Post Reply 
Presidential security
11-26-2013, 02:20 PM
Post: #21
RE: Presidential security
It is a dreary, rainy, and cold day in Southern Maryland - and the phones aren't ringing very much at Surratt House. Therefore, I decided to do a little follow-up on the issue of Presidential/White House guard John F. Parker with information taken from a 1982 article that James O. Hall did for the Surratt Courier.

Parker was born in 1830 in Winchester, Virginia. His father was a butcher, but later became a police officer in Winchester. Young Parker first came to D.C. in the early-1850s to work as a carpenter and also married Mary America Maus in the city in 1855. By the 1860 Census, they were the parents of three children - all girls.

When the war began, Parker enlisted in a unit of the D.C. Volunteers (Metropolitan Rifles) and served his three-month enlistment and was honorably discharged in July of 1861. His wife applied for a widow's pension in 1890, but was turned down because bookkeeping errors during the war did not prove his service -- mainly because there were three John Parkers on the rolls of the D.C. militia units. Mrs. Parker did not list the correct unit when she applied. The dates of service that she gave, however, matched a John Parker of Capt. Kelly's Company.

The D.C. police force in 1861 was pitiful. It was really composed of auxiliary guards employed by municipal corporations and paid out of federal funds. It included quite a few Southern sympathizers and also became overwhelmed by the influx of soldiers and camp followers. A law was passed in August of 1861 to establish the Metropolitan Police Force of the District of Columbia. William B. Webb was the first police superintendent and the first recruits were inducted on September 11, 1861. It is not certain when Parker was inducted, but the 1862 city directory - which was compiled in late-1861 -- shows him as "police."

His difficulties with the department began in 1862. The details are sparse because his personnel file has been missing from the Federal Records Center in Maryland since May 28, 1940, when they were sent to Campbell Photo Service for photostats to be made. What Mr. Hall was able to find was a list of ten charges filed against him between November 11, 1862 and July 22, 1868. A summary of the various charges through November of 1865 was prepared by T.A. Lazenby, secretary of the Board of Police. At that point, Parker had been charged six times -- two reprimands and four charges dismissed.

Mr. Hall found records for four other White House-assigned police in 1864-65, and their records were dismal also, ranging from mistreating prisoners, violent language to citizens, intoxication on duty, brawling in the station, refusal to assist other officers, and discharging firearms in public places. Better men of the city were, of course, serving in the military.

In 1864, it was Ward Hill Lamon, U.S. Marshal for the District of Columbia, who finally asked for a detail of officers to be stationed in the White House. On November 3, 1864, Sgt. Cronin and Patrolmen Donn, Pendel, and Smith reported to "Marshal Lammond" at the "President's House." The detail never exceeded five men at any one time. The following men were added after the original four: Lewis, Crook, McElfresh, Hurdle, Shelton, Parker, and Hopkins. Parker's name does not show up on the list prior to the end of February 1865.

The records for March and April of 1865 are missing (surprise...), but on March 22, 1865, the new superintendent, A.C. Richards wrote the famous letter attempting to get some of his officers out of the draft. Parker evidently appealed to Mrs. Lincoln to keep his job, and this resulted in the April 3, 1865, note signed by the First Lady, verifying that Parker was "a member of the Metropolitan Police detailed for duty at the Executive Mansion by order of of, Mrs. Lincoln" (her signature, but text written by someone else).

On April 14, 1865, Parker had the bad luck of being assigned to the Lincolns' trip to Ford's Theatre. No document has been found specifying his particular duty. We have two variations of his duty as stated in ghost-written books by Officers Pendel and Crook. Pendel said that Parker went on ahead of Lincoln to the theatre "...to see him safe inside." Crook said, however, that Parker "...accompanied the President to the theatre on the night of the 14th..."

Mr. Hall found only two contemporary documents that relate directly to Parker being at Ford's that night. The coachman, Francis Burns, stated that he took a drink with "the footman" and "the special police officer" (but did not name them). He had to mean Forbes and Parker, however. Superintendent Richards filed a formal charge against Parker alleging "neglect of duty," and listed himself and Charles Forbes as witnesses. The specification reads: "In this, that Parker was detailed to attend and protect the President, Mr. Lincoln, that, while the President was at Ford's Theatre on the night of the 14 of April last, said Parker allowed a man to enter the President's private box and shoot the President." This was filed on May 1, 1865, and tried before the board on May 3, 1865. The case was dismissed on June 2, 1865. We know this much only because of the summary written by the previously mentioned board secretary, T.A. Lazenby.

