In 1988, Lincoln assassination researchers General William Tidwell, James O. Hall, and David Gaddy published a book called Come Retribution: The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassination of Lincoln. The volume was the first book of its kind, attempting to unravel the activities of the Confederate Secret Service during the Civil War. The trio documented many plots and instances of guerrilla warfare that Confederate agents undertook to undermine the Union war effort and support the goals of the Rebel South. In addition to documenting the South’s spying apparatus, the authors revitalized the belief of the Union government in 1865, which posited that the Confederate government was behind John Wilkes Booth’s plot against Abraham Lincoln.
There is no denying that John Wilkes Booth had several intriguing interactions with those involved in some way with secret Confederate activities. His conspirator in the kidnapping plot, John Surratt, was a known Confederate courier, helping to transport mail and people across the line between Union and Confederate territory. In October of 1864, while working on his plan to abduct Lincoln, Booth traveled to Montreal, Canada, a hotbed of Confederate intrigue, where it was claimed he met with high-ranking Confederate officials stationed there. At the trial of the Lincoln conspirators, a group of witnesses gave damning testimony regarding Booth’s familiarity with members of the Confederate leadership in Canada. The belief of the federal government was that the assassin was following the directive of Confederate leaders and that they were as much to blame for the murder of Lincoln as John Wilkes Booth.
However, despite the strong belief that the Confederate government was the moving spirit of Booth’s plot, concrete evidence proving such a connection has never quite materialized. Most of the witnesses who placed Booth with high-ranking Confederate officials in Canada were later proven to have committed perjury and been bribed to provide their false testimony. No document from the Confederate government mentions Booth, nor were any documents connecting him to the Confederacy found among Booth’s papers after his crime. John Surratt denied that his foray with Booth was in any way connected with his activities as a rebel courier.
While Booth undoubtedly had flirtations with Confederates and clearly assembled a gang of Confederate sympathizers to help him in his plan, the smoking gun proving that John Wilkes Booth was acting as an authorized agent of the Confederacy remains elusive.
Even with acknowledging the lack of definitive proof, Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy proceeded to build a circumstantial case attempting to prove the Confederacy culpable for Lincoln’s death. One piece of evidence the men pointed to revolved around a trip John Wilkes Booth took to the Parker House hotel in Boston, Massachusetts, in July of 1864.
Part of Come Retribution discusses a Confederate attempt to utilize biological warfare against the Union. Several boxes of clothing “infected” with Yellow Fever were sent to northern cities in an effort to start an outbreak of the deadly disease. Luckily, the plot proved unsuccessful as the medicinal knowledge of the day was unaware that Yellow Fever is not contagious but is spread through the bites of infected mosquitoes. Still, this attempt to poison Northern cities was a significant escalation, and the plot was discussed at the trial of the Lincoln conspirators to show how the Confederacy had been willing to commit terrible deeds to win the war.
Details of the Yellow Fever plot piqued the interest of a man named Cordial Crane, who was an official of the Custom House in Boston, Massachusetts. The trunks of yellow fever clothing had made their way through the port of Boston, and one of the conspirators in the plot was said to have stayed at the Parker House hotel in Boston during the shipping process. Acting under his own initiative, Crane went and consulted the hotel register for the Parker House. While he was not able to find any evidence of the Yellow Fever conspirator in the ledger book, he did note the appearance of John Wilkes Booth’s name. I’ll let Come Retribution take it from here:
“…He [found] J. Wilkes Booth on the Parker House register for 26 July 1864 along with three men from Canada and one from Baltimore. Crane’s suspicions were aroused. He copied the entries and sent a letter dated 30 May 1865 to Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton. He listed the names “Charles R. Hunter, Toronto, CW [Canada West], J Wilkes Booth, A. J. Bursted, Baltimore, H. V. Clinton, Hamilton, CW, R. A. Leech, Montreal.” In his letter to Stanton, Crane wrote that he sent the “names as a remarkable circumstance that representatives from the where named places should arrive and meet at the Parker House at about the same time Harris was on his way to Halifax with his clothing.” Crane put the emphasis in his letter on “Harris” and the supposedly infected clothing. No investigation was made into the other names on the Parker House register. After all, Booth was dead and the War Department already had information about the “yellow fever plot.” Crane’s letter was filed and not followed up.
Now, more than a century later, the gathering at the Parker House can be construed differently. It has all the earmarks of a conference with an agenda. The inference is that agents of the Confederate apparatus in Canada had a need to discuss something with Booth. Capturing Lincoln? Within a few weeks Booth was in Baltimore recruiting others for just such a scheme and had closed out his Pennsylvania oil operations. The inference becomes stronger as a result of a careful search of records in Toronto, Baltimore, Hamilton, and Montreal. No trace of Hunter, Bursted, and Leech was found. The names appear to be aliases.
