunning and outspoken -- and he certainly spent enough time around Louis to make a judgment call. His description of Louis Weichmann was, "He is a lying son-of-a-*****."

Pamela - We do have the copies of the Abel interview ready as well as the paper by Fr. Isacsson. As I stated earlier, our new librarian has only been on duty for three weeks and is part-time, but she was able to find the material quickly. We charge 25-cents per page for copies to non-members of the Surratt Society, and the two papers total twenty-two pages. With $2.00 postage added, your total copy fee will be $7.50. You may either phone in your credit card information (301-868-1121) or send check or money order to the museum at 9118 Brandywine Road, Clinton, MD 20735, and we will send the packet right away.

I believe you will find the Joseph Abel interview disappointing because it is 99% a rehashing of the Lincoln assassination story. Fr.. Isacsson's work is more interesting, albeit more analytical that judgmental. I did remember being interested in some questionable history about why Weichmann did not go any further in seeking a priesthood. Many records at St. Charles College were destroyed in a 1911 fire; however, another old-time friend and researcher, Pep Martin, was able to get the Sulpician Fathers to say that "Weichmann's conduct was classified as not being totally satisfactory." Perhaps his departure from the seminary (right at the time that John Surratt left) was not completely voluntary?

Mention is also made of Weichmann writing to Father John B. Menu at St. Charles, probably to inquire about readmission. Menu did write to the regional superior of the Sulpicians in September of 1863, mildly recommending Louis for readmission. He stated that Weichmann had considerable talents, but that his conduct was not satisfactory, especially near the end of his term at St. Charles. He also stated that the president of St. Charles did not recommend Weichmann. There is even a hint that Louis might "turn to something bad" if rejected. He was being reconsidered when the assassination came. His testimony at the trial and some reference to material concerning his life style that had been revealed at the trial evidently did him in as far as the ecclesiastical leaders were concerned.

Isacsson brings forth citations and credits work done by Martin, John T. Ford, Lloyd Lewis (who interviewed Weichmann's sisters), Victor Mason, Esther Dittlinger (Anderson native), Joseph Abel, Mary Lanell, Father John Costello, and of course, Msgrs. Mulcahey and Conroy. Brophy's indictment points are mentioned, as are GATH's interview with Weichmann and Oldroyd's allowing Weichmann to write his own chapter in Oldroyd's classic. Lincoln scholar Richard Sloan discovered this and has incorporated it into a scenario of Weichmann meeting Oldroyd, which has been performed at a Surratt Society conference as well as other venues over the years.

Isacsson also credits the well-balanced articles produced by Dr. Joseph George and the discovery of Louis's marriage in an Episcopal Church in 1870 - and what appears to be his desertion of said wife within ten years, leaving her to take in boarders. It is suggested that his marrying outside of his denomination and then his separation or abandonment speak to his likely problems with his faith. Coupled with his church rejecting him for further study to become a priest, and the accusations launched by Catholics and others about his treatment of Mary Surratt may account for his complete rejection of the Church until on his deathbed (even when his brother was the parish priest). Talk about a tormented life.

If any members of this forum would like a copy of Isacsson's work, please contact me. Members pay 15-cents per page for copies (total would be $4.75) - see above for costs for non-members.

I am going to sign-off of the Weichmann topic for awhile by recommending further reading by Pamela and others who find Weichmann worthy of further study. Start with American Brutus and continue with Blood on the Moon, and An American Tragedy. I believe that you will find a common pattern emerge based on years of research. I do not wish to continue with one person's bashing of reputable historians based solely on personal interpretation.

Thanks but what I would like is the 6 page article written by Abel, named, "A History Of The Trial Of Mrs. Surratt As Told To Me By A Lewis Weichman At The Time Of President Lincoln's Assassination". Ewald said a left a copy with the Surratt Society. I'll buy the copy of the interview, too. He was interviewed at age 83 about his experiences at age 15.

I've already read and enjoyed the books you recommend.

Father Menu came to John Surratt's trial, ignored Louis and by permission of the marshall of the court, approached the prisoner, John, and shook hands with him in the presence of the jury. He brought 20 students with him, and sat by Surratt the entire day. If Menu typified the teachers at the seminary, no wonder Louis had some problems with them. I would hope so.

So much slur and innuendo. Abandonment, desertion, the child who is ignored at recess, rejected by the church, flip flopping, lying, might turn to something bad if rejected, conduct not satisfactory. Did I leave something out? Probably, there are so many.

