I am reading Alford. He is very convincing in citing multiple sources for the Hale family tradition that JWB presented Forbes with one of Sen Hale's cards. We know that some people crave involvement with famous historical events and will invent tall tales.

This event involving a young lady intimate with Booth strikes me as too embarrassing and titillating to have been invented.

It also solves the mystery of the total lack of interest in Forbes by the authorities. I am unaware of any buff ignorant of the Hale story claiming Forbes was part of the conspiracy.

Am I wrong about the lack of accusations against Forbes?

Tom

(04-08-2015 01:19 PM)Jim Garrett Wrote:  JWB was completely narcissistic, but he had such an engaging personality that most did not realize it. Probably the only woman that JWB loved was his mother.

Respectably disagree. Wish a modern psychologist could travel back in time and interact with him though - that would be very interesting!

The case for Senator Hale's card is pretty compelling, especially concerning Hale's meeting with Johnson and the lack of interest in Forbes. Forbes has always been a mystery to me since you would think that his statements would be FAR better recorded in the investigation. Maybe the "Hale card" theory proves why!

(04-08-2015 09:41 PM)Thomas Thorne Wrote:  Am I wrong about the lack of accusations against Forbes?

Tom, I think you are right. Although Crook is not considered a reliable source he puts the blame squarely on Parker in Through Five Administrations. Also, in her book, Elizabeth Keckly says that Mary Lincoln put the blame solely on Parker. No mention of Forbes being neglectful of his duties whatsoever in either book. Offhand I cannot think of any books I've read which either blame Forbes or include him as part of a larger conspiracy. (Even Robert Lockwood Mills, who is suspicious of most everything in It Didn't Happen the Way You Think, does not "indict" Forbes, if my memory is correct.) Forbes was not called at the trial. He gave no recorded statement at the time. A mystery! He seems to get a pass. Apparently he was silent for 27 years until his 1892 affidavit which is full of lies and embellishments.

(04-08-2015 10:18 PM)Jenny Wrote:  Forbes has always been a mystery to me since you would think that his statements would be FAR better recorded in the investigation.

I sure agree with you, Jenny.

The facts concerning how John Wilkes Booth actually made his way into the president’s private box is still (my opinion), even after 150 years, NOT exactly known. To enter the president’s box Booth had to pass two doors, both closed and unlocked: the outer door (which opened into a short passageway), and a second, inner door. There was no one stationed in the passageway and Lincoln’s police officer bodyguard, John Parker, had unaccountably left the chair placed for him practically in front of the outer door and had gone somewhere else.

Was Forbes monitoring entry through the outer door? Or, was there someone sitting just outside that door, and was it Forbes? We have the account of an Union army officer, who happened to witness the brief encounter between Booth and a man sitting outside the outer door, later describing what he had seen: Booth, apparently recognizing the man, walked up and, after reaching into his vest pocket, presented a card, whereupon Booth was allowed to enter the door. Did this indeed happen? A traditional view (set forth in innumerable accounts of Lincoln’s death) is that Booth was able to enter the outer door unchallenged by anyone at its entrance.

Forbes still remains (my opinion) a something of a mysterious figure. And isn’t it very strange that he never has given a witness statement in the investigation that followed the assassination? If he allowed Booth entrance he was the most important witness! Why was he never called as a witness?

Occam’s razor (a scientific problem solving principle) states that among all kinds of hypotheses the one with the fewest assumptions is true. And what is the simplest explanation here, the one with the fewest assumptions? According to me: Forbes was not there at all! He was NOT a witness.

According to most scholars, Forbes did not leave any known written or verbal account of the events. However, according to Timothy S. Good’s “We Saw Lincoln Shot: One Hundred Eyewitness Accounts (1995)”, Forbes prepared in 1892 a one-paragraph account of the events at Ford’s Theatre in which he acknowledged being in Lincoln’s box when Lincoln was shot but said nothing about letting Booth into that box.