The man using the name “H. V. Clinton” did turn up in a not unexpected place. Such a man registered at the St. Lawrence Hall, Montreal, on 28 May 1864. Instead of listing himself as from Hamilton, CW, he gave his home address as St. Louis, Missouri. He was back at the St. Lawrence Hall on 24 August 1864, again entering his name on the register as “H. V. Clinton, St. Louis.” A thorough search of St. Louis records from the 1850-1870 period was made. “H. V. Clinton” was not found.”
Now this is an example of where I believe Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy go too far astray with their suppositions and theories in hopes of proving their overall thesis. With nothing but transferred names from a hotel registry, they have concocted a scenario in which Booth engaged in a meeting with these fellow hotel guests, and that the purpose of this meeting was the actor’s recruitment into an abduction plot against the President. The main evidence of this scenario is the trio’s belief that the names used in the register are aliases, and thus, proof of the men being Confederate agents. Yet this is a laughable conclusion to make without evidence. A researcher’s inability to find more information about a person listed in a hotel registry doesn’t prove the person used an alias. Once you start down that route, you might as well put on your tinfoil hat because then every name is an alias.
Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy were good researchers, to be sure, but they were as capable of making mistakes and missing things as anyone. One thing that they, and other researchers since, have missed is the fact that they have transcribed one of the names from Crane’s list incorrectly. His list doesn’t include the name Charles R. Hunter, but rather the name “Chas R Winter.”
Above is the original handwritten letter that Crane sent to Edwin Stanton. A microfilmed version of the letter is contained in the Lincoln Assassination Evidence collection housed at the National Archives, and that entire collection is digitized and viewable at Fold3.com. At the bottom of the first page, Crane lists the first of five names he copied from the Parker House hotel registry dated July 26, 1864.
Now, looking at it quickly, I can understand why Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy read this as “Charles R Hunter, Toronto CW.” The first letter of the last name certainly seems like an H with an incomplete crossbar. We’ll get to that later. Instead, look at the second letter in the last name. Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy transcribed this letter as a “u”, but there is clearly a dot floating above it indicating the letter is actually an “i”. An “i” is also the only way that the rest of the word “-nter” would work, since a cursive “n” had two bumps and a ‘u” would steal one of these bumps to make the downstroke. William Edwards and Edward Steers, in their edited printed volume of the evidence agrees that this second letter is an “i” and they transcribe the name as “Chas R Hinter.” However, I believe the name is actually “Winter” with the “W” somewhat hastily drawn. For comparison, look at the way Crane writes Booth’s middle name.
Note how the “W” in Wilkes starts with a little flag or serif before starting the down stroke. The first letter in Charles’s last name also starts with a flag-like serif (admittedly, a somewhat smaller one). Returning to “Wilkes’ we can see how Crane’s downstroke immediately angles upwards and then falls again to make the middle of the “W.” However, rather than bringing the final stroke completely back to the top to complete the capital “W,” this final stroke is significantly shortened and connects directly into the next letter, an “i.” When I taught cursive to my third graders, I always taught them that a capital W doesn’t connect to the rest of the word, but Crane has made his own shortcut of sorts. We can see the same basic formation later on the second page when Crane writes about “the sad tragedy at Washington.” Again, the capital W starts with a decorative serif (this time it’s not connected to the main letter) and the final stroke of the W is almost non existent as it merges into the “a.” Looking back at Charles’s name we see the small flag, the downward stroke and then the start of the upward angled stroke before the line breaks. It could have been that the pen Crane was using was misbehaving, or he failed to put enough pressure during this stroke, which is why it cuts off. Still, we then have the downstroke and the significantly shortened final upstroke that goes into the “i” instead. For those who might still believe this letter is meant to be an “H,” look at the other examples of capital Hs in the letter. There is no starting serif, no upward diagonal. Crane forms the middle of his H by making a loop in his second vertical line. There is no evidence of an attempt to “loop” the downward stroke before the “i.” The name is not Charles Hunter or Charles Hinter, but Charles Winter.
While Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy may not have been able to find a Charles R. Hunter living in Toronto, there was a Charles R. Winter who lived there. Charles Robinson Winter was born in Barnstaple, England, in 1832. His older brother immigrated to Canada in the late 1840s, and Charles eventually followed him. Charles R Winter from Toronto is included in the arrivals list for the Royal Hotel in Hamilton, Ontario, on May 17, 1864. In January 1865, he married a fellow English native turned Canadian resident, Elizabeth A. Baker, at the home of her brother in Toronto. In the 1871 and 1881 censuses, Winter is listed as an “agent” and directories specify him as a “manufacturer’s agent,” a role that would require a lot of travel. In fact, in the 1868 Toronto directory, his occupation is listed as “traveller.” Now, I can’t prove that this Charles R. Winter is the same one as the one who checked into the Parker House hotel in Boston on July 26, 1864, but I feel that this is more of a possibility than this name being an alias. Winter died in 1899 and is buried in Toronto.
