My first post: thoughts on Booth leg fracture

[Rhatkinson]

Hey everyone. This is my first post to the board having just joined. Like everyone else on here I have begun to study the assassination with great interest. Starting with THE seminal book on the subject, Dr. Steers' "Blood on the Moon", I have read everything concerning the assassination that I can get me hands on and am looking forward to the Surratt Society Booth Escape Tour this April (my wife thinks I am "a nerd" for being so interested in Lincoln's assassination.) Anyway, enough about me.

Although I agree with Laurie that where Booth broke his fibia is inconsequential as to the larger issue, it is a subject that I find interesting. Having read Kauffman's book (which was excellent), I was at first compelled to accept that "horse fall" theory. However, after studying more and conversing with Dr. Steers, I believe the most compelling evidence (I am an attorney so I tend to think in those terms) is that the fracture happened at Fords. My reasons (which I invite discussion and critique of - I'm used to it!)

1. The main premise of Kauffman, et al, is that the only evidence supporting a fracture at Ford's comes from Booth's diary and, since it is incorrect about other issues, is a lie made up by Booth to embellish his act. He points to statements made by Herold, Mudd, and Lloyd that support a horse fall causation, but ignores that the same bias he accuses Booth of also applies to these three, albeit for differing reasons (e.g., Booth's bias to was make him sound more heroic/justified; their bias was to save their necks.) The point being that if you discount Booth's version because he had ulterior motives, you must discount the other three for the same reason.

(a) Mudd - (note: I actually attended law school with a direct descendant of Dr. Mudd and the subject of his involvement in the assassination is still a sore subject among Mark's family.) Anyway....it is almost too elemental to have to say, but ANYTHING Mudd said about how Booth broke his leg must be viewed VERY skeptically as he was trying to save his own life. He obviously could not admit that Booth broke his leg at Ford's because to do this would demonstrate he knew about Booth's murder when he treated him. Dr. Mudd was forced to admit (finally) that he knew Booth prior to the murder because too many people knew this information and he could not rely on word of it being kept from the government for long. However, that was ALL he was going to say unless forced to. If Booth's diary is to be disbelieved because he was a "bragger", then anything Mudd says must be even less believable. We KNOW that Mudd lied about other things (re: knowing who Booth was when he treated him, the December 1864 meeting, etc.) so it is safe to conclude that he lied about how Booth broke his leg.

(b) Herold - if you put any credence into Herold's claim, I invite you to go read his statements contained in the "The Evidence". You will immediate see that practically everything Herold said was a lie. Everything. He even claimed that he just "happened" to run into Booth on the road just outside of Washington on the night of the assassination and that Booth convinced him to go ride with him in the country for a couple of days at 11pm at night. Really, that's what Herold says. Yet, we are supposed to take the word of someone that untruthful for the "truth" about how Booth broke his leg. Just like Mudd, Herold had a VERY good reason to lie about how Booth broke his leg.

© Lloyd - this is the most troubling to me as Lloyd's testimony does indeed say that Herold told him Booth had broken his leg on a horse fall and Booth then admitted to killing the President. On its face, this would seem like good evidence supporting Kauffman's theory. I do not have a certain explanation for it, other that two theories: 1, that the transcript of his trial testimony was a mistake as others have hypothesized seeing that no where else in Lloyd's lengthy statements does he mention the horse fall, or 2, that Herold told Lloyd the horse fall "cover" not expecting that Booth himself would then blurt out that they were murders. One of those is a more reasonable (to me) explanation of why Lloyd said what he did (if he said it.)

2. The April 23, 2865 statement of Officer Wood that John brought up should not be overlooked, as to me is VERY compelling testimony that someone told him about the Ford's break. How could Wood have known this? Mudd damn sure didn't tell him (I can't imagine.) It is quite a mystery to me, but it ruins the theory that the "only" evidence of a Ford's break is from Booth's diary. Even though lots of people did never mention Booth seeming to be injured while running at Ford's, SOMEONE thought he broke his leg a Ford's just 9 days after the assassination - well before Booth's diary was found.

