I recommend the R. B. Garrett Letter in the Ida Tarbell Collection that Rob Wick mentioned a few weeks ago on the body on the monitor. Garrett says it was Booth, no question about it.

As to the removed vertebrae--they were evidence?

That must have been wild.

(04-11-2014 02:36 PM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote:  I like this photo of a supposed Booth body exposition from the Hagley Museum and Library collection: http://digital.hagley.org/cdm/ref/collec...ll8/id/180

I'm sure the Booth family loved that. I wonder whose mummified remains were making the rounds in that exhibition.

---

(04-11-2014 03:41 PM)Wild Bill Wrote:  I recommend the R. B. Garrett Letter in the Ida Tarbell Collection that Rob Wick mentioned a few weeks ago on the body on the monitor. Garrett says it was Booth, no question about it.

As to the removed vertebrae--they were evidence?

I would think without the photographic evidence to support their origin, the vertebral pieces wouldn't be worth much from an evidentiary standpoint. Yes? How would those pieces prove anything? We live in a world of DNA evidence and such. One could truly get away with murder back then.

I've reread that news article from 1865 linked to early in this thread by me, and wonder not if the corpse on the deck was Booth, but whether the body being rowed out was his. Perhaps the government was concerned that some shifty folks might attempt to steal the body and - I don't know - take it around the carnival circuit? grin

(04-11-2014 03:03 PM)L Verge Wrote:  We have actually had visitors to Surratt House in years past who had seen this "display" in the carnivals when it made the circuit. One gentleman said he paid 50 cents to see it; another paid 25 cents.

When I was a young boy, probably about 10 years old, I saw the "Booth Mummy" at a carnival in Rockwell, NC. I was with my dad and the display was something like a freak show or something of that nature

It looked a lot like the one we've seen so many pictures of on the internet. My dad told me is was probably a fake. That sparked my interest in the Lincoln Assassination.

I haven't heard from anyone else in this area that remembers that show coming through. When I read about this "mummy" it was usually displayed in the mid-west and I don't remember seeing anything about it being in the North Carolina area.

(04-11-2014 01:21 PM)RickBeaver Wrote:  I've always wondered why the pieces of vertebrae were removed and kept.

On June 9, 1862, the U.S. Surgeon General's office issued a circular announcing an intent to publish a medical and surgical history of the war. Medical directors were instructed to send copies of their records to Dr. Joseph Janvier Woodward and surgical records were to be sent to Dr. John H. Brinton. The Surgeon General's office also planned the development of the Army Medical Museum, with the intent of improving medical and surgical care. The museum needed specimens with case reports to study. Specimens were often sent to Washington preserved in barrels of whiskey, and Dr. Brinton eventually went on an extended "collection" tour for more material. The museum began needing a large supply of alcohol, and the Washington police supplied them with confiscated brandy and liquors. Brinton is believed to have taken along a supply of both during his travels, with the brandy being an "incentive" for field officers to cooperate. Booth was captured by Federal troops, was autopsied by Federal surgeons, and there you have it.

Blaine - Someday, when you have nothing else to do, would you write a small article on the beginnings of the Army Medical Museum? One of my vivid memories is of a class trip to the old museum that was in a building on the grounds of the Smithsonian for so many years. The displays were truly unforgettable. My next adventure to the museum was after it was moved to the grounds of Walter Reed Hospital. The exhibits were nicely done, and the museum itself was very modern -- but it just was not "the old museum."

It has been moved once again near the grounds of Bethesda Naval Hospital. I have not (and probably will not) visit this new facility, but I understand that it is very bare of exhibits and really not that impressive. Sometimes new is not better, IMO.

(04-12-2014 11:15 AM)L Verge Wrote:  Blaine - Someday, when you have nothing else to do, would you write a small article on the beginnings of the Army Medical Museum? One of my vivid memories is of a class trip to the old museum that was in a building on the grounds of the Smithsonian for so many years. The displays were truly unforgettable. My next adventure to the museum was after it was moved to the grounds of Walter Reed Hospital. The exhibits were nicely done, and the museum itself was very modern -- but it just was not "the old museum."

It has been moved once again near the grounds of Bethesda Naval Hospital. I have not (and probably will not) visit this new facility, but I understand that it is very bare of exhibits and really not that impressive. Sometimes new is not better, IMO.

The last I heard was that the three of Booth's cervical vertebrae held by the museum were not on public display. Does anyone know if that is currently the case?

New online exhibit at the Lincoln Financial Foundation entitled "The Booth Mummy"

http://lincolncollection.org/collection/...oth-mummy/

On eBay there was a 1948 press photo of Dr. Orlando F. Scott adjusting a lie detector on Dr. Alice Wynecoop.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/1948-Press-Photo-...567053216f

He was once indicted for a cab fraud charge...

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1929/...aud-charge

and also for perjury.

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1933/...-risk-quiz

(12-28-2015 01:02 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  On eBay there was a 1948 press photo of Dr. Orlando F. Scott adjusting a lie detector on Dr. Alice Wynecoop.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/1948-Press-Photo-...567053216f

He was once indicted for a cab fraud charge...

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1929/...aud-charge

and also for perjury.

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1933/...-risk-quiz

Too bad we never got him for assisting in historical fraud...

Examining a skull. for I.D. purposes, can be disturbing, but necessary. But using the skull of a victim, as an ash tray, a la Powell, is unexplainable. Did Powell smoke? I know he chewed.

As far as can be truthfully determined, the idea of Powell using a skull for an ashtray sprang from Doster's argument in which he stated that Powell "...further believes in Heaven and General Lee; dresses himself in the clothes of Union dead; stands guard over starving prisoners; also has his cup carved out of some Federal skull...." This is just a dramatic assumption on Doster's part; there is no positive proof that he had such a thing. I myself, doubt it. Did Powell smoke? We know he did chew; one list of the contents of the pockets of Powell's discarded overcoat lists a pipe and paper of tobacco....