The final name on Crane’s list is “R. A. Leech Montreal.” Though it’s spelled a tiny bit differently, through some research, I pretty quickly found a Robert A. Leach who resided in Montreal during this time period.
Robert A. Leach was a young lawyer from Montreal. He is found in the 1864 Montreal directory as the “R” in “R & D Leach, Advocates.” This was a firm he shared with his brother David. Both were the elder sons of William Turnbull Leach, the archdeacon of Montreal’s St. George Church. Robert A. Leach died from an unspecified illness in 1871 at the age of 32. He is buried in Montreal. Again, I feel the possibility that the R A Leech in Crane’s letter is more likely to have been Robert A. Leach than an alias of a Confederate agent.
Now I wish I could say that I’ve found prospective identities for each of the names on the list. While I definitely have a step up over Tidwell, Hal, and Gaddy, who worked in the pre-Internet age, the remaining two names on the list have mostly eluded my own searches.
However, it’s clear from Crane’s letter that he had a hard time deciphering the last name of the man from Baltimore. Come Retribution only provides Crane’s first guess, “A J Bursted,” but the original letter shows Crane adding “(or Rursted)” after this entry, showing his uncertainty. “Bursted” and “Rursted” are not surnames for anyone. It is unlikely a person would have used such a nonexistent last name, even as an alias. It is far more likely that Crane just couldn’t read the poor handwriting of the entry. The last name might have been Bustard, Buster, Bumstead, or something else entirely. With only the initials “A. J.” (if even those are accurate), we don’t know what first names to search. Unfortunately, we cannot go back to the original records ourselves to try our hand at deciphering these names. The original registers for the Parker House hotel during this period no longer exist. All we have is this small snapshot from Crane, which doesn’t even specify if these were the only names entered into the register on July 26, 1864. It seems unlikely that a busy metropolitan hotel like the Parker House would only gain five guests over the whole day. It seems more likely that these were the only names Crane recorded because he was looking for a connection to Canada.
But let’s still look at “H V Clinton” of Hamilton, Canada West. This name is seemingly the linchpin of Come Retribution’s theory that the names on the list are all aliases. As they note, the name “H V Clinton” also appears on the register for the St. Lawrence Hall hotel in Montreal in 1864. That hotel was known to cater to many Confederate agents and sympathizers. It was said that the St. Lawrence Hall was the only hotel in Canada to serve mint juleps, a favored drink among the plantation South. I’ll admit that I have not been able to find an “H. V.” Clinton living in Hamilton, Ontario. However, I did find a whole family of Clintons, with different initials, who lived in the area. James H. and William Wesley Clinton were farmers who resided in the Oneida Township of Haldimand County, Ontario. Haldimand County abuts the city of Hamilton, and the distance between downtown Hamilton and the Oneida Township is about 18 miles. A resident of this rural area would likely provide their place of residence as Hamilton on a hotel register in the same way Booth regularly registered in hotels as being from Baltimore rather than Bel Air. While Booth had also lived in Baltimore as a child, once his father died in 1852, he never resided in Baltimore again. The Booths didn’t even have a home there after the 1850s. If I were to try to find John Wilkes Booth in Baltimore records during the 1860s, I would fail. In the 1860 census, the Booths are all enumerated as living in Philadelphia. During the summer of 1864, he resided with his brother Edwin in New York City. Yet, to Booth, he was “from” Baltimore, and that’s why he would sign hotel registers that way. H V Clinton from Hamilton, Ontario, might have followed the same course. There was a man named William Clinton who lived in Hamilton and worked as a saw-filer in 1863 and beyond. Granted, none of these individuals appear to match the given initials “H. V.”, but remember that we are trusting Cordial Crane that he transcribed the right letters. Regardless, there were Clintons living in and around Hamilton, Ontario, during the 1860s who could represent the man who checked into the Parker House.
What of the mysterious H.V. Clinton, who checked into the St. Lawrence Hall in Montreal in 1864? As Come Retribution notes, this Clinton wrote his place of residence as St. Louis, Missouri. He checked in on May 28, July 8, and August 24. For some reason, the Come Retribution authors neglected to mention the July 8 entry, despite their having been aware of it. On that day, H V Clinton checked in at 7:30 pm. Earlier that same day, an entire party from St. Louis had also checked in. This party was headed by “Mr and Mrs Garneau,” their two children, a nurse, and two other guests: a “Miss Withington” and a “Miss Clinton.” The Garneaus were Joseph and Mary Garneau. Joseph was a Montreal native who immigrated to the States and settled in St. Louis. There, he established a bakery that grew into one of the largest factories for baked goods in the U.S. He produced crackers in huge quantities and helped supply the Union with crackers and hardtack during the war. Mrs. Garneau’s maiden name was Withington, and the Miss Withington who joined them was her younger sister, Emily Withington. The names of this party can also be found in a newspaper article published in Buffalo, New York, on July 6. It appears that the Garneau party traveled part of the distance from St. Louis to Montreal aboard a boat called the Badger State commanded by Captain James Beckwith. The article contained a thank you to Captain Beckwith and a positive review of the journey that the boat provided. Included in the signatories of the article are the names Joseph Garneau, Mrs. Joseph Garneau, Miss E Withinton [sic], and Miss Maggie Clinton. I have been unable to determine the relationship between this Maggie Clinton and the Garneaus.
