Thomas F. Harney

[John Fazio]

(11-17-2014 04:56 PM)Rick Smith Wrote:  If Edwin Stanton was not a target, he sure should have been.

Rick:

Why?

John

[RJNorton]

(11-17-2014 04:47 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  8. Three witnesses at the trial testified that O'Laughlen was at Stanton's home on the night of the 13th. Their testimony was corroborated by Atzerodt in one of his confessions.

John, do you know if the reception given by Ellen and Edwin Stanton was announced in the newspapers? The reason I ask is I am curious how O'Laughlen knew to go there as I believe these witnesses said the person they identified as O'Laughlen asked for both Grant and Stanton. Is it your feeling that the person was definitely O'Laughlen? Do you feel that if Grant and Stanton had been produced when asked for that O'Laughlen was going to shoot them both during the reception?

Linda, thank you for the information on Flower's book.

[John Fazio]

(11-18-2014 06:45 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 04:47 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  8. Three witnesses at the trial testified that O'Laughlen was at Stanton's home on the night of the 13th. Their testimony was corroborated by Atzerodt in one of his confessions.

John, do you know if the reception given by Ellen and Edwin Stanton was announced in the newspapers? The reason I ask is I am curious how O'Laughlen knew to go there as I believe these witnesses said the person they identified as O'Laughlen asked for both Grant and Stanton. Is it your feeling that the person was definitely O'Laughlen? Do you feel that if Grant and Stanton had been produced when asked for that O'Laughlen was going to shoot them both during the reception?

Linda, thank you for the information on Flower's book.

Roger:

First, let me correct something in my earlier email re the evidence favoring the Stanton-as-intended-victim conclusion. I left out number 15. Here it is:

15. No less an authority than our own Wild Bill Richter concluded, in The Last Confederate Heroes, Vol. 1, that the Confederate Government planned the destruction of Abraham Lincoln "and his government" (pp. 360, 361). Bill and I are far apart on our sentiments and sympathies re the war, but interestingly we came to the same conclusions as to what really happened on April 14, as did Tidwell, to whom he dedicates his book, as "The man who figured it out".

Now, to your questions, which, IMO, are very good ones.

I do not know if the reception was announced in the newspapers, but IMO it wasn't necessary. O'Laughlen almost certainly learned of it from Booth, with whom he met at the National shortly after his arrival in Washington from Baltimore on the 13th, from where he had been summoned by Booth. The question then becomes: How did Booth know? And the answer is almost certainly that he had a source or sources of information in the government , about which much more can be said if I had the time and space. Tidwell came to the same conclusion. It was doubtless from this same source or sources that Booth learned that the Lincolns and the Grants would be attending the theatre on Friday night, long before noon on the 14th (the conventional widom). See p. 423 of Come Retribution. Whether the intruder at Stanton's home on the 13th was O'Laughlen is one of the great unknowns, but I believe it was, because O'Laughlen met with Booth late in the day on the 13th (as said) and again in the morning of the 14th. This suggests strongly that he was given an assignment by Booth on the 13th and that he reported the results of the assignment to Booth on the 14th. In one of his confessions, Atzerodt said that there was no doubt that O'Laughlen knew "much of all the affairs" and that "although an alibi was tried to be made out, there is no doubt in the minds of those who know all the circumstances of O'Laughlen but that he did visit Secretary Stanton's home as charged in the testimony before the Commission."

No, I certainly do not believe O'Laughlen would have killed anyone on the 13th. Booth had a plan. The massacre was to take place on the 14th. A murder of a high official on the 13th would have thrown a gigantic monkey wrench into his delicately calibrated machinery.

John

[RJNorton]

Thank you, John. It sure makes sense to me that O'Laughlen had not planned to do harm to either Stanton or Grant at the reception. But I do have one more question. If no ill intent was meant, and that indeed seems the case, what was the purpose of O'Laughlen simply showing up at the reception and asking about Grant and Stanton? Certainly he wasn't going to ask them, "Where are you going to be on the night of the 14th?" My mind is blank as to what would be accomplished by O'Laughlen's presence at the reception.

[John Fazio]

(11-18-2014 02:00 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  Thank you, John. It sure makes sense to me that O'Laughlen had not planned to do harm to either Stanton or Grant at the reception. But I do have one more question. If no ill intent was meant, and that indeed seems the case, what was the purpose of O'Laughlen simply showing up at the reception and asking about Grant and Stanton? Certainly he wasn't going to ask them, "Where are you going to be on the night of the 14th?" My mind is blank as to what would be accomplished by O'Laughlen's presence at the reception.

Roger:

IMO his purposes (per instructions from Booth) were to positively identify both men; to learn of their planned whereabouts the following evening, if possible; and to determine the layout of the Secretary's home and grounds so that the same would be familiar to him when it came time for him or a co-conspirator to execute his part in the Friday Night Massacre.

