(02-07-2017 05:18 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(02-07-2017 04:28 PM)Gene C Wrote:  Who claims Booth was in Newport?

Gene, I do not know all the evidence, but I do know there is this:

https://historical.ha.com/itm/autographs...14-61205.s

There's also the letter that Roger posted on #38 in this thread.

http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...age-3.html

Thanks Susan & Roger.
If that's the evidence, it seems a bit weak to me.

Why? I think the hotel register, dated April 5 with Booth's signature, is fairly strong evidence, especially when combined with the letter.

What I don't think is supported by any contemporary evidence is the identity of Lucy as the "lady" with whom Booth checked in.

(02-07-2017 05:49 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  I think Booth went directly from Washington to Montreal based on two reports.

Henry Hogan's wrote that "John Wilkes Booth played a short engagement under the Buckland management, preliminary to the regular opening". This makes sense because Buckland owned the Theatre Royal in Montreal and Booth played for him the winter before. Hogan also said that
"He was here just a week or ten days before the assassination of Lincoln".

That puts Col. Gordon's recollection in a new light. He said "I grasped the hand in friendly farewell that would soon be stained with the blood of an assassinated President. Nor do I think he had such thought at that time. IN A FEW DAYS, I was shocked at the report of Lincoln’s death by the hand of John Wilkes Booth.”

Tidwell admits that the timing is not clear as to what date Gordon was talking about and made the assumption that it was his trip in March since there was no evidence of another.

However, Atzerodt said he went to Canada and if you put Hogan and Gordon's account side by side they seem to confirm each other. There is no other sighting of Booth (that I know of) until April 4 in Newport.

According to Loux, Booth met with John McCullough at the Metropolitan Hotel in New York and talked about a possible summer engagement in Montreal on April 2. Loux's source for this is a June 21, 1865 letter from McCullough to John T. Ford located in the Ford papers. Do you think it's possible that McCullough could've persuaded Booth to go to Montreal for a quick engagement with Booth then returning to New York because of preexisting plans to travel to Boston with his female companion? It's the only explanation I can think of to explain the circuitous route if he did go to Montreal. Does anybody know what McCullough's letter actually says?

(02-07-2017 07:57 PM)Steve Wrote:  According to Loux, Booth met with John McCullough at the Metropolitan Hotel in New York and talked about a possible summer engagement in Montreal on April 2. Loux's source for this is a June 21, 1865 letter from McCullough to John T. Ford located in the Ford papers. Do you think it's possible that McCullough could've persuaded Booth to go to Montreal for a quick engagement with Booth then returning to New York because of preexisting plans to travel to Boston with his female companion? It's the only explanation I can think of to explain the circuitous route if he did go to Montreal. Does anybody know what McCullough's letter actually says?

I also would like to know what the letter said. I do know that McCullough played a summer engagement in Montreal in 1865.

(02-07-2017 07:44 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  Why? I think the hotel register, dated April 5 with Booth's signature, is fairly strong evidence, especially when combined with the letter.

What I don't think is supported by any contemporary evidence is the identity of Lucy as the "lady" with whom Booth checked in.

That seems like a foolish thing to do for someone involved with a senators daughter. Why go to such a public place for a rendezvous?
If he really was in Newport it seems that during these final few week Booth seems to frequently let his passion rule his thoughts.

I am of the same mind as Susan with regards to John Wilkes Booth in Newport. After comparing the signature, even though the B in Booth is formed in a slightly different way than Wilkes normally made it, I do believe that this is Booth's handwriting.

However, I, like Susan, do not believe there is any evidence that points to the mysterious "Lady" being Lucy Hale other than assumptions by researchers. I have a hard time believing that Lucy could have escaped her father to go away with Booth for any length of time. Isn't that why they were making secret plans to run off and marry in spite of her father's objections after she got back from Spain? I'd love to see what real evidence exists that establishes the lady as being Lucy.