Still, the arrival of H V Clinton, also from St. Louis, to the same Montreal hotel, on the same day as the Garneau party featuring Maggie Clinton, definitely seems to be connected. In addition, Come Retribution fails to mention that when H V Clinton returned to the St. Lawrence Hall hotel on August 24, he was not alone. That time, he checked in with “Miss Kate Clinton,” also from St. Louis. The two were put in adjoining rooms. All of this makes me think there was some sort of family connection between H V, Maggie, and Kate Clinton, and that they were also somehow connected to the cracker magnate, Joseph Garneau, who was originally from Montreal.
As Come Retribution mentions, searches for H V Clinton in St. Louis, Missouri, fail to provide identifying information. There were definitely Clintons living in St. Louis in 1864. So far, I have only been able to find one instance of an H V Clinton in St. Louis. It was common practice in days gone by to publish lists of unclaimed letters held by the post office in the newspaper. Many people addressed their letters with just the name of the recipient and the city or town where they resided, rather than a full street address. It was then up to the recipient to go to the post office and inquire about any letters for them to receive their mail. To illustrate this, here’s the envelope to a letter John Wilkes Booth wrote. It gives the addressee’s name but merely directs it to the post office where it would have to be picked up.
If a person did not pick up their mail from the post office after a certain period of time, postmasters would publish a list in the paper, hopefully informing the recipient that they have mail waiting for them. The name H. V. Clinton is featured on such a list in the St. Louis Globe Democrat newspaper on September 15, 1866. It’s worth noting that this date is well after the end of the Civil War. If the name H V Clinton were indeed an alias, there would have been no need to continue using it after 1865. It seems more likely that H V Clinton was a resident of St. Louis in the 1860s, albeit one that is difficult to track down.
During my research, I stumbled across other H V Clintons in the 1860s that could possibly be the same person, but their connection to St. Louis is unproven. There was an H V Clinton living in Carroll Parish, Louisiana, through the 1860s. A H V Clinton and his wife from Indiana visited Newport, Rhode Island, in 1862. Henry V. Clinton, residing in Newport, advertised for a nanny to accompany him and his young son on a year-long trip to Europe in 1864. There’s no way to prove or disprove that any of these are the same H V Clinton.
In the same way, we cannot prove that the H V Clinton from Hamilton, Ontario, who signed the Parker House hotel registry in Boston on July 26, 1864, is the same H V Clinton from St. Louis, Missouri, that thrice signed the St. Lawrence Hall register in Montreal in May, July, and August of 1864. The difficulty in finding either of these men does not prove they are the same person or, even more, that they were an alias for a Confederate agent who subsequently recruited Booth into the plot to kidnap Lincoln.
In the credit of Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy, when they wrote Come Retribution, they were understandably intrigued by the fact that Booth made a seemingly random visit to Boston in the summer of 1864. In June of that year, he had been tending to his failing oil investments in Pennsylvania before arriving and spending weeks with his family in New York City and in New London, Connecticut. This register entry of a trip to Boston was a mystery, and, following Cordial Crane’s suspicions, the trio made a conspiracy out of it.
However, just about a month before Come Retribution was published, a new and exciting discovery was made. Six letters written by the assassin between June 7 and the end of August 1864 were made known to historians. Booth had written the letters to a 16-year-old Boston girl by the name of Isabel Sumner. The actor had likely met the girl during his long engagement in Boston earlier that spring. From the tone and content of these letters it is clear that Booth was smitten with the young woman, so much so that he even gifted her a pearl ring with the inscription “J.W.B. to I.S.” Though it does not appear that their romance lasted beyond the summer, young Ms. Sumner retained this cache of letters, the ring, and photographs of the actor, even after he murdered the President. These items were passed down through members of her family until her descendants revealed them and sold the lot in 1988 to collector Louise Taper. James O. Hall, when in the process of helping to facilitate the sale of the letters to Taper, even wrote to the Sumner descendant offering to send a copy of his soon-to-be-published book, Come Retribution. Had the Sumner letters been known a year earlier, the contents may have caused Hall to see Booth’s Boston trip in a less conspiratorial light.
On July 24, 1864, Booth wrote to Isabel Sumner from his brother’s home in New York City. That letter was sealed in the envelope previously shown above. The smitten Booth apologized to Isabel for coming on so strong with his many love letters and feared he had scared her off. He apologized for his intensity and vowed not to write her another letter until he heard from her. Yet, despite this vow, it’s clear Booth was unwilling to wait for a response. He ended his letter with, “Remember, dear friend not to let anyone see my letters. I will come at once to Boston.” Two days after writing this letter, Booth checked into the Parker House hotel in Boston.