Anyway, those are just my two cents, no more worthy than anyone else's theories. I enjoy the debate, though. I would welcome any comments.

Heath

[L Verge]

Heath - First, welcome to the forum; and of course, with this post, I am personally delighted to have you joining us. I'm getting tired of trying to stand ground about the broken leg on my own!

One thing: I don't consider Booth's diary entries lies. To me, they are exaggerations - but not that far off the mark. Booth did go through a thousand of Lincoln's friends at the theater. Jim Garrett may correct me on the exact number, but Ford's had packed in upwards to 1500 people that night - all of them there to celebrate with Lincoln (and hopefully Grant). "In jumping broke my leg" is more likely meaning the theater jump to me unless the mare was forced to jump a fence along the road to Surrattsville. "Riding sixty miles the first night" and "the bone tearing at my flesh" are perfectly logical statements. As I have said before, Booth did not have an odometer to tell him how far he had ridden; and even if he had a simple fracture, that bone had to cutting into flesh within the leg.

All I can say is that this debate will never end. I have been living with it now for over ten years at Surratt House.

[Rhatkinson]

Laurie, thank you for your welcome. I hope that I can meet you on 4/20 when my brother and I come up for the Tour. I joined as a lifetime member this year and have enjoyed the first two Surratt Society newsletters that I have received. Joan in your office has been most helpful and kind in assisting me.

I read in one of your earlier posts that your great-grandparents were residents of TB on the night of the assassination and heard horses pass around 1am. Very interesting. I can't wait to see with my own eyes these places that I have read about. I love imagining exactly how a place appeared when it bore witness to a historical event (e.g., Kings Mountain here in SC looks practically identical to how it did back in 1781), and it is great that so much has been preserved along Booth and Herold's route.

My brother and I are coming to DC a day early to have a chance to tour around some before the "real" tour. Is there any place that you might recommend of interest that won't be included on the Surratt tour? We will have a car so travel is no problem.

Thanks,
Heath

[wsanto]

Heath,

Welcome to the greatest board on earth concerning Lincoln and the most notorious assassination in our history. Thanks to Roger and all the other scholars and historians that contribute and keep this board fresh and thoughtful.

I too am new to the assassination. I am neither a scholar or a historian and often feel a bit overwhelmed to be allowed to participate in this forum. Everyone on the board has made me feel welcome and I spend a lot of my internet time here learning the different theories about the assassination and those involved.

Your post is very well thought and presented and I agree with all your points. I suppose you read through the thread started by Dave Taylor "Breaking a Leg". If not, it includes a links to Kauffman's rationale for his horse-fall theory. You should also keep up with Mr. Taylors website "Boothiesbarn.com. It is excellent.

There is also a link to Thomas Jone's book that you can read online in the thread about Booth going to the boarding house after the assassination to gather a new hat and other supplies for his escape out of Washington.

Jones discusses the broken leg in his book and presents it as a matter of fact that Booth's injury occurred at Ford's. He also discards the horse fall as a cover story presented to Mudd since, at that time, in the wee hours of the morning after the assassination, Mudd did not know of the assassination and Booth could not risk that he wouldn't provide treatment if Mudd learned of it prior to rendering his care.

I find Jone's recollection as very credible as he was as close to this thing as anyone and he had nothing to fear at the time he penned his work.

[L Verge]

Do you want the other places of interest to be Lincoln-related? Let me think on this.

For lunch that first day, you might want to drop into Wok n' Roll Restaurant at 604 H Street. It used to be Mrs. Surratt's boardinghouse. We go past the site on the bus tour, but only slow down for photo ops from the bus windows. The last time I ate there, it was good food.

