Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

L Verge · (This post was last modified: 05-12-2017 06:15 PM by L Verge.)

About six weeks ago, I was contacted by a lady who had (much to her surprise) inherited a good deal of material belonging to William J. Ferguson, the young actor who was running lines with Laura Keene off-stage at the moment that Booth struck. The lady had been in touch with Ford's Theatre, but they were not interested in discussing the materials until they were authenticated.

Somehow, I received her call for help and knew immediately who was the best man for the job - forum member, Tom Bogar. Tom was traveling for awhile this spring, but he did contact her, and they were able to meet here at the James O. Hall Research Center at Surratt House this past week. There were boxes of materials (and others had remained at home).

Tom spent several hours perusing the items and determined that they were all authentic. Included in the materials were a number of scripts that Ferguson wrote over the years. Some of you may know that he stayed true to his profession after the Civil War and went on to act in silent films.

Tom will be providing this charming woman a letter of authentication regarding the collection that he has viewed. She will likely need an appraisal, and I suppose that she will be contacting Ford's again. There are still goodies out there to be found.

P.S. The middle initial "J" stands for "Jason."

L Verge · 05-08-2017, 06:06 PM

(05-08-2017 03:41 PM)L Verge Wrote: About six weeks ago, I was contacted by a lady who had (much to her surprise) inherited a good deal of material belonging to William J. Ferguson, the young actor who was running lines with Laura Keene off-stage at the moment that Booth struck. The lady had been in touch with Ford's Theatre, but they were not interested in discussing the materials until they were authenticated.

Somehow, I received her call for help and knew immediately who was the best man for the job - forum member, Tom Bogar. Tom was traveling for awhile this spring, but he did contact her, and they were able to meet here at the James O. Hall Research Center at Surratt House this past week. There were boxes of materials (and others had remained at home).

Tom spent several hours perusing the items and determined that they were all authentic. Included in the materials were a number of scripts that Emerson wrote over the years. Some of you may know that he stayed true to his profession after the Civil War and went on to act in silent films.

Tom will be providing this charming woman a letter of authentication regarding the collection that he has viewed. She will likely need an appraisal, and I suppose that she will be contacting Ford's again. There are still goodies out there to be found.

P.S. The middle initial "J" stands for "Jason."

Please re-read this post and note that I have corrected this to read William J. Ferguson (not Emerson). I guess I was trying to think where to state that Ferguson's middle name was Jason and ended up thinking "Jason EMERSON" instead.

Tom Bogar · 05-08-2017, 08:52 PM

I'm happy to have been able to help, and consequently to see, and lay hands on, these marvelous artifacts. One of the most rewarding aspect of writing Backstage was hearing from the descendants of the 46 people whose lives I researched and (hopefully) brought to life. I did send her the letter of authentication, and encouraged her to compile a detailed cataloguing of everything (several quite large boxes). And yes, they are the real deal, held by a linear descendant of Ferguson. It was a wonderful, and yes, moving, experience. It's up to her where she goes from here with it all, and hopefully she will stay in touch.

SSlater · 05-09-2017, 12:09 AM

You are very fortunate to have met with cooperative descendants. That is not always the case. A few years ago I contacted descendants of Sarah Slater (not a direct line, they descent from her brothers.) So, Sarah was an Aunt. They are very aware of all that she did.

I offered to provide all the documentation that I have - THEY WERE NOT A BIT INTERESTED. It seems that they consider her to be a criminal, and did not want to admit their relationship. I have stayed in touch, with Christmas Cards etc. I have stopped calling her SLATER and use her maiden name and only use "after the war" stories, which they like. However they did not change. I have enough "Other" stuff to keep them answering me. I have asked for Pictures. They have not offered Pictures of Sarah, but I do have pictures of others in the family.(For which I compensated them). I sent them a VERY GOOD copy of the Pic we all have - which helps My Case.
I try to be carefull not to antagonize them further. I don't mention Lincoln or the other spy people. I have info they want to hear.
If I make any significant progress - I will share it. (Somehow).
(She has kin in New Jersey and in Florida, who have been nice.)

RJNorton · 05-09-2017, 04:03 AM

(05-09-2017 12:09 AM)SSlater Wrote: I have asked for Pictures. They have not offered Pictures of Sarah,

In the past we have discussed the picture of the lady on p. 376 in John Headley's "Confederate Operations in Canada and New York."

The question is whether or not the lady pictured there is Sarah Slater. Has anyone found any more information to confirm or refute whether or not it's Sarah?