Seen in its proper context, there is no mystery regarding Booth’s visit to Boston in July of 1864. The man was clearly smitten with 16-year-old Isabel Sumner and traveled from New York to Boston to see her. His own written words betray his purpose. His trip to Boston was not of a conspiratorial nature, but one of desire.
In the years since Come Retribution was published, several authors have taken up Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy’s thesis, transforming what the trio presented as couched theories into near certainties. The late John Fazio, author of Decapitating the Union, was the greatest master of this. In his section about Booth’s visit to the Parker House he stated uneqivialy (and without evidence) that Booth, “met with three Confederate agents from Canada and one from Baltimore” and that “this meeting was the first, or at least one of the first, that John had with Confederate agents and that many more followed.” Yet, as can be seen, there is no evidence that Booth took part in a Confederate conference at the Parker House hotel in Boston. The underlying “support” for this is that some of the men who also checked into the hotel on this date were from Canada, and researchers of the past couldn’t find out more about them.
As I stated at the beginning of the post, John Wilkes Booth did have some legitimate and intriguing connections with members of the Confederate underground. But we must also remember that much of this underground was not the same as the official Confederate Secret Service, which enacted authorized missions. Confederate sympathizers often acted in the same way as modern terrorist cells. They had the same ultimate goal to help the Confederacy and win the war, but not every action completed by these groups was controlled by or even known to the Confederate government.
Ultimately, I believe that Booth was speaking honestly when he closed his manifesto for the kidnapping plot, identifying himself as “A Confederate doing duty upon his own responsibility, J. Wilkes Booth.” But even those who believe that the Confederate government may have had a hand in Booth’s plots against Lincoln, it is important to be realistic about the evidence supporting this. There is nothing to support the idea that John Wilkes Booth met with Confederate agents at the Parker House hotel in July 1864.
If you found this post interesting and want to support my research and writing, please consider joining my Patreon page. For just $3 or more a month, you get access to a weekly newsletter that keeps you up to date on all things Lincoln assassination-related. For $7 or more a month, you also get access to exclusive fortnightly posts delving into the history of artifacts relating to the assassination story, and for $15 or more a month, you get monthly videos from me where I share new research discoveries and answer your questions about this history. The contributions of patrons help cover my research subscriptions and associated website costs. For example, the All Access Membership subscription to Ancestry.com (which was needed to consult Canadian and other international records in the writing of this post) costs about $500 a year, so every little bit helps. Click here or on the icon below to learn more about my Patreon.






















Great post, Dave. Nineteenth century cursive is difficult, but I think you nailed it.
I value Come Retribution as a chronicle of the Confederate Secret Service, but the authors’ attempts to connect it to the assassination is filled with so much qualified language and suppositions as to undermine the thesis. The notion of a large Confederate force as a screening operation to protect Booth is far-fetched, to put it mildly. Someone would have talked–before their deathbed. And if the Confederate leadership was involved, they would have assembled a better team than Booth’s motley crew. I get the sense Jefferson Davis, Gen Lee, et al., were too preoccupied to worry about an actor–however handsome and charming he was.
The best chance to uncover such a plot would have been in the contemporary period while the conspirators were still available for questioning and any evidence was still fresh. There was no smoking gun then, and there still isn’t one now. Until new evidence comes to light to change a position, the more hoops you have to jump through to arrive at its conclusion, the more difficult it is to believe.
Let me offer an alternative version of history that I believe has been overlooked.
RICHMOND WANTED LINCOLN DEAD
In their seminal work, Come Retribution, Messrs. Tidwell, Hall and Gaddy presented quite convincing evidence that the Confederate government was directly involved in a plan to capture President Abraham Lincoln; however, they stopped short of saying that Richmond gave the order to Booth to kill Lincoln. In a handwritten note in his files, dated July 9, 1999, James O. Hall, pointedly stated, “The authors did not write in Come Retribution that they had proof that Jefferson Davis or [Judah] Benjamin ordered Lincoln killed by Booth. What we did say is that after the Dahlgren raid, the Confederate government – and that would include both Davis and Benjamin – sanctioned the capture operation, an entirely different matter, which led in direct progression to the assassination.” (emphasis in original) So, the question has lingered: Did the plot to actually kill Lincoln originate in Richmond or did Booth, on his own, revise the plan from one a of a Confederate government-sanctioned capture of Lincoln to one of multiple assassination of key Union officials? The obvious answer to that question and the proof have been in front of us for a while. [James O. Hall, “For My Turner file,” James O. Hall Library, Clinton, MD]
On April 1, 1865, a team of Confederates, under Thomas F. Harney, left Richmond for Washington. Harney was an explosives expert, and he and his team came from the Confederate Torpedo Bureau, which throughout the Civil War developed and deployed all kinds of mines, underground shells, and explosive devices used against Union forces. Harney and his team carried explosive ordinance, and their orders were to rendezvous with Colonel John S. Mosby in Fauquier County, Virginia. Mosby assigned the task of getting Harney and the ordinance into Washington to a special unit under the command of Captain George B. Baylor on April 5th.
