JWB Seduction Charge (Not Breach of Promise)

[jparkuntz]

This is a follow-up to my post of a few weeks ago of a 4/16/1865 Philadelphia Sunday Mercury clipping that indicated that JWB had seduced a young woman in Philadelphia in 1857-58 and that resulted in a requisition being sent from the Governor of Pennsylvania to Virginia to have Booth returned to face that charge.

I have a couple of follow-ups. George Alfred Townsend wrote in his 1865 Life, Crime, and Capture of John Wilkes Booth: "For an affair at his boarding-house he was compelled to pay a considerable sum of money, and it happily occured just as he was to quit the city [Philadelphia]"

Art Loux mentions this quote in his John Wilkes Booth Day-By-Day, but says it is dubious because another source said Booth was staying at John Sleeler Clarke's, not at a boarding house.

Today I went to the Pennsylvania State Archives and found the requisition. See attached. "Seduction" was a pretty serious felony, punishable by a fine and between 7-21 years in prison.

Luckily for Booth (but not the USA), his lawyer Robert M. Lee Jr. "connived" to get the charges dropped for a payoff. Had Booth been held accountable, he would have been behind bars in 1865.

Maybe Philadelphia City Archives might have more details of the charge.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

[L Verge]

(11-29-2017 03:49 PM)jparkuntz Wrote:  This is a follow-up to my post of a few weeks ago of a 4/16/1865 Philadelphia Sunday Mercury clipping that indicated that JWB had seduced a young woman in Philadelphia in 1857-58 and that resulted in a requisition being sent from the Governor of Pennsylvania to Virginia to have Booth returned to face that charge.

I have a couple of follow-ups. George Alfred Townsend wrote in his 1865 Life, Crime, and Capture of John Wilkes Booth: "For an affair at his boarding-house he was compelled to pay a considerable sum of money, and it happily occured just as he was to quit the city [Philadelphia]"

Art Loux mentions this quote in his John Wilkes Booth Day-By-Day, but says it is dubious because another source said Booth was staying at John Sleeler Clarke's, not at a boarding house.

Today I went to the Pennsylvania State Archives and found the requisition. See attached. "Seduction" was a pretty serious felony, punishable by a fine and between 7-21 years in prison.

Luckily for Booth (but not the USA), his lawyer Robert M. Lee Jr. "connived" to get the charges dropped for a payoff. Had Booth been held accountable, he would have been behind bars in 1865.

Maybe Philadelphia City Archives might have more details of the charge.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

---

Since I am addicted to the story of the Lincoln assassination, I am so glad that a deal was cut...

[JMadonna]

I heard that lawyer Robert M. Lee Jr. is on the staff of Harvey Weinstien.

[Steve]

(11-29-2017 03:49 PM)jparkuntz Wrote:  This is a follow-up to my post of a few weeks ago of a 4/16/1865 Philadelphia Sunday Mercury clipping that indicated that JWB had seduced a young woman in Philadelphia in 1857-58 and that resulted in a requisition being sent from the Governor of Pennsylvania to Virginia to have Booth returned to face that charge.

I have a couple of follow-ups. George Alfred Townsend wrote in his 1865 Life, Crime, and Capture of John Wilkes Booth: "For an affair at his boarding-house he was compelled to pay a considerable sum of money, and it happily occured just as he was to quit the city [Philadelphia]"

Art Loux mentions this quote in his John Wilkes Booth Day-By-Day, but says it is dubious because another source said Booth was staying at John Sleeler Clarke's, not at a boarding house.

Today I went to the Pennsylvania State Archives and found the requisition. See attached. "Seduction" was a pretty serious felony, punishable by a fine and between 7-21 years in prison.

Luckily for Booth (but not the USA), his lawyer Robert M. Lee Jr. "connived" to get the charges dropped for a payoff. Had Booth been held accountable, he would have been behind bars in 1865.

