A Second Manhunt Trailer

Today, February 12, 2024, is Abraham Lincoln’s 215th birthday. Likely in celebration of this day, the folks over at AppleTV+ have released a second trailer for their upcoming miniseries Manhunt, based on the book by James L. Swanson. Unlike the trailer released last week, this one is in the form of a featurette and contains clips of the actors and producer of the series discussing their work. It’s still on the sort side of around two minutes in length, but this new trailer does show us a bit more of what the show will have to offer. Give the new trailer a watch:

Here are some of my thoughts after watching this new trailer:

  • The trailer opens with President Lincoln and United States Colored Troop soldiers walking through a severely damaged city. My guess is that this is referencing the visit Lincoln made to the fallen Confederate capital of Richmond not long before the assassination. However, the special effects of the scene could also lead one to believe this may be a dream-like sequence for the president. We’ll just have to wait and see.
  • We get our first glimpses of Lewis Powell’s attack on Secretary Seward and his household here. The clip quickly shows Powell’s entry at the Seward home, his bludgeoning of Frederick Seward with his gun, and his grappling with someone in the Seward house (enough to break a window). This trailer also clears up the question as to where Stanton went first. We see Stanton witnessing the bloodshed at Seward before asking if the President was still at the theater. This is in line with what actually occurred. Stanton had been informed by a messenger that Lincoln and Seward had been attacked and he had traveled to Seward’s house to dispel the rumor. When he witnessed the bloody scene at the Seward house, he then proposed to Gideon Welles, the Secretary of the Navy who had arrived at the Seward home at the same time, that he would go to Ford’s Theatre. As he was getting ready to depart Major Thomas Eckert rode up on horseback, he having just come from the scene outside of Ford’s Theatre. Major Eckert advised Stanton against going to 10th Street for fear there might still be assassins amongst the throng of people. As we know, Stanton decided to go anyway. In the trailer, the man to whom Stanton asks about the President and his whereabouts is Major Eckert.
  • Mary Lincoln is shown mournfully climbing the steps to the Lincoln funeral car in her black mourning attire while a steady rain falls. This is an example of understandable dramatic license on the part of the series. In reality, the bereft Mary Lincoln was too overcome with grief to participate in the public funerary events for her husband. She did not escort Lincoln’s coffin on the funeral train and, as far as I know, never set foot on the train where her husband and son’s remains were transported. The scene does make for a touching visual, though.
  • There are a few character collages that pop up during this trailer. The first is titled “The Hunters,” and shows the actors playing the figures of Edwin Stanton, Col. Lafayette Baker, Thomas Eckert, and Boston Corbett.
  • At the 40-second mark, a voice is heard saying, “It’s a code” and then a cipher cylinder is shown. It will be interesting to see how this is worked into the series. As I’ve written about previously, there’s a lot of confusion and misinformation out there about John Wilkes Booth’s so-called “Confederate” cipher. During the investigation, a paper Vigenère table in Booth’s handwriting was found in his trunk at the National Hotel. It was admitted into evidence during the trial of the conspirators. A Vigenère cipher cylinder like the one shown in the trailer was also entered into evidence. This cylinder had been captured from the Confederate offices in Richmond along with coded letters. However, there is no connection between Booth’s Vigenère table and the seized Confederate cipher aside from the format being the same. A Vigenère table is merely a tool for encoding or decoding information. We know of no coded letters written by Booth or his conspirators. The Vigenère table was likely Booth’s attempt at playing “spy,” as he would like to boast to his sister, Asia. While the Confederacy used their ciphers to send coded messages, there is no evidence that Booth ever participated in this. No coded notes from the Confederacy have ever been found mentioning Booth or his plot. The purpose of admitting the cipher cylinder as evidence at the trial was due to the fact that Confederate officials were also being tried, in absentia, for Lincoln’s murder. The fact that Booth owned a Vigenère table was the government’s weak attempt to connect Booth to the Confederate government. While having a Vigenère table may seem damning, it’s more akin to trying to connect Botoh to Jefferson Davis because they both had crossword puzzles on their desks. The government was desperate to put the blame for Lincoln’s death on Confederate officials, which is why they threw everything they could against the wall, hoping something would stick.
  • The second character collage grouping is called “The Conspirators” and shows John Wilkes Booth, David Herold, Mary Surratt, and John Surratt. I look forward to seeing where the miniseries places John Surratt on the night of the assassination. Will they depict him as being in D.C. that night or up in Elmira, New York, as he always stated?
  • While the actor playing David Herold is talking, there a brief scene is shown of a man emerging from a brick alleyway near Ford’s Theatre, likely meant to be the alley between Ford’s Theatre and the Star Saloon next door. He catches sight of Edwin Stanton and then attempts to run when he is stopped by Thomas Eckert. It all happens so fast it’s hard to tell who that character is meant to be. My best guess is that it is supposed to be Edman Spangler. I hope I’m mistaken, as that scene would be pretty unfair to ol’ Ned. Spangler never attempted to flee from the authorities who interviewed him multiple times before officially arresting him. As one of the few conspirators that most historians agree was innocent of any involvement in Booth’s plot, it’s hard to see him acting as if he had a reason to flee. But I could be wrong about my identification here.
  • Stanton is shown holding a Lincoln mask, complete with strings presumably for attaching to one’s face. I can’t say if masks like these ever existed. This mask is based on a genuine Abraham Lincoln face mold that the President sat for with sculptor Clark Mills in February of 1865. Plaster and bronze copies of this mold can be found in many museums and Lincoln sites around the country. Many folks confuse this mold to be a “death mask” of Lincoln made after his assassination, but it was a life mask made when the President was alive.

Clark Mills’ plaster life mask of Abraham Lincoln. 1865

  • The special effects department did a good job of photoshopping their Booth actor into the famous images of Lincoln’s second inauguration. We know that Booth was present on that day, and in 1956, photography historian Frederick Hill Meserve pointed out a somewhat familiar mustachioed face in the crowd to readers of Life Magazine.
  •  The collage of “The Informants” shows the characters of Mary Simms, “Wallace,” Joseph “Peanut John” Burroughs, and Louis Weichmann. I don’t know who “Wallace” is, but that is the character name actor Josh Stewart plays, according to IMDB. My guess is that this identification is a mistake. My money is that he is supposed to be Mary Surratt’s tavern renter, John M. Lloyd.
  • I’m not trying to harp on it as I’m sure the actress will give a great performance, but I feel it’s important to reiterate that Mary Simms was not at the Mudd farm during John Wilkes Booth’s escape. Mary and her family had been enslaved by Dr. Mudd, but they left the Mudd farm in 1864 when they were freed after the new Maryland state constitution prohibited slavery. Mary Simms did testify at the trial of the conspirators, but her testimony had nothing to do with John Wilkes Booth. She was a prosecution witness against Dr. Mudd, testifying about his Confederate sympathies and disloyalty during the Civil War. Mary Simms did not interact with John Wilkes Booth during the escape. All of the scenes where they appear together or of her at the Mudd house in 1865 are completely fictitious.
  • Since the actual layout of the box at Ford’s Theatre has not been replicated, the assassination scene has been understandably altered. In the trailer, we see Major Rathbone apparently jump down to the President’s box after the shot. Booth slashes at him a couple of times, knocking him back. Rathbone does not appear to make a last-second grab at the assassin’s clothing as he testified. Instead, the miniseries appears to show that Booth gets tripped up by the decorative flags, a common enough version of the events. The portrait of Washington that was affixed to the front of the actual box does not appear to be present in this recreation (or if it is, it does not get knocked to the stage when Booth makes his jump).
  • I do like how one audience member is seen to climb onto the stage and give chase to Booth after the shot. That’s a nice nod to Major Joseph Stewart, “one of the tallest men in Washington,” who was the only audience member to quickly run after the assailant.
  • There’s a scene of a mustache-less Booth riding fast through a village of some sort during the daytime. This is likely another case of dramatic license. After shaving his mustache off at Dr. Mudd’s, Booth made his way under the cover of darkness to Samuel Cox’s home and was then secreted in a nearby pine thicket. Once in the thicket, Booth and Herold’s horses were disposed of. After this, the only times Booth rode on a horse was when sharing it with another person and never at breakneck speed. It certainly helps with the action, though.
  • Mary Simms is shown in conversation with Louis Weichmann, apparently motivating him to disclose all that he knows. As far as I know, Mary Simms and Louis Weichmann never interacted with each other. While Weichmann was arrested and pressed to divulge what he knew about the conspirators, Mary Simms was never arrested. She was only brought forward to testify at the trial a month after the assassination.
  • As we expect with trailers, the last bit is full of quick edits that build up the action. The scenes fly by so fast that it’s too difficult to break them all down. But I am curious as to what urban-looking building is on fire at the 1:45 mark, the identity of the pretty lady apparently tending to Booth at 1:46, and is Stanton holding a baseball in his hand when he embraces Lincoln at 1:34?
  • I enjoyed hearing the cast speak about the series. Patton Oswalt, in particular, seems like he enjoyed his role, which is wonderful to hear.
  • The costuming for all the characters is really well done. Everything looks the period as far as I can see, and the details are exceptional.

I’m not sure if they will tease us with another trailer between now and the miniseries’ debut on March 15, but if they do, I’ll be sure to let you all know. I’m really looking forward to seeing the whole thing in about a month’s time.

In the meantime, Happy Birthday, Abe!

Categories: History, News | Tags: , , , , , | 6 Comments

Forensic Analysis of the Abraham Lincoln Assassination

An interesting article has been published in The American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology by Drs. Theodore N. Pappas, Sven Swanson, and Michael M. Baden from the Department of Surgery at Duke University School of Medicine. The authors attempted to come to a conclusion about an oddly debated detail of Lincoln’s assassination: the path the bullet took inside Abraham Lincoln’s skull.

In the journal article, the doctors discussed the contradictory evidence that exists regarding the path Booth’s bullet took as it was fired into Lincoln’s brain. This debate is not a new one, as fellow MDs and late Lincoln researchers John K. Lattimer (whose diagram is shown above), Blaine Houmes, and E. Lawrence Abel each wrote about this topic.

What makes this new journal article unique is the way in which Drs. Pappas, Swanson, and Baden, were granted access to the Presidential Box to re-stage the assassination based on eyewitness accounts. They attempted to simulate the circumstances surrounding the assassination to get a better idea of the path the bullet may have taken. I’m happy to see Ford’s Theatre allowing this scientific exploration, even though the process involved a somewhat eerie floating skull over the reproduction Lincoln Rocker.