Captain Baylor and his command, including Harney and his team left Fauquier County for Washington on April 8th. Two days later they were at Burke Station in Fairfax County and less than fifteen miles from Washington. Union cavalry under the command of Colonel Charles Albright happened upon the Confederates, and there was a brief battle with only a few casualties. Most of the Confederates escaped, but Harney and three others were captured and imprisoned at the Old Capital Prison in Washington. Colonel Albright’s action report of the skirmish at Burke Station said that Harney “brought [explosive] ordnance to Colonel Mosby and joined his command.” What evidence is there of the objective of Harney’s mission?
The Confederate government evacuated Richmond on April 2, 1865. At the time, President Lincoln was aboard the River Queen, a steam ship that was docked near General Grant’s headquarters at City Point. Union troops, including those under the command of Colonel Edward H. Ripley, entered and occupied the Richmond the next day. In 1907, Ripley, a Vermonter, published his memoir, The Capture and Occupation of Richmond. In it, he told that Lincoln had learned that explosives experts had left Richmond a few days before with lethal plans directed straight at him. Without realizing it, Ripley grasped the objective of Harney’s mission. Ripley was at his headquarters on April 4 when he was visited by an enlisted man, William H. Snyder, who was assigned to the Torpedo Bureau, which was under the command of General Gabriel J. Rains. Snyder, in his Confederate uniform, asked Colonel Ripley to meet with him on a “very important subject.” Ripley granted the soldier’s request.
Snyder told Ripley that he had a problem of conscience. He considered that the outcome of the war was apparent, and he wished to avoid further bloodshed. He was particularly concerned about the safety of President Lincoln. Ripley recalled Snyder’s disclosure as follows:
“He knew that a party had just been dispatched from Raine’s torpedo bureau on a secret mission, which he understood was aimed at the head of the Yankee government, and he wished to put Mr. Lincoln on his guard and to have impressed on him that just at this moment he believed him to be in great danger of violence and he should take greater care of himself. He could give no names or facts, as the work of his department was secret, and no man knew what his comrade was sent to do, that the President of the United States was in great danger.”
Ripley called in his adjutant, Captain Rufus P. Spaniels, who took down Snyder’s statement under oath. Ripley then sent a note to President asking for a conference. Lincoln, having come from City Point, was aboard the Malvern, anchored in the James River outside of Richmond. By then, it was 10:00 p.m. Lincoln responded that same night and set a meeting with Ripley at 9:00 a.m. the next morning, April 5th. At that time, Ripley took Snyder with him to the Malvern, but Snyder was not allowed to enter Lincoln’s cabin. Ripley read Snyder’s statement aloud to Lincoln, stressing the danger to Lincoln from Confederates from the Torpedo Bureau. He urged the President to talk with Snyder. Lincoln heard Ripley out but closed the conversation by saying, “I cannot bring myself to believe that any human being lives who would do me any harm.” Lincoln refused to meet with Snyder and returned to Washington on April 9th.
At the time that Harney left Richmond on April 1st, a Confederate courier by the name of John Harrison Surratt, Jr., was also present in Richmond and meeting with Confederate Secretary of State Judah P. Benjamin. Surratt arrived in Richmond on March 29th, accompanied by a female spy, Sarah Slater, who was carrying messages from Jacob Thompson and Edwin G. Lee, Confederate operatives in Montreal. The Confederates used operatives in Canada to plan and carry out covert operations, or as they called them, “secret service” missions because Canada, as a colony of England at the time was by extension also a neutral territory, so they could not be arrested by Union forces, and it was relatively to go back and forth across the border. Initially, Mrs. Slater was to be accompanied by another Confederate agent, Augustus S. Howell, but he was arrested as a suspected spy in a tavern owned by Surratt’s mother in southern Maryland on March 24. Surratt, an experienced courier, stepped in to escort Mrs. Slater to Richmond due to Howell’s incarceration.
John Surratt, Jr. and Sarah Slater also left Richmond on the morning of April 1st, and made their way back to Washington on the afternoon of April 3rd. Mrs. Slater checked into the Metropolitan Hotel. Surratt returned to the boarding house on H Street run by his mother, Mary, where he learned that John Wilkes Booth had left Washington on April 1st and was currently in New York City. In talking to Louis Weichmann, a friend and boarder with whom he shared a room, Surratt showed Weichmann that he was carrying ten $20 gold pieces, or more than $18,500 in today’s dollars, money that Surratt no doubt obtained from Confederate Secretary of State Benjamin. On the morning that Surratt and Slater left Richmond, Confederate Secretary of the Treasury, George A. Trenholm executed appropriations warrant Number 3504 to draw $1,500 “In Gold” and payable to Benjamin from the “Secret Service” account. Surratt exchanged $40 in gold for $60 in greenbacks, a common discount for cash at the time, with another boarder.
