To anyone:

Lloyd's testomony that Booth had told him "I am pretty certain that we have assasinated the President, and Secretary Seward". Does Booth he make this statement based on whom he assigned to murder Seward? Was Herold there and reported what he had "heard", or did Herold hear the news skedaddling out of town?

John "The FOZ" Your acquaintance is enough - I don't drink. Does "Spring for a double" mean that you can do a double back flip? I would enjoy seeing that. I am not a full Lincoln Assassination fan, my interests center on Spies and events in King George County, VA. so I do not participate in the full Assassination Search. I do attend the Friday evening buffet, with my Lady, expressly to meet the likes of you. As "Wild Bill" has put it - right in the middle of everything.Want to see Cawood's Camp? Brogden's Camp? The "Trap. Stay an extra day in March, and I'll give you the "Cawood, no escape Tour". Do you know where Benjamin Arnold lived? (Wilbur Payne, a descendant of Mrs. Quesenberry owns it). I have 1864 maps of this area. Anyway that I can help - I am ready. JOHN

(02-02-2013 09:44 AM)DanielC Wrote:  Great job John, I really enjoyed your article. I'm of the opinion that Herold was more of a point person on the night of the assasination. Where he was.? I don't know. One thing stood out to me though. Lloyd's testomony that Booth had told him "I am pretty certain that we have assasinated the President, and Secretary Seward". Does he make this statement based on whom he assigned to murder Seward? Was Herold there and reported what he had "heard", or did Herold hear the news skedaddling out of town?

Best,

Dan

Dan:

Thank you for your input and for your compliment.

My belief is that Booth could make that statement because he knew to a certainty that Johnson was not assassinated. He received that information from Herold. Herold could have come to that firm conclusion only if he had had some hand in the attempt, even if it were only to go to the Kirkwood and be told by Atzerodt (whom we know was there, at the relevant time, per Fletcher) that it was a no-go, conditions being unfavorable, and let's blow this joint.

There is no indication that Booth had post-assassination contact with Atzerodt or Powell, so his only source of information was Herold. How could Herold have found out that Johnson was untouched if he was with Powell and then went directly from Seward's home to the bridge?
Conclusion: He wasn't with Powell; he was at the Kirkwood, after he fulfilled whatever role he played in or around Ford's Theatre.

John

(02-02-2013 04:34 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  Jerry:
Please identify, with particularity, the "excerpt in the archives" to which you refer. Is it in your book? In The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence? Thank you in advance, because if the except will solve the "Mysteries of Silas T. Cobb" (a chapter title), I shall be very grateful to you.
John

John,
The excerpt is in my book and is very commonly used. I'm sure you've seen it before. Unfortunately, I'm away from home with my new grandson and can't lay my hands on a copy of my book.

Cobb starts talking about what happened when he is interrupted by someone( Stanton?) telling him that he was incorrect and proceeds to tell him the order of events..

Jerry

---

(02-02-2013 11:56 AM)L Verge Wrote:  I would like to add that the security had surely become less "secure" with all the celebrations going on.

Laurie
There were no change in the orders and I have found no evidence that it was less secure nor that the orders were not being followed..

I remember reading in "Manhunt" and/or "Blood on the Moon" that when Fletcher approached the Navy Yard Bridge in pursuit of Herold and his horse he was told by Cobb that he could cross into Maryland after Herold but would not be allowed back into Washington that night. Apparently he opted to stay in Washington and suspend his pursuit.

Certainly he did not have a pass that evening. If that is true, then that is fairly strong evidence that Cobb was allowing traffic across the bridge into Maryland if not back into Washington despite the special order.

That's a very good point, Bill.

Thanks for your earlier comments, John. Mr. Beckert is my Dad. I'm Joe. You raised a good point about Herold crossing at a different time than Booth and if he was also capable of shooting his way across the bridge. I think Bill has made my earlier points moot by throwing Fletcher into the mix.

(02-02-2013 07:06 PM)wsanto Wrote:  I remember reading in "Manhunt" and/or "Blood on the Moon" that when Fletcher approached the Navy Yard Bridge in pursuit of Herold and his horse he was told by Cobb that he could cross into Maryland after Herold but would not be allowed back into Washington that night. Apparently he opted to stay in Washington and suspend his pursuit.

Certainly he did not have a pass that evening. If that is true, then that is fairly strong evidence that Cobb was allowing traffic across the bridge into Maryland if not back into Washington despite the special order.

The testimonies of Cobb and Fletcher don't match up exactly. Its possible that Cobb may have said 'If I pass you, you won't be able to return till morning' rather than 'you can pass but you won't be able to return till morning'. Its a matter of interpretation. The bottom line is Fletcher didn't cross.

But lets say that Fletcher was 100% correct. Why would he not be allowed to return till morning? Because even if he made an exception for Fletcher, Cobb knew that the guards at the other end of the bridge would enforce the rules of no pass, no entry. I see it as stronger evidence that the rules were being enforced.