I won’t spoil the doctors’ findings here. Instead, I encourage you all to read the article for yourself. As far as scientific journal articles go, this one is very easy to digest. Click here or on the following title to read their article on The American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology‘s website:

I’m grateful to these doctors and the ones who came before them for using their expertise to help further our understanding of this key event in American history.

Categories: History, News | Tags: , , , , | 16 Comments

Manhunt Miniseries Trailer

AppleTV+ released its first trailer today for its upcoming miniseries based on the Lincoln assassination book, Manhunt: The 12-Day Chase for Lincoln’s Killer by James L. Swanson. I have previously written about this new series that is set to debut on the streaming service on March 15. This trailer gives us our first real look into the series, which will focus on the efforts of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton to track down Lincoln’s assassins. Give the trailer a watch:

I had a few initial thoughts while watching this trailer.

  • Anthony Boyle, the actor playing John Wilkes Booth, looks pretty good in the role. He has a decent resemblance to the assassin, much more so than some of the reenactment Booths used in some TV documentaries about the assassination.
  • Booth yells “Freedom for the South” from the theater box. While a limited number of eyewitness accounts claimed Booth might have yelled, “Freedom!”, “Revenge for the South!” or “The South is avenged!” I don’t recall reading “Freedom for the South!” before. It’s certainly not in Swanson’s book. The overwhelming evidence is that Booth said, “Sic Semper Tyrannis!” after shooting Lincoln, though whether this was in the box or on the stage is debated.
  • Stanton is shown learning of Lincoln’s assassination while riding a carriage during a fireworks display. Fireworks are also shown as Booth is riding out of Baptist Alley behind Ford’s. While visually appealing, the Grand Illumination in D.C. featuring fireworks was technically on the night of April 13, not the night of Lincoln’s assassination. Also, Stanton learned of the attack on Secretary Seward first. It was when Stanton arrived at the Seward house to check on the Secretary of State at about the same time as Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles that he was informed that Lincoln had also been targeted. However, this trailer may be depicting that event as it’s unclear from the clip where Stanton is supposed to be.
  • Booth is shown interacting with and seemingly threatening actress Lovie Simone, who plays the part of Mary Simms. As I previously noted, Mary Simms and her siblings left the Mudd farm in 1864 and were not around in 1865. Booth did not interact with Mary Simms during his escape.
  • The interior of Ford’s Theatre replicates the stage set of Our American Cousin well, but the theater box looks nothing like the real thing. It appears that Major Rathbone and Clara Harris are seated in their own box a few feet above the President and Mrs. Lincoln. It’s too bad the actual box appearance and layout couldn’t be recreated.
  • The overhead shot of Lincoln’s plain coffin being carried down the circular stairs of the Petersen House is an effective one.
  • At the 1:06 mark, you’ll see the actor playing Booth’s slayer, Boston Corbett. The actor’s name is William Mark McCullough. Coincidentally, he played John Wilkes Booth in 2015 Smithsonian Channel documentary, Lincoln’s Last Days.

  • There’s just a flash of the conspirators seated in their courtroom at the 1:13 mark. I can easily make out a hunched and bearded George Atzerodt, but I’m not sure about the other two men visible. Mary Surratt is erroneously shown placed amongst the men.
  • A man is shown in daylight pulling guns on the fugitives and stating, “I know who you are Mr. Booth.” I was uncertain who this figure was supposed to represent, but looking through the cast list on IMDB, it seems this is actor Roger Payano in the role of Oswell Swan. Swan guided Booth and Herold across the Zekiah Swamp to Samuel Cox’s home of Rich Hill. However, this occurred at nighttime, and Swan didn’t know the identities of the men he took over the swamp. He certainly didn’t pull a gun on them.
  • At 1:30, blink and you’ll miss actor Matt Walsh as Dr. Samuel Mudd handing something to Herold and Booth while a servant (likely the anachronistic Mary Simms) watches in the background. From this quick shot, Walsh looks good as Dr. Mudd.
  • The music in this trailer is quite good. I hope the actual show utilizes some of the songs included here.

From this trailer, it’s clear there will be a lot to talk about when the miniseries airs. What are your thoughts on this first look?

Categories: History, News | Tags: , , , , , , , , | 22 Comments

“Who could have done this?” – Christmas, 1883

140 years ago today, on December 23, 1883, a tragedy eighteen years in the making occurred in Germany. For the prior nine months, an American couple, their three children, and their nanny had been living in the German city of Hanover. The couple was independently wealthy and often split their time between a home in Washington, D.C., and various long vacations abroad in Europe. Their German neighbors noted that the 46-year-old husband was “shy of human beings” but that they had lovely interactions with his 49-year-old wife and their three children, aged 13, 12, and 11. The family enjoyed life in Hanover as the children were educated in nearby schools.

Then tragedy struck just two days before Christmas. In the early morning hours, screams were heard from the room shared by the couple. The nanny, Louise, who was also the wife’s sister, entered the bedroom in response to the uproar. Louise witnessed a tragically bloody scene before her. Her sister was sprawled on the bed with two bullets in her chest and a knife wound to her heart. Within minutes, the woman was dead.

On the floor lay the husband. He had been stabbed five times, with one of the wounds striking his lung. In severe pain, he cried to Louise and to his wife for help. But Louise was focused on the bed above him. The husband gathered his strength and pulled himself onto the bed. The shock of seeing his wife’s bloody and lifeless body caused the man to scream out to Louise, “Who could have done this? I have no enemies!”

Louise quickly called for the authorities. When the German police arrived, the husband warned them of possible attackers hiding behind the paintings on the bedroom walls. He was taken to a hospital and treated for his stab wounds. Fearful of the well-being of his children, the man begged the police to catch the perpetrator of this violent act. The police informed the husband that the culprit had already been arrested at the scene of the crime. But it was not a man hiding behind a painting that had caused the bloodshed. It was the wounded husband, himself, Henry Rathbone, who had murdered his beloved wife, Clara.

Eighteen years earlier, Major Henry Rathbone and his fiancee Clara Harris had been invited by Abraham and Mary Lincoln to join them for a night at the theater. The young couple were happy to spend a night out with the President and First Lady as the nation was celebrating the effective end of the Civil War. Henry and Clara were seated beside the Presidential couple when assassin John Wilkes Booth snuck into their shared theater box. Before the intruder’s presence had even been detected, Booth fired his derringer pistol at the back of Lincoln’s head, fatally wounding the President.

To his credit, Rathbone reacted quickly. The army veteran grabbed the intruder and grappled with him. Booth took out a long knife and slashed at the Major. Rathbone lifted his arm to block the blade and suffered a deep and painful stab to the arm as a result. When Booth mounted the balustrade of the box, preparing to jump to the stage below, Rathbone reached for him. The Major got a handful of clothing, throwing the descending man off balance to the stage. As cries from Mrs. Lincoln and Clara Harris echoed from the box, Rathbone screamed for someone to stop that man. Others attempted to enter the box in order to render aid to its occupants, but Booth had barred the outer door shut before shooting the President. Bleeding profusely from his stab wound, Rathbone managed to dislodge the wooden bar from the outer door, allowing doctors and others to rush in. The Major nearly passed out from blood loss as all attention was focused on the unconscious President.

Major Rathbone had performed admirably in attempting to subdue the assassin at Ford’s Theatre. He recognized the gunshot and reacted far quicker to it than anyone else in the theater. Rathbone had grappled with an armed assassin at the risk of his own life. He had demonstrated true bravery.

Despite his heroics, Henry Rathbone was forever haunted by the night of April 14, 1865. He came to unreasonably blame himself for Lincoln’s death, even though there was nothing he could have done to prevent the shooting. Still, the event likely caused Rathbone to develop Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which slowly affected his mental health.

Henry and Clara had postponed their marriage in the aftermath of the assassination out of respect for the martyred President. The couple eventually wed in 1867, and three children were born from their union. The oldest was Henry Riggs Rathbone, born on February 12, 1870. This meant that Henry’s namesake son shared a birthday with the late President Lincoln. Another son, Gerald, was born in 1871, and a daughter, Clara Pauline, came in 1872. When living in Washington, the family resided in a house located in the affluent neighborhood of Lafayette Square. From their home, the Rathbones could easily see both the White House and the home where Secretary of State William Seward was living when he was attacked by Lewis Powell on the night of Lincoln’s assassination.

Clara Rathbone was very much in tune with her husband’s mental struggles. The family’s long vacations to Europe were her efforts to bring about a change of scenery and mood for Henry, and, for several years, these effectively treated his despondency. His children were also a source of great pride to Henry, and he loved them dearly. However, Henry’s melancholic periods increased in length as the years passed. He began to grow more temperamental and aggressive towards Clara at times. In late 1882, as the Rathbones were planning their trip to Hanover, they visited family back in New York for a time. Their extended family all noticed a great change in Henry. Henry would often alter the subject of conversations to that of Lincoln’s assassination, stating his belief that the country had expected him to protect the President. His friends reassured him that this was not the case, but Henry couldn’t be swayed from his sense of guilt. The family also noticed Henry’s increased outbursts of anger. Some advised Clara to separate from Henry for a time or have him placed in an asylum. But Clara felt that Henry was better off in the company of her and their children than in the care of strangers. She loved Henry and felt she was the best person to help bring him out of his instances of paranoia. However, Clara did ask for her sister, Louise, to join the family in Hanover in order to help her with the children and Henry.

Clara Harris Rathbone

The family’s time in Hanover did little to improve Henry’s mood. Henry became increasingly irritable and paranoid. He began to believe that Clara was planning to leave him and take the children with her. Despite her constant reassurances to him that she and the children weren’t going anywhere, he continued to ruminate on the idea.

Henry became increasingly somber and distant in the days leading up to Christmas. Clara noticed the change and feared that Henry might attempt to take his own life. Henry seemed to have completely succumbed to his depression. For years, he had suffered from dyspepsia, a form of chronic indigestion, that had caused him constant pain, though how much of this physical pain was more psychosomatic is not known. Perhaps fearful of another sneak attack like the one he experienced in 1865, Henry slept with a pistol under his pillow. All of Henry’s demons took control of him on the morning of December 23.

At around 5:30 a.m., Henry arose from his bed, dressed himself, grabbed his pistol, and walked down the hall to the room where his children were sleeping. He knocked on the door, which was answered, but not opened, by Louise, who also occupied the room. Henry asked Louise through the door if Pauline was in bed. Louise replied that she was. He then asked if the two boys were in the room as well. Louise affirmed that they were. Henry told Louise to open the door as he wanted to see them for himself. In Henry’s deluded mind, the children had been taken away or were in the process of departing. Not knowing Henry was armed, Louise proceeded to crack the door, hoping the sight of his sleeping children would restore his senses.