Surratt spent the night with Mrs. Slater at the Metropolitan Hotel in Washington, and on the next morning, April 4th, he and Mrs. Slater boarded the early train bound for New York. Once in the city, their first stop was at the home of Edwin Booth, John Wilkes’ older brother. According to Surratt, the pair arrived too late as the younger Booth had departed for Boston earlier. The story goes that Surratt then continued on to Montreal, and that Mrs. Slater went to her sister’s who lived in the city as well.
Surratt arrived in Montreal on the morning of April 6th and registered at the St. Lawrence Hall hotel, the unofficial Confederate headquarters in Canada, under the name “John Harrison.” He then met with General Edwin G. Lee, commander of the Confederate “Secret Service” operations in Canada, who was also staying at the St. Lawrence Hall at the time. In his diary for April 6th, Lee recorded, “Letter by Charley from Mr. Benjamin; my last rec’d all safe.” “Charley Armstrong” was Lee’s code name for Surratt.
While in Boston on April 6th, “Booth attracted attention with a fine display of marksmanship at a shooting gallery near the Parker House [hotel].” [Loux p. 207] On April 7th, Booth travelled from Boston to New York. Little is known of his activities once he arrived, other than when a fellow actor and friend Samuel Chester saw him that evening, Booth, who had been drinking, bragged to him that at Lincoln’s second inauguration on March 4, 1865, that he had a splendid chance to kill Lincoln, which is the first indication that Booth’s objective had changed. As late as March 17th, Booth’s efforts were directed at the capture of Lincoln. Booth arrived back in Washington on April 8th, where two days later, “Booth practiced at a shooting gallery at Ninth and Pennsylvania Avenue.” [Loux p. 208] Lincoln had not yet returned to Washington.
So, what is the proof that ties all this together? After his capture, Lincoln assassination conspirator, George Atzerodt, made several rambling confessions. Atzerodt was assigned by Booth to kill Vice President Andrew Johnson. German-born, Atzerodt spoke with an accent, was unkept in appearance, and was known to have enjoyed a drink. Consequently, history generally regards him as a low-life. However, throughout the Civil War, Atzerodt was a blockade runner, rowing Confederate agents, materials, supplies, and mail, back and forth across the Potomac. He was smart and clever enough to have never been caught. While being held at the Washington Arsenal Penitentiary, Atzerodt asked to speak to his brother-in-law, John L. Smith, who was a detective on the staff of Baltimore Provost Marshal James L. McPhail. Atzerodt’s request was granted, and on the evening of May 1, 1865, Smith wrote down the substance of Atzerodt’s answers to McPhail’s questions. In the course of that interrogation, Atzerodt made a stunning admission:
“Booth said he had met a party in New York who would get the Prest. certain. They were going to mine the end of the Pres. House, near the War Dept. They knew an entrance to accomplish it through. Spoke about getting friends of the Prest. to get up entertainment & they would mix in it, have a serenade & thus get the Prest. & party.”
How did “a party in New York” know about a top-secret mission, which originated in Richmond, to plant explosives under the Executive Mansion, and kill Lincoln and other members of the Union government that had been launched a week before Booth returned to Washington? How did the news of the secret mission travel from Richmond to New York, where Booth learned of it?
That Booth knew that Harney had been dispatched by Richmond to kill Lincoln means that Booth knew that Richmond wanted Lincoln and others in the Union government dead. Whether that information was conveyed to Booth couched as “orders,” is irrelevant. What is relevant is that it is quite clear that Booth knew Richmond wanted Lincoln and others dead, and, thus, he acted accordingly. The notion of assassinating Lincoln originated in Richmond.
It would also explain how and why the kidnapping plot, which was centered solely on Lincoln, was expanded to include VP Johnson and Secretary of State Seward for assassination, in short, to decapitate the Union government. As Booth wrote, “something decisive and great” had to be done. Those words originated in Richmond and were conveyed to Booth. Why and how else did Booth have knowledge of a secret mission to kill Lincoln and others in an explosion under the White House? That information had to come directly from Richmond, and the message to Booth was clear: the Confederate government wanted Lincoln and others in the Union leadership dead.
I further believe that the courier who delivered Richmond’s message to Booth was John H. Surratt, Jr. Surratt was in Richmond when Harney’s mission commenced, and he could have learned of it from Benjamin. Both Surratt and Booth were in New York City on April 4th. (I am working on their respective timelines. Surratt said in his lecture that he and Booth did not meet on that day, but most of what Surratt said was a lie.) In any event, the news had to come from Richmond. (I think Surratt delivered the message and then left town, and made himself conspicuous in Elmira.)