Let me emphasize that I come to my conclusions based on the evidence as I have it. In fairness, however, it must be said that the evidence is inconclusive inasmuch as O'Laughlen's alibi was deemed good enough by the commissioners to keep him from the gallows. He did, after all, have seven witnesses testify on his behalf, against only three who put him at Stanton's. The commissioners, therefore, could hardly be blamed for sparing him, despite the conspiracy laws. Nevertheless, I still favor the conclusion that it was he at Stanton's, because some of the witnesses putting him there were unequivocal in their judgment that it was he and because of Atzerodt's statement, which the commissioners, of course, were ignorant of inasmuch as it was made after the trial was over.

John

[RJNorton]

Many thanks. If it were indeed O'Laughlen at the reception his purpose would seem similar to Lewis Powell who was apparently "scouting" the Seward residence during the April 12-April 14 time frame.

[L Verge]

I believe that Mike Kauffman used to state on the Surratt Society's Booth tours that O'Laughlen may well have been going to Stanton's house to warn him of the plot - having contracted a bad case of nerves - and then backed off. I don't have American Brutus at home to check on whether this ended up in the final edit.

[John Fazio]

(11-18-2014 06:53 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I believe that Mike Kauffman used to state on the Surratt Society's Booth tours that O'Laughlen may well have been going to Stanton's house to warn him of the plot - having contracted a bad case of nerves - and then backed off. I don't have American Brutus at home to check on whether this ended up in the final edit.

Laurie:

Kauffman suggests that possibility on p. 216 of American Brutus. He offers it as a greater likelihood than going there to murder someone. But, as I have already said, O'Laughlen could not have been there for the purpose of murder because that would have upset all of Booth's plans. "Murder", therefore, is a straw man upon which the O'Laughlen-as-warner scenario is posited. IMO O'Laughlen did not intend to warn Stanton or Grant of anything. It is pure speculation on Kauffman's part, based on a false premise and without any evidence to support it. Despite being one of the best researchers in the business, Kauffman frequently arrives at the wrong conclusions, IMO. O'Laughlen came to Washington on the 13th because Booth summoned him there. He met with Booth as soon as he arrived. He was then identified by three men as being at Stanton's that evening. He then met again with Booth the following morning. What is the most reasonable conclusion?

John

[L Verge]

I doubt that the O'Laughlen puzzle will ever be solved, but as I understand it, O'Laughlen came to D.C. on the 13th with three Baltimore friends - Early, Henderson, and one whose name I can't remember. If his purpose was to meet Booth, get final orders, and carry out a strike on Stanton or Grant on the 14th, why bring potential witnesses with him?

The other thing that throws me is the description given by someone who claims to have seen him at the Stanton residence (maybe the Union officer?). The man was described as being tall, dressed in black, and wearing a top hat. Again, that just doesn't sound like O'Laughlen.

Several of us are collaborating with editors Frank Williams and Mike Burkhimer on a book due out in late-2015 or early-2016 tentatively entitled The Lincoln Assassination Riddle. O'Laughlen is not going to be a major player in the book, but his role or non-role in the final plot could sure be listed as one of the riddles, imo.

[Rick Smith]

(11-17-2014 08:51 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 04:56 PM)Rick Smith Wrote:  If Edwin Stanton was not a target, he sure should have been.

Rick:

Why?

John

John,

In the words of my good friend, Bill Richter, "He needed killing."

Seriously; as part of an effective, overall plan to decapitate the federal government, Stanton should have been a target. No one else, aside from Seward & Lincoln, would have been able to continue the running of the Union government. Do not misunderstand me; I am no fan of Stanton, Seward or Lincoln, it is just that I think Stanton would have been the most effective in administrating the Union plan.

Rick

---

John,

Forgot to add a postscript: It is very interesting that you and Bill come to the same conclusions, with which I agree.

Looking forward to your new book.

Rick

[John Fazio]

(11-19-2014 02:03 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I doubt that the O'Laughlen puzzle will ever be solved, but as I understand it, O'Laughlen came to D.C. on the 13th with three Baltimore friends - Early, Henderson, and one whose name I can't remember. If his purpose was to meet Booth, get final orders, and carry out a strike on Stanton or Grant on the 14th, why bring potential witnesses with him?

The other thing that throws me is the description given by someone who claims to have seen him at the Stanton residence (maybe the Union officer?). The man was described as being tall, dressed in black, and wearing a top hat. Again, that just doesn't sound like O'Laughlen.

Laurie:

The third friend was Edward Murphy. I submit that it is not reasonable to come to any conclusion, as to why O'Laughlen came to Washington on the 13th, other than its being incident to Booth's order. We know that Booth went to Baltimore in the morning of the 13th to get O'Laughlen back in the game and that O'Laughlen left Baltimore for Washington on the 3:30 pm train, arriving at 5:30 with his three friends. IMO bringing three friends with him might well have been for the express purpose of establishing his bona fides for being in Washington and, if need be, to provide an alibi. They were, after all, all Unionists. The stew is simply too thick to conclude that his summoning, his meeting with Booth at the National shortly after his arrival, the triple identification at Stanton's home and his meeting with Booth at the National the following morning, were not related to the assassination.