For want it is worth, here is how travel between New York, Newport, and Boston worked in 1865. The most fashionable way, and the way it seems Booth took, was the Fall River Line. At the time of Booth's trip, there were two steamer ships making the journey between New York and Newport. They were the Metropolis, which left NY on Tuesday, Thursdays, and Saturdays; and the Empire State, which left on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. These steamers left New York City at 5 pm. Before 1863, you were sailed up to Fall River, MA where you would be dropped off. In 1863, however, the railroad line was extended further south to Newport, RI and from that time until 1869, the steamer started dropping off its passengers at Newport instead. When you arrived in Newport in the early morning of the next day, you would then board a steamboat train which would take you into Boston. The steamboat train did not run until the steamboat had arrived which was "at or after 4:00 am". However, the steamboat train was not the only means of rail transport to Boston. Even the steamboat company advertised that one "may remain on board until the starting of the Accommodation at 8 am" which would provide one with "a night's rest on board". To service those who did not want to take the 4:00 am train, there was another local train that departed from Newport at 8:00 am. After that, the next train to Boston didn't leave until 3:00 pm.

Booth doesn't strike me as the 4:00 am type, so I think it's safe to say he was never planning on catching the early steamboat train. If I was to make an assumption, I think Booth either accidentally or deliberately missed the 8:00 am train as well. This leaves him stuck in Newport until the afternoon train at 3:00 pm.

To be honest, I find it strange that so many people checked into the Aquidneck House in the morning of April 5th. Booth and his Lady are 2 out of the 12 people who check in at the time labeled "B" which I take to be shorthand for breakfast. At least four more check in at the time labeled "D" which I take to be dinner (which, in the 1800's is the word for what we now call lunch). So by lunchtime on April 5th, the Aquidneck House has at least 16 people who have checked in. Compare this to the day before, April 4th, when only 9 people checked in over the course of the whole day. And on April 3rd, we see only seven people checking in (though there may have been others on the preceding page).

Though I have not been able to find any evidence for it, I would venture a guess that there may have been some issue with the train that day that required so many people to check into a hotel around breakfast time. Perhaps the 8:00 am train didn't run on that day as planned. Perhaps this is what stranded Booth and some of the other passengers in Newport for a time. I know this is all supposition but I don't feel it is out of the realm of possibility.

So then, who is the Lady with Booth? I would submit the idea that perhaps she was just another one of the steamboat's passengers who was waiting for the next train. I don't believe that Booth would have had a hard time convincing a female passenger to join him for breakfast. He was a handsome and personable actor after all. I can see Booth registering at the Aquidneck, without any plans to actually spend the night, and perhaps writes "and Lady" because he may not even know what his date's name is! That also sounds like Booth to me. Anyway they share a meal, place their luggage in the room and then proceed to walk around Newport. Perhaps Booth and his date even separate for a time which is when he was seen seemingly wandering by Mary Powell. Eventually, Booth and his date return to the hotel later for lunch, with Booth apparently attempting to share a meal in the more private setting of the room. However, before the meal comes, they realize that they must be sure to catch the train lest they be trapped in Newport even longer, and depart before lunch is served. Booth and his lady friend take the train to Boston, where they finally part their separate ways. Booth goes on to see his brother Edwin perform and his lady friend leaves to wherever she was heading in Boston.

Is my scenario largely supposition, yes, I admit that it is. But I feel that with the evidence we have, it is equally as plausible as Lucy Hale being Booth's "Lady". In fact, I would submit that my scenario is probably more likely given Lucy Hale's father.

(02-07-2017 09:52 PM)Dave Taylor Wrote:  I am of the same mind as Susan with regards to John Wilkes Booth in Newport. After comparing the signature, even though the B in Booth is formed in a slightly different way than Wilkes normally made it, I do believe that this is Booth's handwriting.

However, I, like Susan, do not believe there is any evidence that points to the mysterious "Lady" being Lucy Hale other than assumptions by researchers. I have a hard time believing that Lucy could have escaped her father to go away with Booth for any length of time. Isn't that why they were making secret plans to run off and marry in spite of her father's objections after she got back from Spain? I'd love to see what real evidence exists that establishes the lady as being Lucy.

