(10-13-2017 06:15 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Thanks for your help once again, Steve. If I find anything additional from the Johnson Home curator, I will pass it on.

I noted in the first link that Johnson supposedly mentioned that Stanton committed suicide by cutting his throat. This has bounced around for years. I wonder if Johnson was the sole source of this unsubstantiated rumor?

I have received the following reply from Kendra Hinkle from the NPS at the Andrew Johnson Home:

I've spent most of the day in the Andrew Johnson Papers, V. 16, and there is quite a lot regarding Mrs. Surratt in them, particularly in regard to Judge Holt. While nothing is stated precisely in regard to the McElwee reference, there are several allusions to the same concepts...

There is information from Secretary of the Navy, Gideon Welles, who cooberrated [sic - corroborated] that "I never saw the record of the trial, the decision of the court, or the petition for clemency, nor was I even present at any consultation in regard to either, or any matter touching her trial and execution." He made this statement in 1873, in response to Mr. Bingham stating that "the petition in behalf of Mrs. Suratt was 'presented to the President and was duly considered by him and his advisers before the death sentence upon Mrs. S. was approved, and that the President and his Cabinet, upon such consideration, were a unit in denying the prayer of the petition.'"

Johnson alluded to the passions of the time in a speech in 1872:

"...the nation was reeling in delirium; notwithstanding sympathy and excitement ran high - ran from one end of the land to the other - notwithstanding the rebellion had just collapsed, though peace was not made; passion and anger had grown out of it. The assassination produced the wildest excitement throughout the whole of the American Continent. Yet, notwithstanding all this - when reason seemed to topple and fall upon her throne, and I was brought in by this act as President of the United States - for I, too, was one of the parties to be assassinated - Under all these circumstances, and here was the ship of State riding as it were in the trough of the sea, and we could not tell whether she would be engulphed, and collapse, and pass to the bottom to be lost forever. But there sat I, holding the helm of the ship of State, doing what I could to preserve her balance and equilibrium."

He also made a speech in Chattanooga in 1874 in which he stated, "All that I did was to let the law take its course...I may have done wrong in this pardon matter. We are all liable to err..."

I would still like to know more about McElwee... Also, I am at home without Kate Larson's book, Assassin's Accomplice. Could someone check to see if Kate lists the Johnson Papers held by the NPS as a source?

(10-28-2017 10:51 AM)L Verge Wrote:  Also, I am at home without Kate Larson's book, Assassin's Accomplice. Could someone check to see if Kate lists the Johnson Papers held by the NPS as a source?

I just checked, and I do not see them listed, Laurie.

(10-28-2017 01:36 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(10-28-2017 10:51 AM)L Verge Wrote:  Also, I am at home without Kate Larson's book, Assassin's Accomplice. Could someone check to see if Kate lists the Johnson Papers held by the NPS as a source?

I just checked, and I do not see them listed, Laurie.

Thanks, Roger. That's unfortunate if those papers have many references to the Surratt case - it would seem primary source materials. However, maybe there is nothing new that she didn't find elsewhere. I think I'm going to have to develop a friendship with the NPS personnel at the Johnson Home... Or, do any of this forum's members live in the vicinity?

---

I should have mentioned that the University of Tennessee Press published 16 volumes of the Johnson Papers back in the 1980s, and each volume is nearly 1000 pages. My days of wading through tons of such things are over!

(10-28-2017 05:39 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(10-28-2017 01:36 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(10-28-2017 10:51 AM)L Verge Wrote:  Also, I am at home without Kate Larson's book, Assassin's Accomplice. Could someone check to see if Kate lists the Johnson Papers held by the NPS as a source?

I just checked, and I do not see them listed, Laurie.

Thanks, Roger. That's unfortunate if those papers have many references to the Surratt case - it would seem primary source materials. However, maybe there is nothing new that she didn't find elsewhere. I think I'm going to have to develop a friendship with the NPS personnel at the Johnson Home... Or, do any of this forum's members live in the vicinity?