As for the description of the intruder not conforming to O'Laughlen's dimensions, there are possibilities: he was in disguise, or, more likely, it was a surrogate.

As for your upcoming book on riddles, I hope you have Surratt's whereabouts on 4-14 in there. You probably won't have much to write about, because my book clears up all the mysteries, enigmas and conundrums. (Just kidding, of course, but I do believe it offers plausible explanations for some of them.)

John




[b]
Several of us are collaborating with editors Frank Williams and Mike Burkhimer on a book due out in late-2015 or early-2016 tentatively entitled The Lincoln Assassination Riddle. O'Laughlen is not going to be a major player in the book, but his role or non-role in the final plot could sure be listed as one of the riddles, imo.

[/b]

[Gene C]

I am more inclined to believe O'Laughlen came to DC with his friends to celebrate the end of the war. As a former confederate, and growining up in Baltimore, it might be better for him to celebrate out of town. The friends also make it more difficult for Booth to speak to him privately, and give him a reason why he can't participate in Booth's crazy scheme. What is O'Laughlins motive for going along with Booth, now that he war is over? This was an ill conceived plot from the beginning, and now the success of escaping safely is not very good. Kidnapping the president and holding him for ransom to free POW's is one thing, murder is something worse. The war is over, there is no glory in ringing a doorbelll and shooting an unarmed man, even if it's Stanton. I think O'Laughlin was slightly brighter than Herold & Paine. He quit once before. I don't think Booth has anything to offer him as to why he should get further involved.

I have not read enough of the trial transcripts to comment on what eye witnesses said. I have read that a few of these witnesses called to testify against some of the conspirators gave questionalbe testimony.

[HerbS]

Gene-Your theory does make sense.-Herb

[RJNorton]

(11-19-2014 06:15 PM)Gene C Wrote:  I have not read enough of the trial transcripts to comment on what eye witnesses said. I have read that a few of these witnesses called to testify against some of the conspirators gave questionalbe testimony.

Gene, from Poore, here is the testimony of the three witnesses who said they saw O'Laughlen at the Stantons' reception:



DAVID STANTON,

a witness called for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows:—

By the JUDGE ADVOCATE:

Q. Look upon the prisoner O’Laughlin, and state to the Court whether you have seen him at any time before; and, if so, when and where?
A. I saw him [pointing to Michael O’Laughlin]. He is the man with the black mustache.
Q. When and where did you see him last?
A. I saw him on the 13th of April, the night before the assassination, at the Secretary of War’s.
Q. In the house of the Secretary of War?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. State what occurred there, and under what circumstances he was there.
A. I simply saw him pass in the door, and take a position on one side of the hall; and he remained there some minutes, until I requested him to go out. He followed me out as far as the gate of the house, on the left-hand side of the house. That was the last I saw of him.
Q. Did you have any conversation with him in the house?
A. I asked him what his business was. He asked where the Secretary was. I told him he was standing on the steps. He did not say any thing further; and finally I requested him to walk out.
Q. Did he ask for anybody else besides the Secretary?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did he explain at all why he was there?
A. No, sir.
Q. He came in uninvited, did he?
A. Yes, sir. I presumed he was intoxicated, at first; but I found out, after having some conversation with him, that he was not.
Q. Was General Grant there that night?
A. Yes, sir: he was in the parlor.
Q. Did he ask any thing in regard to him?
A. I do not remember that he did.
Q. Did he see him from his position?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he go away from the house when you put him out?
A. I went into the house. I did not see whether he left or not, there was such a crowd there.
Q. What hour was that?
A. I presume, about half-past ten. They were serenading the Secretary and General Grant.
Q. Were you at the Secretary’s the night of the assassination?
A. I was there after it, and staid there all night.
Q. Do you know any thing of a man being seen lurking or hanging about the premises that night?
A. No sir. It was eleven o’clock before I got there.
Q. Was the inquiry of O’Laughlin simply after the Secretary of War?
A. Yes, sir: I pointed him out. He did not seem to go to see him, and did not tell what his business was.

Cross-examined by MR. COX:

Q. Was that the first time you ever saw this man?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When did you see him since?
A. I never saw him since, until I saw him on the monitor as a prisoner.
Q. How long afterwards was that?
A. I do not remember the date: it was the day that they took Booth’s body away from the vessel.
Q. You say it was half-past ten o’clock at night when you first saw him on the steps?
A. About that: I had not a time-piece. The fireworks commenced at nine o’clock, and lasted about an hour and a half. It was after they were over.
Q. Was there a crowd there at the time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it very light or dark?
A. It was not very light.
Q. Was it moonlight or gas?
A. No, sir: it was dark.
Q. How was he dressed?
A. In a black suit.
Q. What kind of hat?
A. I think a black slouch hat. He had it off in his hand. I did not pay particular attention to that.
Q. When you say a black suit, do you mean his whole suit was black?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What kind of coat?
A. It was a dress coat.
Q. Black vest and pants?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I do not know exactly where the Secretary’s house is. Where is it?
A. Fourteenth and K Streets; the second house from the corner of Fourteenth and K. There is a vacant lot between that and the Rugby House: it is No. 320.
Q. Opposite Franklin Square?
A. Yes, sir: about opposite the centre of the square.
Q. What particularity about his appearance was there that enabled you to identify him when you saw him in the entry?
A. The hall was very lit up: I was almost in contact with him when I addressed him,—directly in front of him.
Q. How far inside of the door was he?
A. About ten feet. He was next to the library-door.
Q. After having seen him on that occasion, and before you saw him again, did you recollect his size? He was standing in the hall, of course?
A. He was standing in the hall. About my height,—five feet four inches about.
Q. When you saw him on the monitor, was he standing or sitting or lying down?
A. He stood up. I had a very indistinct view of him, though, because it was so dark.
Q. You thought at first he was intoxicated, but discovered that he was not?
A. I presumed he was, from the way he came into the house. I inquired before went to him, of different members of the family, if they knew him. Finding they did not know him, I addressed him.
Q. When he walked out, did he seem unsteady in his gait?
A. He followed me out. I requested him to go out, and he did, going after me.
Q. Were plenty of people about?
A. Yes, in front of the house.
Q. Was anybody else in the hall or on the doorsteps?
A. The Secretary of War was on the doorsteps, and Major Knox.
Q. This man had got behind them?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was General Grant sitting in the parlor?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was that lit up?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had he the same mustache and beard that he has now?
A. I think so: I do not see any change, with the exception of that caused by want of shaving.




MAJOR KILBURN KNOX,

a witness for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows:—

By the JUDGE ADVOCATE:

Q. Will you state whether or not, on the evening of the 13th of April last, you were at the house of the Secretary of War, in this city?
A. Yes, sir: I was.
Q. Do you see among the prisoners here any person whom you saw there on that occasion?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Which one is it?
A. There he is [pointing to Michael O’Laughlin].
Q. Can you state under what circumstances you saw him, and at what hour, and what occurred?
A. I was at the house of the Secretary of War about half-past ten o’clock, I should judge. I had been on duty at the War Department, and left there at ten o’clock, after the illumination was over, and walked up to the Secretary’s house. On the steps were General Grant, Mrs. Grant, the Secretary, General Barnes and his wife, Mr. Knapp and his wife, Miss Lucy Stanton, Mr. David Stanton, and two or three small children. There was a band there playing at the house. I was talking to Mrs. Grant and to the General. They were standing on the upper steps. They set off some fireworks in the square opposite; and I stepped down a little to allow the children to see them. I got down on the step, I think, next to the last one, leaning against the railing; and this man [O’Laughlin] came up to me, I suppose after I had been there ten minutes probably, and he said, “Is Stanton in?” Said I, “I suppose you mean the Secretary”? He said, “Yes.” I think he made the remark, “I am a lawyer in town: I know him very well.” I was under the impression he was under the influence of liquor. I told him I did not think he could see him then; and he walked to the other side of the steps, and stood there probably five minutes. I still staid there, I suppose, for about five minutes; and he walked over to me again, and said, ‘Is Mr. Stanton in?” and then he said, “Excuse me: I thought you were the officer on duty here.” Said I, “There is no officer on duty here.” He then walked on to the other side of the steps, and walked inside of the hall, the alcove, and stood on the inside step. I saw him standing there; and I walked over to Mr. David Stanton, and said, “Do you know that man?” He said he did not. I said to him, “He says he knows the Secretary very well; but he is under the influence of liquor, and you had better bring him out.” Mr. David Stanton walked up to him, talked to him a few moments, and then took him down the steps. He went off, and I did not notice him again.
Q. Did he say any thing about General Grant?
A. He did not. General Grant, I think, had gone into the parlor at the time. I am not certain about that; but that is my impression.
Q. He was looking in to see the Secretary from his position, was he?
A. I think the Secretary stood on the steps outside, and this man stood behind the Secretary; and from where he stood he could see into the parlor. On the left-hand side of the hall, going in, is the library; on the other side is the parlor-door. He stood on the side next to the library; and, in that position, he could have looked into the parlor, and seen who was in there, through the door. The whole house was illuminated and lighted up.
Q. Do you feel perfectly certain, or not, that the prisoner O’Laughlin is the man you saw?
A. I feel perfectly certain.

Cross-examined by MR. COX:

Q. Was it moonlight or dark on that evening?
A. I cannot tell: I do not recollect.
Q. Was there a crowd surrounding the Secretary’s house at the time?
A. Yes, sir: quite a large crowd.
Q. Close up to the steps?
A. Yes, sir: all around.
Q. And he mingled with the crowd, or close to them?
A. I did not notice any thing at all about him until he walked up on the steps and spoke to me. I paid no attention to it whatever; and, after he went out again, I saw him no more.
Q. You did not go inside of the hall while he was there?
A. Not while he was there.
Q. I understand you to say that Secretary Stanton was on the upper step at that time?
A. I think so.
Q. Did he pass by him?
A. Yes, sir: he went to the right of them. I am certain that Secretary Stanton was on the upper side at the time, talking to Mrs. Grant.
Q. He walked by the Secretary, did he?
A. Secretary Stanton was on the left-hand side; and the man went up on the right-hand side, and went in, and took a place on the step on the left-hand side.
Q. How was he dressed?
A. He had on a black slouch hat, a black frock-coat, and a black pair of pants: as to his vest I cannot say.
Q. That was while the fireworks were going on, you stated?
A. Yes, sir: there were fireworks after that.
Q. Had you ever seen that man before?
A. I never had.
Q. Have you seen him since?
A. I have.
Q. When?
A. A week ago last Sunday.
Q. Here?
A. In this prison.
Q. You came here for the purpose of identifying him?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you come in company with any one else?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With Mr. Stanton?
A. No, sir.
Q. It was the hour of half-past ten, I think you said?
A. Yes, sir, it was half-past ten. I was on duty at the War Department that night; and, after the lights were put out, I walked up to the house. I suppose I had been there ten or fifteen minutes.
Q. You cannot remember whether it was a dark night or moonlight?
A. I cannot. It is my impression that it was a moonlight night; but I did not take any particular notice.




JOHN C. HATTER,

a witness called for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows:—

By the JUDGE ADVOCATE:

Q. Will you state whether or not you know the prisoner O’Laughlin?
A. I know a man by that name.
Q. Do you recognize him here?
A. It is that man sitting back there [pointing to the prisoner O’Laughlin].
Q. Will you state whether you saw him on the 13th of April last? and if so, where, and under what circumstances?
A. I saw him on the night of the illumination—I suppose it was the night General Grant came from the front—at Secretary Stanton’s house.
Q. What occurred there between you and him? What was said?
A. I was standing on the steps, looking at the illumination; and this man [O’Laughlin] approached me, and asked me if General Grant was in. I told him he was. He said he wished to see him. Said I, “This is no occasion for you to see him. If you wish to see him step out on the pavement, or on the stone where the carriage stops, and you can see him.”
Q. What time of night was it?
A. I should judge it was about nine o’clock: it may have been a little after nine.
Q. Was that all that occurred between you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He did not go in the house, or attempt to go in?
A. No, sir.
Q. Was he on the steps of Mr. Stanton’s house?
A. Yes, sir: I was standing on the top step.
Q. Was he on the top step also?
A. Yes, sir: he was on the steps, I should judge about two steps below me; which brought him, I believe, about the third step from the pavement.
Q. Did he leave the steps while you were there?
A. He left the step after I spoke to him. He was talking: but I did not understand what he was saying. He walked off away from the step towards the tree-box. He seemed to reflect over something, and came back, and walked off; and then I turned my eyes off him, and did not see him any more.
Q. Was the house illuminated?
A. Yes, sir: the house was lit up from the inside; and it was pretty light outside too.

Cross-examined by MR. COX:

Q. What is your business?
A. I am employed at the War Department: I am a sergeant in the Adjutant-General’s service.
Q. Were you on duty at Mr. Stanton’s?
A. Yes, sir: I am on duty at the Secretary’s room.
Q. Had you ever seen this man before that evening?
A. I do not think I had: not to my knowledge.
Q. When did you see him the next time?
A. I next saw him in prison; I think, in this building, or the one adjoining.
Q. How long ago?
A. That was Sunday week.
Q. You came here to see if it was the same man?
A. When I first started to come down here, I did not know the object of my coming down.
Q. Who did you come with?
A. I was accompanied by Major Eckert and Major Knox. When I came down here, I did not know what I had to come down for. I inquired of Major Eckert if I had to come in the building, when in front of the house; and the major told me to come in. Then, when I was inside the building, I was told to stop a moment at the door. I was up, I should judge, about steps in the second story; and even then I did not know what I came down for, until Major Eckert called me in: but, the moment I looked around the room and saw the man, I thought to myself, “I see the object of my coming down.”
Q. Those are the only two occasions on which you recollect ever having seen him?
A. Those the only times with the exception of this time.
Q. What made you think it was the same man? Was there any thing peculiar about his appearance?
A. The first time I saw him it was very light, and he had on a dark suit of clothes, with a heavy mustache, black, and an imperial; and the way I took such much notice of him was, while I was speaking to him he was standing a little lower down, and I was looking right in his face at the time.
Q. What kind of a hat had he on?
A. A black hat.
Q. What kind?
A. A dark slouch hat, not very high, a little low, something like the one on the table there.
Q. How was he dressed?
A. In dark clothes.
Q. What sort of a coat had he on,—a dress-coat or a frock-coat?
A. A dress-coat.
Q. What was the color of his pantaloons?
A. They were dark: I could not say exactly whether they were black or dark-brown. They were dark, though.
Q. What size was he?
A. I should judge he was my size. While he was standing there, he might seem to be a little lower, because he was standing about two steps below me. I should judge him to be about five feet four or five inches.
Q. That you think was at nine o’clock?
A. I should think it was about nine o’clock: it might have been after.
Q. Had a crowd come to serenade the Secretary?
A. Yes, sir: there were four or five bands there at that time.
Q. Was the Secretary on the steps at the time?
A. No, sir: the Secretary was inside in the parlor with General Grant.
Q. They had not come out then?
A. No, sir: they had not been out then.
Q. There was nobody on the steps but you?
A. Nobody but myself.
Q. Was the crowd close up to the steps?
A. The crowd was pretty close; right up to the lower step.
Q. Was the front door open at the time?
A. Yes, sir; both doors were open: the front door was open, and then there was another door like a front entry open too; and the gas was full lit around.