For want it is worth, here is how travel between New York, Newport, and Boston worked in 1865. The most fashionable way, and the way it seems Booth took, was the Fall River Line. At the time of Booth's trip, there were two steamer ships making the journey between New York and Newport. They were the Metropolis, which left NY on Tuesday, Thursdays, and Saturdays; and the Empire State, which left on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. These steamers left New York City at 5 pm. Before 1863, you were sailed up to Fall River, MA where you would be dropped off. In 1863, however, the railroad line was extended further south to Newport, RI and from that time until 1869, the steamer started dropping off its passengers at Newport instead. When you arrived in Newport in the early morning of the next day, you would then board a steamboat train which would take you into Boston. The steamboat train did not run until the steamboat had arrived which was "at or after 4:00 am". However, the steamboat train was not the only means of rail transport to Boston. Even the steamboat company advertised that one "may remain on board until the starting of the Accommodation at 8 am" which would provide one with "a night's rest on board". To service those who did not want to take the 4:00 am train, there was another local train that departed from Newport at 8:00 am. After that, the next train to Boston didn't leave until 3:00 pm.

Booth doesn't strike me as the 4:00 am type, so I think it's safe to say he was never planning on catching the early steamboat train. If I was to make an assumption, I think Booth either accidentally or deliberately missed the 8:00 am train as well. This leaves him stuck in Newport until the afternoon train at 3:00 pm.

To be honest, I find it strange that so many people checked into the Aquidneck House in the morning of April 5th. Booth and his Lady are 2 out of the 12 people who check in at the time labeled "B" which I take to be shorthand for breakfast. At least four more check in at the time labeled "D" which I take to be dinner (which, in the 1800's is the word for what we now call lunch). So by lunchtime on April 5th, the Aquidneck House has at least 16 people who have checked in. Compare this to the day before, April 4th, when only 9 people checked in over the course of the whole day. And on April 3rd, we see only seven people checking in (though there may have been others on the preceding page).

Though I have not been able to find any evidence for it, I would venture a guess that there may have been some issue with the train that day that required so many people to check into a hotel around breakfast time. Perhaps the 8:00 am train didn't run on that day as planned. Perhaps this is what stranded Booth and some of the other passengers in Newport for a time. I know this is all supposition but I don't feel it is out of the realm of possibility.

So then, who is the Lady with Booth? I would submit the idea that perhaps she was just another one of the steamboat's passengers who was waiting for the next train. I don't believe that Booth would have had a hard time convincing a female passenger to join him for breakfast. He was a handsome and personable actor after all. I can see Booth registering at the Aquidneck, without any plans to actually spend the night, and perhaps writes "and Lady" because he may not even know what his date's name is! That also sounds like Booth to me. Anyway they share a meal, place their luggage in the room and then proceed to walk around Newport. Perhaps Booth and his date even separate for a time which is when he was seen seemingly wandering by Mary Powell. Eventually, Booth and his date return to the hotel later for lunch, with Booth apparently attempting to share a meal in the more private setting of the room. However, before the meal comes, they realize that they must be sure to catch the train lest they be trapped in Newport even longer, and depart before lunch is served. Booth and his lady friend take the train to Boston, where they finally part their separate ways. Booth goes on to see his brother Edwin perform and his lady friend leaves to wherever she was heading in Boston.

Is my scenario largely supposition, yes, I admit that it is. But I feel that with the evidence we have, it is equally as plausible as Lucy Hale being Booth's "Lady". In fact, I would submit that my scenario is probably more likely given Lucy Hale's father.

That sounds reasonable to me. As I said on the other thread, I don't think Lucy would have risked her reputation by stealing off to a hotel with Booth, and for that matter I don't think Booth would have wanted an angry father/senator chasing him up the East Coast.

I would also like to point out that the man who wrote to the War Department about Booth's time in Newport was not an employee of the Aquidneck House. Alfred Smith was a Newport real estate agent who later died a millionaire. I'm not sure where he got his information, but he did provide greater detail than what was in a brief Newport newspaper article (attached)

Thank You - everybody, for participating in this study. We all have more information to work with, but we don't have an answer - YET!