Maybe Philadelphia City Archives might have more details of the charge.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

Wow, great and important find! I'm glad the Mercury story was able to be verified. About the Philadelphia Archives, I have to tell you something important. In less than 2 weeks it's going to close and isn't scheduled to reopen until September 2018 because it is moving locations:

https://blog.eogn.com/2017/11/29/philade...gust-2018/

This link may be helpful in understanding Pennsylvania laws regarding the crime of seduction at the time:

https://books.google.com/books?id=vj2TAA...ia&f=false

[jparkuntz]

Quote:Wow, great and important find! I'm glad the Mercury story was able to be verified. About the Philadelphia Archives, I have to tell you something important. In less than 2 weeks it's going to close and isn't scheduled to reopen until September 2018 because it is moving locations:

https://blog.eogn.com/2017/11/29/philade...gust-2018/

This link may be helpful in understanding Pennsylvania laws regarding the crime of seduction at the time:

https://books.google.com/books?id=vj2TAA...ia&f=false

Yikes, I can't make it down there before they close. I'm not sure how requisitions get issued, other than that they come to Governors from counties. But I don't know what agency within a county sends that prompt: a sheriff, a commissioner, or a court.

I saw the 7-21 year penalty for seduction in an act from Pennsylvania that was referring to slaves. So it would be interesting to find out what the penalty was in 1859 for non-slave: was it still 1-3 years, as indicated in the 1843 act you quote? Or was it weaker or stronger?

I can tell you that of all the 1857-1860 Pennsylvania requisition files I looked through yesterday, about one third were for seduction, one third for forgery, and the other third other felonies.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

[Dennis Urban]

Interesting that the affidavit is addressed to the governor of Virginia and indicates that Booth has taken refuge there. This may have been the first time he fled to Virginia, but certainly not the last. Fascinating stuff.

[L Verge]

John Brown was hanged in Virginia on December 2, 1859. This document is dated December 3, 1859. Guess where Booth was and why he was there...

[Dennis Urban]

Easy. He was performing in Richmond, left without telling the theatre manager and joined up with the Richmond Grays on their way to Charles Town where he observed the hanging. There are several stories about Booth obtaining some uniform clothes. I do not know if it was ever established if he joined the unit or was just a unit groupie. He did admire John Brown however.

[L Verge]

(11-30-2017 02:14 PM)Dennis Urban Wrote:  Easy. He was performing in Richmond, left without telling the theatre manager and joined up with the Richmond Grays on their way to Charles Town where he observed the hanging. There are several stories about Booth obtaining some uniform clothes. I do not know if it was ever established if he joined the unit or was just a unit groupie. He did admire John Brown however.

Bingo! And I bet that someone connected to Pennsylvania saw a playbill or such that placed Booth in Richmond. I doubt that anyone from the Grays knew about his indiscretion.

Booth admired Brown for his holding firm, but not for what he did.

[jparkuntz]

(11-30-2017 04:23 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Booth admired Brown for his holding firm, but not for what he did.

I would argue that he admired Brown for his sense of drama.

[L Verge]

(11-30-2017 05:31 PM)jparkuntz Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 04:23 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Booth admired Brown for his holding firm, but not for what he did.

I would argue that he admired Brown for his sense of drama.

You may be right, and if so, that would seem to me a good reason for Booth to want to be taken alive in 1865 so that he could be the center of his own dramatic ending among a crowd of spectators.

Second question: Would you consider writing a small blurb about this for the Surratt Courier -- three-quarters to a full page?? If you want to gather more details, it can be even longer.

[Steve]

This 1833 report from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has more information on what constituted the crime of seduction. I don't know if the law was changed in the intervening two decades:

https://books.google.com/books?id=d_9HAQ...&q&f=false

[jparkuntz]

Steve and I both went to the Philadelphia City Archives last week and separately reviewed the Quarter Sessions court records from 1857-1860, and found a handful of Seduction charges--but NONE involving J.B. Wilkes/John Wilkes Booth. This is definitely the Grand Jury/Court that would have issued an indictment and convened a trial.

Yet the requisition for Booth exists in the Pennsylvania State Archives.

