Was Stanton a murder target?

[loetar44]

John,
I’m afraid I still disagree, with respect and consideration. Our discussion will definitely NOT say that I don’t like your conclusions or that I don’t respect you. Be assured of the opposite. No doubt about it. Your book ("Decapitating the Union") is absolutely fabulous and one of my favorite books on my Lincoln shelve. I always recommend your book to others. You present sufficiently strong evidence and you defend your conclusions in a very strong way. I appreciate that. However, in all honesty, the way I see it, whether it is prima facie evidence, or not, one should never neglect rebutting evidence, or give rebutting evidence a lot less attention, or treat evidence in your favor as a proven fact, or give more credit to sources that support your theory.

That said, I would first like to straighten my comment about O’Laughlen in Grant’s train heading to Burlington. I know you never said that O’Laughlen was in that train. I once read that there is a theory which said that, but don’t remember where I read it and in what context exactly. Let's drop it.

What I ment with “… what you know for certain”, are facts like: Booth was in the presidential box in Ford’s Theatre, Booth shot Lincoln, Booth killed the President with a gun, not a knife, Seward was attacked by Powell, O’Laughlin was in DC with three friends and was in the National on April 13 and 14, etc. things like this. There is no doubt about these facts. This are things we know for certain.

You said “Could haves are infinite”. Yes! So, it is actually simpler than things which do have an end. Because when something has an end, we have to define where that end is.

This brings me again to Occam’s Razor. Let me explain again. Occam’s Razor is a principle which says that an event with minimal assumptions is simpler and the simplest explanation is (usually) the best. It’s a variant of the KISS- principle (Keep It Simple Stu***). The principle also says, that if you notice upon further investigation that you have not the simplest explanation: change your theory!

I don’t believe that the theory that the Confederate Government and its Secret Service conspired against the Union is a “simple” or the “simplest theory”. Conspiracy always tend to be very complex, while murder is usually surprisingly simple. But this is NOT Occam’s Razor! The term “razor” refers to "shaving away" unnecessary assumptions. What remains is a simpler theory closer to the truth.

Can I throw my two cents in? Another example. What is closer to the truth? Did O’Laughlin meet Booth on Friday morning about 9:00 am on April 14, 1865 in the National or not? John I use your text from “Decapitating”, p. 113.

Theory A:
1) fact #1: O’Laughlen, in company with Early, Murphy and Henderson, stopped at the National
2) fact #2: O’Laughlen said he wanted to see Booth again
3) fact #3: Henderson testified that O’Laughlen told him he did’nt see Booth
4) fact #4: Early testified that he, Murphy and Henderson waited about three quarters of an hour
5) fact #5: They got tired of waiting and sent some cards up to Booth’s room summoning O’Laughlen
6) fact #6: The cards were returned with the message that there was no one in the room.
7) fact #7: The three men then left the hotel and went to a restaurant
8) fact #8: They were joined about an hour later by O’Laughlen
9) fact #9: O’Laughlen told later to Henderson that Booth wasn’t in
10) assumption #1: Booth was in (the greater likelihood is, that Booth was in)
11) assumption #2: O’Laughlen met with him
12) assumption #3: somewhere in the hotel if not in Booth’s room
13) assumption #4: he [O’laughlen] told his friends he did not meet with him [Booth] because he wished to distance himself from Booth
14) assumption #5: probably because he did not like what he heard from Booth
15) assumption #6: It is a reasonable to assume that Booth gave him [O’Laughlen] instructions on Thursday evening
16) assumption #7: having to do with reconnoitering Stanton’s home (either personally or by surrogate)
17) assumption #8: [O’Laughlen] returned to the National on Friday morning to apprise Booth of the results of the effort
18) assumption #9: the second visit must have been related to the first

Theory B:
1) fact #1: O’Laughlen, in company with Early, Murphy and Henderson, stopped at the National
2) fact #2: O’Laughlen said he wanted to see Booth again
3) fact #3: Henderson testified that O’Laughlen told him he did’nt see Booth
4) fact #4: Early testified that he, Murphy and Henderson waited about three quarters of an hour
5) fact #5: They got tired of waiting and sent some cards up to Booth’s room summoning O’Laughlen
6) fact #6: The cards were returned with the message that there was no one in the room.
7) fact #7: The three men then left the hotel and went to a restaurant
8) fact #8: They were joined about an hour later by O’Laughlen
9) fact #9: O’Laughlen told later to Henderson that Booth wasn’t in
Source for the following items: Clara E. Laughlin's “The Death of Lincoln: The Story of Booth's Plot, His Deed, and the Penalty.”
10) fact #10: Friday morning early Mr. [Walter] Burton, the night-clerk of the National, going off duty, met Davy Herold in the hall. "Going to see Booth?" he asked the boy. Davy said he was.
11) fact #11: "Well, I don't think he's in," said Burton …. Davy went to 228 and knocked, but got no response
12) fact #12: when the room was opened it was found to have been unoccupied.
13) fact #13: Nobody knows where Booth was that evening of the 13th, or that night. He was not at the National after Thursday noon
14) assumption #1: Booth was not in the National on Friday morning
15) assumption #2: O’Laughlen did not meet Booth in the National on Friday morning
16) assumption #3: O’Laughlen met someone else in the National

IMO, because theory A has a lot more assumptions than theory B, theory B is a simpler theory and more in keeping with Occam’s Razor, and therefore closer to the truth. I don’t say that it is proven that O’Laughlen did not meet Booth in the National, it “could be” that he indeed met him. I only say that it is CLOSER TO THE TRUTH that O’Laughlen did not met Booth in the National.

BTW: we have no trace of Booth until about noon on Friday (“it was fully 11 am”), when he entered the breakfast-room at the National and was seen by Miss Carrie Bean. John T. Ford said in an interview on April 29, 1865: “He was the last man at breakfast that day; one lady only [Carrie Bean] was in the room, finishing her morning meal. She knew him [Booth] and responded to his bow of recognition.”

John, a question to you, why did you not mention Walter Burton and Carrie Bean in your book? They are not in the index. Or did I miss something?

Back to “Was Stanton a murder target?”. It “could be”, but in line with Occam’s Razor it is still in my opinion closer to the truth he was not. I realize that conspiracy theories are almost impossible to disprove, because one always can find some way to rationalize away evidence that contradicts the opposite belief.

Kees