Bill Binzel
Bill,
I love having your feedback and input, as always. To be honest, I actually feel that the Harney plot is another example of Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy drawing a greater conclusion than the original evidence provides for. We know that Thomas Harney was employed by the Torpedo Bureau of the Confederacy and that he was captured while moving with Mosby’s men in April of 1865. We also know that the captured group had “ordnance” with them. However, reports from the authorities who arrested the men noted that the intended purpose of this group was “ to prey upon trains.” The captives themselves admitted to having “been sent by Mosby to capture the quartermaster’s animals” which were transported by train in the area. If one were intended to stop a train and steal its cargo of mules and horses, utilizing an explosive ordnance as a debilitating distraction would do the trick. There is nothing from Harney or anyone else involved in that group that states his purpose was the White House.
Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy use Atzerodt’s statement as the proof that the White House was targeted, but Atzerodt doesn’t say anything about the Confederates or Harney. It was supposedly a group from New York that was planning such a scheme. While I respect your connection of John Surratt’s movements and presence in New York, would not Booth have told Atzerodt that his source for the information about the White House plot was their fellow conspirator, John Surratt, if that had been the case?
As far as Col. Riley is concerned, he wrote his book forty-two years after the events he describes. We all know how memory alters over time and how the desire to increase one’s importance in the eyes of history might lead one to exaggerate. The whole segment of Riley trying to warn Lincoln about imminent danger just days before his death is a very common trope in our field. What bothers me the most is that the actual statement from William Snyder that exists in the files does not mention anything about a danger to Lincoln. Snyder recounts the plot to burn New York City and another planned outing for a group of Confederate agents to ransack Newport, RI, and escape on a ship. One would expect Snyder’s supposedly dire warning to Riley about an ambiguous threat to Lincoln, which resulted in Riley talking to Lincoln personally about it, would have been taken down. Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy state that such a statement has yet to be found. It seems to me that they are ignoring what Snyder is confirmed to have stated in preference to Riley’s much later memoirs, which better suits (but still does not directly connect to) their theory.
The Confederates arrested with Harney stated that their goal was to target trains and capture animals from the Union. Fellow torpedo bureau employee William Snyder swore in writing about Confederate plots against cities, but not against the President. George Atzerodt, in one of his many statements, claims that a New York party planned to mine the White House, but doesn’t equate it to Harney or the Confederate Secret Service. And, decades later, Col. Riley recounted that William Snyder warned him of a generic threat to Lincoln that the President brushed off, but we have no supporting evidence of this aside from his story.
There certainly is a way to weave these pieces together in such a way as to conclude that Thomas Harney was on his way to target the White House, that John Surratt knew about it, and that he passed this information on to Booth. Personally, though, I feel this is another example of how Come Retribution draws conclusions that aren’t actually proved by the evidence we have. It’s yet another supposition built on earlier suppositions. It creates an intriguing theory, but one I still feel is severely lacking in substance.
Great detective work by you Dave, JBarry and Mr. Binzel.
I share the opinion of all that while the Confederate authorities were clearly involved in black hat operations, including schemes which focused upon abduction and eventually assassination, that no hard evidence has survived which connects them with Booth’s efforts. Indeed, the research conducted to date leads to a contrary conclusion and that in fact Booth was jealous of any competition as he craved the fame, poignantly reflected by Atzerodt’s “lost confession” that the actor wanted to get Lincoln first.
Moreover, I think it is quite telling that the theories which emerged in the wake of the assassination and thereafter which have attempted to make that connection have been summarily dismissed as obvious fakes or blasted by investigations which proved they were based on perjury (e.g., Charles A. Dunham/JAG Holt).
As for Holt’s perfidy, the fact such stories were concocted at all strongly suggests the federal authorities, understandably desperate to tie the Confederacy to Booth, had been unsuccessful in unearthing any reliable evidence thereof.
Good post, and I think you are right in your conclusion.
I gave a speech at Ford’s years ago on this topic and concluded it, “The only thing cooking up at the Parker House was those delicious Paker House rolls.”
Tom Turner gave a speech to the ALI years ago with the same conclusion. Hall was in the audience. Tom and I talked about his paper before he gave it and agree there is a lot of difference between an intelligence assessment and an historical fact. The former are good guesses and assumptions. The latter, to me, need to be like evidence vetted, proved, and entered as a fact in a courtroom.
Good post, again.
By the way, I’d guess that Isabel’s letters were sent to the PO because she didn’t want them delivered to her home – where her snoopy parents lived.
Dr. Alford,
Thank you for the compliment and for your thoughts on the matter. We appear to share similar viewpoints on this. I like how you concisely explain the difference between intriguing theories and historical fact. Also, that’s a great point about why Isabel’s letters were addressed to the post office rather than her home. I doubt her parents would have approved of her ‘friendship’ with Mr. Booth.
Also, for anyone who’s interested, here’s the speech Dr. Alford gave at Ford’s Theatre that he references: https://www.c-span.org/program/public-affairs-event/history-methods-and-the-lincoln-assassination/119718