[RJNorton]

Heath, as you are an attorney, I have a question for you. Exactly what is hearsay? One of the arguments I have used in the past is that most of the evidence that the break didn't occur at Ford's is hearsay as we are going by what a deceased man told others. Why would folks trivialize Booth’s own statement that he broke his leg while jumping; to me there is a difference between the written word of a dead man and the spoken word of a dead man (like Laurie I do not see lies in Booth's diary...embellishments, yes, but not outright lies). By my way of thinking the written diary of a deceased man is not hearsay, but the spoken words of a deceased man are hearsay. What do you think?

Obviously I agree with those who accept the traditional account of the leg break at Ford's, but I willingly and eagerly read the opposing arguments. I just do not find them convincing, but I compliment everyone on the articulate nature of the posts no matter where they stand on this issue.

[MaddieM]

(02-16-2013 01:05 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Heath - First, welcome to the forum; and of course, with this post, I am personally delighted to have you joining us. I'm getting tired of trying to stand ground about the broken leg on my own!

One thing: I don't consider Booth's diary entries lies. To me, they are exaggerations - but not that far off the mark. Booth did go through a thousand of Lincoln's friends at the theater. Jim Garrett may correct me on the exact number, but Ford's had packed in upwards to 1500 people that night - all of them there to celebrate with Lincoln (and hopefully Grant). "In jumping broke my leg" is more likely meaning the theater jump to me unless the mare was forced to jump a fence along the road to Surrattsville. "Riding sixty miles the first night" and "the bone tearing at my flesh" are perfectly logical statements. As I have said before, Booth did not have an odometer to tell him how far he had ridden; and even if he had a simple fracture, that bone had to cutting into flesh within the leg.

All I can say is that this debate will never end. I have been living with it now for over ten years at Surratt House.

For what it's worth.. I think Booth broke his leg jumping onto the stage. It was probably just bad luck for him. The percussion would surely have been enough to break that bone, and you'd only have to land badly to quite easily do that. People have broken bones in lesser falls.

Something that may well have already been discussed but I'll bring it up again is that there was a third horseman at the bridge after Booth and Herold rode over that night of the 14th but he was turned away by the guards. Would that have been Powell or someone else?

[Rhatkinson]

Laurie, thanks for the advice on the Wok 'N Roll. We'll try that out. I did mean to say any Booth/Lincoln sites. What I would like to see (that may not be included on the tour) are things like the exact location of where the Navy Yard Bridge was, the exact location of Souper's Hill, things like that. Any advice or suggestions would be much appreciated.

Hey Roger,

Hearsay is technically "any out of court statement offered in court to prove the truth of the matter asserted." This definition obviously covers a very wide area and so there are numerous exceptions to the hearsay rule (e.g., a dying declaration: the robber shoot me and when the cops arrive I blurt out "John Doe shot me" then I die. At court the cop could testify about my statement even though it is hearsay.)

However, statement by a party/defendant is NOT hearsay (e.g., if of the plaintiffs in the car wreck suits that I defend for the at fault driver tells his buddy that "my back isn't hurt at all, I'm just making this up for the suit", that buddy would be able to testify at trial about what the plaintiff said because it was the plaintiff's OWN statement and he is there to be cross-examined and (try to at least) explain it.

As it pertains to Booth, his diary would be allowed into evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule (written declarations of a party). His oral statement to Herold, etc. MAY be allowed depending on the circumstances. In SC, our "Dead Man Statute" (which is basically the same in all other states) says that no witness can testify about what the dead guy told them IF what the dead guy said helps the witness (or the party that called the witness to the stand.) For instance, a son who was excluded from his dad's will could not testify that "dad told me he wanted me to get everything he owned when he died" because that obviously helps the son. He could say, "dad told me that he once met a man who claimed he was John Wilkes Booth" because that doesn't benefit the son.