(02-02-2013 08:03 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  [But lets say that Fletcher was 100% correct. Why would he not be allowed to return till morning? Because even if he made an exception for Fletcher, Cobb knew that the guards at the other end of the bridge would enforce the rules of no pass, no entry. I see it as stronger evidence that the rules were being enforced.

Perhaps they were relaxed on allowing traffic out of Washington but still strictly not letting anyone into Washington. That was the impression I got with my limited reading of the escape.

It makes sense to me that after Richmond fell, given the daily late-night celebrations, they would be more relaxed on letting traffic pass from Washington into Maryland after curfue. But it also makes sense to me that they would continue to be strict on not allowing traffic back into Washington given the context of the war. Traffic into Washington was the real threat at that time.

Excellent points John. Thank you.

Traffic into Washington had been the threat throughout the war - especially at that particular bridge (and Bennings) because it led into "hostile" territory known as Southern Maryland. Other bridges led into Virginia, and the close environs of that state to D.C. were in Union hands quickly after the war started.

As for relaxing orders about crossing the bridge, John and Jerry focus on the sentries doing their duty. At that particular time of celebrations, my instinct tells me that "tight security" became a matter of personal choice on the part of Cobb and other sentries - especially if the people they stopped seemed reputable and well-dressed.

Finally, about how Booth knew who had killed whom, I still think the scenario of Herold as point man rings true. Escort Powell and wait to hear the cry of murder, assume Powell has done his job; rush over to the Kirkwood and see absolutely no sign of turmoil there and figure Atzerodt had chickened out (or to placate you, that Herold couldn't get to the weapons which he should have taken all along); head to the appointed bridge to meet up with Booth and skedaddle.

(02-02-2013 06:21 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  

(02-02-2013 04:34 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  Jerry:
Please identify, with particularity, the "excerpt in the archives" to which you refer. Is it in your book? In The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence? Thank you in advance, because if the except will solve the "Mysteries of Silas T. Cobb" (a chapter title), I shall be very grateful to you.
John

John,
The excerpt is in my book and is very commonly used. I'm sure you've seen it before. Unfortunately, I'm away from home with my new grandson and can't lay my hands on a copy of my book.

Cobb starts talking about what happened when he is interrupted by someone( Stanton?) telling him that he was incorrect and proceeds to tell him the order of events..

Jerry

---

(02-02-2013 11:56 AM)L Verge Wrote:  I would like to add that the security had surely become less "secure" with all the celebrations going on.

Laurie
There were no change in the orders and I have found no evidence that it was less secure nor that the orders were not being followed..

Jerry:

Thank you. I have your book, so no problem.


Laurie:

I agree with you: enforcement of General Order No. 5 had to have been relaxed, ESPECIALLY for outgoing traffic. That is the position taken by nearly all historians. Further, the fact that Fletcher was also passed, one way, is probative of the reduced enforcement. When Cobb told him he could not return, he probably had the sentries on the other side in mind, knowing that they would be stricter because he would then represent traffic into the city rather than out of it. Still further, the fact that Cobb was only "blessed out" by Augur, with no punishment more severe than that, also argues for lax enforcement of the rule.

John

---

(02-02-2013 07:06 PM)wsanto Wrote:  I remember reading in "Manhunt" and/or "Blood on the Moon" that when Fletcher approached the Navy Yard Bridge in pursuit of Herold and his horse he was told by Cobb that he could cross into Maryland after Herold but would not be allowed back into Washington that night. Apparently he opted to stay in Washington and suspend his pursuit.

Certainly he did not have a pass that evening. If that is true, then that is fairly strong evidence that Cobb was allowing traffic across the bridge into Maryland if not back into Washington despite the special order.

wsanto:

A very good point re the strictness of enforcement of the rule being dependent on the direction of the traffic.

John

---

(02-02-2013 09:45 AM)Gene C Wrote:  Was Cobb the only guard at the bridge, or just the only one that confronted anyone trying to pass over, and how many guards on the other side?
How long was the bridge?

Gene:

I have no idea how many guards were on the other side, but your reference to the same has caused me to rethink the scenario in which Booth shoots the sentry if he gets a no-passage decision. If he decides to get into a gunfight with Cobb and his comrade(s), he will then also have to deal with sentries on the other side. That fairly well neutralizes that scenario, I believe. There is another difficulty. If Booth had started gunplay on the city side of the river, there is no way Herold would have made it across. Even if Booth had somehow been successful in his forced passage (highly unlikely), he would have been left without a guide in Maryland. I am inclined to believe, therefore, that Booth would have resorted to gunplay only if he had additional help.

I continue to be impressed with the insights of the contributors to this forum, insights which I find very helpful.