---

I should have mentioned that the University of Tennessee Press published 16 volumes of the Johnson Papers back in the 1980s, and each volume is nearly 1000 pages. My days of wading through tons of such things are over!

Laurie - I have the text of W. E. McElwee's May 1, 1923 manuscript, in which he recounts a chance conversation with Andrew Johnson on July 29, 1875. Johnson died two days later. McElwee wrote that he was "not attempting to quote his [Johnson's] exact words, but in substance."

With regard to why Booth shot Lincoln, McElwee wrote that Johnson said: "I made no investigation of the matter but it was asserted that Boothe [sic] had a friend that had been condemned to death. That Booth had seen Lincoln and had been led to believe the president would commute the sentence but that Stanton and Seward had interfered and prevented any clemency[.]"

With regard to Stanton's death, McElwee wrote:

Johnson said: "Stanton was the Marat of American politics. He was not assassinated by Charlotta Cordy [sic] but he committed suicide by cutting his own throat."

McElwee asked: "Do you want us to understand you, Mr. Johnson, as saying that Mr. Stanton committed suicide?"

Johnson replied: "Yes, he cut his damned throat from ear to ear but it was kept out of public print."

With regard to Mrs. Surratt, McElwee wrote:

Johnson said: "The execution of Mrs. Surrat [sic] was a crime of passion without justice or reason. She knew no more about the intentions of Boothe [sic]and his associates than any other person who chanced to know Booth or Asterot [sic]. They had simply boarded, as others had done, at her boarding house. She was entitled to a tral [sic] in open court and the record of the trial preserved. But her executioners knew the records would condemn them if kept till passion had subsided and they were destroyed."

McElwee asked: "Is there no record of the condemnation and execution of Mrs. Surrat [sic]?"

Johnson replied: "No sir, the records were immediately destroyed. They were not even kept till John [Surratt] was arrested and tried."

McElwee: "If She was not guilty why did not you interpose Executive clemency?"

Johnson: "If I had interfered with the exectution it would have been my death and a riot that would probably ended in war."

McElwee: "Was there any appeal made to you for mitigating the sentence as reported after the execution?"

Johnson: "No appeal reached me. Her daughter forwarded one but it was suppressed by Secretary Stanton. I heard of it afterwards but never saw it[.] It was a murder founded on perjury and executed to gratify passion. The chief witness afterwards confessed to his perjury."

For many reasons, not the least of which are outright falsehoods, I do not consider the recollections of Mr. McElwee to be credible. Chance meetings that result in detailed "confessions" hours before a historic individual's death are always suspect, muchless when they are first reported nearly 50 years after the fact, out of character, and demonstrably false. For example, McElwee's Johnson is cowardly. Of his many flaws, few historians have described Andrew Johnson as a coward. I certainly would not.

In regards to Laurie's earlier comment. I've checked old newspapers and the first mention of the rumor that Stanton committed suicide that I could find was from papers dated 25 January 1870; a month after Stanton died. "Fake news" has a long provenance.

(11-02-2017 07:01 PM)Steve Wrote:  In regards to Laurie's earlier comment. I've checked old newspapers and the first mention of the rumor that Stanton committed suicide that I could find was from papers dated 27 January 1870; a month after Stanton died. "Fake news" has a long provenance.

Steve - Indeed. What was the paper?

The earliest article I could find is from the front page of the 25 January 1870 edition of the Albany Argus:
   

However, it's more of a mocking reply to somebody else's article.

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, on page 2 of the 26 January 1870 edition, actually includes details of the rumor, attributing it to the New York Democrat:
   

I can't find the Democrat in any newspaper databases I looked at, so I don't know what the article actually said. Although, I'm assuming it was printed at least a day before the Argus article.

Also, note the Eagle article using the term "judicial murder of Mrs. Surratt".