So, probably any statement that Booth made to Herold about how he broke his leg before he was killed would be allowed into evidence because it didn't help the government. The diary most certainly would be allowed in. If Booth had confessed on the Garrett porch before he croaked then the soldier who heard that could testify about what Booth said because that would be an exception to the hearsay rule (dying declaration). It all just depends on the circumstances as with most things in the law.

Heath

---

Thanks for the info on Jones. I have not actually read his account (embarrassingly enough). His confirmation that the leg was broken at Ford's goes a long way in my book as he would:

(a) be in a position to know from his first hand conversations with Booth and Herold following the assassination (i.e., if the Ford's excuse was just made up by Booth to favor him, Herold would know it was b.s. and Jones had a chance to speak at length to BOTH Herold and Booth and discern what was the truth), and

(b) have no reason to lie about that in his book.

---

(02-16-2013 03:33 PM)MaddieM Wrote:  Something that may well have already been discussed but I'll bring it up again is that there was a third horseman at the bridge after Booth and Herold rode over that night of the 14th but he was turned away by the guards. Would that have been Powell or someone else?

Maddie, the third horseman was not Powell, but Fletcher, who was chasing Herold to try and get his stolen horse back. He was told that he could cross, but not return, so he decided to go back to the city.

There also is some theory that Atzerodt went to the bridge (he was supposed to help guide Booth and Herold in to Virginia) but that he chickened out. I don't think he ever made it to the bridge.

Heath

[L Verge]

Heath is quite right about the third rider being the stableman Fletcher. I have often wondered if Fletcher had made up a lie that he was going home to T.B. or some other village in Southern Maryland (and hence would not return that night), he would have been allowed to cross also - just a thought...

As for Atzerodt: After a bit of tippling when he chickened out of the crime, Atzerodt did hop a streetcar for the Navy Yard. That point was the end of the line for that car, but Atzerodt stayed on and rode it back into the city.

Note to Heath: We do take the escape route bus across the Navy Yard Bridge (the newest one that was just completed last year). You might want to drive at least to the gates of the Navy Yard because, again, this is a drive-by, not a stop -- and Davy Herold's house will be on your left within a block of the main gate of the Yard on Eighth Street, SE. Unless it has been repainted, it is a large, white block of a house with a green tin roof and little embellishment. I would not suggest crossing the bridge. It delivers you into old Uniontown (now Anacostia) and one of the highest crime areas in D.C.

You will also cross Soper's Hill on the bus tour. It was where Branch Avenue (which becomes Rt. 5 in Maryland) crosses under the notorious Capital Beltway (I-95). For about a two-mile stretch once you enter Maryland, we have to swerve off Booth's original route because of development. The old route is still there, and we used it when I was a child until dual-lane highways and shopping centers crept into Southern Maryland. There is currently a stop light near the Beltway where I can point over to show you the original road. We pick up the original route shortly after crossing under the Beltway. I know! Too much information for a stranger to town.

Just between you and me - if you are arriving on Friday, I would take a tour of Ford's Theatre, the Petersen House, and the new Education Center that just opened beside Petersen's last year. We are lucky to be able to get into Ford's before it opens to the masses at 9 am. However, that means we have to leave the site before 9 am. So, you don't have time to dally over the exhibits or the Education Center on our tours - especially if we are to get you back before sunset. Ford's is on a timed ticket schedule otherwise, so check to see if you can fit a Friday tour into your plans. P.S. There is a very nice Ford's volunteer on this forum who may just be working that day and who may just agree to meet y'all.

Other than that, you can brave the traffic around 14th and Pennsylvania to see the National Theatre - which is on the site of the old Grover's Theatre, where Tad was watching the play when it was announced that the President had been shot. If you've never been in D.C., the White House and Lafayette Square behind it deserve a look. On the Square is the Stephen Decatur House, which is open to the public (but non-Lincoln), and also the White House Historical Association maintains a gift shop on the Square. I haven't been there in a number of years, so I don't know if it now has exhibits or a tour. All of these things have websites to check beforehand.