[John Fazio]

(11-19-2014 07:37 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(11-19-2014 06:15 PM)Gene C Wrote:  I have not read enough of the trial transcripts to comment on what eye witnesses said. I have read that a few of these witnesses called to testify against some of the conspirators gave questionalbe testimony.

Gene, from Poore, here is the testimony of the three witnesses who said they saw O'Laughlen at the Stantons' reception:



DAVID STANTON,

a witness called for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows:—

By the JUDGE ADVOCATE:

Q. Look upon the prisoner O’Laughlin, and state to the Court whether you have seen him at any time before; and, if so, when and where?
A. I saw him [pointing to Michael O’Laughlin]. He is the man with the black mustache.
Q. When and where did you see him last?
A. I saw him on the 13th of April, the night before the assassination, at the Secretary of War’s.
Q. In the house of the Secretary of War?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. State what occurred there, and under what circumstances he was there.
A. I simply saw him pass in the door, and take a position on one side of the hall; and he remained there some minutes, until I requested him to go out. He followed me out as far as the gate of the house, on the left-hand side of the house. That was the last I saw of him.
Q. Did you have any conversation with him in the house?
A. I asked him what his business was. He asked where the Secretary was. I told him he was standing on the steps. He did not say any thing further; and finally I requested him to walk out.
Q. Did he ask for anybody else besides the Secretary?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did he explain at all why he was there?
A. No, sir.
Q. He came in uninvited, did he?
A. Yes, sir. I presumed he was intoxicated, at first; but I found out, after having some conversation with him, that he was not.
Q. Was General Grant there that night?
A. Yes, sir: he was in the parlor.
Q. Did he ask any thing in regard to him?
A. I do not remember that he did.
Q. Did he see him from his position?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he go away from the house when you put him out?
A. I went into the house. I did not see whether he left or not, there was such a crowd there.
Q. What hour was that?
A. I presume, about half-past ten. They were serenading the Secretary and General Grant.
Q. Were you at the Secretary’s the night of the assassination?
A. I was there after it, and staid there all night.
Q. Do you know any thing of a man being seen lurking or hanging about the premises that night?
A. No sir. It was eleven o’clock before I got there.
Q. Was the inquiry of O’Laughlin simply after the Secretary of War?
A. Yes, sir: I pointed him out. He did not seem to go to see him, and did not tell what his business was.

Cross-examined by MR. COX:

Q. Was that the first time you ever saw this man?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When did you see him since?
A. I never saw him since, until I saw him on the monitor as a prisoner.
Q. How long afterwards was that?
A. I do not remember the date: it was the day that they took Booth’s body away from the vessel.
Q. You say it was half-past ten o’clock at night when you first saw him on the steps?
A. About that: I had not a time-piece. The fireworks commenced at nine o’clock, and lasted about an hour and a half. It was after they were over.
Q. Was there a crowd there at the time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it very light or dark?
A. It was not very light.
Q. Was it moonlight or gas?
A. No, sir: it was dark.
Q. How was he dressed?
A. In a black suit.
Q. What kind of hat?
A. I think a black slouch hat. He had it off in his hand. I did not pay particular attention to that.
Q. When you say a black suit, do you mean his whole suit was black?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What kind of coat?
A. It was a dress coat.
Q. Black vest and pants?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I do not know exactly where the Secretary’s house is. Where is it?
A. Fourteenth and K Streets; the second house from the corner of Fourteenth and K. There is a vacant lot between that and the Rugby House: it is No. 320.
Q. Opposite Franklin Square?
A. Yes, sir: about opposite the centre of the square.
Q. What particularity about his appearance was there that enabled you to identify him when you saw him in the entry?
A. The hall was very lit up: I was almost in contact with him when I addressed him,—directly in front of him.
Q. How far inside of the door was he?
A. About ten feet. He was next to the library-door.
Q. After having seen him on that occasion, and before you saw him again, did you recollect his size? He was standing in the hall, of course?
A. He was standing in the hall. About my height,—five feet four inches about.
Q. When you saw him on the monitor, was he standing or sitting or lying down?
A. He stood up. I had a very indistinct view of him, though, because it was so dark.
Q. You thought at first he was intoxicated, but discovered that he was not?
A. I presumed he was, from the way he came into the house. I inquired before went to him, of different members of the family, if they knew him. Finding they did not know him, I addressed him.
Q. When he walked out, did he seem unsteady in his gait?
A. He followed me out. I requested him to go out, and he did, going after me.
Q. Were plenty of people about?
A. Yes, in front of the house.
Q. Was anybody else in the hall or on the doorsteps?
A. The Secretary of War was on the doorsteps, and Major Knox.
Q. This man had got behind them?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was General Grant sitting in the parlor?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was that lit up?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had he the same mustache and beard that he has now?
A. I think so: I do not see any change, with the exception of that caused by want of shaving.




