What Was The Role of David Herold

[John Fazio]

(04-16-2013 08:48 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  

(04-16-2013 09:05 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  Jerry and William:

Jerry, I read your book, and much as I would like to support your work, I have to be honest and say I do not believe the evidence supports the "pass" theory, which is central to your book. There is talk in Atzerodt's confessions and statements about passes, true, but nowhere is there any indication that either he or Booth or any of the conspirators actually obtained one. Further, nothing in the conversations between Cobb and Booth and Herold suggests that anyone had a pass. If Booth or Herold had a pass, they would simply have flashed it and they would then have been permitted to pass on the strength of it. Instead, we have all this palaver about the time of day, the rules, where are you going, why, etc., etc. All of this suggests that Booth and Herold had other reasons to know they would be permitted to cross, which, in my judgment, is why they knew they didn't need a pass and therefore did not bother to get one, assuming they could have gotten one if they wanted one. Te other reason? Perhaps Mosby men in the wings prepared to force passage if needed. Perhaps a well placed bribe of Cobb. Here is something else to think about. Rule No. 5 provided that passage could only be granted after 9:00 if one had a pass AND GAVE THE RIGHT COUNTERSIGN. But then, in the official accounts, we hear nothing about a countersign. Was one required? What was it? Was it given by Booth and Herold? In the entire corpus of literature on the subject, I have found only one reference to the use of a countersign that night. It is in Guttridge and Neff's book. That alone makes it suspect, but the fact that they cite no authority for their reference makes it even more suspect. They said (p. 147, Dark Union) that the password was "T.B." and the countersign was "T.B. Road" and that Booth and Herold used it on the Maryland side of the river. Can you shed any light on this?

John

John,
You are probably a great defense attorney the way you can throw out a lot of doubt without coming up with a viable theory as to what actually happened. The central issue is how Booth and Herold crossed when the orders were very clear that they needed a pass to cross at night. Atzerodt states that Booth wanted him to get a pass from Johnson AND that Booth and Herold had already seen Johnson. If you believe what Atzerodt said was true (and this was not known until 1977) then the answer jumps out at you. If you don’t believe it then you can throw all the ‘perhaps this and that’ that you want and still not come up with a viable theory.

Remember that in the official records there is an excerpt of Cobb undergoing some obvious coaching before he took the stand. In my judgment his testimony was carefully choreographed so that he was telling the truth but very restrictive on what he said to protect the new president. Does that ever happen in testimony nowadays?

As for the countersign my question is how often did it change? Most probably it changed on a weekly basis so that old passes could not be used over again. If Johnson gave Booth & Herold a pass on Monday or Tuesday of that week it would probably not expire before that Friday evening.

Jerry:

What is that reference in the Official Record to coaching of Cobb? I do not recall it from your book. I find that very interesting. Please advise.

There is an interesting note in Dark Union (a book I do not have a high regard for, but, as I keep saying, even a blind man can stumble over a nugget occasionally). Inter alia, the authors say (p. 263):

What occurred at the Navy Yard Bridge has never been positively established. One has to consider: F. E. Demond and F. L. Bates, June 16, 1916, Swaim Collection, Georgetown University Library, Special Collections...and Lieut. David Dana, Boston Sunday Globe, Dec. 12, 1897...(Further)..."the failure to question Cobb immediately after the crime is as perplexing as the failure to question (special policeman) Parker." (Stanley Kimmel, The Mad Booths of Maryland)

I wonder: did you have occasion to check any of these references in connection with your book? If so, I should like to hear something about them. Thanks in advance.

John