Yes, I read that about the acquaintance with the Petersens. I would think the Wiechmanns (as the name was most likely originally spelled - and "Wiechmann" occurs indeed way more common than "Weichmann") came from North Germany, from the Hamburg, Hannover, or Bremen area. This map shows where all Wiechmanns are located who are registered in the German telephone directory:
http://www.verwandt.de/karten/absolut/wiechmann.html

This doesn't answer the question as to what region of Germany was home to Weichmann's parents, but Elizabeth Leonard did a very good synopsis of Weichmann's history in relation to the Surratts and the assassination in her book Lincoln's Avengers. Here's a link to the 20+ pages in that book: https://books.google.com/books?id=DOC3SM...&q&f=false

From Lincoln's Avengers, p95, "...Weichmann, whom he (Capt. Gleason) described as 'physically and intellectually... a giant, but in bravery...a dwarf.'" I guess Weichmann was tall.

I haven't read Leonard's entire book, so maybe she included Gleason's apology to Louis, but I didn't see it in the portion of her book linked by Laurie. From Weichmann, p110, "'Dear Weichmann: Over two months ago, since your welcome letter reached me, and you are deserving of a long apology from me for not writing before...

Well, my boy, accept my congratulations, heartily, sincerely, for the manly way you discharged your disagreeable duties in regard to the Surratt family. You have done nobly and are deserving of all credit. When I last saw you my feelings were anything but true, friendly ones as you must know, but the course you pursued, the testimony you gave, which I assure you was critically read by me, has a long time since completely changed my opinion, and I beg your pardon for all the unjust suspicions which I have ever entertained toward you...Sincerely, your friend, D.H. Gleason'"

Leonard also mentioned that before Louis moved to Mary's house, Surratt was a frequent and welcome visitor, "when he visited, Surratt frequently brought with him fruits and vegetables from his family's home in Surrattsville." I assume she's referencing Weichmann, but she left out an important detail. p18, Weichmann, "In those days, he was accustomed to bring fruits and vegetables from his home in the country to the Washington market to sell." This activity of John's gave Louis reason to believe John had employment with the family business that was ordinary work as opposed to working for the rebellion.

Since the family business was tobacco farming and running the tavern - not truck farming, I have often wondered if the transport of fruit and vegetables into D.C. was sporadic and more in time with and coordinated with Surratt's courier runs. A bushel of apples can hide courier packets, so can floorboards on wagons, and Surratt used to joke about even hiding things in the heels of his boots.

anyone familiar with this?

http://www.lincolncollection.org/collect...item=59320

Yes, Dr. George was a friend. I read it about thirty years ago when it first was published. I believe the Hall Center has a copy also. He also wrote on Mary Surratt, based on letters that she wrote to Fr. Finotti in Boston. One of his pamphlets is entitled A True Childe of Sorrow, taken from one of her letters.

Dr. George died several years ago. He was professor emeritus in history at Villanova University and very sympathetic to Mary Surratt. He worked alongside James O. Hall, John C. Brennan, and Erich Ewald.

I'll take a wild guess that The Days are Yet Dark deals with Louis Weichmann's guilty conscience due to his part, his betrayals, in causing the execution of an innocent woman. Ewald, in one of the Courier articles, said that Dr. George rediscovered Louis's marriage, since it had been reported in the Herald at the time of his death.

I'm reading John Surratt the Lincoln Assassin Who Got Away by Michael Schein and he references the Isacsson Dissertation, Guy W. Moore and, of course, the "fabulously strange St. Marie" (whose source was Surratt) as his sources for stating that Weichmann stole dispatches, from John Surratt, p30, "It is highly credible...." from his place of employment and gave them to rebel courier and friend, John Surratt. I don't have either of these works. Has anyone read them and know what their sources are?

As far as I can discover, the sources for the seemingly endlessly repeated allegations that Weichmann stole dispatches for the Confederacy are: John Surratt, the Rockville lecture, Booth to Arnold, Surratt to St. Marie, and researchers Isacsson and Moore. Is that it?

Schein applies these allegations to their logical conclusion, p31, "If this is true, Weichmann not only stole sensitive documents and gave them to his dear friend, the Rebel spy, but he actually opened the doors of the War Department in Washington to Surratt for late night plunder! Just in case there is any doubt, Weichmann's action would constitute espionage in time of war--a hanging offense."

Do you all think that Weichmann could have been a counter agent?I do,or am I all wet?

Michael Schein did quite a bit of research at the Surratt's Hall Center - making a long trek from his home in Washington State on 3-4 occasions. I have skimmed his book only at this point (too many books coming at me fast and furious -- I love it!). We sell it in the gift shop also. From what I can tell, however, it is nicely done and well-referenced throughout.