Gene, from reading his book, I don't think Weichmann considered anything he did heroic, but I think he felt proud of doing his duty as best he could, and he did engender a lot of admiration for the way he conducted himself at the trials by people who witnessed his testimony. He was also proud of his manuscript, August 16, 1900, "Dear Dr., I send these chapters to you in the greatest confidence. You know it is a matter about which I am very sensitive and I do not wish any of it to be made public until I am entirely ready. I am egotist enough to think that I have written the best and most complete history of this subject, better than any which has yet been given out to the public." --written to Dr. Porter

Also, based on this letter it seems incredible to think that Weichmann would give his manuscript to a poorly educated 15 yr old boy, Abel, to take home. Didn't happen.

RJNorton · 09-09-2015, 05:26 AM

(09-08-2015 07:44 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote: I read that "Clara" had been identified as Clara Pix Ritter. I saw that there's an article about her in the 2007 Prologue, a publication of the National Archives, but the only site that has it for download is behind a paywall--anyone know if it's worth reading?

Possibly some new information has been uncovered since 2006 when Mike K. sent me the text of the Clara letter.

At that time it was Mike's guess that Sarah Slater wrote the letter. Mike felt Booth (or John Surratt) was behind this (as a way of embarrassing Weichmann). Mike said the War Department investigated the letter and "at the return address, they found a bewildered elderly woman who told about the shady activities of people who wanted to use her address, look through her mail, etc. The lady's neighbor at the time was a man named Thomas Zininia, and his name showed up on an envelope in Booth's trunk. I never quite knew how to connect these points, but assume Zininia was working with Surratt in New York, and Booth had gone up there to meet him -- perhaps about sending a letter to Weichmann."

L Verge · 09-09-2015, 10:55 AM

Pamela - What I will be sending you is the Abel piece entitled "A History of the Trial of Mrs. Mary Surratt as Told to Me by a Mr. Lewis Weichman at the Time of President Lincoln's Assassination" - exactly what you requested.

Interesting lines include: '...he told me all about the trial and how he was forced to testify against her unwillingly...he also said he was writing a book on the trial. In fact, two books. He had finished one in manuscript form and asked if I wanted to read it...he was writing this book to ease his conscience and set the record straight. If the book had been published it would have created quite a furor in Washington and the Country. ...and I only listened to him and read the manuscript only to please him. In his book he claimed that Mrs. Surratt was innocent. Why was Weichman not indited [sic] the same as Mrs. Surrat, as he was a spectator at these meetings...? '

The rest of the manuscript is some really bad history on the war, Stanton, Weichmann, KKK, and other assorted subjects. I would like to know about the second manuscript, which is said to have been on Weichmann accusing the Pope and the Catholic Church for the war.

Eva Elisabeth · (This post was last modified: 09-09-2015 06:30 PM by Eva Elisabeth.)

(09-07-2015 12:38 PM)RJNorton Wrote:
(09-07-2015 11:19 AM)HerbS Wrote: Do you all think that Weichmann could have been a counter agent?I do,or am I all wet?
Excellent question, Herb! Was he trying to work for both sides? Just speculation on my part - I think the fact that he didn't move out of the Surratt boardinghouse possibly says something about what he may have been doing. I put myself in his shoes, and in my way of thinking, if I were really 100% a Union man (as he said he was in his book), I do not think I would have been comfortable living there. He gives an explanation for why he continued to stay there in his book. Do I believe it? I am not sure - maybe yes, maybe no.

Roger, I wonder the same. Unless I were a spy (or a wannabe spy), if I were a Union man, I wouldn't have felt any comfortable. I am reading Weichmann's book, but haven't yet arrived at his explanation - and I'm so curious. Would you mind to share? I apologize at the more knowledgeable posters on this topic and thread to whom this might be a "basic"! Thanks!

RJNorton · 09-09-2015, 02:16 PM

Eva, Weichmann said his most sincere friends asked him why he did not move out. His answer was:

"No, in the hour of danger the true soldier does not desert his post, but rather stays and watches the movements of his enemies. I was a sworn officer of the Government, and held a remunerative position under it; so did my father in the United States arsenal in Philadelphia, and I was bound by every consideration of honor to remain where I was, and if anything came up again to renew my suspicions to report it at once to the War Department."

Eva, please see p. 109 for details.