Does anyone know...?
|
09-12-2017, 10:53 PM
Post: #31
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-12-2017 04:00 PM)Gene C Wrote: John, would you consider Miss Porterfield a reliable witness? Gene: I know nothing about her. I checked the witnesses in the Surratt trial and she is not listed. The only thing that gives her some credibility is her statement that Booth asked her how to spell tyrannis. This is significant because someone else said that Booth asked her the same question, and that he added: "two 'r's' or two 'n's' ? ". I cannot lay my hands on that reference right now. I, of course, cannot vouch for her credibility, but if one person says something happened, it is better, historically, than if no person says something happened. In other words, her story is not much to go on, but it is better than nothing. If someone can contradict any part of her story, let them do so. John |
|||
09-13-2017, 01:12 AM
Post: #32
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-12-2017 03:22 PM)John Fazio Wrote:(09-12-2017 02:09 PM)Wild Bill Wrote: John: Did she mention any relationship to John Porterfield? |
|||
09-13-2017, 04:54 AM
Post: #33
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-12-2017 06:59 PM)L Verge Wrote:(09-11-2017 11:00 PM)John Fazio Wrote:(09-11-2017 11:37 AM)L Verge Wrote: How do you explain away the weapons and materiel stored at Surratt's tavern from March 17 until April 15? The Atzerodt statement about supplies sent to Mudd ahead of time? The details about the purchase of the boat as supplied years later by Smoot? The folklore (which you never should discount) that half of Southern Maryland knew about a planned kidnapping? The assistance of the Confederate underground in that area? Laurie: I don't know anything about Dr. Garland and I don't know anyone who does. Reference to him is made on p. 278 of my book. It derives from an oral statement made by Arnold to James L. McPhail, Provost Marshal of Maryland, to the effect that Booth had corresponded with Drs. Mudd, Garland and Queen. McPhail included this statement in a note he attached to a written statement made by Arnold, which written statement McPhail gave to Stanton. My reference for this is Steers's Blood on the Moon, pp. 172, 173. It appears that the written statement did not mention Garland; only Queen and Mudd. That conclusion derives from the fact that Eaton Horner, one of McPhail's detectives, testified at the conspiracy trial and said that Arnold had stated that Booth had a letter of introduction to Dr. Mudd and Dr. Queen. Steers's reference is to "Statement of Sam Arnold, RG 94, M-619, reel 458, frames 0305-0312; and Baltimore American, "Statement of Arnold on His Arrest," January 19, 1869, p.1, col.1". Steers adds that "The Dr. Garland mentioned in the note has not been identified." My guess is that Dr. Garland was either a man of little or no importance or was so powerful and influential that he managed to cover his tracks better than the other two doctors. Because no reference to him crops up anywhere else, I favor the first explanation. It may well have been nothing more than a name Arnold heard from Booth and so he threw it into the stew verbally, but didn't think it important enough to put in the written statement. As for the folklore in lower Maryland about kidnapping, if word of it was so widespread, that would mean, of course, that Union intelligence knew of it too. That, in turn, would mean that it really wasn't planned, because the last thing the Confederate leadership would do would be to plan a kidnapping the knowledge of which was all over lower Maryland. A bona fide kidnapping plan would be such a super-secret thing that it would be known to almost no one, i.e. only to a very select few operatives charged with the responsibility of engineering it. In other words, widespread "knowledge" of a kidnapping plot is evidence of its non-existence, not its existence. As for the assistance of the Confederate underground in that area, it came into play only to assist Booth and Herold escape. Tidwell, Hall and Gaddy said: "When Jones mentioned Thomas Harbin and Joseph Baden in his book, he revealed something of the clandestine apparatus working to effect Booth's escape. The word had already gone across the river to those on the other side that Booth was still free and would be sent across as soon as possible. Be ready." (CR, p. 451) Further, on p. 458, they make reference to "how closely the Confederate clandestine machinery was following Booth's movements through King George County." It strains credulity to suppose that all this help was spontaneous. It is far more likely that the greater number of mail line operatives knew what was coming and were prepared for it. I believe we have beaten this one enough. We're a couple of old oaks: not likely to bend much. With great respect, John |