The fact that Charles Forbes was positioned at the outer door to Lincoln’s box was mentioned in newspaper articles shortly after the assassination. George S. Bryan’s 1940 book on the assassination does also mention this. But in most other accounts it is omitted. Forbes’ presence at the door is also omitted in almost all movie or TV versions of the Lincoln assassination. It was not until 1983, when William Hanchett re-identified Forbes as “the man who allowed Booth to reach Lincoln’s chair,” in his “The Lincoln Murder Conspiracies”. From that day it became the most popular theory. In 1984 an historical society placed on Forbes’ unmarked grave a tombstone which reads in part: “He accompanied the Lincolns to Ford’s Theatre on the night of April 14, 1865 and was seated just outside the box when the president was shot.”

Nowadays authoritative books on the assassination mention Forbes’ presence in the theatre and his decision to pass Booth into the box. But is it a proven fact that Forbes (or someone else ???) had stationed himself near the outer door of the president’s box? Is there any hard evidence to support this? Or is it one of the many hypotheses (myths) that still surround Lincoln’s death? That Booth may have used the name of Senator Hale, to gain entry to the box, and that Stanton wanted to protect Hale's good name and therefore did not call Forbes as a witness, is according to me speculation (but certainly an interesting theory; in politics anything can happen).

If there was no one positioned near the outer door to Lincoln’s box when Booth entered through that door, declares a lot. Who was that Union army officer, who said that he witnessed the brief encounter between Booth and a man. Did he recognize Forbes? How reliable is his account? Did he say that Booth spoke with “someone” and that this “someone” was later interpreted as “almost certainly Forbes”, which is of course no hard evidence at all. Did others see the brief encounter?

(04-14-2015 05:07 PM)loetar44 Wrote:  Did others see the brief encounter?

Some eyewitness accounts do not mention Forbes at all. James P. Ferguson was sitting on the side of Ford's opposite the State Box. Ferguson said:

"Some time near 10 o’clock, during the second scene of the third act of “Our American Cousin,” I saw Booth pass along near the President’s box, and then stop and lean against the wall. After standing there a moment, I saw him step down one step, put his hands on the door and his knee against it, and push the door open—the first door that goes into the box."

After prof. William Hanchett re-identified Forbes in 1984 as the man who let pass Forbes, a complete change in views was set in motion. (The late) William A. Tidwell in “Come Retribution” (1988) and Edward Steers, Jr., both seen by me (beyond any doubt) as excellent scholars and both widely recognized as authorities on the Lincoln assassination (like Hanchett), also support the Forbes-story. I see Hanchett, Tidwell and Steers principally responsible for the Forbes-story. Of course their conclusions are based on extensive investigation of archives and original documents. I hope that I don’t ask an inconvenient question, but Mr. Steers, as I’ve learned member of this symposium, please can you shed some more light on the Forbes question?

(04-15-2015 09:25 AM)loetar44 Wrote:  After prof. William Hanchett re-identified Forbes in 1984 as the man who let pass Forbes, a complete change in views was set in motion. (The late) William A. Tidwell in “Come Retribution” (1988) and Edward Steers, Jr., both seen by me (beyond any doubt) as excellent scholars and both widely recognized as authorities on the Lincoln assassination (like Hanchett), also support the Forbes-story. I see Hanchett, Tidwell and Steers principally responsible for the Forbes-story. Of course their conclusions are based on extensive investigation of archives and original documents. I hope that I don’t ask an inconvenient question, but Mr. Steers, as I’ve learned member of this symposium, please can you shed some more light on the Forbes question?

Forgive me for being unlettered since I haven't read any recent books on the assassination, past Kauffman's and Killing Lincoln. But, I tend to agree with the fact that there was no one preventing Booth from reaching the President. Many years ago we visited Ford's and I seem to remember that there was a peephole in the door to the President's box, and the docent there said that Booth was able to access the box at an earlier time to prepare himself for what he was going to do. Perhaps he deliberately got Parker and Forbes "likkered up" prior to the assassination. Just a thought: another one of many.

Hi Mercine. I wonder if that hole in the door to Box 7 is the reason some books have Booth entering the box through that door. Nowadays I think most historians feel Booth entered through the open door to Box 8, not the door with the peephole. Mike Kauffman makes a very sensible argument (IMO) for the Box 8 entry in In the Footsteps of an Assassin.