(11-03-2017 06:13 PM)Steve Wrote:  The earliest article I could find is from the front page of the 25 January 1870 edition of the Albany Argus:


However, it's more of a mocking reply to somebody else's article.

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, on page 2 of the 26 January 1870 edition, actually includes details of the rumor, attributing it to the New York Democrat:


I can't find the Democrat in any newspaper databases I looked at, so I don't know what the article actually said. Although, I'm assuming it was printed at least a day before the Argus article.

Also, note the Eagle article using the term "judicial murder of Mrs. Surratt".

Remind me what year DeWitt's book of the same name came out. Near the end of the century?

(11-03-2017 07:04 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Remind me what year DeWitt's book of the same name came out. Near the end of the century?

DeWitt's book has a publication date of 1895, and a copyright date of 1894.

(11-03-2017 06:13 PM)Steve Wrote:  The earliest article I could find is from the front page of the 25 January 1870 edition of the Albany Argus:


However, it's more of a mocking reply to somebody else's article.

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, on page 2 of the 26 January 1870 edition, actually includes details of the rumor, attributing it to the New York Democrat:


I can't find the Democrat in any newspaper databases I looked at, so I don't know what the article actually said. Although, I'm assuming it was printed at least a day before the Argus article.

Also, note the Eagle article using the term "judicial murder of Mrs. Surratt".

Thank you, Steve!

(11-03-2017 07:04 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(11-03-2017 06:13 PM)Steve Wrote:  The earliest article I could find is from the front page of the 25 January 1870 edition of the Albany Argus:


However, it's more of a mocking reply to somebody else's article.

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, on page 2 of the 26 January 1870 edition, actually includes details of the rumor, attributing it to the New York Democrat:


I can't find the Democrat in any newspaper databases I looked at, so I don't know what the article actually said. Although, I'm assuming it was printed at least a day before the Argus article.

Also, note the Eagle article using the term "judicial murder of Mrs. Surratt".

Remind me what year DeWitt's book of the same name came out. Near the end of the century?

Laurie, I checked the online newspaper archives and the earliest use of the phrase "judicial murder of Mrs. Surratt" that I could find was on page 4 of the 28 March 1867 edition of the Detroit Free Press, in an article entitled "Butler and Bingham Again".

Thanks, all. Just a trivial historical note because I always gave credit to DeWitt for a rather intriguing title. It appears that he lifted it from a newspaper account decades earlier.

BTW: Bob Cook just let me know that Time-Life has a new book on Women Outlaws, and Mary Surratt gets four pages in the 96-page paperback.

Interesting, and Mary made the front cover

https://www.amazon.com/TIME-LIFE-Women-O...dpSrc=srch

I did not look at Johnson’s papers. Wish I had. Cabinet members and Atty. Gen. Speed all said they saw the petition for clemency and that Johnson rejected it. I’d be interested in Johnson’s contemporaneous thoughts on Surratt and the trial, if they exist, but I’m sure there is nothing there that documents in real time his spurious claim that she was railroaded. I don’t have much respect for the guy and don’t find him to be trustworthy. DeWitt has no credibility, either, in my view. His book is filled with errors, misstated and reworded testimony from the trial, and he also uses very selective testimony to support his argument that Mary was innocent, and completely ignores other damaging facts. He slanders practically everyone who testified against her. His own jurist career was very brief and not notable, and he was a Copperhead Democrat. Context is everything.

(01-17-2018 11:41 AM)KLarson Wrote:  I’d be interested in Johnson’s contemporaneous thoughts on Surratt and the trial, if they exist, but I’m sure there is nothing there that documents in real time his spurious claim that she was railroaded.

Nope, just his 'recollection'.

At the time he was in a war with Stanton over who controlled Reconstruction, him or the congress. Any accusation, the more spurious the better, was used to cast Stanton as a villain was used for that purpose. Pretty close to what we're witnessing today.