|||
09-13-2017, 09:58 AM
Post: #34
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
Everyone:
A little clarification re Miss Porterfield. Please Google "Weik a new story of the Lincoln Assassination". Then hit "The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine". This will take you to the 1913 issue. There, beginning on p. 559, you will find the article. Miss Porterfield was from Greencastle, Indiana. She happened to be in Washington at the time because her mother brought her there. On p. 561 there is the business about Booth asking her how to spell "tyrannis". Reck ("Last 24 Hours") mentions the incident (p. 105) and lists Weik's article as his source. I haven't checked, but it's a good bet that everyone who mentions this exchange between Miss Porterfield and Booth is using the same source--Weik's article. Her account squares well with everything else we know about April 14. It's an interesting read and I am inclined to credit it fairly well. I believe everyone knows that I do not reject tradition too easily. Everything has a root. I found no reference in her account to John Porterfield, the Secret Service agent in Canada. John |
|||
09-13-2017, 09:58 AM
Post: #35
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
Agreed that we are beating a dead horse. I just don't think that anyone nowadays understands the Confederate network (and frustration) in Southern Maryland and the Northern Neck of Virginia. When I first started working at Surratt House, I met a gentleman who was writing a book on Lincoln. He told me that he was amazed at the animosity that still existed among old-timers in Maryland regarding Mr. Lincoln -- more than what he had encountered in the Deep South...
"I don't know anything about Dr. Garland and I don't know anyone who does. Reference to him is made on p. 278 of my book. It derives from an oral statement made by Arnold to James L. McPhail, Provost Marshal of Maryland, to the effect that Booth had corresponded with Drs. Mudd, Garland and Queen." That reference is exactly what put Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy on the trail of the elusive Dr. Garland over thirty years ago. Ed Steers worked closely with Hall while researching Blood on the Moon, so I suspect that's why he picked up on the reference also. At the time, Mr. Hall asked me to use my St. Mary's County roots to see if we could identify Dr. Garland. I wish I still had my notes on the doctor, but I don't. I just remember that there was a Dr. Garland in St. Mary's County at the beginning of the war and that he went south to serve Davis. Would he have been part of the pipeline between the Southern Maryland planters and Richmond? Don't forget that the residents of St. Mary's were just as involved in the underground as those in Prince George's and Charles Counties and that river crossings occurred in that county also. |
|||
09-13-2017, 12:12 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2017 12:16 PM by Gene C.)
Post: #36
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)John Fazio Wrote: Everyone: a direct link https://books.google.com/books?id=U3oAAA...on&f=false Weik worked closely with William Herndon, Lincoln's law partner, in Herdon's classic biography "Herndon's Lincoln". (the entire volume of Century Illustrated looks like it has some interesting articles) So when is this "Old Enough To Know Better" supposed to kick in? |
|||
09-13-2017, 02:34 PM
Post: #37
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)L Verge Wrote: Agreed that we are beating a dead horse. I just don't think that anyone nowadays understands the Confederate network (and frustration) in Southern Maryland and the Northern Neck of Virginia. When I first started working at Surratt House, I met a gentleman who was writing a book on Lincoln. He told me that he was amazed at the animosity that still existed among old-timers in Maryland regarding Mr. Lincoln -- more than what he had encountered in the Deep South... Laurie: If Hall, Steers, et al., couldn't get their hands around Dr. Garland, I believe he will most likely remain an elusive figure for a long time. As for Lincoln, we need to think of the alternative to Union victory to properly assess him, his motives and his methods. Imagine a major power on the North American continent that codified guarantees of slavery in its organic law, i.e. its constitution, and this at a time when all the major powers of the world (Great Britain, France and Russia), and most of the lesser powers, had already abolished the institution. Then imagine the effect of the precedent on the political future of the country. How long would it have been before a state or group of states which were part of the CSA decided that they didn't like what what was going on in Richmond and so pulled out. The Confederate government could hardly have objected inasmuch as