I think that this evidence now shows that there were more people involved in the conspiracy!

Well, yes, at this point we can make the assumption that there were more people involved.
We can also perhaps assume that there were cover-ups, as has been implied with the case of Lucy Hale. We are looking back 150 years now, and detective work was primitive. I don't think the concept of fingerprinting had yet been discovered, and there were no phone records, no video cameras. I am still aghast at the way the doctoring was done on poor Mr. Lincoln.
I am going to have to revisit Kauffman's work.
Anyone out there have any ideas about who some of the other potential conspirators might be? We need to keep in mind that this was not the conspiracy to kidnap Lincoln, but the actual murder plot that must have morphed from Booth's anger and hatred. His rancor grew murderous after Lincoln's April 11th speech. He had only a few days after that to set the wheels in motion, however.

historybuff-I couldn't agree with you more about your ideas! I tend to feel that,A.Johnson and Stanton,had somewhat of a role in the plot,and or cover-up.I feel that the Confederate leadership was involved.I also feel that we might never know how many people were involved.The same goes for the JFK assassination!

There is something odd in the Charles Forbes story. If he gave Booth access to Lincoln’s box he certainly was one of the most important witnesses of the murder. It bothers me that there is no recorded interrogation, that he was never questioned, that there is no written testimony and that he was never interviewed in an official capacity. How is that possible?

The simplest explanation is in my opinion (as I suggested in my earlier post) that Charles Forbes was NOT there. He was NOT important in protecting Lincoln. However, he was MADE important AFTER the assassination, by “assuming” that he was seated in the Dress Circle opposite the outer door of Lincoln’s box. Forbes’ claim in September 1892, saying “[I] accompanied him [Lincoln] in the carriage, was with him from the carriage to the box in the theatre, and was in the box when the assassin fired his fatal shot” isn't supported by any contemporary evidence that I know of. Maybe Forbes was there and maybe he was in the box, but that was in my opinion (shortly ?) AFTER the assassination. If Forbes did have a role in protecting the President, why was he never charged? Why Forbes became, after Lincoln's death, a messenger for the Treasury Department and later for the Adjuntant General's office?

There are no biographies of Forbes and he seldom appears as more than a footnote in published works on the assassination. I have books in which his name is not even being listed in the book's index. What I know is that Charles Forbes started working at the White House shortly after Lincoln's first inauguration. He began as one of several house servants and became a favorite with Lincoln, and Mary. He often accompanied Lincoln on trips outside the White House and also ran errands for Mary and drove her around Washington. He also looked often after Willie and Tad. As far as I know Lincoln never considered him as a “close friend”, or a “friend of the family”. Forbes described himself as Lincoln's "body servant", but others called him the President’s valet, messenger, attendant, footman,…. But he was NEVER seen as a bodyguard.

As I see it, it was only John Parker who stood guard over the box, he alone, nobody else. We know, he left his post, apparently to go outside for a drink, although he later told William Crook he went to find a seat “so that he could see the play”. It was Parker who left Lincoln unprotected…. Forbes is nothing to blame.

Who was Parker? He was a low-life member of the Metropolitain Police Force with many reprimandes on his record, cited for unbecoming conduct, insubordination, loafing and drunkenness while on duty. It was Mary Lincoln who was in the first place responsible for assigning Parker to the White House detail. Parker was up for army draft and wanted to avoid it. Mary wrote letters on April 3 and April 4, 1865 (shortly after her return from City Point on April 2) sponsoring Parker’s transfer to the White House guard.

The fact that Parker’s absence was never adequately explained, has in my opinion to do with Mary Lincoln and Stanton. When Mary’s sponsorship of Parker came to light, Stanton did not want to make this public, because he had not withhold Parker’s assignment. So, in my view it were Mary’s actions, Stanton’s inaction and Parker’s incompetence that made it incredibly easy for Booth (or anyone) to enter the box and kill Lincoln. Parker was charged with neglect (tried and acquitted).

And last but not least, what is true of the story I read (Michael Kauffman ?) that it was Mary who ended up blaming Forbes for her husband's death. As far as I know (correct me if I’m wrong) she never did.