John, as I recall, you believe it is Sarah. Have you found any additional information? I would love to know if it's she.

L Verge · 05-09-2017, 08:20 AM

Remind me again of how old Sarah would have been in 1864-65, please. The more I look at the facial features of this "young Confederate widow" (which Sarah was not), the more she appears more matronly to me. I say that because of the heavy lines that extend from her nose to the corners of her mouth - what we used to call Howdy Doody lines in women.

At first, I thought perhaps the photo was taken in her later years (maybe at the "reunion" of Headley's), but the style of her bodice is definitely CW era. Would she have even wanted her picture taken at that time? When was the reunion? Could the photo have been taken then? Would the style of dress still be in fashion?

SSlater · 05-09-2017, 04:10 PM

(05-09-2017 08:20 AM)L Verge Wrote: Remind me again of how old Sarah would have been in 1864-65, please. The more I look at the facial features of this "young Confederate widow" (which Sarah was not), the more she appears more matronly to me. I say that because of the heavy lines that extend from her nose to the corners of her mouth - what we used to call Howdy Doody lines in women.

At first, I thought perhaps the photo was taken in her later years (maybe at the "reunion" of Headley's), but the style of her bodice is definitely CW era. Would she have even wanted her picture taken at that time? When was the reunion? Could the photo have been taken then? Would the style of dress still be in fashion?

Laurie. Sarah was born 1843. Sarah was in and put of Canada betwee n Dec. 1864 and April 1865 - in this time frame she was between 21 and 22. I'll send you a better picture when I get some ink. JFS

SSlater · 05-10-2017, 07:55 PM

(05-09-2017 04:03 AM)RJNorton Wrote:
(05-09-2017 12:09 AM)SSlater Wrote: I have asked for Pictures. They have not offered Pictures of Sarah,

In the past we have discussed the picture of the lady on p. 376 in John Headley's "Confederate Operations in Canada and New York."

The question is whether or not the lady pictured there is Sarah Slater. Has anyone found any more information to confirm or refute whether or not it's Sarah?

John, as I recall, you believe it is Sarah. Have you found any additional information? I would love to know if it's she.

Justification that the Picture in "Headley" is Sarah Slater.
John W. Headley writes in his Book , described above , that "A lady" carried the request from the Saint Albans Raiders to Richmond asking for documentation that showed that they were an organized military group acting under orders from the Confederate Government while conducting a raid on St. Albans , Vermont. Not one of them remembered her name, nor did any of the Confederate Commissioners in Canada.

In 1906, when Headley was preparing to publish his book, one of the Raiders was able to provide a picture of the Lady, that he secured from the Police at the Jail in Canada. Again. no one remembered her name. Recognition by the Police is critical to identifying the unnamed Lady. They were not deceived by "Long, black, face hiding, "Widow veils" - they saw and can identify ".... the lady who assisted the Prisoners." But they didn't know her name.

This ease at identifying "the Lady" is shared by the prisoners. They saw her often and regularly, over a period of time, when her features were not hidden.

In 1906, their memory was vivid, of the Lady that "helped them stay alive." They never would have allowed that honor be provided to an undeserving individual. The Raiders all agreed "The lady in the picture is the Lady that secured the documents that set them free."

Completely independent of this documentation, the Rev. Stephen Cameron, who was in Canada during their trial, and who also traveled to Richmond to secure the same evidence that "The Lady'' searched for, followed the Lady to Richmond, on a different time schedule and most likely by another route. They obviously did not join together in Richmond -otherwise there never would have be two issues of the same documents.

Each, again, moved on separate departure dates and by separate routes. Surprisingly, their separate return routes resulted in their arrival in Canada on the same date. We are all aware that the information provided to the Court was effective and the Raiders were freed.

This documentation shows that the Raiders knew "The Lady" by sight, without knowing her name. And that the Rev. Cameron knew of her contributions as a Currier, and he knew her name.

The Rev. Cameron had an intensive, long term contact with Sarah A. Slater, beginning in Richmond in the fall of 1864, when he escorted her from Richmond to Canada, as she began her new assignment as a Confederate Agent.

The Police in Canada and the Confederate Prisoners say "The Picture" is the Lady who attended to the Prisoners. Rev Cameron says that the Lady in the picture, who traveled to Richmond, is Sarah Slater

RJNorton · 05-11-2017, 04:11 AM

Thank you very much, John.

Headley's book was published in 1906. John Surratt lived until 1916. I'd love to know if Surratt ever purchased the book. If he did, the photo must have brought back memories.