they had fought a 4-year war to validate the right of secession. Then imagine the same process in what was left of the United States. How long would it have been before a state or group of states in the North decided that they too didn't like what was going on in the national capital and so pulled out and established a separate county or countries. How long would it have been before the entire country looked like modern-day Europe, with all the attendant fratricide that has characterized that continent prior to the Pax Americana. Few, in my judgment, saw the matter as clearly as Lincoln, which is why he resisted the demands of the abolitionists and the radicals in his own party for immediate abolition of slavery. He knew that to do that would mean loss of the border states and therefore the war and, for the foreseeable future, emancipation. Few besides Lincoln realized that sea changes, fundamental reworkings of the order of things, could only be achieved in the fullness of time, and so he acted accordingly. Yes, he sometimes had to resort to extra-judicial and even extra-constitutional means to assure a favorable result, but as all historians know, it is sometimes necessary to go outside the law to preserve it. That is why the more thoughtful among us, North and South, do not criticize Lincoln, but honor him John |
|||
09-13-2017, 03:44 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-13-2017 03:57 PM by L Verge.)
Post: #38
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-13-2017 02:34 PM)John Fazio Wrote:(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)L Verge Wrote: Agreed that we are beating a dead horse. I just don't think that anyone nowadays understands the Confederate network (and frustration) in Southern Maryland and the Northern Neck of Virginia. When I first started working at Surratt House, I met a gentleman who was writing a book on Lincoln. He told me that he was amazed at the animosity that still existed among old-timers in Maryland regarding Mr. Lincoln -- more than what he had encountered in the Deep South... John - You are preaching to an old history teacher who used that exact same principle to illustrate to my students why a confederation was not an ideal situation for our country -- either at the end of the Revolutionary War or in the mid-19th century. However, on this date in 2017, it is much easier to play Monday-morning-quarterback than it was for our ancestors who were dealing with some unconstitutional measures being put in place by Mr. Lincoln as well as federal invasions and interventions in states that had not left the Union. BTW: I am not anti-Lincoln; I find him rather fascinating and, since I am a pragmatist, I understand some of his actions. Likewise, however, I understand the feelings of those who were chafing under his administration's policies and the screeching and wailing of some rabid abolitionists. I find myself chafing under the situation that is occurring today with the screechers and the wailers! P.S. Have you read the several cogent articles cited by Eva, Darrell, and others about African society and the influence of European nations long before America became the scapegoat?? |
|||
09-14-2017, 02:15 AM
Post: #39
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)John Fazio Wrote: Everyone: I used the information from The Century article to track down her marriage record: and then used that and the article to find her in 1860 census (transcription errors look at original image): https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MC7M-9BQ 1865 New York census: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVNJ-97LL 1855 marriage of her mother and stepfather (3rd record on the right): https://www.nysoclib.org/sites/default/f...856-28.jpg and then using the information from that marriage record to find her mother's first marriage record in 1842 in Davidson County, Tennessee: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:KZ7P-PHZ Miss Porterfield was Luella Porterfield born around 1847 to Robert Porterfield and Mary Figures. According to the 1860 census, she was born in Kentucky, although that's the only record mentioning her birthplace that I've found so far so that can't be confirmed. Her parents were from Tennessee. According to this short bio of John Porterfield, the Confederate agent from Nashville Tennessee, he was born in 1819 and died in 1874: https://books.google.com/books?id=fKqJFX...74&f=false The Findagrave image of his tombstone: https://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cg...d=31514052 According to several online trees (which I have yet to confirm) Luella's father, Robert Porterfield, and John Porterfield were brothers. If true, that would make her John Porterfield's niece. |
|||
09-14-2017, 02:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2017 02:49 AM by John Fazio.)