I read Guy Moore's work forty years ago. It is basically his graduate thesis put in book form after his wife and professors encouraged him to get it published for the masses. We depended heavily on it and the mountains of research done by Mr. Hall in developing our interpretive plans for Surratt House. Guy Moore is still alive, I believe, and still a member of the Surratt Society. I will say that we "fanatics" found his work a breath of fresh air in the 1970s, when Helen Jones Campbell was the only one who had published on the Surratts. Her works leave a lot to be desired.

As for Henri Beaumont de Ste. Marie, I have placed little faith in what he had to say since his role in the story appears to be more of the bounty hunter. If I remember correctly, though, he was closer friends with Weichmann before the assassination than he was with John Surratt. They spent quite some time together in Little Texas (or Ellengowan or whatever that territory in the Maryland hinterlands was called) after Surratt headed home. Didn't he also spend time with Louis in D.C.?

Herb - good question, because he was in an excellent position to be one. I asked Mr. Hall once why the feds didn't descend on the Surratt boardinghouse once Weichmann supposedly reported strange happenings there. He said that they likely put the house on the "to be watched" list - along with dozens of others. Could Louis have been the "watchman?" Is that how the authorities knew to come so quickly to H Street on the night of the assassination? Don't you love the intrigue? Now, if we could just find the missing pieces of the puzzle that could put all our theories into place - either in history or into the trash!

(09-07-2015 10:19 AM)HerbS Wrote:  Do you all think that Weichmann could have been a counter agent?I do,or am I all wet?

Excellent question, Herb! Was he trying to work for both sides? Just speculation on my part - I think the fact that he didn't move out of the Surratt boardinghouse possibly says something about what he may have been doing. I put myself in his shoes, and in my way of thinking, if I were really 100% a Union man (as he said he was in his book), I do not think I would have been comfortable living there. He gives an explanation for why he continued to stay there in his book. Do I believe it? I am not sure - maybe yes, maybe no.

Thanks Laurie and Roger,I tend to feel that,Weichmann was in deep,muddy,hot water!I also feel that he knew full well what he was doing!

I've posted here all the sources that I know of for the Weichmann spy scenario and it's so thin, it's transparent. Did even one clerk make statements about suspicious activity in the office involving Louis? Was anything reported as missing from the offices? Was any pilfered information traced back to Louis?

As for Weichmann continuing to live in the Surratt House even after he became aware of rebel and suspicious activity--there are many factors to be considered, including the reality of the war ending and his optimism that John would settle down to a sensible life, the horrible idea of reporting his friend and theology schoolmate to authorities based on suspicions, and an idea that was inconcievable for him at that time, which was Mary Surratt participating in a deadly conspiracy. Just for starters.

Does this sound like a man who would participate in spying?

Dear sir;

I received your kind and welcome letter only on Tuesday and I would have answered immediately has not some business with respect to you prevented me. I was surprised at the sudden resolution you have formed of quitting Texas by the first of May. Yet I do not blame you for leaving so lonely and deserted a place as the romantic village in which you are now at present stationed. I have made several applications by letter to some of my most influential acquaintances but up to this period I have not recieved any answer either favorable or unfavorable. I expect a reply in a few days. I also wrote to my friend Jno Surratt about the position of which he spoke when in Texas. As soon as he gives me an answer I shall inform you of the result.

Do not be disheartened, dear friend, cheer up; better times are coming. After rain comes sunshine, after storm comes a calm. You do not know what is in reserve for you.

Rest assured that I shall do all that is in my power. I have no doubt that if you come to Washington you will by your exertions eventually obtain some position. I am sure of it. You must also excuse me for not writing in French; my mind this morning is not sufficiently settled. I promise you however, that the next one shall not fail to meet your your expectations. Let me know, if you please, whether you intend to come to Washington as soon as you leave Texas. I shall certainly be very happy to receive you. In the meantime have courage; all things will be right bye and bye. Wishing you as all my friends in Texas, the complements of the season.

I am
Truly yours
Lewis J. Wiechmann
PS Excuse my haste as I am on the point of commencing school.
dated April 23 1863 and postmarked April 26, Washington, to Henri B. de Steve Marie

Does this sound like a man who would conspire to kidnap the President?

"I had almost forgotten to tell you that I called on your friend. Mr. Wm. Underwood, at the Carver Hospital. He has nearly recovered from his wound, though it has not yet quite healed. He intended going home in a week or two, and perhaps he may be there now, as it has been over a week since I saw him.