Susan Higginbotham · 05-11-2017, 07:57 AM

Where did Cameron identify the photograph as being that of Sarah?

Gene C · 05-11-2017, 01:11 PM

Great research John!

My problem with the photograph is Headley. His book is very self aggrandizing. His self proclaimed actions and involvement in the New York bombings - arson fires, (which was very unsuccessful) were considered then as well as today, not as an honorable act of war, but of terrorism. An act he is quite proud of. Plus his book is written 40 years after the events occurred. (I can understand why) I question his accuracy of many of the events and his involvement in the activities he wrote about. I understand the over exaggeration was quite common with this type of book written after the war.

While I do not question Sarah Slater's involvement and role in providing the documents for the defense of the Vermont Bank Robbers, I question the photo alleged to be of Sara Slater, and the story behind it, based primarily upon Headley's claim and statements. I believe he is an unreliable witness
I am wondering how many of the "Raiders" were alive in 1906 including Rev. Cameron.

I am interested in the source of this statement,
"The Police in Canada and the Confederate Prisoners say "The Picture" is the Lady who attended to the Prisoners. Rev Cameron says that the Lady in the picture, who traveled to Richmond, is Sarah Slater"

A link to some previous comments on the forum
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...ht=Headley

_____________________________________________________

***Congrat's to Tom Bogar for his work in helping the person with the William Ferguson documents.

BettyO · (This post was last modified: 05-11-2017 02:02 PM by BettyO.)

Quote:I am wondering how many of the "Raiders" were alive in 1906 including Rev. Cameron.

Lt (later General) Bennett Young died in 1919. It was he, who at 20-21 years of age, instigated the Saint Alban's Raid. He was an exceedingly interesting man - captured and tried for the raid who was later promoted to general. A movie entitled "The Raid" was produced in 1954 starring Van Heflin. His book, Confederate Wizards of the Saddle concerns his membership in John Hunt Morgan's unit. I checked, but no mention of Sara Slater. Movie is available for download from Youtube and the book is available on Internet Archive.

Movie- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uECSJkbO9BA

Book - https://archive.org/details/cu31924030921260

L Verge · 05-11-2017, 03:32 PM

How did the police in Canada come to have the photo in the first place? Sarah certainly wasn't passing out photos of herself. Was the police department that modernized that they had the capabilities of photographing their subjects? If so, Sarah obviously changed into something more becoming because those are certainly not widow's weeds that she's wearing in that photo.

I guess the other alternative in my mind is that the photo was taken (or given) at the reunion. I know nothing about Headley, the reunion, Cameron. When was the reunion?

Susan Higginbotham · 05-11-2017, 04:35 PM

(05-11-2017 03:32 PM)L Verge Wrote: How did the police in Canada come to have the photo in the first place? Sarah certainly wasn't passing out photos of herself. Was the police department that modernized that they had the capabilities of photographing their subjects? If so, Sarah obviously changed into something more becoming because those are certainly not widow's weeds that she's wearing in that photo.

I guess the other alternative in my mind is that the photo was taken (or given) at the reunion. I know nothing about Headley, the reunion, Cameron. When was the reunion?

Headley claims in a footnote on p. 376 that one of the prisoners in jail at Montreal succeeded in securing the young widow's photograph. I presume that's the source of the photograph in his book on the opposite page.

L Verge · 05-11-2017, 05:27 PM

(05-11-2017 04:35 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:
(05-11-2017 03:32 PM)L Verge Wrote: How did the police in Canada come to have the photo in the first place? Sarah certainly wasn't passing out photos of herself. Was the police department that modernized that they had the capabilities of photographing their subjects? If so, Sarah obviously changed into something more becoming because those are certainly not widow's weeds that she's wearing in that photo.

I guess the other alternative in my mind is that the photo was taken (or given) at the reunion. I know nothing about Headley, the reunion, Cameron. When was the reunion?

Headley claims in a footnote on p. 376 that one of the prisoners in jail at Montreal succeeded in securing the young widow's photograph. I presume that's the source of the photograph in his book on the opposite page.

Thanks for the citation, Susan, but that only causes me to question how that prisoner got the photo. He had no SmartPhone, and I cannot imagine that a secret agent lady would be passing out photos of herself - even though CDVs were the calling cards of the day. What purpose would Sarah have in giving strangers her photo (even if she had helped save them).

No one would love to see a photograph of Sarah Slater any more than I. I worked with James O. Hall for nearly thirty years, and he was so absorbed with her that I would love to see what the lady looked like. There is just something about Headley's photo that doesn't ring true to me.