Post: #40
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-13-2017 03:44 PM)L Verge Wrote:(09-13-2017 02:34 PM)John Fazio Wrote:(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)L Verge Wrote: Agreed that we are beating a dead horse. I just don't think that anyone nowadays understands the Confederate network (and frustration) in Southern Maryland and the Northern Neck of Virginia. When I first started working at Surratt House, I met a gentleman who was writing a book on Lincoln. He told me that he was amazed at the animosity that still existed among old-timers in Maryland regarding Mr. Lincoln -- more than what he had encountered in the Deep South... Laurie: Your perceptions, or, more accurately, your understanding of the perceptions of both sides, is praiseworthy. As Jesus said of the poor, "screechers and wailers" we will always have with us. No, I haven't read the articles you refer to, but I'll check them out. John (09-14-2017 02:15 AM)Steve Wrote:(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)John Fazio Wrote: Everyone: Steve: Fantastic work! Your are a master of your craft. Thank you. John |
|||
09-14-2017, 05:09 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-14-2017 05:09 PM by Steve.)
Post: #41
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)L Verge Wrote: Agreed that we are beating a dead horse. I just don't think that anyone nowadays understands the Confederate network (and frustration) in Southern Maryland and the Northern Neck of Virginia. When I first started working at Surratt House, I met a gentleman who was writing a book on Lincoln. He told me that he was amazed at the animosity that still existed among old-timers in Maryland regarding Mr. Lincoln -- more than what he had encountered in the Deep South... Have you considered the possibility that Arnold misremembered Garland's last name? Maybe it was actually a similar surname that was more common in the area, like Gardiner. |
|||
09-14-2017, 06:05 PM
Post: #42
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-14-2017 05:09 PM)Steve Wrote:(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)L Verge Wrote: Agreed that we are beating a dead horse. I just don't think that anyone nowadays understands the Confederate network (and frustration) in Southern Maryland and the Northern Neck of Virginia. When I first started working at Surratt House, I met a gentleman who was writing a book on Lincoln. He told me that he was amazed at the animosity that still existed among old-timers in Maryland regarding Mr. Lincoln -- more than what he had encountered in the Deep South... I did find a reference to a Dr. Garland; I just don't remember where thirty-plus years later. Your suggestion is a logical one -- Gardiners, however, were/are more prevalent in Charles County instead of St. Mary's. |
|||
09-15-2017, 12:37 PM
Post: #43
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
John, here is John Surratt's version of the kidnapping plot. What parts do you think are true (if any), and what parts do you think are false?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "After some difficulty everything was amicably arranged and we separated at 5 o'clock in the morning. Days, weeks and months passed by without an opportunity presenting itself for us to attempt the capture. We seldom saw one another owing to the many rumors afloat that a conspiracy of some kind was being concocted in Washington. We had all the arrangements perfected from Washington for the purpose. Boats were in readiness to carry us across the river. One day we received information that the President would visit the Seventh Street Hospital for the purpose of being present at an entertainment to be given for the benefit of the wounded soldiers. The report only reached us about three quarters of an hour before the time appointed, but so perfect was our communication that we were instantly in our saddles on the way to the hospital. This was between one and two o'clock in the afternoon. It was our intention to seize the carriage, which was drawn by a splendid pair of horses, and to have one of our men mount the box and drive direct for southern Maryland via Benning's bridge. We felt confident that all the cavalry in the city could never overhaul us. We were all mounted on swift horses, besides having a thorough knowledge of the country, it was determined to abandon the carriage after passing the city limits. Upon the suddenness of the blow and the celerity of our movements we depended for success. By the time the alarm could have been given and horses saddled, we would have been on our way through southern Maryland towards the Potomac River. To our great disappointment, however, the President was not there but one of the government officials - Mr. [Salmon P.] Chase, if I mistake not. We did not disturb him, as we wanted a bigger chase than he could have afforded us. It was certainly a bitter disappointment, but yet I think a most fortunate one for us. It was our last attempt. We soon after this became convinced that we could not remain much longer undiscovered, and that we must abandon our enterprise. Accordingly, a separation finally took place, and I never saw any of the party except one, and that was when I was on my way from Richmond to Canada on business of quite a different nature - about which, presently. Such is the story of our abduction plot." |
|||
09-15-2017, 05:57 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-17-2017 12:58 AM by Steve.)
