Where was John Surratt on April 14, 1865 ?

[RJNorton]

If I remember correctly, Mary Surratt received a letter from John Surratt on April 14, 1865. The letter was postmarked Montreal and dated April 12th. Strangely, IMO, Mary told the authorities she could not find the letter. Is there any chance that the letter Mary "lost" contained information on John's April 14th location?

[loetar44]

(03-23-2017 07:45 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  If I remember correctly, Mary Surratt received a letter from John Surratt on April 14, 1865. The letter was postmarked Montreal and dated April 12th. Strangely, IMO, Mary told the authorities she could not find the letter. Is there any chance that the letter Mary "lost" contained information on John's April 14th location?

Do I remember it correctly Roger? Did John Surratt sent four letters from Canada; two to Anna Ward (according to some – John’s girlfriend) and two to his mother. Anna gave for some reason her letters (after reading) to Mary Surratt and Mary told Louis Weichmann of the existance of the letters (the last one dated St. Lawrence Hotel, Montreal, April 12th), but also said she didn’t know where the letters were. Anna Ward later expressed that she felt Mary had likely burned them so they couldn’t be used as evidence. If this all is true, it’s indeed very, very strange. It would have proven that John Surratt was not in Washington City at the time of the assassination.

[RJNorton]

Kees, I do not know how many letters there were in all - hopefully someone can answer that. But I think it's strange that she "misplaced" her most recent letter from John.

[L Verge]

(03-23-2017 09:27 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Kees, I do not know how many letters there were in all - hopefully someone can answer that. But I think it's strange that she "misplaced" her most recent letter from John.

I believe that there's one story that Mary laid it on a window sill or near an open window and the wind may have swept it out.

Susan H can fill in the blanks here, I suspect; but Anna Ward was much older than John and very likely part of the mail line - therefore a safe way of getting letters to family, etc. without direct contact. We did a story on her years ago in the Surratt Courier in July 2008.

Anna Ward (Annie) had been a teacher at the school in Bryantown when Anna Surratt was a student. She then took a job at the Visitation School near the boardinghouse. I recall one version that had Ward coming to the home on April 10th at the same time Booth was visiting, looking for John. She brought with her a letter that John had sent his mother via her. Mrs. Surratt could not read it because of her poor eyesight and asked Ward to read it. It was then turned over to Anna Surratt.

Weichmann came in about that time and read it also. Unfortunately, he never discussed its contents in his manuscript (strange?) - only said something about the death of the Confederacy. However, he did say that Booth became agitated at that point and soon left.

Of course, this does not account for three more letters (if there were that many), including the one supposedly dated April 12 and sent from Canada.

There is a story/myth that years later, residents of the H Street home found a stash of letters under a floorboard and burned them all because of "incriminating" comments. If you believe that story, then maybe you can surmise that, in true Confederate mail drop fashion, Mary's correspondence from John after he left in early-April was hidden by her, Anna, and/or Weichmann. Something else to ponder...

[loetar44]

From the testimony of Miss Anna Ward, for the Defense, June 3rd., 1865 (source: the New York Times, June 5th)

   

https://newspaperarchive.com/new-york-ti...-1865-p-2/

[RJNorton]

Have we ever answered the question of why John Surratt mailed letters to Annie Ward that were intended for his mother?

[L Verge]

(03-23-2017 05:05 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  Have we ever answered the question of why John Surratt mailed letters to Annie Ward that were intended for his mother?

As I stated above, I can only guess that Annie Ward was a small part of the extensive mail system of the Confederacy. John had every right to worry about the feds keeping an eye on him and his activities - including intercepting his mail addressed to his mother. Perhaps Ward was a convenient go-between.

[RJNorton]

We have discussed so many things that I hope this is not a repeat. We have discussed Susan Jackson's trial testimony, but have we discussed what she told the authorities? It's different.

From The Evidence:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"A Negro woman (Susan Jackson) stated that the night of the murder, late at night, three men called at the house of Mrs. Surratt and requested to see her. The woman was in the habit of sleeping upon the floor in a basement room. At the time she was lying upon the floor apparently asleep; that these men in the course of their conversation stated to Mrs. Surratt that her son was in the theater with Booth at the time of the assassination. One of the number requested her to allow him to change his clothes with she acceded to, and took him upstairs, and he was gone apparently sufficient time to allow him to change his clothes. When he returned the girl feigned sleep. Another boarder at the house by the name of Nora Fitzpatrick, about nineteen years of age, was present at this interview and leaned over this girl to see whether she was asleep, and when one of the men inquired whether she might not overhear what was said, said that the girl was asleep and they need not be afraid."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Who were the three men and which one needed to change his clothes?

[Susan Higginbotham]

(03-24-2017 04:34 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  We have discussed so many things that I hope this is not a repeat. We have discussed Susan Jackson's trial testimony, but have we discussed what she told the authorities? It's different.

From The Evidence:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"A Negro woman (Susan Jackson) stated that the night of the murder, late at night, three men called at the house of Mrs. Surratt and requested to see her. The woman was in the habit of sleeping upon the floor in a basement room. At the time she was lying upon the floor apparently asleep; that these men in the course of their conversation stated to Mrs. Surratt that her son was in the theater with Booth at the time of the assassination. One of the number requested her to allow him to change his clothes with she acceded to, and took him upstairs, and he was gone apparently sufficient time to allow him to change his clothes. When he returned the girl feigned sleep. Another boarder at the house by the name of Nora Fitzpatrick, about nineteen years of age, was present at this interview and leaned over this girl to see whether she was asleep, and when one of the men inquired whether she might not overhear what was said, said that the girl was asleep and they need not be afraid."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Who were the three men and which one needed to change his clothes?