Clara, awoken by her husband’s departure from their bedroom, had made her way to Henry by this time. She eyed the weapon in his hand and the look in his eyes. Clara attempted to calm Henry and began directing him back towards their bedroom. She called out to her sister to “lock the door and save the children; there is going to be dreadful work.”

To Henry, this command confirmed his paranoia. Clara was planning on absconding with his children and leaving him alone. He grabbed Clara by the arm and dragged her into their bedroom. Louise locked the door of the children’s bedroom and listened helplessly to the sounds of struggle from the couple’s bedroom down the hall. Louise heard the door of the couple’s bedroom lock and unlock several times. Whether Henry was trying to prevent Clara from escaping or Clara was attempting to keep Henry in the room to protect the children is unknown.

Eventually, Louise left the children alone and went to the couple’s bedroom in hopes of protecting her sister. Henry quickly escorted Louise out of the room and locked the door. Not long after, Louise heard Clara scream, “Henry, let me live!” followed by gunshots and a long silence. A house servant, aroused by the gunfire, joined Louise outside the couple’s bedroom door. Together, they two broke the door’s lock and entered the room. There, they found Clara dying on the bed and Henry with self-inflicted knife wounds on the floor.

Louise fled to her sister, whose last words were, “He has killed us both at last.”

Henry Rathbone’s trial commenced in January 1884. He was adamant that he had nothing to do with his wife’s death and that someone else had broken into his home, attacked him, and murdered Clara. Through interviews with Louise and others, the court effectively established a history of insanity on the part of Henry Rathbone. Rather than sentenced to prison, Henry was committed to an asylum in Hildesheim, Germany. He remained there for over 25 years until his death in 1911.

The three Rathbone children, left without either parent, were taken in by Clara’s brother William Harris, and moved to Ohio. In time, Henry Riggs Rathbone, the eldest child, became a Representative from Illinois and sponsored the government’s purchase of Osborn Oldroyd’s collection of Lincolniana housed in the Petersen House where Lincoln died.

Henry Riggs Rathbone in front of the Petersen House

The story of Henry Rathbone and Clara Harris demonstrates the devastating long-term effects victims of crime can face. Henry Rathbone’s mind was forever scarred by the events of April 14, 1865. His inability to save the President created a sense of overwhelming guilt from which he could not escape. This trauma festered in Henry, devastating his mind. Yet, in the end, it was Clara, not Henry, who paid the ultimate price for this trauma. Clara, herself having suffered the trauma of witnessing the shooting of the President and the stabbing of her fiancee, lost her life in trying to stop the man she loved from harming their children. In this way, both of the Rathbones proved themselves to be selfless and heroic.

While Henry is the one who killed Clara in a fit of insanity 140 years ago today, he is not the sole answer to the question, “Who could have done this?” The blood of this Christmas tragedy is also squarely on the hands of John Wilkes Booth.

References:
Worst Seat in the House: Henry Rathbone’s Front Row View of the Lincoln Assassination by Caleb Stephens

Categories: History, OTD | Tags: , , , , | 10 Comments

Manhunt: A New Miniseries

After almost two decades in developmental hell, a miniseries based on James L. Swanson’s 2006 book Manhunt: The Twelve-Day Chase for Lincoln’s Killer is finally going to become a reality. While reports said that filming on the project had been completed in 2022, nothing about the series’ possible premiere date was forthcoming until an article was published on December 13, 2023, in Vanity Fair. The article, titled “Manhunt: First Look at the Long-Awaited Show About Hunting Lincoln’s Killer” can be read in full here.

This article announced that the miniseries will premiere on March 15, 2024, on the streaming platform Apple TV+. Two episodes will be released on that day, followed by weekly releases of new episodes until the finale on Friday, April 19, 2024. This makes seven episodes of the series in all.

The Vanity Fair article provided an overview of the series, highlighting the efforts of those involved in bringing this project to life. I applaud Monica Beletsky, the showrunner and writer, for her dedication to shedding light on the unknown aspects of the assassination. The focus of the miniseries will be on Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War, and his role as a catalyst for justice. It is refreshing to see Stanton portrayed in a heroic light, especially given the numerous conspiracy theories that have attempted to implicate him in Lincoln’s death.

The role of Secretary Stanton is played by British actor Tobias Menzies. Images provided by Apple TV+ give us our first official look at the protagonist. While I do not believe that actors have to look very much like the historical figures they emulate, I have to state that I am disappointed to see that Menzies was not given a beard for the role. Edwin Stanton wore a very recognizable beard. I understand not wanting to cover up Menzies’ handsome face, but, in my opinion, portraying Stanton without his long skunk beard is like depicting Abraham Lincoln without his iconic stovepipe hat. I suppose it’s a good thing the miniseries won’t be debuting for another three months as that will give me time to slowly come to accept this clean-shaven man as Edwin Stanton.

In addition to covering the process of creating the series, the Vanity Fair article hints at several characters and scenes we can expect in the series. I was excited to read how the character of Mary Lincoln will be portrayed. Showrunner Beletsky states in the article that Mrs. Lincoln “was owed a different portrayal” than prior characterizations of her as merely being crazy, or a burden to President Lincoln. I believe that prior media interpretations (and many historians, for that matter) have been unnecessarily hard on Mrs. Lincoln. Beletsky seems to agree, relating how the loss of her children occurred, “pre-psychology, pre-therapy, pre-understanding of trauma. I asked the question of, ‘How would you behave had you suffered so much loss?’” It will be interesting to see how actress Lili Taylor takes on the role of the First Lady during one of the most traumatizing times in her life.

The article also shows us other interesting visuals, such as comedian Patton Oswalt in the role of Col. Lafayette Baker. The leader of the National Detective Poice was a key ally to Stanton during the hunt for Booth, but his methods and character were considered extreme even to jaded politicians. I’m excited to see how Oswalt is able to capture this scoundrel of a man.

There are also a few historical inaccuracies to be found in the article (aside from Stanton’s beard). Some are small nitpicks, such as an image of Stanton and his son, Edwin Lamson Stanton, apparently on horseback on the hunt for John Wilkes Booth. While Stanton was instrumental in helping to organize the manhunt for the conspirators, he did not take part in the search himself. As the Secretary of War during wartime, he had many other duties to perform as the search was going on. While Stanton occasionally interviewed prospective witnesses, his schedule of cabinet meetings, preparing Lincoln’s funeral arrangements, and sending off telegrams to various generals in the field about the remaining Confederate forces kept him confined to Washington during the manhunt. It’s possible that the caption for the image is merely mistaken and does not actually show Edwin and his son hunting for Booth but merely riding somewhere together. Time will tell.

Another critique I have is the characterization that John Wilkes Booth’s actions may have been motivated by a sense of professional rivalry between himself and his brother, Edwin (or his deceased father, Junius Brutus Booth). This belief comes up often enough, with many others playing on the idea that Lincoln’s death was the result of some intense sibling rivalry between John Wilkes and Edwin. I think many people fail to realize that, in 1865, John Wilkes and Edwin were pretty much on equal footing in terms of fame. Granted, Edwin had some advantage over his brother because he had started his career earlier and he had ingratiated himself into New York City society. In addition, just prior to the assassination, Edwin had finished his historic run of 100 nights of Hamlet. In time, Edwin would be known as one of the greatest actors of his day and is still considered by many as the greatest Hamlet who ever lived, but his legacy was still many years in the making in 1865.

John Wilkes Booth was also a very successful actor, and it was mostly due to his own choice to stop acting in 1864 and 1865, that caused him to cede so much ground, as it were, to his older brother. There was undoubtedly some rivalry between the siblings who were engaged in the same profession, but both brothers enthusiastically supported each other. They performed together on many occasions and celebrated each other’s histrionic achievements. While the two brothers were very far apart politically, I don’t believe that John Wilkes Booth felt too overshadowed by Edwin’s success. Nor do I believe that sibling rivalry had any real influence on Wilkes’ decision to kill Lincoln. However, I accept that this is a valid interpretation for someone to have.

There is also some shakiness regarding the layout of Ford’s Theatre in the article. It states that “Lincoln’s killer could have been lost to history if Booth had quietly slipped away, backed into the corridors of Ford’s Theatre, and escaped anonymously out into the streets of Washington, DC” rather than jumping to the stage in full view of the audience as he did. Anyone familiar with Ford’s Theatre knows there was nowhere else for Booth to go after barricading himself into the corridor leading to the President’s box. A jump from the box to the stage was his only option. Even if he had removed the wooden bar he had placed to prevent entry into the box, he would still have been surrounded by angry audience members until he could get to the back of the house. There was no scenario in which Booth could have “quietly slipped away” after shooting the President as he did. Retracing his steps out of the box would have meant his instant capture.

When I first read the article, the names of the owners of the house across the street where Lincoln died were the “Petersons.” I’m glad to see that someone has since fixed the spelling of their name and the house to Petersen.

Minor issues aside, the article does include one substantive bit of historical inaccuracy that could result in some misinformation. This is associated with the fugitives’ time at the home of Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. The article provides the following image of actors Lovie Simone and Antonio Bell as Mary Simms and her brother Milo.

A good deal of the article discusses the figure of Mary Simms, a young woman who had been enslaved by Dr. Mudd and testified against him at the trial of the conspirators. Mary Simms’ testimony connected Dr. Mudd to Confederate activities during the war and was a key part of establishing his disloyal sympathies. The inclusion of Black witnesses in a criminal trial against white defendants was a historic case, and Stanton worked hard to ensure this would happen. Mary Simms was a brave woman who risked a lot to give her testimony. Her brother Milo (who believed he was only about 14 or so in 1865) also testified about conditions on the Mudd farm.

Both Mary and Milo Simms have a role in the Lincoln assassination story, and I’m happy to see them in the Manhunt miniseries. However, the caption under the images states that the two “grapple with their orders to provide aid and comfort to the fugitive assassin.” In the main article text just below the caption, it states the following:

During Mudd’s treatment, Booth crosses paths with Mary Simms (played by Greenleaf’s Lovie Simone), who was enslaved by Mudd and later testified in the investigation into Lincoln’s killing. “Mary Simms is someone that I came across in the transcript of the conspirators trial,” says Beletsky. “I found her extremely compelling. I knew that she kept house for Dr. Mudd and that her brother was considered Dr. Mudd’s carpenter. So with that in mind, when Booth needs a crutch, I have Milo, her brother, making the crutch.”

The big issue with the caption and the quote above is that Mary and Milo Simms were not at the Mudd farm in 1865. Both Mary and Milo are clear in their testimony that they left the Mudd property in November of 1864, just after the new Maryland state constitution abolished slavery, freeing them. Mary and Milo had no interaction with John Wilkes Booth during his escape, and none of their testimony at the trial had to do with the assassin himself. While the showrunner may have decided to have Milo Simms make Booth’s crutch in the miniseries, in reality, Dr. Mudd stated that the crutch was made by himself and an English handyman who resided on the farm named John Best.