John

---

(02-02-2013 05:16 PM)John Stanton Wrote:  John "The FOZ" Your acquaintance is enough - I don't drink. Does "Spring for a double" mean that you can do a double back flip? I would enjoy seeing that. I am not a full Lincoln Assassination fan, my interests center on Spies and events in King George County, VA. so I do not participate in the full Assassination Search. I do attend the Friday evening buffet, with my Lady, expressly to meet the likes of you. As "Wild Bill" has put it - right in the middle of everything.Want to see Cawood's Camp? Brogden's Camp? The "Trap. Stay an extra day in March, and I'll give you the "Cawood, no escape Tour". Do you know where Benjamin Arnold lived? (Wilbur Payne, a descendant of Mrs. Quesenberry owns it). I have 1864 maps of this area. Anyway that I can help - I am ready. JOHN

John:

Sorry to hear you don't drink. Well, I can make it a coke or whatever. I am not an alcoholic by any means (thankfully), but I find a cocktail a day one of life's little pleasures, especially toward the end of the day and especially toward the end of a stressful day. I once felt that way about cigarettes, until I realized they were the Grim Reaper in disguise. I finally succeeded in ridding myself of the addiction, but it was probably the hardest thing I ever did. That was about 26 years ago.

Spring for a double means to pay for a double drink, i.e. one that has two jiggers of whatever mixed with the whatever, which makes it twice as costly.

"Cawood"? I vaguely recall that that was the name of a Confederate officer who was enlisted, with Mosby, to facilitate Thomas F. Harney's entrance into Washington in the closing days of the war? Or perhaps it was another mission at or about that time. I think, rather, that it was Thomas Nelson Conrad's mission. Am I on the right track? I will check it out.

Your offer re the tour sounds terrific, but I'm not sure I will be able to swing it. My wife has health issues and I am expected to get back to her quickly for that reason, as I had to do with the last two conferences. Thank you anyway.

John

Well, I certainly can't argue with Laurie's 'instinct' nor that clearly written military orders were secretly meant to apply to only one end of the bridge.


I guess that means that it's perfectly understandable that a General would look the other way to protect a Sergeant who allowed his Commander and Chief's murderer to escape by not following the rules.

But what do I know? I'm just an old grandpa.

(02-02-2013 07:34 PM)J. Beckert Wrote:  That's a very good point, Bill.

Thanks for your earlier comments, John. Mr. Beckert is my Dad. I'm Joe. You raised a good point about Herold crossing at a different time than Booth and if he was also capable of shooting his way across the bridge. I think Bill has made my earlier points moot by throwing Fletcher into the mix.

Joe:

Thanks for your response.

Please see my comments to Gene C., below, in which I discuss rethinking the forced passage scenario because of resistance on the other side of the river and because it would jeopardize Herold's crossing, or Atzerodt's, if he had been inclined to follow them.

John

---

(02-02-2013 10:09 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  Well, I certainly can't argue with Laurie's 'instinct' nor that clearly written military orders were secretly meant to apply to only one end of the bridge.


I guess that means that it's perfectly understandable that a General would look the other way to protect a Sergeant who allowed his Commander and Chief's murderer to escape by not following the rules.

But what do I know? I'm just an old grandpa.

Jerry:

Hey, we're both grandpa's, so you can't top me there. (Hint: My grandfather was born 3 years after the end of the C.W. That's as much as I will tell, because if I tell more you will all show up at my door with oxygen tanks.)

i hope Laurie won't mind my speaking for her, but I don't think she meant that the lax enforcement on the city side was a "secret". Rather, I believe it was a case of its just being a reality because the sentries and the city population in general were in a celebratory and devil-may-care mood because of the successful conclusion of the war. It is just a normal and expecteed thing in those circumstances to be less strict with the traffic, now that virtually all danger had passed, or so it appeared, especially for outgoing traffic. Do you think anyone was enforcing the traffic laws (or any other laws) in Times Square when everyone was dancing in the streets to celebrate the end of WWII? You've seen photos, I'm sure, in which that sailor is planting a big smooch on that dish in the white dress. Do you believe the policiman who failed to arrest them for public indecency was reprimanded?

As for Augur, I don't think he looked the other way; he reprimanded Cobb severely, but in the end nothing more serious than that was done because Augur, too, must have known that enforcement of the rule had eased and that the sentries had discretion in the matter. To a degree, the facts speak for themselves. But I still maintain that there has to be more to the story than this, because there are too many coincidences as it stands. It is not possible that Booth left so many things to chance and they all fell his way.

John

The way John is piecing this together makes a lot of sense, especially with scenario of Booth having to shoot his way across the bridge and then deal with the sentries on the NB side. With respect to Herald's later crossing, that makes sense also, but I think Fletcher's "pass" just shoots the whole theory of the difficulty of crossing the bridge to the south to pieces.

(02-02-2013 10:15 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  To a degree, the facts speak for themselves. But I still maintain that there has to be more to the story than this, because there are too many coincidences as it stands. It is not possible that Booth left so many things to chance and they all fell his way.

Perhaps Booth and/or Herold had tested the security for outgoing traffic on the bridge in the days preceding the assassination and they knew their would be no problem crossing into Maryland.