The key to this mystery is Robert M. Lee, the "conniving" Philadelphia lawyer; the woman who he was involved with--Jane Fleming/Annie Melville, later Mrs. Robert M. Lee/Eusebia Fitzgerald; and her previous paramour, the master forger, James Buchanan Crosse.

I believe this trio forged warrant documents that were sent to Harrisburg, and used them to successfully blackmail Booth after he had left Philadelphia. He was a prime target: young, vain, and from a famous, wealthy family.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

[L Verge]

(12-15-2017 08:50 PM)jparkuntz Wrote:  Steve and I both went to the Philadelphia City Archives last week and separately reviewed the Quarter Sessions court records from 1857-1860, and found a handful of Seduction charges--but NONE involving J.B. Wilkes/John Wilkes Booth. This is definitely the Grand Jury/Court that would have issued an indictment and convened a trial.

Yet the requisition for Booth exists in the Pennsylvania State Archives.

The key to this mystery is Robert M. Lee, the "conniving" Philadelphia lawyer; the woman who he was involved with--Jane Fleming/Annie Melville, later Mrs. Robert M. Lee/Eusebia Fitzgerald; and her previous paramour, the master forger, James Buchanan Crosse.

I believe this trio forged warrant documents that were sent to Harrisburg, and used them to successfully blackmail Booth after he had left Philadelphia. He was a prime target: young, vain, and from a famous, wealthy family.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

I like your conclusions, Jerry, as to the true story behind these seduction charges against Booth. Previous centuries had their share of cheats and liars also.

As for the legal terms that Steve found regarding "seduction:" Am I interpreting the beginning statements correctly? Does it specify that a father may seduce his under-age daughter without repercussions since she is still under his "command?"

[Lincoln Wonk]

(11-30-2017 06:49 AM)jparkuntz Wrote:  

Quote:Wow, great and important find! I'm glad the Mercury story was able to be verified. About the Philadelphia Archives, I have to tell you something important. In less than 2 weeks it's going to close and isn't scheduled to reopen until September 2018 because it is moving locations:

https://blog.eogn.com/2017/11/29/philade...gust-2018/

This link may be helpful in understanding Pennsylvania laws regarding the crime of seduction at the time:

https://books.google.com/books?id=vj2TAA...ia&f=false

Yikes, I can't make it down there before they close. I'm not sure how requisitions get issued, other than that they come to Governors from counties. But I don't know what agency within a county sends that prompt: a sheriff, a commissioner, or a court.

I saw the 7-21 year penalty for seduction in an act from Pennsylvania that was referring to slaves. So it would be interesting to find out what the penalty was in 1859 for non-slave: was it still 1-3 years, as indicated in the 1843 act you quote? Or was it weaker or stronger?

I can tell you that of all the 1857-1860 Pennsylvania requisition files I looked through yesterday, about one third were for seduction, one third for forgery, and the other third other felonies.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

---

(12-17-2017 12:44 PM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 06:49 AM)jparkuntz Wrote:  

Quote:Wow, great and important find! I'm glad the Mercury story was able to be verified. About the Philadelphia Archives, I have to tell you something important. In less than 2 weeks it's going to close and isn't scheduled to reopen until September 2018 because it is moving locations:

https://blog.eogn.com/2017/11/29/philade...gust-2018/

This link may be helpful in understanding Pennsylvania laws regarding the crime of seduction at the time:

https://books.google.com/books?id=vj2TAA...ia&f=false

Yikes, I can't make it down there before they close. I'm not sure how requisitions get issued, other than that they come to Governors from counties. But I don't know what agency within a county sends that prompt: a sheriff, a commissioner, or a court.

I saw the 7-21 year penalty for seduction in an act from Pennsylvania that was referring to slaves. So it would be interesting to find out what the penalty was in 1859 for non-slave: was it still 1-3 years, as indicated in the 1843 act you quote? Or was it weaker or stronger?

I can tell you that of all the 1857-1860 Pennsylvania requisition files I looked through yesterday, about one third were for seduction, one third for forgery, and the other third other felonies.

Jerry Kuntz
Warwick NY

Thanks for letting everyone know. This will really be a problem for American Revolution researcher, especially.