Based on the descriptions in the article, we will have to see how truthful the scenes involving Mary and Milo Simms turn out to be. Any interaction between Mary Simms and John Wilkes Booth would be completely fictitious since she was no longer residing at the Mudd farm when Booth shot Lincoln.

I want to clarify that my intention is not to minimize the effort and creativity of those involved in Manhunt. I understand that historical dramas often take creative liberties to enhance the narrative. Even so-called “documentaries” are often fast and loose with the truth nowadays. However, when these liberties stray too far from the established historical record, they can have a negative impact on the viewer’s understanding of the past and cause more harm than good. It is frustrating as a historian when this happens since there are often just as creative ways of telling the story in ways that are accurate. For example, while Mary Simms was far from the Mudd farm at the time of the assassination, other men and women who were formerly enslaved by Dr. Mudd were there when the fugitives arrived. Thirteen-year-old Lettie Hall and her eleven-year-old sister Louisa Cristie had been enslaved by the Mudds, stayed with them after emancipation, and were at the home when Booth showed up. The two girls cooked and served breakfast to Booth at the Mudd home on April 15. Frank Washington had likewise been enslaved by the Mudds and was still at the farm working as a plowman in 1865. Washington was there when Booth and Herold arrived, and he personally put their horses in the doctor’s stables. When he testified at the conspirators’ trial, Washington was very nervous and was clearly conflicted about how he was supposed to testify. His desire to tell the truth was undoubtedly being challenged by his fear of retribution by his white neighbors if he spoke against the Mudds. These figures and the internal conflicts they had regarding their activities on April 15 would have been very interesting to see represented on screen. But, perhaps they still will be, and I’m getting all concerned about Mary Simms for nothing. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Despite Stanton’s missing skunk beard and the unknown accuracy of the Mary and Milo Simms portions, I remain excited about the series’ potential to reach a new audience and contribute to increased interest in this pivotal event. Though it will mean shelling out for yet another streaming service, I’m willing to throw a few bucks to Apple TV+ to watch a miniseries that I truly thought would never come. Come March 15, 2024, I’ll settle in to watch Manhunt for what I hope will be an engaging and thought-provoking viewing experience that stays true to the spirit of history.

Categories: History, News | Tags: , , , , , , , | 19 Comments

New Section: On This Day

As a kid, I remember visiting the “calendar store” that popped up in our local mall near the end of every year. While not as popular as the similarly seasonal Spirit Halloween or Santa Markplace-type stores, the calendar store was nonetheless a fun place to browse the wide variety of calendars designed to suit all tastes. 12 months of beach scenes? Check. Themed kitty cat photos? Check. Outhouses from around the world? Check. Almost any type of animal or location was represented in the calendar store. While the traditional 12 monthly calendars were no doubt the store’s bread and butter, this was not the limit of calendar technology. They had 16-month calendars for those who liked to plan far ahead, weekly calendars one could use as a planner with areas for notes, and small calendars that fit onto bookmarks. My favorite calendars were always the Day-to-Day calendars that had a tear-away page for each day. They were attached to plastic stands so that they stood up like a frame on your desk. As the year went by, you’d rip off one page a day, and your calendar would get thinner and thinner. Each year, I would select my day-to-day calendar for the upcoming year, regularly choosing between my favorite comic strips, Peanuts, Garfield, The Far Side, Foxtrot, etc. In addition to the daily fix of a comic strip, the best day-to-day calendars had word puzzles, riddles, or fun trivia on the back of each sheet. As I got older, I noticed that Saturday and Sunday started to share a single page and comic, which I always thought was a bit of a rip-off.

Whenever I would open my brand new day-to-day calendar, it took all my available willpower not to flip through it and read every page on that very first day. These were early lessons in self-control that I generally did pretty well with, although I would always jump ahead to my birthday and some holidays just to see what those days would have in store. These day-to-day calendars gave me something small to look forward to every day.

Several years ago, I had the idea to create my own day-to-day calendar relating not to my favorite comic strips but to my favorite historical subject: the assassination of Lincoln. An odd subject for a calendar, I admit, but not any stranger than others I’ve seen, like Museum Bums 2024. I thought how interesting it would be to assemble one event relating to Lincoln’s assassination or the Booth family for each day of the year. Maybe it could be something that I could even publish. I started the process of trying to find relevant facts. I soon discovered, however, how difficult such a project like this would be. After struggling to find a dozen or so facts and inputting them into a spreadsheet, I shelved the idea.

In the intervening years, two big changes occurred. First was the publication of Art Loux’s book John Wilkes Booth: Day By Day. Art spent his lifetime meticulously tracking and documenting Booth’s whereabouts. While it was impossible to say where Booth was every day of his life, his career as an actor made it possible to fill out most of his movements from 1860 onward. In many ways, Art’s book is like a day-to-day calendar themed around John Wilkes Booth, which is probably why I enjoy it so immensely.

The other big change was my move to upload my digital research files from just being on my one computer to a backup on the cloud. For years, I had been terrified a hard drive failure would cause me to lose every file I’d ever saved. As a result, I started uploading my files to the cloud. This also gave me the ability to access my files from my phone, no matter where I was. This greatly improved my ability to conduct research in the field. An unexpected side effect of uploading my files to the cloud was that they suddenly became searchable. The all-seeing cloud could decipher and read the text from many of the pictures I had uploaded. When I searched my cloud drive for a phrase or word, I found that I was no longer limited to only files I had given that name to. All the documents that the cloud could read and bore that word or phrase popped up in my search. The functionality of my research had increased immeasurably.

In August of 2021, I found myself tweeting about when John Wilkes Booth recruited his childhood friends Samuel Arnold and Michael O’Laughlen into his plot. It happened to be just around that day, so I used the common enough Twitter hashtag #OTD, which stands for On This Day or On This Date. The tweet got some good engagement, so the next day, I searched my cloud for that day and found a corresponding event among my files. I tweeted another #OTD tweet for that day. I followed suit on the third day as well. Soon, I discovered I had unintentionally reignited my project from years ago to create a day-to-day calendar of the Lincoln assassination. And now I was doing it on the fly, not spending months researching and preparing.

Each day, before bed, I would try to find an event that would work for the next day. When my own files failed to produce anything, I would fall back on Art’s book to locate a Booth-related event I could use. Some days were easy and provided many options. Other days were frustratingly difficult, and I struggled mightily to find something better than John Wilkes Booth performed in such a-such play. As a visual learner, it was also important to me that each event be supplemented with images of some kind. Often, I would work late into the night, finding an event and assembling relevant images to accompany it. On weekends, I would try to get ahead and prep multiple days if I could.

An example of one of my On This Day tweets

I had previously highlighted my daily tweets as weekly stand-alone posts here on the blog. However, since that time, Twitter has been bought, renamed, and had its accessibility severely curtailed. My tweets no longer load properly in my prior posts. In addition, Twitter has become increasingly toxic since the takeover by Lex Luther. I’ve decreased my activity on that platform as it gives way to increased bigotry and right-wing conspiracy-mongering. It is becoming completely unrecognizable from what it was, and I am not confident my years’ worth of content on that site will survive.

However, I did not want my day-to-day project to all be for naught. I made a mistake in assuming my work would be preserved long-term on Twitter. Therefore, I have painstakingly copied the text and pictures from each of my On This Day tweets and reproduced them as regular text and image slideshows. To house this project, I have created a new section here on LincolnConspirators.com. Twitter can continue to X itself into oblivion without me fearing the loss of over a year’s worth of work.

The On This Day section is the culmination of over a year of work researching and highlighting different events relating to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and the Boooh family for every day of the year. It is my own Lincoln Assassination Day-to-Day Calendar in a digital form.

In order to prevent an overload of 365+ mini-posts, I have attempted to hide each day under a collapsible list. Clicking a month on the list will reveal each day of the month. Clicking a specific day will reveal an event (or occasionally two) that occurred on that day in a certain year. Underneath the text is a slideshow of relevant images. I know it’s not the prettiest of lists, but I assure you that there are diamonds hidden beneath the surface if you don’t mind doing a little digging.

While each entry is hidden underneath the list, the page still attempts to load each entry’s slideshow when the page is first opened. As a result, some of the slideshows take longer to load completely, especially those in the latter part of the year. If you click on an entry and the slideshow is just a black screen, give it some time, and it should eventually load. I appreciate your patience.

It’s up to you how you want to use this calendar. You could come back and visit each day to read about an event on its anniversary or binge them all at once. I won’t judge. This list is static for now, but I have the idea of adding more events and facts in time. When that happens, I’ll make an announcement.

Click the Lincoln calendar image above or on this link to visit the On This Day page. There is also a new link on the top menu of the website to find the OTD page easily in the future.

I hope you enjoy delving into a whole year of Lincoln assassination and Booth family-related events.

Categories: History, News, OTD | Tags: , , , , | 4 Comments

Breakfast with Booth: Cynthia Ann Brooks

This post is the third and final entry in my recent series exploring who might have breakfasted with John Wilkes Booth on the morning of Lincoln’s assassination. The first installment explored the identity of Carrie Bean, a young socialite that journalist George Alfred Townsend claimed shared breakfast with Booth on April 14, 1865. The second post discussed the theory that Booth was joined that morning by his own secret fiancee, Lucy Hale. For this third post, we’re going to consider a third woman to whom an intriguing connection to Booth’s breakfast has been made. Her name is Cynthia Ann Brooks. According to articles from her granddaughter, John Wilkes Booth gave Cynthia Brooks his picture at breakfast on the morning of Lincoln’s assassination.

First, the verifiable facts I have been able to glean about the family in question. Cynthia Ann was the daughter of Joseph and Elizabeth Allen. She was born in about 1812 in Maine. Her family claimed kinship to the Revolutionary War patriot Ethan Allen, who, along with Benedict Arnold, captured Fort Ticonderoga from the British in May of 1755 without firing a shot. As a young child, Cynthia’s family moved to Hamilton, Ohio, a town just north of Cincinnati. At around the age of 20, Cynthia married Eri V. Brooks, a police officer and justice of the peace in Hamilton. The couple had at least five children. In 1850, Eri Brooks died, so Cynthia Brooks and her children moved in with her brother, William Allen.