MAJOR KILBURN KNOX,

a witness for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows:—

By the JUDGE ADVOCATE:

Q. Will you state whether or not, on the evening of the 13th of April last, you were at the house of the Secretary of War, in this city?
A. Yes, sir: I was.
Q. Do you see among the prisoners here any person whom you saw there on that occasion?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Which one is it?
A. There he is [pointing to Michael O’Laughlin].
Q. Can you state under what circumstances you saw him, and at what hour, and what occurred?
A. I was at the house of the Secretary of War about half-past ten o’clock, I should judge. I had been on duty at the War Department, and left there at ten o’clock, after the illumination was over, and walked up to the Secretary’s house. On the steps were General Grant, Mrs. Grant, the Secretary, General Barnes and his wife, Mr. Knapp and his wife, Miss Lucy Stanton, Mr. David Stanton, and two or three small children. There was a band there playing at the house. I was talking to Mrs. Grant and to the General. They were standing on the upper steps. They set off some fireworks in the square opposite; and I stepped down a little to allow the children to see them. I got down on the step, I think, next to the last one, leaning against the railing; and this man [O’Laughlin] came up to me, I suppose after I had been there ten minutes probably, and he said, “Is Stanton in?” Said I, “I suppose you mean the Secretary”? He said, “Yes.” I think he made the remark, “I am a lawyer in town: I know him very well.” I was under the impression he was under the influence of liquor. I told him I did not think he could see him then; and he walked to the other side of the steps, and stood there probably five minutes. I still staid there, I suppose, for about five minutes; and he walked over to me again, and said, ‘Is Mr. Stanton in?” and then he said, “Excuse me: I thought you were the officer on duty here.” Said I, “There is no officer on duty here.” He then walked on to the other side of the steps, and walked inside of the hall, the alcove, and stood on the inside step. I saw him standing there; and I walked over to Mr. David Stanton, and said, “Do you know that man?” He said he did not. I said to him, “He says he knows the Secretary very well; but he is under the influence of liquor, and you had better bring him out.” Mr. David Stanton walked up to him, talked to him a few moments, and then took him down the steps. He went off, and I did not notice him again.
Q. Did he say any thing about General Grant?
A. He did not. General Grant, I think, had gone into the parlor at the time. I am not certain about that; but that is my impression.
Q. He was looking in to see the Secretary from his position, was he?
A. I think the Secretary stood on the steps outside, and this man stood behind the Secretary; and from where he stood he could see into the parlor. On the left-hand side of the hall, going in, is the library; on the other side is the parlor-door. He stood on the side next to the library; and, in that position, he could have looked into the parlor, and seen who was in there, through the door. The whole house was illuminated and lighted up.
Q. Do you feel perfectly certain, or not, that the prisoner O’Laughlin is the man you saw?
A. I feel perfectly certain.

Cross-examined by MR. COX:

Q. Was it moonlight or dark on that evening?
A. I cannot tell: I do not recollect.
Q. Was there a crowd surrounding the Secretary’s house at the time?
A. Yes, sir: quite a large crowd.
Q. Close up to the steps?
A. Yes, sir: all around.
Q. And he mingled with the crowd, or close to them?
A. I did not notice any thing at all about him until he walked up on the steps and spoke to me. I paid no attention to it whatever; and, after he went out again, I saw him no more.
Q. You did not go inside of the hall while he was there?
A. Not while he was there.
Q. I understand you to say that Secretary Stanton was on the upper step at that time?
A. I think so.
Q. Did he pass by him?
A. Yes, sir: he went to the right of them. I am certain that Secretary Stanton was on the upper side at the time, talking to Mrs. Grant.
Q. He walked by the Secretary, did he?
A. Secretary Stanton was on the left-hand side; and the man went up on the right-hand side, and went in, and took a place on the step on the left-hand side.
Q. How was he dressed?
A. He had on a black slouch hat, a black frock-coat, and a black pair of pants: as to his vest I cannot say.
Q. That was while the fireworks were going on, you stated?
A. Yes, sir: there were fireworks after that.
Q. Had you ever seen that man before?
A. I never had.
Q. Have you seen him since?
A. I have.
Q. When?
A. A week ago last Sunday.
Q. Here?
A. In this prison.
Q. You came here for the purpose of identifying him?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you come in company with any one else?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With Mr. Stanton?
A. No, sir.
Q. It was the hour of half-past ten, I think you said?
A. Yes, sir, it was half-past ten. I was on duty at the War Department that night; and, after the lights were put out, I walked up to the house. I suppose I had been there ten or fifteen minutes.
Q. You cannot remember whether it was a dark night or moonlight?
A. I cannot. It is my impression that it was a moonlight night; but I did not take any particular notice.