IIRC, Kate Larsen suggests that the men were Weichmann and the detectives who were getting ready to take him to search for John Surratt.

As I remember, neither Susan nor Nora Fitzpatrick was questioned about this incident at trial, which suggests that the government no longer put much faith in the story.

[RJNorton]

Thank you, Susan.

The part that really caught my eye was: "that these men in the course of their conversation stated to Mrs. Surratt that her son was in the theater with Booth at the time of the assassination."

Where would that information come from (if Susan Jackson heard correctly and were telling the truth)?

[L Verge]

(03-24-2017 08:04 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Thank you, Susan.

The part that really caught my eye was: "that these men in the course of their conversation stated to Mrs. Surratt that her son was in the theater with Booth at the time of the assassination."

Where would that information come from (if Susan Jackson heard correctly and were telling the truth)?

The answer that Susan gave from Kate Larson's book is basically the same answer that I have heard most experts in the field give - these were the authorities who first went to the boardinghouse shortly after the assassination and were let in by Weichmann.

IF Jackson heard correctly and was telling the truth, she likely heard one of the men state that Surratt was at the theater to see what reaction Weichmann (or others) would have.

Consider your own reactions if you were a new employee, uneducated, and awakened in the middle of the night with strange men (probably talking excitedly and angrily). Could you give clear and concise testimony as to what happened?

Could it have been Weichmann who went upstairs to change clothes?

[brtmchl]

What led the Metro Police to the Surratt home so quickly after the shooting? It is my understanding that John Surratt's name started circling 45 minutes after the attack as the attacker of Seward. I understand that Surratt and Booth were known acquaintances but Booth was a famous man who had many acquaintances.

What specific tip had they received that led them there so quickly? I can't imagine that it was from questioning of those at the theatre that could have had that quick of a reaction.

From wiki: "Department of War employee Daniel Gleason, had alerted federal authorities to Confederate activity centered on the Surratt house, but this does not explain why D.C. police rather than federal agents appeared there."

[loetar44]

(03-24-2017 09:28 AM)brtmchl Wrote:  What led the Metro Police to the Surratt home so quickly after the shooting? It is my understanding that John Surratt's name started circling 45 minutes after the attack as the attacker of Seward. I understand that Surratt and Booth were known acquaintances but Booth was a famous man who had many acquaintances.

What specific tip had they received that led them there so quickly? I can't imagine that it was from questioning of those at the theatre that could have had that quick of a reaction.

From wiki: "Department of War employee Daniel Gleason, had alerted federal authorities to Confederate activity centered on the Surratt house, but this does not explain why D.C. police rather than federal agents appeared there."

Good question!

Historians usually argue that the information Capt. Daniel H.L. Gleason supplied to the War Department led to the arrest of Mary Surratt and the other women in the Surratt house. Gleason worked with Weichmann and had heard information from him that the Surratt house “was a nest of illegal activities”. He first testified this on April 18 (one day after Mary Surratt’s arrest). When Weichmann told Gleason of his suspicions, Gleason did not take this too seriously.

It was Susan Jackson who told Mary Ann Griffin (her aunt) about seeing three men in the Surratt house on Saturday night April 15 and that one of them had said to Mary that John Surratt was in Ford’s Theater at the moment of the assassination. Ms. Griffin told her employer (Surratt's neighbor) John H. Kimball the story and Kimball in turn told Mr. P. M. Clark (citizen). Kimball and Clark informed the military authorities on April 17. Gen. Augur then gave Col. Olcott the order to arrest all the people present in the Surratt house. Later Col. John Foster said: “The information derived from this girl [Susan Jackson] led to the arrest of Mrs. Surratt, which was made late in the evening of the 17th.” (by the Metropolitan Police Force, not the War Department !)

Why would Susan gave an erroneous testimony, later repeated to Provost Marshall Wells? It is said that the three mysterious men (probably?) were: Weichmann, Holohan and Police officer McDevitt. Jackson was a new servant and lived and worked in the Surratt house for only 2 or 3 weeks. BUT, she knew Weichmann and Holohan, because they had a room there! At least they were no strangers to her! Why did she then not recognize them? Strange, very strange.

After the execution of the conspirators, people who felt they deserved reward money came forward. After much argument the rewards were finally released in July 1866. President Johnson revoked the reward for John Surratt (why?). And, why received Kimball, Clark, Griffin and Jackson their money if "the government no longer put much faith in the story." (Susan's words)?

Notice that Kimball and Clark received double (each $500) what Griffin and Jackson received (each $250). This difference was simply because Kimball and Clark were men while Griffin and Jackson were African-American women.

   

[Susan Higginbotham]

Kimball requested the reward on the ground that his report had led to the decision to return to the boardinghouse on April 17 and to the arrests of Mary Surratt and Lewis Powell. As Powell might well have not been captured had the authorities not come to the boardinghouse on the evening of April 17, there were certainly strong grounds for rewarding Kimball, Clark, Griffin and Jackson, even if Jackson's story proved to be unfounded.

[RJNorton]

(03-24-2017 09:28 AM)brtmchl Wrote:  What led the Metro Police to the Surratt home so quickly after the shooting?

Mike, several possibilities are mentioned in the thread here.

Regarding who gave the Surratt tip, Mike Kauffman writes, "it remains one of the great mysteries of the Lincoln assassination story."