In 1857, Cynthia’s eldest daughter, Clara Belle Brooks, married a man named Richard Hall. The young couple moved to Superior, Wisconsin, where Richard and Clara’s brother, Eri Brooks, Jr., set up a law firm. The firm eventually moved to Houghton in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. While Eri became a justice of the peace in the area, Richard and Clara were unhappy with life in the isolated far north. The couple moved to Indianapolis, which was Richard’s hometown. There, in 1859, the Halls gave birth to a daughter, Clara “Carrie” Hall. In 1860, Richard accepted a position as a clerk in the Census Bureau in D.C. As a result, he moved his family to the nation’s capital. Young Carrie Hall would grow up in the bustling streets of Washington.

In 1861, Richard Hall was transferred over to the Pension Bureau. He was employed there until 1864, when he resigned from his government position in order to become a real estate broker. Richard was involved in political matters and took part in events at the city’s Union League. He was a strong supporter of Abraham Lincoln and spoke passionately in favor of the President at the Union League in the lead-up to the 1864 election. During their time in D.C., the Hall family lived in a variety of residences. By 1865, however, the Washington city directory shows the Halls lodging at everyone’s favorite locale: the National Hotel.

Between 1865 and 1867, Richard served a stint as the D.C. Recorder of Deeds. Near the middle of 1867, Richard left the government once again in order to return to his life as a real estate dealer. Not long after starting up his real estate business again, Richard was called for jury duty in the district. On June 13, Richard reported to the courthouse, and, like every American, he tried hard to get out of jury duty. Richard informed the court that, being a real estate agent, “the interests of other persons would suffer, perhaps, a great deal more than my own” if he were chosen to serve on a jury. The court was unmoved by Mr. Hall’s claims that his business could not wait for him to complete jury service.  The court responded that his business excuse “would let off nine out of every ten of the jury” if they accepted it. He was ordered to stay and became one of the prospective jurors for an upcoming trial. Later that day, Richard Hall was interviewed again by the court, with the addition of lawyers from the prosecution and defense. This process, known as voir dire, allows the lawyers to judge prospective jurors’ knowledge of the case and their ability to be impartial based on the evidence. The case that Richard Hall was a prospective juror for was that of the escaped Lincoln conspirator, John Surratt, Jr., who had recently been captured abroad and returned to the United States.

Richard Hall knew that John Surratt’s trial would be a lengthy one, and he had no desire to sit on the jury day in and day out. Thus, when asked by the court if he had already “formed or expressed an opinion in relation to the guilt or innocence” of John Surratt, Richard replied with “Yes, sir; I have.” Pressed further whether his opinion on the case would bias or prejudice him in listening to the evidence and rendering a verdict, Richard Hall stated, “There are some facts in connection with the case that I think would very strongly prejudice my mind.” When asked a similar question by the prosecution, Mr. Hall reiterated that “I would, if compelled to sit as a juror, listen to the facts and to the evidence, but I have no hesitancy in saying that my judgment would be greatly influenced by circumstances.” Richard Hall was trying his hardest to get out of jury duty for John Surratt’s trial, yet his responses didn’t relieve him. The defense made no objection to his selection as a juror, perhaps seeing his honesty as the best they could hope for from a jury pool where everyone had an opinion about John Surratt. Richard Hall did not come across as biased enough to be dismissed.

Jury selection for John Surratt’s trial took much longer than anticipated. June 15 had been set as the cutoff for when the jury had to be impaneled, or else Surratt’s trial could not begin until the next court term. As a result, the prosecution was scrambling to narrow down the possible jurors to the 12 they needed. This worked to Richard Hall’s advantage. On June 15, he was called, once again, to be interviewed for voir dire. However, he failed to respond to his name, with it later being reported that he was “sick”. His absence, combined with the requirement that the jury be selected on this date, meant that Mr. Hall successfully avoided becoming a member of John Surratt’s jury of his peers.

In the 1870 census, Richard, Clara, and Carrie Hall are all recorded as living at the National Hotel. Seven years later, 18-year-old Carrie was engaged to be married. Her beau was a man named Roger Sherman Bartley, and he was the nephew of General William Tecumseh Sherman. The couple’s wedding on December 27, 1877, was a celebrated event that made the D.C. papers.

In addition to the famous general, one of Roger Sherman Bartley’s other uncles was John Sherman, who had a long career in politics. From 1877- 1881, John Sherman was the Secretary of the Treasury, and through this connection, Roger Bartley was able to find employment. In 1880, Roger and Carrie moved to Denver, Colorado, where Roger was assigned as an assistant clerk in the small branch of the U.S. Mint located there. The branch tested and melted down gold into bullion for shipment to other branches. Roger and Carrie made their home in Colorado and had four children together.

In the early 1900s, at least three articles were published in the Denver Post newspaper featuring interviews with Carrie Hall Bartley. The first occurred on October 7, 1901, and was titled “The Souvenir of an Assassin“. This was followed by the article “Booth Gave Her His Picture Day He Assassinated Lincoln” on February 8, 1909. And finally, “Autograph Lincoln Pictures Treasured by Mrs. Welker” was published on February 12, 1917. Carrie divorced Roger Bartley in 1910 and, in 1912, married a Christian Science practitioner named Lloyd William Welker. This is the reason her name has changed in this last article.

In each of these articles, Carrie Hall recalls her time as a young girl living at the National Hotel in 1865. The middle article actually contains an image of Carrie Hall taken when she was a young girl in Washington:

Carrie recounts that her grandmother, Cynthia Brooks, resided in D.C. along with her and her parents during the Civil War. The 1865 city directory and 1870 census confirms the Halls resided at times at the National Hotel. As our previous entries have demonstrated, the National Hotel was often a convergence point for the who’s who of D.C. As a result, Mrs. Brooks had the opportunity to rub elbows with the high society of Washington. In 1864 and 1865, this came to include the famous actor John Wilkes Booth. Carrie stated that:

“My grandmother was a very interesting conversationalist…[she] and John Wilkes Booth, who stayed at the National also, had many lively arguments about the merits of the war, and she was as enthusiastic in her praise of the administration as Mr. Booth was opposed to it… She used to say Mr. Booth was very polished and interesting.”

The three articles also describe Cynthia Brooks’ supposed run-in with John Wilkes Booth at breakfast on the morning of Lincoln’s assassination. Each is a bit different, so we’ll take them one at a time.

“The Souvenir of an Assassin” from 1901 tells Carrie Hall’s story, but she is not quoted in the article. It narrates that Carrie and her grandmother were among the last people at breakfast on the morning of April 14, 1865. This was due to young Carrie feeling ill that morning. John Wilkes Booth was the only other person at the breakfast table with them at this late hour. Apparently, Mrs. Brooks shared with Mr. Booth that the family had plans to attend Ford’s Theatre that night. Before departing from the table, Booth, “gave a penny” to Carrie, “and his picture to her grandmother – both child and grandmother comparative strangers to him – as souvenirs. The penny was spent for candy, but the picture was preserved with a pitiful likeness of the martyred president to offset it.”

There isn’t much more detail in this first article about the interaction, and it portrays Mrs. Brooks and Booth as being relative strangers. In addition, the article implies the image was given to Mrs. Brooks because Booth knew “what part he was to play in the performance” at Ford’s Theatre later that night. However, while assassination was certainly on Booth’s mind, he did not know at breakfast that the Lincolns had accepted the invitation to attend Ford’s Theatre. That knowledge was only conveyed to him when he visited Ford’s after breakfast to pick up his mail.

The 1909 article “Booth Gave Her His Picture Day He Assassinated Lincoln” is the most detailed of the three and includes quotes from Carrie Hall. It is from this article that we learn that Cynthia Brooks was a “prominent figure in Washington society before and during the war of the rebellion” and where the prior quotes about her conversations with Booth come from. Carrie starts her narration with an acknowledgment of the imperfect nature of memory:

“‘I have only a dim recollection of the morning Mr. Wilkes gave that picture to my grandmother,’ says Mrs. Bartley. ‘I have heard it told so often that I perhaps confuse what I have been told with what I actually observed.”

Carrie then recounts that she and her grandmother were late to breakfast on April 14th but that “Mr. Booth was later still.” When he came into the breakfast room, Booth sat down next to Mrs. Brooks, and they talked as usual.

“Well, before he left the table that morning he took from an inside pocket his picture and handed it to her unsolicited. She accepted it graciously but with some surprise, and he remarked that she might like to have it after a while.

She thought it strange since he did not say anything about intending to leave.”

Carrie recalled that her parents and grandmother were planning on attending Ford’s Theatre that night, but they didn’t go because the young girl was sick. They heard the news like everyone else in the city, and Clara Hall woke Carrie up to tell her of Lincoln’s assassination.

“Grandmother said the next day that she understood then why Mr. Booth had given her his picture. She never could reconcile his kind ways and polished manner with the brutal murder of Mr. Lincoln.”

While the 1901 article reproduced the image of Booth that was given to Cynthia Brooks, the process of digitizing it made it difficult to see. From this 1909 article, we can more clearly see that Mrs. Brooks was gifted with a copy of this photograph of Booth:

This article was decorated not only with the image of Lincoln mentioned in the 1901 article but with other images of the Lincoln family as well. According to a throwaway caption, these were “photographs of members of the Lincoln family presented to Mrs. Cynthia Brooks shortly before the assassination of the President.” We’ll address these images again in a little bit.

The final article that I have been able to find comes from 1917, just a year before Carrie’s death. On the anniversary of Lincoln’s birth, the now-named Carrie Welker showed off her collection of images to the Denver Post once again. Carrie is not quoted in this piece, and her story is told by the reporter who interviewed her:

“On the morning of the day Lincoln was assassinated, Mrs. Brooks, who was living at the then famous old National hotel on Pennsylvania avenue, was late for breakfast. As the main dining room was closed, she ate in a small private dining room, just off the main parlor. While breakfasting, J. Wilkes Booth, whom she knew well, entered the parlor, and, seeing her in the next room, entered and sat down with her at the table to chat a few minutes. Before leaving, he said: ‘Mrs. Brooks, may I present you with my photograph?’ And he took a picture from his pocket and gave it to her.”

There is no mention of Carrie having been present with her grandmother at breakfast that morning. The article does recount the story that the Halls had tickets to attend Ford’s Theatre that night but did not go on account of Carrie’s illness.

While there is little information in relation to the story of Booth presenting his image to Mrs. Brooks, this article does add a brand new story revolving around the images of the Lincoln family in Carrie’s collection. According to this 1917 article, Richard Hall was “Lincoln’s friend” who was, “very closely associated with the president.” It continues:

“Shortly before Lincoln was assassinated he had some new photographs taken of himself and the members of his family. He considered these particularly good. Almost at the same hour that Booth was giving his picture to Mrs. Brooks[,] Lincoln presented a set of the new photographs of himself and family to Mr. Hall. Included in the set were pictures of the president, Mrs. Lincoln, Thaddeus [sic] Lincoln and Robert Lincoln.”