Mrs. Surratt is buried in Mt. Olivet Cemetery on the outskirts of the city (Bladensburg Road opposite the National Arboretum). She's in Section F, I think. If interested in going, I'll send you complete details. At the request of the Surratt family, the cemetery will no longer give you directions or historical information on the lady. Anna and her husband and several children as well as Isaac Surratt are buried in the same plot, but only Mrs. Surratt's grave is marked. John Lloyd is buried within that same area, and I believe that poor Henry Wirz is interred not too far away. Rich Smyth (another on this forum) can quote you chapter and verse as to where their graves are located.

That should be enough to keep you in trouble in D.C. on Friday. If you get lost, Surratt House's number is 301-868-1121. We don't send guide dogs, but most of the time there is someone who can help with directions.

[Rhatkinson]

Laurie,

Thank you so much for the excellent advice; my brother and I will be sure to follow it. I am very much interested in details of Mrs. Surratt's gravesite. Please send it either here or to my email at rha@tpgl.com

I cannot thank you enough and hope we can meet on 4/20.

As an aside, Laurie, is there any way to get back issues of the Surratt Courier? I have the last two issues since I joined but would love to have the complete collection.

Heath

[Jim Garrett]

Welcome Heath:

You will find this symposium of the highest calibre. Laurie is very close to the mark with a number of 1500 in attendance on the night of the assassination. The NPS usually give out a number of 1700. This is well over the 1865 capacity, however, this was a great opportunity for the Ford's. Good Friday is usually a slow night for the theater. To have the "men of the hour" both attend would guarantee a sell out. The official capacity was about 1200. However, the Ford brothers were known to bring out additional chairs and place them in the back. The seating in the family circle (top balconey) was high back bench seating. They would pack patrons in to standing room only.

There was no official count as to the number of attendees. My guess in part because Harry Ford, Joseph Sessford and Thomas Raybold were in the process of counting the receipts when they were interupted by the "crime of the century".

On Lafayette Square, I believe 722 Jackson Pl. is the home of Major Henry Rathbone. To the left of it, is the home of Genenral Daniel Sickles. The Decatur house was the residence of Senator Judah P. Benjamin just before the war, so theres another tentative link. No longer standing were the homes of John Hay (after the war, now the location of the Hay-Adams Hotel), The Old Club (home of Secretary Seward) the home of Gideon Welles, and on Pa Ave across from the Treasury was the HQ of General C.C. Auger. The White House Historical Association has a very nice gift shop/book store between the Rathbone home and the Decatur House.

Wok N Roll has decent food at moderate prices (go with the lunch specials). If you stand across the street from the Surratt Boarding house aka Wok N Roll, take in the block. The first three buildings are original to 1865, the building on the corner, the alley, the Surratt boarding house, and the building next to it. It's easy to visualize, even with the modern buildings and facades, the block at the time of the war.

Again Heath, welcome to the new"old Club".

[Rhatkinson]

Thanks, Jim. Those are great suggestions and I will most certainly take those sites in when I get to DC on 4/19.

It is a shame that the Seward House was destroyed.

[Jim Garrett]

So much for progress. Lafayette Square was the epicenter for the political and social life of Washington. Within just a few blocks were all the power brokers. Stanton was on K St across from Franklin Park, Chase was just around, I believe on I Street. Make sure you contact Ford's Theatre as soon as possible. They have time entry. Be sure to get a ticket on the hour, not the half hour. When you go to Ford's, ask for Eric Martin. He is a ranger there and very knowledgeable. He is planning on attending the conference.

Mt. Olivet no longer will tell visitors where Mrs. Surratt is buried. If I can, I will look for a map of the cemetery and provide the location. Congressional Cemetery has a number of notables including David Herold and Oak Hill also has a number of notables including Edwin Stanton.

[L Verge]

We have the map of Mt. Olivet also, if Jim can't find it. We've made so many copies over the years, it's wearing out.