Kees, I agree Mary never blamed Forbes. My memory may be faulty, but I think I read somewhere that she actually kept in touch with Forbes after the assassination.

The coachman, Francis Burke, made a statement that doesn't prove where Forbes was seated but does seem to indicate his presence in the area that night (although no names are specially mentioned in his statement). His statement, dated April 25, 1865, said that during the play he had a drink with "the special police officer and the footman of the President." Like Forbes, Burke was not called at the conspiracy trial.

Kees, I agree that Forbes' activities that night are elusive and tough to nail down.

(04-16-2015 05:26 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  Kees, I agree Mary never blamed Forbes. My memory may be faulty, but I think I read somewhere that she actually kept in touch with Forbes after the assassination.

The coachman, Francis Burke, made a statement that doesn't prove where Forbes was seated but does seem to indicate his presence in the area that night (although no names are specially mentioned in his statement). His statement, dated April 25, 1865, said that during the play he had a drink with "the special police officer and the footman of the President." Like Forbes, Burke was not called at the conspiracy trial.

Kees, I agree that Forbes' activities that night are elusive and tough to nail down.

I agree with both Kees and Roger about the unanswered questions regarding Forbes. I don't remember ever hearing about Charles Forbes until the Lincoln Group of D.C. erected the marker for him at Congressional Cemetery in the 1980s. I wish that Ed Steers would chime in on this because I believe that he was part of the committee that worked on that marker.

And talk about coincidence, I received a call today from a gentleman who has a small, but impressive, collection - one item of which is a letter that Mary wrote regarding Forbes and the draft. Maybe more will be revealed...

(04-16-2015 05:26 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  Kees, I agree that Forbes' activities that night are elusive and tough to nail down.

Mr. Steers is very specific in his “Lincoln’s Assassination” (2014): “Charles Forbes … was … seated at the end of a row that placed him closest to the outer door to the box” (p. 53)

---

(04-16-2015 07:01 PM)L Verge Wrote:  And talk about coincidence, I received a call today from a gentleman who has a small, but impressive, collection - one item of which is a letter that Mary wrote regarding Forbes and the draft. Maybe more will be revealed...

There is an unproven theory that Mary Todd Lincoln was distantly related to John Frederick Parker, via her mother Eliza Parker….

---

I did some reading today and found that it was Captain Theodore McGowan of the Veteran Reserve Corps who made the statement of the encounter between Booth and someone, just before Booth entered the President’s box. McGowan was sitting in the aisle leading by the wall toward the door of the box. He wrote on May 15, 1865 that he saw three to five feet from where he was sitting a brief encounter between “a man” and “the President’s messenger”. He said that the man took a visiting card from his pocket and showed it to the President’s messenger He did NOT say that it was Forbes and he did not say that the man got permission to enter the box. He only said that he saw the man go through the door and that he closed the door.

Sitting next to McGowan was Lieutenant Alexander Crawford. He gave his account to Stanton at the Petersen House immediately after the assassination. He declared that he looked up (four or five times ) at the man who came in, and that this man suddenly stepped into the President’s box.

Note that McGowan and Crawford were sitting right next to each other and that they both observed the same event. McGowan spoke about a brief encounter and a “visiting card”, but Crawford did not.

Dr. Leale gave an account on July 20, 1867 (to Maj. Gen Butler), 2 years after the event (!), saying that he saw a man speaking with another (a “reluctant usher”) near the outer door and that the man entered, after which the door was closed and the usher resumed his place. No names. Was the usher from Ford’s?

This are the only accounts of eyewitnesses I’ve found. All other accounts are secondary and therefore not substantially accurate. Even the three eyewitness accounts are not in consistence with each other … visiting card, no visiting card, President’s messenger, usher, conversation, no conversation. According to a June 1865 Harper’s Magazine article Booth was stopped by a “sentinel”.

Will we ever know exactly what happened in front of the outer door that night? I suspect that all interpretation is a kind of “reading into”, or call it “cherry picking” , a selection of facts that support a conclusion that you want to find, but might not reflect the truth, nobody knows exactly. Is the right German expression “hineininterpretierung”, Eva?