This entire paragraph is almost assuredly untrue. Richard Hall was a Lincoln supporter, and perhaps he had been fortunate enough to meet the President at a social function once or twice, but there is nothing to support the idea that the two men were friends. In addition, the images supposedly given to Mr. Hall by the President were not “recent” images of the Lincolns, as stated. The photograph of Mrs. Lincoln was taken in January of 1862, while the portrait of Lincoln in profile dates to February of 1864.

It’s interesting how the images of the Lincoln family increased in importance over the years. In the 1901 article, the portrait of Lincoln was described as “pitiful” and merely an image kept adjacent to the image gifted to Mrs. Brooks by John Wilkes Booth. In the 1909 article, a caption merely states the Lincoln family images were “presented” to Mrs. Brooks, with no statement of by whom. Then, in this 1917 article, the images of the Lincolns are the most important pictures, gifted to Richard Hall by Abraham Lincoln personally. In addition, the article’s title called them “Autographed Lincoln Pictures,” even though there is nothing in the article that suggests any of the images are autographed.

While there’s no reason to believe the part of the 1917 article that deals with the Lincoln images, what about the overall claim that Cythnia Ann Brooks spoke with John Wilkes Booth at breakfast on the morning of the assassination and was given a photograph by the actor? While there were some small changes across these three articles, this part of the story stayed largely consistent over the 16 years.

John Wilkes Booth was known to present his photographs to friends and acquaintances. In fact, on February 9, 1865, Booth wrote to his friend Orlando Tompkins in Boston, asking the man to visit the photography studio of Silsbee, Case and Company in that city for him. He wanted the proprietor, John G. Case, to “send me without a moments delay one dozen of my card photghs… as there are several parties whom I would like to give one.” As much as I would love for Cynthia Brooks to have been the recipient of one of these images, Booth specifically requested not the photograph in Carrie Hall’s collection, but this one of him seated with a black cravat and cane:

After the assassination of Lincoln, this same image would be used on the wanted posters for Booth and his conspirators.

Unfortunately, there is no way to verify the story of Cynthia Brooks and her Booth photograph. Richard, Clara, and Carrie Hall were living at the National Hotel in 1865. However, try as I might, I have not been able to verify that Cynthia Brooks lived at the National or was even in Washington at the time of the assassination. It’s very possible that she did visit D.C. during the war years to see her daughter and granddaughter, but I don’t have any documentation to prove it. In truth, I have been unable to find records of Cynthia Brooks after the 1860 census. In 1871, Clara Hall included her mother’s name on an application for an account at the Freedman’s Bank, insinuating that Mrs. Brooks was still alive at that time, but I have not been able to find her anywhere.

The account of John Wilkes Booth presenting his image to Cynthia Brooks at breakfast on April 14, 1865, is an example of family lore. It’s a story that was passed down to Carrie Hall, who was too young to truly remember the events herself. It could be a real event, or perhaps it was a misremembered story of having seen Booth while the Halls were living at the National Hotel that merely evolved over time.

This series on John Wilkes Booth’s breakfast ends with far more questions than answers. Did he share a silent, but polite meal with Cara Bean? Did Lucy Hale make an appearance and interact with her fiancee for perhaps the last time? Or did Booth dine alongside Cynthia Ann Brooks and her granddaughter before presenting them both with small tokens of his esteem? In truth, we’ll never know the exact circumstances of this meal. All we do know for sure is that this was the last breakfast John Wilkes Booth ever ate as an actor. The next morning, the nation gathered at their own breakfast tables and read the shocking news of how John Wilkes Booth had now become an assassin.


Extra content:

While researching the family of Cynthia Brooks, I came across several interesting things. I already shared how her son-in-law, Richard Hall, was almost a jury member on John Surratt’s trial in 1867. This connected the family to Lincoln’s assassination in two different ways. However, the family actually has a connection to more than Lincoln’s assassination.

According to the article from 1901, Cynthia’s daughter Clara Hall attended the trial of Charles Guiteau in 1881. While there, Mrs. Hall shared a similar interaction with the assassin of President Garfield as her mother did with Lincoln’s killer years before:

“Mrs. Hall was attending the Guiteau trial and was seated facing the murderer. Feeling that he was the center of international interest, and that any little attention from him would be of great moment, Guiteau wrote his name with the customary flourish and handed it over to the surprised lady. Guiteau’s personal vanity stood out strongly to the very moment of execution.”

The article reproduced the autograph Charles Guiteau handed to Clara Hall, including Mrs. Hall’s explanatory notes about it:

The Brooks/Hall women had connections to unstable men beyond their interactions with Presidential assassins. In 1880, Clara divorced Richard Hall after he abandoned her and left D.C. for Tucson, Arizona, attempting to make a fortune as a miner. During a visit back east a year later, Richard Hall was said to have suffered a bout of paralysis in which he “lost his mind”. Richard was committed to an asylum in Indiana and died there in 1882 at the age of 49.

In 1910, Carrie Hall Bartley filed for divorce against her husband, Roger Sherman Bartley, on account of “another woman”:

“Mrs. Bartley testified that her husband packed up his belongings in October, 1908, when they were living in Fort Collins, and went to a hotel, instructing her to vacate the house in a short time, as he proposed to be responsible for her shelter and support no longer.”

After 32 years of marriage, Carrie requested $25 a month in alimony from Roger due to his desertion and entanglements with another woman. The judge ordered that Roger pay Carrie $50 a month instead. After the divorce, Roger Sherman Bartley eventually went on to marry a woman 31 years his junior named Edith Stoneback.

However, Carrie was actually the first of the two to remarry. Her second husband was Lloyd William Welker, a musician turned Christian Science practitioner. Their marriage was a seemingly happy and affluent enough one, as an article from 1917 noted that Mr. and Mrs. L. Will Welker were, “driving one of the handsomest new inclosed roadsters in town.”

Carrie Welker was a Christian Science practitioner like her husband. These are effectively faith healers who attempt to heal illness and pain through prayer. Carrie and L. Will operated out of an office where they met with and prayed with patients. According to Carrie’s obituary, “she was to all appearances enjoying perfect health” while tending to patients on Friday. Then, while at home on Saturday, June 15, 1918, Carrie Welker, “laid down for a few moment’s rest and while sleeping passed to the great beyond.” She was 58 years old.

In 1920, L. Will Welker remarried a singer by the name of Elsa Weffing. Elsa Welker died in 1930. In 1932, L. Will married a fellow Christian Science practitioner named Nelle Carr. Nelle Welker died in 1936. In December of 1937, L. Will married a woman named Agnes Durham who died two months later. Now, when I was relating this history to my true crime podcast-obsessed wife, Jen, she immediately told me that L. Will Welker seemed like a serial killer slowly knocking off his wives. I’ll admit that the numbers don’t look great for L. Will Welker. The fact that Carrie’s obituary stated she was in perfect health before she just fell asleep and died looks mighty suspicious as well. Additionally, there is an account of a man named Claude Poston who disappeared on December 3, 1915. The last place Poston had been seen was at L. Will’s Christian Science practitioner office where he had come for a session. His body was found seventeen days later, frozen solid in a ravine. All of this seems to support Jen’s hunch that L. Will Welker just might have been a serial killer.

But, at the same time, the view of Christian Scientists was that all healing was possible through prayer, so many did not seek out traditional medical help for their illnesses. This led to much higher fatality rates among Christian Scientists. L. Will Welker’s other wives may have died from a lack of medical treatment, believing they could solely pray their way to healing. Elsa Welker was noted to have been in ill health for a year before she died, even though she was only 45. Claude Poston, the man who ended up frozen in a ravine, had been praying with Welker in an attempt to help with his bouts of amnesia. His wife believed that Claude got confused after leaving Welker’s office, stumbled out into the woods, and ended up dying from exposure in the ravine he was found in. So perhaps there is nothing nefarious about the many deaths surrounding Lloyd William Welker. He lived a long life, himself, dying in California in 1959. (Jen still posits he might have been a serial killer, though).

There was one final little nugget I was able to uncover that still needs more investigation. While trying to determine what happened to Cynthia Brooks after her appearance in the 1860 census, I tried tracking down her other children aside from Clara Hall, hoping she might have moved in with one of them. I didn’t have much luck, but I did stumble across an article that mentioned Cynthia’s eldest son, Eri V. Brooks, Jr. As I wrote before, Eri had formed a law firm with his brother-in-law, Richard Hall, in Wisconsin and then Michigan before Richard and Clara moved away. When that happened, Eri Brooks, Jr. stayed in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and became a judge there. In 1910, a small article appeared in different newspapers stating that a discovery had been made at the Eagle River Court House among the effects of Judge Brooks, who had died several years before. The discovery was a document containing a case from 1857. The case concerned the disposition of a canal boat called the White Cloud. The boat had been ordered seized due to a $40 debt owed by the owners of the boat to a 14-year-old boy. The fourteen-year-old who was owed the money and had brought the suit was a young William McKinley.

I’m not an expert on President McKinley, but I am curious about this suit and whether there is any truth to this article. I’ve reached out to the experts at the McKinley Presidential Library, and we’ll see if they can find anything about this case. If I learn anything about it, I’ll post a comment below at a later date. Still, if Eri Brooks did have this document in his papers, then the Brooks family has a small connection to yet a third assassinated U.S. President.

Categories: History | Tags: , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Breakfast with Booth: Lucy Hale

In an earlier post, I introduced you to Carrie Bean, a young socialite from New York who journalist George Alfred Townsend claimed had breakfast with John Wilkes Booth on the morning of Lincoln’s murder. GATH is our only source for this event, but Miss Bean’s connection to the National Hotel and some of its residents makes it possible that this breakfast did occur. However, Carrie Bean is not the only one who has been linked to the assassin’s morning meal. There are sources that state that Booth spent his final breakfast before his infamous deed in the presence of his fiancée, Lucy Hale.

Lucy Hale likely needs no introduction to readers of this blog. In 1865, Lucy was the 24-year-old daughter of New Hampshire Senator John P. Hale and his wife, Lucy Lambert. The Hales often resided at the National Hotel when staying in Washington. At the time of the assassination, Senator Hale was in a sort of limbo. In June of 1864, the statesman had lost his bid for renomination by the New Hampshire Republican party and was replaced by Aaron Cragin. When Lincoln took office for his second term on March 4, 1865, Hale was officially out of a job. However, the staunch abolitionist lobbied for an ambassadorship position. On March 10, Hale was nominated to become the administration’s new minister to Spain. At the time of the assassination, the Hales were preparing for their new lives abroad.