"Have you heard from your Uncle James [a Union soldier] lately ? There has been some very hard fighting out West recently, and you know, Cousin Bell, that the foe has very little regard where he directs his bullets. May God preserve him, and grant that he may see the end of this unholy war without harm."

Yet the writer of this letter (and other quite charming letters), John Surratt, certainly did plot to kidnap the President, and perhaps worse than that.

I think that under the right (or perhaps more aptly, wrong) circumstances, particularly in wartime, just about anybody is capable of anything.

I can't claim as a proven fact that Weichmann supplied John Surratt with confidential information, but I think it's possible that he did. Gilbert Raynor, the clerk whose statement you kindly pointed me to, did mention that Surratt visited Weichmann at work and that Weichmann boasted of ways he could make a large sum of money, and Colonel Foster mentioned "large quanties of envelopes, with the official frank of the office of the Commissary General of Prisoners," being found in the room Weichmann and Surratt shared. Maybe two or three envelopes were used by Weichmann as bookmarks, but large quantities?

(09-07-2015 04:01 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  Does this sound like a man who would conspire to kidnap the President?

"I had almost forgotten to tell you that I called on your friend. Mr. Wm. Underwood, at the Carver Hospital. He has nearly recovered from his wound, though it has not yet quite healed. He intended going home in a week or two, and perhaps he may be there now, as it has been over a week since I saw him.

"Have you heard from your Uncle James [a Union soldier] lately ? There has been some very hard fighting out West recently, and you know, Cousin Bell, that the foe has very little regard where he directs his bullets. May God preserve him, and grant that he may see the end of this unholy war without harm."

Yet the writer of this letter (and other quite charming letters), John Surratt, certainly did plot to kidnap the President, and perhaps worse than that.

I think that under the right (or perhaps more aptly, wrong) circumstances, particularly in wartime, just about anybody is capable of anything.

I can't claim as a proven fact that Weichmann supplied John Surratt with confidential information, but I think it's possible that he did. Gilbert Raynor, the clerk whose statement you kindly pointed me to, did mention that Surratt visited Weichmann at work and that Weichmann boasted of ways he could make a large sum of money, and Colonel Foster mentioned "large quanties of envelopes, with the official frank of the office of the Commissary General of Prisoners," being found in the room Weichmann and Surratt shared. Maybe two or three envelopes were used by Weichmann as bookmarks, but large quantities?

Yes, his letter does sound consistent with someone who could conspire against the President. He talked about bullets, and an unholy war, compared to Weichmann who talked about sunshine, courage, a romantic village, complements of the season, influential acquaintances, succeeding through his exertions and writing in French. If you don't see the difference, I do.

Here's a letter to Ste. Marie written at the same time:

Dear sir,

I received a letter from Mr. Wiechmann yesterday, stating your intention to leave Texas by the first of May. I spoke to Mr. Hill about a teacher. He said he wanted one and was willing to have you as our teacher, but he could not build a schoolhouse for some time.

If you have made up your mind to go S---- I can send you all safely. Do not have the least doubt of it. Times are better than they were. All you have to do is let me know the day you will be in Washington, and I will meet you. You can carry a hand trunk with you.

There will not be the least difficulty, only perhaps you will have to remain among us some two or three weeks. Still, we can easily make the time pass agreeably. I suppose "Texas" looks as dreary as possible. My kindest regards to Father Mahoney. Do not fail to come to Washington.

Your friend,
J. Harrison Surratt

This is a letter written by a hardened blockade runner boasting about his skills. Texas isn't romantic, it's dreary. He isn't encouraging Ste Marie to obtain a respectable position by his own exertions, perhaps aided by influential friends; he told him there was no job available and encouraged him to head south, and presumably join the Confederacy. This difference between the two men is distinct, at least to me.

I haven't read anywhere that Weichmann was questioned about the envelopes although I presume he was. Louis was teaching himself phonography at home with daily lessons, considered to be incredibly difficult to do by Pittman. Perhaps Weichmann took some work home with him, rather than stay late and miss meals that his board paid for. I don't know why the envelopes were in his room and neither do you. To you it suggests something dark, to me something conscientious. Weichmann did answer to the money making comment. Have you read it in The Evidence?

(09-07-2015 03:01 PM)HerbS Wrote:  Thanks Laurie and Roger,I tend to feel that,Weichmann was in deep,muddy,hot water!I also feel that he knew full well what he was doing!

I believe that Professor Joseph E. George, whom we mentioned earlier, entitled one of his articles on Weichmann "The First Law of Nature..." Self-preservation is the logical route for most people to take, and your thoughts, Herb, have been echoed by many over the years.

I'm going to have to continue reading Michael Schein's book. He is a professor of American Legal History, so hopefully he can add additional insight.