Post: #44
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
(09-14-2017 06:05 PM)L Verge Wrote:(09-14-2017 05:09 PM)Steve Wrote:(09-13-2017 09:58 AM)L Verge Wrote: Agreed that we are beating a dead horse. I just don't think that anyone nowadays understands the Confederate network (and frustration) in Southern Maryland and the Northern Neck of Virginia. When I first started working at Surratt House, I met a gentleman who was writing a book on Lincoln. He told me that he was amazed at the animosity that still existed among old-timers in Maryland regarding Mr. Lincoln -- more than what he had encountered in the Deep South... I found a Dr. Garland who has a link to St. Mary's County, although pretty tenuous and his biography doesn't seem like it matches what I've read of Arnold's description. Also he lived in Washington DC at the time, so I'm not sure why Booth would meet him in Maryland. Dr. John Belfield Garland was an assistant surgeon at Stanton Military Hospital in Washington: https://books.google.com/books?id=ulg9AQ...on&f=false and https://books.google.com/books?id=MVtXAA...22&f=false Garland's parents were married in St. Mary Co. Maryland, although he grew up in Richmond: https://books.google.com/books?id=55I38F...22&f=false and transcription of the 1802 St. Mary's Co. Maryland marriage of his parents, Peter Rust Garland and Winifred Belfield: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F4NB-VHZ I'm pretty skeptical this is the same person (especially since he's working at a Union hospital), but I thought I'd post it anyway to see what your thoughts are. Even if it's not the same person, maybe he's somehow related to the right Dr. Garland. |
|||
09-16-2017, 10:04 AM
Post: #45
|
|||
|
|||
RE: Does anyone know...?
I think my memory is coming back regarding the supposed "Dr. Garland" who went south to serve as a doctor to Jefferson Davis -- and I owe everyone an apology. The Dr. Garland was actually Dr. AYP Garnett. From genealogytrails.com/main/jeffersondavis.html
"Jefferson Davis was lucky in that one of his Washington physicians was so pro-Southern in his sympathies that he felt it advisable for him to spend the war period in Richmond. There among his other services for the Confederacy was the care of the health of President Davis and his family. "A.Y.P. Garnett A".Y.P. Garnett was born Sept. 19, 1819, and died July 11, 1888. He was the son of Muscoe Garnett; was born on the Rappannock River in Essex County, Virginia. He graduated in medicine from the Medical Department of the University of Pennsylvania in 1841. On June 13, 1848, he married Mary E. Wise, a daughter of Henry A. Wise, governor of Virginia. He settled near Washington. D.C. where he enjoyed a large practice in the families of men prominent in public life, including the family of Senator Davis. In 1851 he had some service in connection with the U. S. Navy. He removed from Washington to Richmond in 1861 and returned to Washington in 1865. In Richmond he was personal physician to Jefferson Davis and served in two military hospitals. Later, he was president of the American Medical Association. He died at Rehobeth Beach, Delaware, of heart disease. Washington sketches of physicians teem with fine references to Dr. Garnett." I now vaguely remember searching for Garland in the records of the St. Mary's County Historical Society and finding reference to the Peter Garland that Steve mentioned above. However, I could never make the connection with a later generation being in Southern Maryland and in a position to conspire with the original kidnapping or later murder of Lincoln -- even though many Southern Maryland planters would gladly have joined forces in the conspiracy, I'm sure. Would like to know where Dr. Garnett lived while in the DC area. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 15 Guest(s)