JOHN C. HATTER,

a witness called for the prosecution, being duly sworn, testified as follows:—

By the JUDGE ADVOCATE:

Q. Will you state whether or not you know the prisoner O’Laughlin?
A. I know a man by that name.
Q. Do you recognize him here?
A. It is that man sitting back there [pointing to the prisoner O’Laughlin].
Q. Will you state whether you saw him on the 13th of April last? and if so, where, and under what circumstances?
A. I saw him on the night of the illumination—I suppose it was the night General Grant came from the front—at Secretary Stanton’s house.
Q. What occurred there between you and him? What was said?
A. I was standing on the steps, looking at the illumination; and this man [O’Laughlin] approached me, and asked me if General Grant was in. I told him he was. He said he wished to see him. Said I, “This is no occasion for you to see him. If you wish to see him step out on the pavement, or on the stone where the carriage stops, and you can see him.”
Q. What time of night was it?
A. I should judge it was about nine o’clock: it may have been a little after nine.
Q. Was that all that occurred between you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He did not go in the house, or attempt to go in?
A. No, sir.
Q. Was he on the steps of Mr. Stanton’s house?
A. Yes, sir: I was standing on the top step.
Q. Was he on the top step also?
A. Yes, sir: he was on the steps, I should judge about two steps below me; which brought him, I believe, about the third step from the pavement.
Q. Did he leave the steps while you were there?
A. He left the step after I spoke to him. He was talking: but I did not understand what he was saying. He walked off away from the step towards the tree-box. He seemed to reflect over something, and came back, and walked off; and then I turned my eyes off him, and did not see him any more.
Q. Was the house illuminated?
A. Yes, sir: the house was lit up from the inside; and it was pretty light outside too.

Cross-examined by MR. COX:

Q. What is your business?
A. I am employed at the War Department: I am a sergeant in the Adjutant-General’s service.
Q. Were you on duty at Mr. Stanton’s?
A. Yes, sir: I am on duty at the Secretary’s room.
Q. Had you ever seen this man before that evening?
A. I do not think I had: not to my knowledge.
Q. When did you see him the next time?
A. I next saw him in prison; I think, in this building, or the one adjoining.
Q. How long ago?
A. That was Sunday week.
Q. You came here to see if it was the same man?
A. When I first started to come down here, I did not know the object of my coming down.
Q. Who did you come with?
A. I was accompanied by Major Eckert and Major Knox. When I came down here, I did not know what I had to come down for. I inquired of Major Eckert if I had to come in the building, when in front of the house; and the major told me to come in. Then, when I was inside the building, I was told to stop a moment at the door. I was up, I should judge, about steps in the second story; and even then I did not know what I came down for, until Major Eckert called me in: but, the moment I looked around the room and saw the man, I thought to myself, “I see the object of my coming down.”
Q. Those are the only two occasions on which you recollect ever having seen him?
A. Those the only times with the exception of this time.
Q. What made you think it was the same man? Was there any thing peculiar about his appearance?
A. The first time I saw him it was very light, and he had on a dark suit of clothes, with a heavy mustache, black, and an imperial; and the way I took such much notice of him was, while I was speaking to him he was standing a little lower down, and I was looking right in his face at the time.
Q. What kind of a hat had he on?
A. A black hat.
Q. What kind?
A. A dark slouch hat, not very high, a little low, something like the one on the table there.
Q. How was he dressed?
A. In dark clothes.
Q. What sort of a coat had he on,—a dress-coat or a frock-coat?
A. A dress-coat.
Q. What was the color of his pantaloons?
A. They were dark: I could not say exactly whether they were black or dark-brown. They were dark, though.
Q. What size was he?
A. I should judge he was my size. While he was standing there, he might seem to be a little lower, because he was standing about two steps below me. I should judge him to be about five feet four or five inches.
Q. That you think was at nine o’clock?
A. I should think it was about nine o’clock: it might have been after.
Q. Had a crowd come to serenade the Secretary?
A. Yes, sir: there were four or five bands there at that time.
Q. Was the Secretary on the steps at the time?
A. No, sir: the Secretary was inside in the parlor with General Grant.
Q. They had not come out then?
A. No, sir: they had not been out then.
Q. There was nobody on the steps but you?
A. Nobody but myself.
Q. Was the crowd close up to the steps?
A. The crowd was pretty close; right up to the lower step.
Q. Was the front door open at the time?
A. Yes, sir; both doors were open: the front door was open, and then there was another door like a front entry open too; and the gas was full lit around.

Roger:

Thank you for this. Like Dave Taylor, you do nothing by halves, and that's good. The testimony is solid, until one reads the defense's alibi witnesses. Then doubts begin to creep in, until we read Atzerodt's confession in which he says that "although an alibi was tried to be made out, there is no doubt in the minds of those who know all the circumstances of O'Laughlen but that he did visit Secretary Stanton's home as charged in the testimony before the Commission." This confession was made shortly before Atzerodt's execution, when he had no motivation to lie. But bear in mind that even if we accept his being at Stanton's home on the 13th, it doesn't put him there on the 14th.

John

John