The testimony of Capt. Theodore McGowan during the Conspiracy Trial has gotten a lot of mileage (some of it courtesy of Eisenschiml's famous "conclusions"). Eisenschiml said that McGowan saw Booth hand his card to Parker. That's not what McGowan said in his statement of May 15. He stated under oath that the man who entered the box selected a card and "...then showed it to the President's messenger." Just a few minutes before Booth, Simon Hanscom, editor of the Washington National Republican had been to the box to deliver a document. He wrote in his newspaper that he found only the "footman and messenger" at the door to the box - and he identified the man by name, Charles Forbes.

So, the question boils down to whether or not Parker had been instructed to guard the President throughout the play. If so, he was guilty of "neglect of duty." If his duty was a lesser one of getting Lincoln into and out of the theatre, negligence would be improper. Parker remained on White House duty until May 10, when he was returned to street duty in the 5th Precinct. On July 22, 1868, he was charged with gross neglect of duty and was apparently tried and charges dismissed -- this record is missing also. Entry 57 in RG 351 in the National Archives show that he was absent without leave on August 13, 1868. His police trail ends there.

Parker went back to his trade as a carpenter and was employed at the Navy Yard. City directories through 1890 describe him variously as a carpenter, a ship's carpenter, and as a machinist. He died in Washington on June 28, 1890. The death certificate lists the cause as pneumonia, complicated by asthma and exhaustion. He was buried beside four of his children in Glenwood Cemetery. In 1904, his wife joined them in the unmarked plot.

I was wrong earlier in saying that he had no descendants. As of 1982, there were Parker descendants in the D.C. area, but they did/do not carry the Parker name and have no pictures of him nor family records.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
Presidential security - Rhatkinson - 11-24-2013, 12:45 PM
RE: Presidential security - Anita - 11-24-2013, 09:53 PM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 11-25-2013, 06:21 AM
RE: Presidential security - BettyO - 11-25-2013, 07:04 AM
RE: Presidential security - J. Beckert - 11-25-2013, 08:08 AM
RE: Presidential security - Anita - 11-25-2013, 01:57 PM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 11-25-2013, 03:00 PM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 11-25-2013, 03:05 PM
RE: Presidential security - Anita - 11-25-2013, 07:39 PM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 11-25-2013, 08:38 PM
RE: Presidential security - Gene C - 11-25-2013, 08:40 PM
RE: Presidential security - Anita - 11-25-2013, 10:05 PM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 11-26-2013, 05:56 AM
RE: Presidential security - Craig Hipkins - 11-26-2013, 08:53 AM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 11-26-2013, 09:10 AM
RE: Presidential security - Craig Hipkins - 11-26-2013, 09:29 AM
RE: Presidential security - Gene C - 11-26-2013, 11:22 AM
RE: Presidential security - Gene C - 11-26-2013, 01:25 PM
RE: Presidential security - Craig Hipkins - 11-26-2013, 02:02 PM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 11-26-2013 02:20 PM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 11-26-2013, 03:08 PM
RE: Presidential security - Gene C - 11-26-2013, 03:41 PM
RE: Presidential security - A Clayton - 12-01-2014, 09:35 AM
RE: Presidential security - Craig Hipkins - 11-26-2013, 03:00 PM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 11-26-2013, 03:45 PM
RE: Presidential security - J. Beckert - 11-26-2013, 05:38 PM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 11-26-2013, 05:47 PM
RE: Presidential security - J. Beckert - 11-26-2013, 07:32 PM
RE: Presidential security - Eva Elisabeth - 11-26-2013, 07:53 PM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 11-26-2013, 08:04 PM
RE: Presidential security - Gene C - 11-26-2013, 08:30 PM
RE: Presidential security - J. Beckert - 11-26-2013, 08:37 PM
RE: Presidential security - Anita - 11-26-2013, 08:49 PM
RE: Presidential security - Eva Elisabeth - 11-26-2013, 10:47 PM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 11-27-2013, 09:40 AM
RE: Presidential security - J. Beckert - 11-27-2013, 10:01 AM
RE: Presidential security - Gene C - 10-04-2014, 10:30 AM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 10-04-2014, 01:16 PM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 10-04-2014, 01:33 PM
RE: Presidential security - Jim Garrett - 10-11-2014, 08:23 AM
RE: Presidential security - RJNorton - 12-01-2014, 09:56 AM
RE: Presidential security - A Clayton - 12-01-2014, 10:12 AM
RE: Presidential security - Linda Anderson - 12-01-2014, 05:35 PM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 12-01-2014, 03:57 PM
RE: Presidential security - Jim Woodall - 12-03-2014, 02:04 AM
RE: Presidential security - A Clayton - 12-03-2014, 07:52 AM
RE: Presidential security - L Verge - 12-03-2014, 12:01 PM
RE: Presidential security - A Clayton - 12-03-2014, 02:36 PM
RE: Presidential security - Jim Woodall - 12-04-2014, 07:57 AM
RE: Presidential security - A Clayton - 12-04-2014, 08:27 AM

Forum Jump:


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