At what point John Wilkes Booth and Lucy Hale met and subsequently became romantically involved is unknown. A commonly repeated yet erroneous story claims their romance began in 1862 when Booth sent Lucy a valentine signed “A Stranger.” This is too early of a period for the two to have become entwined. John Wilkes Booth didn’t even make his first appearance on the D.C. stage until 1863. The source of this erroneous story is a letter to a “Miss Hale” that was found in an antique store by Richmond “Boo” Morcom. In 1970, American Heritage published an article written by Morcom titled, They All Loved Lucy, in which he attributed the letter to Booth without evidence. After Morcom’s passing in 2012, his papers were donated to the New Hampshire Historical Society. A look at the original document shows that the letter is not in John Wilkes Booth’s handwriting. To demonstrate this, here is the end of the “Stranger” valentine found by Morcom with a sample of John Wilkes Booth’s writing underneath it. I’ve underlined some of the same words found in each letter for easy comparison.

The letter and word formations are just too different to have been written by John Wilkes Booth.

Part of the reason this incorrect story continues to live on is due to the fact that John Wilkes Booth is known to have composed a valentine for Lucy Hale. Junius Brutus Booth, Jr. wrote a letter to his sister Asia, updating her on family matters. John Wilkes was visiting Junius in New York at the time and June wrote to Asia that:

“John sat up all Mondays night to put Miss Hales valentine in the mail – and slept on the sofa – to be up early & kept me up last night until 3 1/2 AM – to wait while he wrote her a long letter & kept me awake by every now and then useing me as a dictionary…”

While John Wilkes is documented as having composed a valentine for Lucy Hale, this occurred in February of 1865, and we do not have any idea what his valentine said. It was likely destroyed, along with all other correspondences from Booth, by Lucy Hale or her family in the aftermath of Lincoln’s assassination.

While Lucy and Booth may have known of each other as early as 1863, when Booth made his Washington debut, it doesn’t seem like they had much in the way of a relationship until late 1864. During the summer and early fall months of 1864, John Wilkes Booth stayed with his family in New York and then traveled into the Pennsylvania oil region. He was actually infatuated with another woman at this time, 16-year-old Isabel Sumner, whom he had met during his Boston engagement in the spring. It wasn’t until November of 1864 that Booth’s residency at the National Hotel started as Washington became his base of operations in his conspiracy against Lincoln. Thus, his and Lucy’s romance was a relatively quick one.

A few years ago, I wrote about an envelope dated March 5, 1865, that contains poems by John Wilkes Booth and Lucy Hale. I explained that while some authors have used this envelope as evidence that the couple broke up on this date, I believe this conclusion to be incorrect. The two were planning a life together despite the difficulties involved with her father’s nomination to be the next minister to Spain. Lucy was expected to accompany her family to their new country. As a result, John P. Hale started having his family learn some of the Spanish language they would soon be immersed in. In mid to late March, Lucy Hale traveled to New York City and stayed with friends as she took some rudimentary Spanish lessons. On March 21, Booth traveled up to New York City ostensibly to be there for his brother Edwin’s 100th night of Hamlet the next day. However, according to Junius Brutus Booth, Jr.’s diary entry on March 22, “John came on to see Miss Hale.”

In the aftermath of John’s crime, Asia Booth wrote a letter to her friend Jean Anderson where she described the relationship between John and Lucy as the Booth family understood it:

“I told you, I believe, that Wilkes was engaged to Miss Hale. They were devoted lovers and she has written heart-broken letters to Edwin about it. Their marriage was to have been in a year, when she promised to return from Spain for him, either with her father or without him. That was the decision only a few days before this awful calamity. Some terrible oath hurried him to this wretched end. God help him.”

There is no evidence that Lucy Hale had any foreknowledge of what her secret fiance was planning.

Due to her being the daughter of a former Senator, Lucy Hale’s name was mainly kept out of the papers in the aftermath of Booth’s crime. There were a few references to Booth having been engaged to a New England Senator’s daughter, but propriety kept her actual name out of it. As years went by, however, more details came out about their relationship from some of Booth’s former friends and acquaintances.


In December of 1881, a journalist by the name of Col. Frank A. Burr wrote at length about John Wilkes Booth for the Philadelphia Sunday Press. Burr had done an immense amount of research into the life and death of John Wilkes Booth. He traveled down to the Garrett Farm and interviewed members of the Garrett family about Booth’s final days. He visited Green Mount Cemetery and described the Booth family plot. Burr also interviewed friends of Booth’s in order to flesh out his motivations. The result was one, or perhaps two, lengthy articles covering many aspects of Booth’s life, crime, and death. The reason I am uncertain about how many articles Burr’s work was split into is because, try as I might, I have been unable to track down the relevant Sunday issue(s) of the Philadelphia Press. These particular editions seem to be an endangered (or possibly extinct) species in archives and libraries today.

While Burr’s original piece has proven elusive, continued interest in Lincoln’s assassination meant that several newspapers reprinted parts of his work, often splitting it up into more manageable portions. The Evening Star out of Washington, D.C., appears to be one of the first to reprint part of Burr’s work. A lengthy article called “Booth’s Bullet” credited to the Philadelphia Press and “F.A.B.” was published in the Evening Star on December 7, 1881.

It appears that the Evening Star chose to cut out the whole section about Burr’s trip to the Garrett farm. Instead, the article was broken into three sections. The first section documented Burr’s visit to John Wilkes Booth’s grave in Green Mount Cemetery. The second was an interview Burr had with John T. Ford, and the third section was Burr’s interview with actor John Mathews. On the day of the assassination, Booth had given Mathews a sealed envelope, which he instructed Mathews to give to the newspapers the next day. The envelope contained Booth’s written explanation for why he assassinated Lincoln. Mathews was a member of the Ford’s Theatre cast and witnessed Lincoln’s assassination firsthand. Afterward, he returned to his boarding house, which happened to be the Petersen House, where Lincoln was taken. As the President lay dying in an adjacent bedroom, John Mathews opened the sealed envelope and read the assassin’s manifesto. After finishing it, Mathews made the decision to burn the letter, fearing it would implicate him in Booth’s great crime. The entirety of the “Booth’s Bullet” from the Evening Star can be read here.

Within this article, there are several references to Lucy Hale. John T. Ford stated to Burr that:

“Booth was a very gifted young man, and was a great favorite in society in Washington. He was engaged, it was said, to a young lady of high position and character. I understood that she wrote to Edwin Booth after the assassination telling him that she was his brother’s betrothed, and would marry him, even at the foot of the scaffold.”

John Mathews related a lengthy exchange he had with Booth regarding love and Lucy Hale:

“‘John, were you ever in love?’
‘No. I never could afford it.’ I replied.
‘I wish I could say as much. I am a captive. You cannot understand how I feel. What are those lines in Romeo and Juliet describing love? I have played them a hundred times but they have flown from me.’
‘Will you stand a bottle if I’ll give them to you?’ I asked.
‘I will – two of them,’ replied Booth.
‘Here are the lines,’ I answered:
O! anything, of nothing first create!
O! heavy lightness! Serious vanity!
Mis-shapen chaos of well-seeming forms!
‘That’s it,’ replied Booth. ‘If it were not for this girl I could feel easy. Think of it, John, that at my time of life – just starting, as it were – I should be in love!’

[Burr:] Did he mention the lady’s name?
[Mathews:] Oh, yes; but that shall be sacred with me. She is married now, and it would serve no good purpose either to his memory or to the truth of history to revive it. He loved her as few men love. He had a great mind and a generous heart, and both were centered upon this girl, whom he intended to make his wife. Her picture was taken from his person after he was killed.”

In addition to these mentions of Booth and Lucy’s romance, this article is the earliest source that places Lucy Hale with Booth at breakfast on the morning of his great crime. John T. Ford stated the following:

“The facts in the case are that he never knew the President was to attend the theater until nearly noon of that day. He was always a late riser. He came down to breakfast about ten o’clock on that morning, and his fiancee, who also boarded at the National Hotel with her parents, met him. They had a short conversation, and after breakfast he walked up to the Surratt mansion on H street, as is supposed from the direction in which he was first seen coming by the attaches of the theater that morning.”

To be fair, this description is a little vague as to whether Lucy Hale joined Booth for breakfast or merely had a conversation with him during his breakfast. Lucy’s inclusion is really a throwaway reference in a section about Booth’s movements. However, it still connects the two on the morning of the assassination.

Another paper that reprinted Frank A. Burr’s work was The Atlanta Constitution. They published the story of Burr’s visit to the Garrett farm on Sunday, December 11, 1881. A month later, on Sunday, January 15, 1882, the Constitution published another article attributed to Burr titled “Booth’s Romance”.

This article was similar to the earlier article found in the Evening Star, but “Booth’s Romance” is markedly different in spots from “Booth’s Bullet.” The section about visiting Booth’s grave is not present in the Constitution, and while the interviews with John T. Ford and John Mathews are present, they have been moved around, reworded, and elaborated on in different places.

For example, here is the beginning of “Booth’s Romance”:

“‘Oh! If it were not for that girl how clear the future would be to me! How easily could I grasp the ambition closest to my heart! With what a fixed and resolute purpose, beyond all resistance, could I do and dare anything to accomplish the release of the confederate prisoners! Thus reviving the drooping southern armies, and giving new heart to the waning cause!

What are those lines in Romeo and Juliet describing love? I have played them an hundred times, but they are now covered with the mist of greater thoughts and I cannot see them. I am, I am in love!’

‘O! any thing of nothing first create!
Oh! heavy lightness! serious vanity!
Mis-shapen chaos of well seeming forms!’
quoted an actor associate and friend into whose room John Wilkes Booth had strode one morning in April, 1865, and thrown himself upon the bed, his mind torn with conflicting emotions.”

In content, this introduction is similar to the exchange between Booth and John Mathews as written in “Booth’s Bullet,” but it is portrayed and narrated differently in “Booth’s Romance.” A similar change is present in the part about Booth’s breakfast. “Booth’s Romance” does not talk about Booth’s breakfast in the same section as John T. Ford’s interview but merely narrates Booth’s movements uncredited:

“About 10 o’clock in the morning of the day upon which the crime was committed Booth came down the steps of the hotel to the breakfast room, late as an actor’s wont. Immaculately dressed in a full suit of dark clothes, with tall silk hat, kid gloves and cane, he walked forth the young Adonis of the stage… At the foot of the stairs he met his fiancee, who was there awaiting his coming. They walked into the breakfast room, and took their morning meal together. A few minutes chat in the parlor followed. Those words were doubtless the last she ever spoke to him.”

