Timeline Needed for Ms. Slater

[SSlater]

(03-13-2017 12:21 AM)SSlater Wrote:  

(03-10-2017 09:52 AM)L Verge Wrote:  

(03-10-2017 01:50 AM)SSlater Wrote:  1 Jan 1865. Slater has been in Canada for several months.
10 Jan. Slater departs Canada for Richmond. (to get the "papers' needed by the St. Albans Raiders.)
16 Jan. Slater asks for a passport "to visit her mother in NYC" This is a ruse - she needed a passport to cross the Potomac and didn't have one.
22 Jan Arrives Richmond
31 Jan Departs Richmond -alone- for Canada. Arrives at Brogden's Camp on Lower Potomac..
1 Feb. Meets Gus Howell for the first time. He is to escort her to NYC.
(Stays at the European Hotel) She continues to Canada alone.
13 Feb. Arrives at St. Lawrence Hall at 3 AM. Howell had returned to D.C. to wait for her.
22 Feb Slater arrives D.C. Quickly departs Surratt House with Howell for the Potomac.
25 Feb. Atzerodt rows Surratt, Howell and Salter across the Potomac to the "Tennant" Farm (I once owned that Farm).
26 Feb. Howell leaves for Richmond. Surratt and Slater - wait a day.
28 Feb Arrive Richmond.
Early March. Howell and Slater depart Richmond for the Camp on the lower Potomac. ".
10 Mar Slater spends a night at Surratt House. Mrs. Surratt introduces Sarah as as "Mrs. Slater" from N.C. -spoke French and carried dispatches to Montreal.
11 Mar. dep. for NYC and Canada.
17 Mar. Slater's arrival is shown in E. G. Lee's Diary. Signs at SLH as from NY. Room #146. This is when Thompson said "This makes the thing all right".
19 Mar. R. D. Watson sends letter.
20 Mar. S. F. Cameron @ SLH room 175.
21 Mar Slater dep. Canada.
23 Mar Slater arv .NYC. Travels to D.C. with Booth.
25 Mar. Slater arv. Surratt House. Surratt and Barry escort Slater to Potomac.
26 Mar. Slater and Surratt cont. to Richmond.
29 Mar. Slater and Surratt At Spottswood hotel. Surratt signs as John Sherman.
1 Apr. Slater and Surratt Dep for Potomac
3. Apr. Slater and Surratt arv D.C..
3 Apr. Dep D.C. for Canada.
6 Apr. Arv. Montreal 10:30 AM
Apr. Surrratt (and Slater) ORDERED to Elmira.
14 Apr. Surratt and Slater in Elmira.
18 Apr. Surratt and Slater arv. Montreal.
I'm submitting this as a favor to Laurie. Normally, I do not research for Researchers.

Thank you so much, John. I knew you'd come through for me!

This question arose because our researcher wanted to put Slater in Albany, NY, on March 23, not NYC. He had her at the St. Nicholas Hotel, which was a very ritzy hotel in Manhattan (only a tiny section of it still stands today, and few people know its history - google it). It was one of the targets of the Confederate Army of Manhattan in November of 1864, when terrorists tried to sabotage about 20 public places in the city.

One more question for John: Did Sarah stay at the St. Nicholas? Who paid for that expensive room? Want to bet it was in Judah Benjamin's budget?

In the researcher's research, he noted that Sarah was seen in Albany about 23 March 1865. I showed you that she was at another location on that date ---but suggested a possibility that she was there on a different date. I looked at my notes carefully, hoping I could offer a suggestion. VIOLA! Sarah was in Albany on one day - between April 14 and April 18. She changed trains, in Albany, on her return to Montreal. This confirms that she had been with Surratt in Elmira -and she was really the "little man" who traveled with Surratt. Does this get your researcher "off the hook"?
Extending this same information a little further - did Sarah change trains in Albany on her way to Elmira? That would have been earlier in April.

All that fuzzy activity reported in late March 1865 might just be a good example of the Confederate Secret Service dispensing "Disinformation", - that Sarah was in Albany on March 23.
When in fact she was traveling south from New York - with Booth.
Laurie: Will you ask the Researcher" where he found the information that he gave us? I do not doubt that he did find that she was "reported to be in Albany." I want to "Correct" the information, for the benefit of our historians.
Now, thinking a little deeper. Who was the individual who could identify Sarah? I bet there weren't 10 people outside of the Confederate Secret Service , that knew what Sarah looked like.
She was always in disguise as a grieving widow, with a full veil over her face. In the case of "Albany", we know she was traveling with Surratt, disguised as a "bundled up old man". You could not even tell if it was a woman. ( that information is provided in Lafayette Baker's "History of the U.S. Secret Service") (( one of his detectives identified Surratt but didn't know who his companion was.))
It appears that the ancient "disinformation" is still working very effectively.

[SSlater]

(03-10-2017 07:58 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  

(03-10-2017 07:32 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(03-10-2017 04:46 PM)SSlater Wrote:  Laurie. Since you have come through for us on many occasions----I wanted to return the favor. Thank you for all you do.
I would be interested in knowing why your researcher thought she was in Albany. There may be a story there. She might have been sneaking around - on a different date. (even a day or two earlier).

