Post Reply 
Booth's women
05-07-2018, 01:51 PM (This post was last modified: 05-07-2018 01:58 PM by STS Lincolnite.)
Post: #18
RE: Booth's women
(05-07-2018 01:00 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  
(05-07-2018 09:30 AM)Ernesto Wrote:  as famed Jimmy Durante (Im giving away my age) used to say, "everyone wants to get into the act". Witnesses at the assassination, "I knew Lincoln" etc. The mystery woman story comes out almost fifty yrs. later and is not corroborated, as far as I know, by anyone else. Getting on board the Montauk would have taken a lot of effort, but no one else mentioned the episode. I give it the same credibility as Lucy saying she would marry Booth even at the foot of the scaffold. How can anyone prove or disprove the mystery woman. But given all the press and later coverage, if there had been a woman, surely it would have been mentioned. Hence, the speculation, may be fun, but scarely, "worth the candle."

I see no reason to doubt that there was a woman on the Montauk. The 1890 article I mentioned earlier quotes 1865 military correspondence concerning the comings and goings on the ship, and it is one of those letters--not meant for the public and not naming the lady--that mentions a lady's presence there (see the attached file).

A September 30, 1881, story in the Washington Post reports a rumor that Maggie Mitchell was the mystery lady, acting on behalf of Booth's fiancee. Mitchell, contacted by the reporter, denied the story and pointed out that she was not even in Washington at the time.

I agree Susan. Those letters make it pretty clear there was a woman on board - and escorted by 2 Naval officers no less.

Also, I am including a link below for a transcript of the report this article got its information from (Navy Yard, Washington, History from Organization 1799, to Present. By Henry B. Hibben):

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/li...ibben.html

You have to scroll down quite a way to get to the relevant excerpt but it is there just as in the article. There is also some other in the information that looks interesting that I want to go back to and read. Just had a few minutes over my lunch for a cursory glance and then post. Also, with a little digging, I would guess one could find the original 1865 letters quoted in this report in the National Archives.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
Booth's women - Steve - 04-22-2018, 12:12 PM
RE: Booth's women - RJNorton - 04-22-2018, 12:49 PM
RE: Booth's women - Jenny - 04-22-2018, 10:06 PM
RE: Booth's women - Gene C - 04-23-2018, 08:14 AM
RE: Booth's women - iva281 - 04-23-2018, 08:05 PM
RE: Booth's women - Ernesto - 05-02-2018, 01:34 PM
RE: Booth's women - ReignetteC - 04-22-2018, 09:49 PM
RE: Booth's women - Rsmyth - 04-23-2018, 07:24 AM
RE: Booth's women - Jenny - 04-23-2018, 11:30 AM
RE: Booth's women - Susan Higginbotham - 04-23-2018, 09:36 AM
RE: Booth's women - Wild Bill - 05-03-2018, 06:49 AM
RE: Booth's women - Jenny - 05-05-2018, 01:12 PM
RE: Booth's women - Ernesto - 05-07-2018, 09:30 AM
RE: Booth's women - Susan Higginbotham - 05-07-2018, 01:00 PM
RE: Booth's women - Jenny - 05-07-2018, 01:14 PM
RE: Booth's women - STS Lincolnite - 05-07-2018 01:51 PM
RE: Booth's women - Susan Higginbotham - 05-03-2018, 09:37 AM
RE: Booth's women - Jenny - 05-07-2018, 12:59 PM
RE: Booth's women - RJNorton - 05-07-2018, 02:13 PM
RE: Booth's women - Steve - 05-07-2018, 02:19 PM
RE: Booth's women - RJNorton - 05-07-2018, 02:21 PM
RE: Booth's women - Steve - 05-07-2018, 02:29 PM
RE: Booth's women - Jenny - 05-07-2018, 02:41 PM
RE: Booth's women - STS Lincolnite - 05-07-2018, 03:13 PM
RE: Booth's women - Gene C - 05-08-2018, 07:35 AM
RE: Booth's women - Ernesto - 05-10-2018, 11:07 PM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)