Our work is made more difficult by the fact - back then they were trying to hide all their activities - and did a good job of it.

I would not rule out Lucy as being not promiscuous. I have read that she and John often went to other cities on week ends, sometimes accompanied by Lucy's sister Elizabeth, and John McCollough and he being a married man with a family in Philadelphia. (The girls - two peas from the same pod).
I believe strongly, that Booth was completely enamored with Lucy and would not seek company elsewhere. We know that he was engaged to Lucy at this time and wore a same ring on his pinky, to show his commitment. He bragged to Chester, when he got to New York - that he was to be married.

It is unfortunate for us, that so many authors have given us their opinions, instead of saying "I don't know". That leaves us without one trustworthy source to believe - without any reservation. (This study is proving this assumption.) It's very easy to say the woman was Lucy and he opposite is true - and we can't PROVE either statement.

I have convinced myself that the whole trip to Boston was intended to introduce Lucy to Edwin. Edwin and John fought tooth and nail over politics, but this trip was a forgone conclusion that the pretty Lucy was a victory for John. She was a beauty and she belonged to him and he wanted Edwin to know it.

Please continue to post your comments. We have to resolve these discrepancies, if we are to find out what went on back then.

PS John (The Lawyer one). Harney was captured AFTER Lee surrendered. That fact appears in all the "after action" reports.

So how do you account for Ella Starr? According to her, Booth was visiting her (or maybe someone else in her house of ill repute) two weeks before the assassination. Clearly he was seeking company besides Lucy's--for one purpose, at least.

As far as I know, the claim that Booth and McCullough went out of town with Lucy and her sister originates with McCullough's statement in 1882 that he and Booth were involved with two well-connected women from Washington, whom they nicknamed "Jack" and "Bob" to protect their identities and trysted with in Baltimore. But again, the women aren't named by McCullough, nor does he say they were sisters.

Good explanation Dave, that makes sense.
Do I understand that this was a day trip to Newport? I made the assumption that if he had signed the register, he stayed overnight.

Just to add to the intrigue...

The late Art Loux once posted on this forum:

"I believe Booth & Lady checked into the Aquidneck House on April 5. The handwriting on the register is not Booth's. Mr. Hall found another J. W. Booth who lived in Boston and speculated the guy with lady was not our JWB."


However, this is not the way Art's book reads. In his book he accepts the fact that it's our JWB at the Aquidneck House in Newport.

You can see how the word "Boston" was written here.

I find Susan's and Dave's speculations much more plausible than others, and I say that based on the prevailing social standards of the day. A "lady" may be promiscuous, but a "proper" lady did not openly publicize it; and for any of us to further paint Lucy's sister with the same brush because she accompanied Booth, McCullough, and Lucy is unfair. Chaperones were almost required "baggage" in the earlier days when a young lady and gent were out in public. Not sure of the spelling, but the term for such was something pronounced like doo-ay-na.

(02-08-2017 09:19 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Just to add to the intrigue...

The late Art Loux once posted on this forum:

"I believe Booth & Lady checked into the Aquidneck House on April 5. The handwriting on the register is not Booth's. Mr. Hall found another J. W. Booth who lived in Boston and speculated the guy with lady was not our JWB."

However, this is not the way Art's book reads. In his book he accepts the fact that it's our JWB at the Aquidneck House in Newport.

You can see how the word "Boston" was written here.

I came across the same gentleman as Mr. Hall when I was researching yesterday. A James W. Booth had recently moved to Boston in 1865 with his wife and daughter. A son was born to the pair later in April of 1865 who they coincidentally named Edwin Booth. I'm not sure this Mrs. Booth would have been up for traveling when she was practically 9 months pregnant. And if this was the "Lady" where was the couple's daughter at the time?

Like Art, I originally did not believe this was Booth's handwriting. The B in Booth is different than in Booth's normal signature. However, the way the J is connected to the W is the exact same way Booth connected the two. In the word Boston, Booth regains his traditional style of making his capital Bs. The word Lady also matches his handwriting perfectly. In the end, I had to admit that it was Booth's signature, albeit a strange variation for him.