As far as I know - Sarah never stayed at the Saint Nicholas Hotel.
That does not mean she never did. I doubt that she stayed at ANy hotel in NYC. - because her Mother lived in New York.
Her mother gave a NYC home address when she applied for a pension based on her huband's military service. (That's a story for another time)

Some thoughts on that Barry Guy. Barry was expected to escort Sarah to Richmond, because Surratt was busy on something else.
(Remember, Watson wanted him to meet Sarah in NY, but Surratt couldn't make it.) Booth brought her to D.C. Surratt was polite and traveled along to keep her company - as far as the Potomac. But Sarah told him some secrets, and he wanted to know more, so he discharged Barry and he took her to Richmond. (He stayed with her, every day for the next month. I would like to believe that she told him about the new Lincoln Plans).
Was Surratt trying to keep her out of trouble? Was Surratt trying to worm into then new plans? I wouldn't be too far from the truth if I guessed that he was ORDERED to take care of her, until after they mined the White House. Thus when they got to Montreal, and didn't have any pending assignments, E. G. Lee sent them to Elmira to do him a favor and to get them out of the way. After the war, they were still together in Canada, until Lee sent her back to New York - to get her away from Surratt. (That's another story that needs work.)
Any other thoughts on this situation?

John - I have spoken to this researcher many times; but this time, he called directly to Colleen at our research center, so I don't know the gist of the entire conversation. I believe this person is concentrating on the Judah Benjamin angle.

It never dawned on me that Sarah would stay with her mother while in NY, but that is a logical assumption - unless she did not want to involve her family in her covert actions.

As for E.G. Lee's concern about Sarah and John, Jr., from the standpoint of John's "intentions," I suspect that Lee had good reason to warn Sarah. Those intentions may have been part of the reason why John dismissed David Barry from escort duty. Didn't someone (Weichmann?) mention that John had a female on his mind - or words to that effect?

In a letter written to Brooks Stabler on March 26, 1865, John, who had returned his team to Stabler, wrote that he had "women on the brain" and might be away for a week or so. Whether he actually was thinking of a woman, or whether this was just a nice, masculine-sounding excuse, who knows?

I've said this earlier on the forum, but I don't think the lady Lee warned against John Surratt (if he did indeed issue a warning) was Sarah. In his diary, Lee makes several mentions of a Miss Young, a New Yorker who was staying with John and Sarah Lovell. On August 18, 1865, he notes the arrival of "Mr. Armstrong" (Surratt), and mentions a visit to the theater to see Kean in the role of Richard III; apparently the party included Miss Young and Surratt, although the entry's worded rather vaguely. On August 21, Lee writes, "Mr. Armstrong very devoted; made an opportunity for him in the library." Later he adds, "Had very confidential conversation with 'the Young' after returning from theater at 11 p.m." Miss Young had left Montreal by August 30. On that date, Lee, who described her in a letter to his mother as "remarkably pretty, sings, is said to be rich, tries to be a belle," wrote in the same letter, "She behaved so well and seemed so determined to make a friend of me, that when she left Montreal and asked me, when saying goodbye, if we didn't part friends, I told her 'yes' most heartily." He added, "But the other Yankees I have met haven't found much favor at my hands."

I don't see any reason to assume that the Yankee Miss Young was Sarah. It also seems improbable to me that Lee would be "making an opportunity" for John Surratt to have a tete-a-tete with a married woman--especially since John would have had plenty of opportunities with Sarah during their travels without any help from Lee.

Hi Laurie. put Susan on the line. I want to exchange information on Miss Young. Thanks!
Hi Susan. I don't know for surethat Miss Young was - or wasn't- Sarah. So, I will present the facts as I see them and ask you to present your views.
It seems that we are both using the same basic info E.G.Lee's Diary. In it Lee rarely uses a person's real name. For example : Surratt is "Charley Armstrong". (Why would he use Miss Young's real name and then heap derogatory stories on her?)
Good ole' Charlie had been in constant, exclusive companionship with Sarah for the previous 6 weeks (+/-) and as Lee says "Appears devoted". Lee could see "no Good" coming from a continued relationship with a married woman (Sarah), so he suggested that see 'stop and desist". (I have to agree with him). I can't comprehend Surratt dropping Sarah and reaffixing his devotion to Miss Young in less than a week. (Her departure changed his attitude completely.)
As for Sarah, I have read in her divorce papers that "she returned to New York "in early May", and took up residence with Rowan - Her husband . Which I do not believe. (That is the reason I have been using "early May" as the time of the separation, Now I know that her arrival was much later..
While we are on the subject. I believe that Sarah's testimony during the Divorce Proceedings to be a Pack of lies. She got the divorce as part of an arrangement to CHANGE HER NAME. If you recall, Surratt was still being hunted for prosecution for his part in the Assassination. Sarah could be dragged into court on the same charges. (Her life with Long - is another story)
Have you ever tried to find "Bouthiller" in Canada? There are frequent references to Surratt's association at diner and parties with Bouthiller, in Canada - at the same time he was enraptured with Miss Young. Bouthiller has been described as "a young Canadian", who disappears. I wonder if that is a code name for someone else that we know.