Cliff, this is really interesting! I will be looking forward to an update!
Thank you Scott for getting this subject going again - and thank you Susan and Cliff for the new information. I would love to have Peanuts on my Burroughs family tree, but no matter what, I would like to know whatever we can find about him.
Joan Chaconas wrote an article on Joseph Burroughs for the June 1989 Surratt Courier. Her estimate of Burroughs' age is similar to Tom's but slightly younger. She writes, "There is no evidence as to his age but he was probably about 15 or 16 years old."
In Steers "The Evidence" pg. 140, there is a statement by John Bohran and in parenthesis Joseph Burroughs. The statement lists John C. Bohran "Peanut John."
(07-07-2014 07:14 PM)STS Lincolnite Wrote: [ -> ]A while back, I was paging through Michael Kauffman's In the Footsteps of an Assassin. On page 57, in a picture caption, Mr. Kauffman describes Joseph "Peanuts" Borrows as "the young son of a local doctor". The idea that he was the son of a doctor was a new one to me. I went back to American Brutus, and throughout the book, Mr. Kauffman spells Peanuts' last name as "Borrows" as compared to the more commonly seen "Borroughs". I was not, however, able to find any reference or note in regards to a source regarding young Mr. Borrows (Borroughs?).
Does anyone know where the statement claiming Peanuts was the son of a doctor may be sourced from?
I've noticed it as well. I love that book. It is interesting that he makes this bold claim as a matter of fact in the caption for the picture when it seems highly dubious. I simply believed it as fact when I read it. Makes you wonder why he would even include it.
But, as I've learned from previous threads, better to not question Mr Kauffman.
I tried to order that book ("Footsteps") on Amazon after reading fantastic reviews and got a message saying it was no longer available.
So disappointed, I was almost in tears.
(07-09-2014 08:55 PM)LincolnToddFan Wrote: [ -> ]I tried to order that book ("Footsteps") on Amazon after reading fantastic reviews and got a message saying it was no longer available.
So disappointed, I was almost in tears.
I just checked on Amazon, it is available now.....but "only 3 left in stock, more on the way."
(07-09-2014 05:24 PM)Rsmyth Wrote: [ -> ]In Steers "The Evidence" pg. 140, there is a statement by John Bohran and in parenthesis Joseph Burroughs. The statement lists John C. Bohran "Peanut John."
I saw that too. "Peanuts" seems to have a lot of name variations.
Thanks much for the heads up, Scott!
(07-09-2014 05:24 PM)Rsmyth Wrote: [ -> ]In Steers "The Evidence" pg. 140, there is a statement by John Bohran and in parenthesis Joseph Burroughs. The statement lists John C. Bohran "Peanut John."
This is a very interesting development, Rich, and worth looking into. I seems to me that Steers and Edwards added the bracketed information [Joseph Burroughs] under the Bohran name to indicate that Burroughs was his real name, and in their footnote, they give the possibility of "Borrows" and "Bohran."
In the trial records, the name is given as Joseph Burroughs - so who in the heck is Bohran. Betty and Susan, city directories please; Cliff, what's your take on the "Bohran?"
This guy has plagued historians for 150 years. It's time that we clearly identify him.
(07-08-2014 08:33 PM)STS Lincolnite Wrote: [ -> ]I did re-read Peanuts' testimony (In: The Lincoln Assassination , The Evidence, ed. Edwards and Steers) and did see something I hadn't taken much notice of before. Burroughs is recorded as living with his father at 511 10th Street (I believe that is the address of Ford's Theatre - was the address different in 1865?).
Scott, I believe I have read that the Petersen House's address was 453 10th street in 1865. Ferguson's Greenback Restaurant, on the north side of Fords, was 452 10th Street. So this would put Ford's in the 400 block at the time of the assassination.
(07-10-2014 11:01 AM)RJNorton Wrote: [ -> ]Scott, I believe I have read that the Petersen House's address was 453 10th street in 1865. Ferguson's Greenback Restaurant, on the north side of Fords, was 452 10th Street. So this would put Ford's in the 400 block at the time of the assassination.
Thanks Roger. I knew some DC addresses had changed since 1865 but wasn't sure if it was all or just some. The current address I find for Ford's Theatre (on their website) is 511 10th street NW. What an odd coincidence that the address of the Theatre now is the same as where Peanuts was recorded as living then. I love those odd little historical twists!
I couldn't find any Bohran in the 1864-1866 directories or in the 1860 census.
I did notice that the "Joseph Burrough" statement was signed with a mark, which suggests that Peanuts was illiterate. The Bohran statement isn't signed.
Both statements can be viewed for free at fold3.com, but I can send images to Roger to post if anyone wants.
Peanuts told his story several times.
April 15, 1865 statement - named as Joseph Burrough; tells of his actions on the night of the assassination; statement is signed with "his mark" and, as Susan said, likely indicates he was illiterate.
April 24, 1865 - named as John C. Bohran - Peanut John; again tells briefly about the night of the assassination; this statement is not signed by mark or otherwise; I would suspect the person taking the statment simply mis-recorded his name here (possibly based on Peanuts own speech patterns?). The contents of the statement make it clear this is the same person identified as Joseph Burrough in the first statement and Joseph Burroughs in the trial.
May 16, 1865 - witness at trial; tells in more detail about the night of the assassination and his interactions with Booth.
Did not testify at John Surratt trial that I could find. I did not look to see if he was called at Andrew Johnson impeachment proceedings (but I will when I get a chance) like many others were.
(07-10-2014 10:44 AM)L Verge Wrote: [ -> ] (07-09-2014 05:24 PM)Rsmyth Wrote: [ -> ]In Steers "The Evidence" pg. 140, there is a statement by John Bohran and in parenthesis Joseph Burroughs. The statement lists John C. Bohran "Peanut John."
This is a very interesting development, Rich, and worth looking into. I seems to me that Steers and Edwards added the bracketed information [Joseph Burroughs] under the Bohran name to indicate that Burroughs was his real name, and in their footnote, they give the possibility of "Borrows" and "Bohran."
In the trial records, the name is given as Joseph Burroughs - so who in the heck is Bohran. Betty and Susan, city directories please; Cliff, what's your take on the "Bohran?"
This guy has plagued historians for 150 years. It's time that we clearly identify him.
Hi Lori. I've found many legitimate variations of the Burroughs surname over the years, some traditional and some merely to differentiate one family from another with the same name in the same town. But in the case of Peanut's statement, I think it's simply a matter of mistaken phonetics. Whoever recorded his name simply wrote what he heard, "Bohran," rather than what the boy actually said. At the time, what was really important is what the witness saw and heard, not precise spelling of names. If you say "Burroughs" quickly with a slight Southern drawl (something like "baurra") it's easy to see how the transcriber could make that error. I'm fairly confident the correct spelling of his surname is Burroughs.