In this version, Booth and Lucy Hale definitively shared breakfast together before they departed from each other’s company. However, there is no attribution for this added detail, and it appears to be an unsupported elaboration. “Booth’s Romance” is filled with confusing attributions when compared to “Booth’s Bullet”. For example, in the section cited as the interview with John T. Ford, we get this exchange:

“‘He was received by the very best people. The lady to whom he was engaged to be married belonged to the elite of Washington society.’
‘Do you know the lady’s name?’
‘Yes, but it shall be sacred. She is married now and it would do no good to the truth of history to revive it. Booth’s whole soul was centered upon her, and he loved her as few men love. Her picture, I understand, was taken from his body a short time after his capture, and she was faithful to him to the very last.'”

These statements are said to be from John T. Ford, but the ending part about Lucy Hale’s name being “sacred” was attributed to John Mathews in the article “Booth’s Bullet.” It appears the composer of “Booth’s Romance” combined the two statements by Ford and Mathews together and attributed them all to Ford. However, without access to Burr’s original work in the Philadelphia Press, it’s hard to know which account, if either, is the accurate portrayal.

Regardless, these articles from Frank Burr seem to provide John T. Ford as the source for the claim that John Wilkes Booth shared his breakfast with Lucy Hale on April 14, 1865. But how reliable is that story?


It’s important to remember that John T. Ford was not in Washington, D.C., on the day of the assassination. In truth, Ford was not all that involved with the day-to-day operations of his namesake theater. He had spent most of the winter and spring of 1864-1865 in Baltimore, running his Holliday Street Theatre. He left the management of Ford’s Theatre in the hands of his brothers, Harry and Dick Ford. When Lincoln was shot at Ford’s Theatre, John T. Ford was in Richmond. Before the war, Ford had operated a theater in Richmond, and he still had family in the area. With the fall of the Confederate capital earlier that month, Ford had applied for and received a military pass to travel south. All of John Ford’s knowledge about the specifics of the assassination comes from what he learned from his brothers, employees, and eyewitnesses after his return to the city.

This isn’t to say that John T. Ford is someone we should ignore. While he wasn’t in town when Lincoln was shot, when he returned to Washington, Ford was arrested and held at the Old Capitol Prison. He wrote a great deal about his time in prison and his interactions with some of the other folks imprisoned with him. Ford became a big proponent of Mary Surratt’s innocence as a result of what he witnessed while incarcerated.

In April of 1889, John T. Ford published an article in the North American Review entitled, “Behind the Curtain of a Conspiracy”. If you want, you can read the full article here. The bulk of the piece was a defense of Mary Surratt and an attack on Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt for allowing Mrs. Surratt to be executed. However, Ford also took the time to narrate John Wilkes Booth’s movements on the morning of the assassination. When discussing Booth’s breakfast, John T. Ford wrote this:

“On the morning of April 14, 1865, it was fully 11 a.m. when John Wilkes Booth came from his chamber and entered the breakfast-room at the National Hotel, Washington. He was the last man at breakfast that day; one lady only was in the room, finishing her morning meal. She knew him and responded to his bow of recognition. He breakfasted leisurely, left the room when he had finished, went to the barber-shop…”

Ford makes no mention of Lucy Hale in this 1889 article. His allusion to a single lady in the breakfast room more closely matches GATH’s description of Carrie Bean from 1865.

The reality is that John T. Ford was extremely inconsistent when discussing Booth’s breakfast over the years. In an article from 1878, he stated that Booth, “was the last guest at breakfast” and makes no mention of any ladies being present. To Col. Burr in 1881, he stated that Lucy Hale met Booth at breakfast, but it is unclear if she joined him for the meal. Then, in 1889, he wrote that another unnamed lady was also eating breakfast at the time. John T. Ford is all over the map.

Perhaps the most interesting of all of John T. Ford’s descriptions of Booth’s breakfast is one that he gave to the Evening Star on April 18, 1885. In this account, Ford includes both Carrie Bean and Lucy Hale.

“The last male guest at the National hotel breakfast, on the morning of April 14th, 1865, was John Wilkes Booth. When he entered the breakfast room, a young lady, Miss B—. was finishing her meal at a small table near by the one assigned him by the waiter in charge. He glanced over the bill of fare and pleasantly whispered his order for a light meal, which was soon brought. The young lady lingered at her table. The young actor was an acquaintance, and a known admirer of one of her feminine friends – (the daughter of a distinguished public man, whose family occupied a suite of rooms at the same hotel,) besides he was young graceful, and exceedingly handsome. His breakfast was soon finished, he rose as the lady did, and they walked together to the door, where his silk hat, light overcoat, cane and gloves were lying on a table. He laid the coat on his left arm, and with hat, gloves and cane in his hands, he bowed to the young lady and passed along the hall way and down the steps to the office, placing his hat and coat on and leisurely gloving one hand, he noticed that it was after eleven by the hotel clock, as he sauntered towards the door on the Avenue. At this time two handsomely dressed young ladies were passing – he bowed, they acknowledged the salutation and entered the parlor hallway of the hotel. Had any one been looking on when he drew and opened an encased picture from a side pocket, the likeness of one of the two ladies would have been recognized in the subject of the ambrotype. He quickly replaced the picture in his pocket, and started in an easy loitering walk towards 6th street…”

Ford paints a compelling and almost theatrical scene in this article. Booth shares a meal in the same room as an acquaintance, Carrie Bean, who admires the matinee idol and delays completing her meal so that they will finish at the same time. Always the gentleman, Booth escorts Carrie Bean from the breakfast room and bids her adieu. Preparing to depart the hotel, Booth comes across Lucy Hale, his secret fiancee, with an escort, most likely her sister Lizzie. The public nature of their meeting in the hotel parlor, along with Lizzie’s presence, prevents the lovers from acknowledging each other with anything beyond the same polite pleasantries Booth had just demonstrated with Miss Bean. But the couple still lock eyes and exchange a knowing smile. As the Hale sisters pass him, Booth takes out the image of Lucy he keeps on his person, the same image that will later be found in his pocket diary upon his death. Booth looks upon Lucy’s face before placing it in his pocket. He exits the National Hotel on his way to Ford’s Theatre where he will get confirmation that Lincoln would be attending that night, altering his future, and Lucy’s, forever. If I were to direct such a scene, I pan away from the hotel door after Booth exits out onto the street and turn back to Lucy Hale. Lizzie would be prattling on about something innocuous but our focus would be on Lucy’s face, which would still be a bit blushed from having a small moment of connection with her secret fiancee. She continues ignoring Lizzie and looks at the door Booth exited out of, longing for him to come back. But she never sees him again.

It’s a scene worthy of a theater owner and a pair of star-crossed lovers like John Wilkes Booth and Lucy Hale, but this account is likely just as fictitious as Romeo and Juliet. While John T. Ford no doubt took an interest in learning as much as he could about the events that led up to the President’s assassination at his namesake theater, his absence from the city on the day in question, and his many contradictions throughout the years, make it impossible to put any faith in his accounts regarding Booth’s breakfast. Sadly, aside from John T. Ford, I have been unable to find any compelling evidence to support the idea that John Wilkes Booth had breakfast with Lucy Hale on the morning of April 14, 1865. I don’t believe John Wilkes Booth dined with Lucy Hale that morning. At what point the pair saw each other for the last time will likely always be a mystery.


Epilogue

When I first started reading and doing research about the Lincoln assassination, I avoided the topic of John Wilkes Booth’s romantic entanglements like the plague. Booth was rumored to have been involved with so many different women that the late Dr. Ernie Abel wrote an entire 352-page book about them all. Booth engaged in numerous flings with women that he merely used and then disposed of. While Lucy Hale appears to have been a special case, I still don’t believe that Booth had the capacity to make any long-term relationship work, especially a marriage. Booth was a narcissist with an insatiable desire to be admired and revered. While Booth tried to portray Lincoln’s assassination as an act of justice for the South, it was more an attempt for glory and immortality for himself. Even if he had chosen not to assassinate Lincoln, I believe his relationship with Lucy was still doomed. Booth’s inability to feel fulfilled by any single person would have caused him to stray and ruined Lucy’s life as a result.

With that being said, I do believe that John Wilkes Booth thought he loved Lucy Hale. I say he thought he loved her because I don’t know how capable Booth was of truly loving someone other than himself. Booth’s version of love was not enough to stop him from killing Lincoln, but I believe he did think of Lucy Hale during his final days on the run. In fact, I think he left a final message for Lucy in his diary.

As mentioned earlier, before committing his crime, John Wilkes Booth left a lengthy letter for publication in the newspapers. This was his detailed explanation of why he had taken the drastic action of killing the President. John Mathews destroyed the letter shortly after the assassination for fear of being connected to the crime. While on the run from the authorities, the assassin clambered for newspapers and was dejected to find his words had not been published. Perhaps predicting that he would not survive long enough to try and justify his actions to the world in person, Booth decided to compose another manifesto. With a notable lack of paper, John Wilkes Booth was forced to take down his thoughts in his small datebook from 1864. It was in a pocket of this datebook that he held Lucy Hale’s photograph. Booth ripped out the previously used pages and started the datebook fresh, labeling his main entry as “April 14, Friday the Ides”.

Much has been written about the text of John Wilkes Booth’s diary. Yet, a central section of his diary has been mainly ignored in practically all analyses of his motivations, mindset, and mood. Before writing anything about his deed or his reasonings, Booth opens his diary with two words that stand alone.

The words are “Ti Amo“. The phrase is Italian and translates to, “I love you.”

If Booth had written “I love you” in English, the message could be interpreted as being for anyone, a final note to his mother and siblings perhaps. But writing the phrase as “Ti Amo” codes this phrase in a way that makes it more specific. It is intended for a specific person, who, upon reading it, should know it was for them and them alone.

I contend that this “Ti Amo” was Booth’s final message for Lucy Hale. We know that Lucy was learning Spanish in preparation for her family’s departure to Spain. John Wilkes Booth traveled from D.C. to New York City in March of 1865 in order to visit Lucy, who was taking Spanish lessons in the city. While “Ti Amo” is Italian and not Spanish, it is only one letter different from the Spanish phrase for “I love you”. Perhaps Booth meant to write the Spanish “Te Amo” but ended up with the Italian “Ti Amo” by mistake. Or perhaps the Italian version was a playful response to Lucy’s own “Te amo”. In my view, writing “I love you” in a foreign language in his diary was a way for Booth to announce his love specifically for Lucy without endangering her further by mentioning her name. I might be giving John Wilkes Booth more romantic credit than I should, but I truthfully cannot think of who else this message was meant for other than his secret fiancee, Lucy Hale.

Categories: History | Tags: , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.