Posts Tagged With: Conspiracy Trial

The Testimony Regarding Dr. Mudd

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day project documenting the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators. To further support usability of this project for students and researchers, I am releasing individualized tables of the testimony given at the trial relating to each conspirator. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. I have previously released the testimony regarding Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, David Herold, George Atzerodt, Samuel Arnold, Michael O’Laughlen, Edman Spangler and finish today with Dr. Samuel Mudd. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called Dr. Samuel Mudd Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of Mudd on The Trial homepage


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning Dr. Samuel A. Mudd. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of Dr. Mudd, I organized the testimony into eight categories, labeled A – H. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. Dr. Mudd Introducing John Wilkes Booth to John Surratt

The first witness to mention Dr. Mudd by name at the trial was Louis Weichmann, one of Mary Surratt’s boarders. Weichmann described how he and John Surratt were introduced to John Wilkes Booth by Dr. Mudd. It was through this introduction that Surratt joined the conspiracy and facilitated the recruitment of others like George Atzerodt and Lewis Powell. This introduction was, therefore, a big piece of the prosecution’s case in connecting Dr. Mudd to Booth’s plot. As damaging as this was, however, Weichmann made a huge error on the stand stating that the introduction occurred in January of 1865 and not on December 24, 1864 when it actually happened. As a result, Dr. Mudd’s defense brought many witnesses forward to establish Dr. Mudd’s whereabouts from December, 1864 to April, 1865 in order to counter Weichmann’s mistaken timeline.

B. Dr. Mudd’s Interactions with the Authorities

Some of the detectives who visited and searched the Mudd house after the assassination made the accusation that Dr. Mudd denied having been visited by anyone on April 15th. This led the defense to bring forward witnesses showing that Dr. Mudd not only complied with the authorities who visited him, but also alerted some of his neighbors concerning the “strangers” who had sought medical attention from him.

C. Booth with Dr. Mudd in 1864

John Wilkes Booth visited Charles County and met Dr. Mudd in November of 1864. He returned to the area in December. During these visits, Dr. Mudd helped Booth purchase the horse that was later used by Lewis Powell on the night of the assassination. The defense tried to explain these interactions by showing how Booth was looking to buy land in the area.

D. Dr. Mudd Threatening Lincoln

One of Dr. Mudd’s neighbors, Daniel Thomas, testified that in March of 1865 he heard Dr. Mudd threaten the life of President Lincoln. According to Thomas, Dr. Mudd claimed that Lincoln, his cabinet, and all Union men in Maryland would be dead in a couple of weeks. Dr. Mudd’s defense called a plethora of witnesses to testify to Thomas’ unreliability and desire for reward money.

E. Dr. Mudd and David Herold Riding to Bryantown

Becky Briscoe, one of the prosecution witnesses, claimed she saw David Herold wait outside of Bryantown on April 15 as the doctor visited the town. The defense provided witnesses who agreed that Mudd was somewhat accompanied by Herold as he rode to Bryantown, but that Herold turned back and went back to the Mudd farm alone.

F. Dr. Mudd Learning about the Assassination in Bryantown

Prosecution witnesses charged that the identity of Lincoln’s assassin was well known in Bryantown when Dr. Mudd visited on April 15 with two of Mudd’s neighbors testifying that the doctor told them about it. The defense brought many Charles County residents who claimed there was much uncertainty at the time.

G. Dr. Mudd’s Disloyalty and Harboring Confederates 

Many of those formerly enslaved by Dr. Mudd testified about his pro-Confederate attitudes and cruel treatment. Several alleged that Dr. Mudd allowed Confederate agents to hide out on his property. His defense stated that Dr. Mudd only allowed a group of men to hide on his property near the beginning of the war because they were concerned about being arrested.

H. Dr. Mudd in D.C. on March 3, 1865

Two prosecution witnesses, Rev. Evans and Marcus Norton, claimed to have seen Dr. Mudd in Washington, D.C. on March 3, 1865. Evans stated he saw Dr. Mudd entered Mrs. Surratt’s boardinghouse while Marcus Norton claimed Dr. Mudd barged into Norton’s room at the National Hotel thinking it was John Wilkes Booth’s. Dr. Mudd’s defense brought several witnesses to speak to the unreliability of these men and to show that Mudd was on his farm during the period in question.

For the closing argument in defense of Dr. Samuel Mudd please click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In many instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. For example, many Charles County witnesses were asked about their opinion of prosecution witness Daniel Thomas even if their main testimony was about a different aspect of Dr. Mudd’s case. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , | Leave a comment

The Testimony Regarding Edman Spangler

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day project documenting the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators. To further support usability of this project for students and researchers, I am releasing individualized tables of the testimony given at the trial relating to each conspirator. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. I have previously released the testimony regarding Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, David Herold, George Atzerodt, Samuel Arnold, Michael O’Laughlen and continue today with Edman Spangler. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called Edman Spangler Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of Spangler on The Trial homepage. The organized testimony regarding the other conspirators will be published later this week.


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning Edman Spangler. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of Edman Spangler, I organized the testimony into five categories, labeled A – E. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. A Mustachioed Edman Spangler was in Front of Ford’s Theatre During “Our American Cousin”

One of the stranger claims testified to at the trial was that a man slightly resembling Spangler was seen out in front of Ford’s Theatre while the show was going on. This man, along with two others (one of whom may have been Booth) were very interested in the time and peeking in and out of the theater. The man who testified about this was unsure if Spangler was the right man since the man he saw had a mustache. Spangler’s lawyer, Thomas Ewing, brought forth defense witnesses to show that Spangler was at his post backstage practically all evening and never wore a mustache, effectively countering this bizarre scenario.

B. Edman Spangler’s Friendship with Booth

In order to convince the commissioners that Spangler was involved in Booth’s plot they had to establish his friendship and association with the assassin. This was easily enough done through employees at Ford’s Theatre who saw the two together. Spangler had helped to set up a stables for Booth in the alley behind the theater and they often took drunks together. Thomas Ewing countered that Booth was friendly to all the employees at Ford’s and that Spangler was too much of a drudge to have been trusted by Booth with knowledge of his plot.

C. Edman Spangler (Briefly) Held Booth’s Horse at Ford’s Theatre

When John Wilkes Booth arrived at the back door of Ford’s Theatre on the night of April 14, he sent word for Spangler to come out and see him. Spangler did so and was informed by Booth that he wanted him to hold his horse. Though Spangler quickly passed the task off to another employee before returning to his own responsibilities as a scene shifter, this act of assistance was the most overt act of conspiracy the government could thoroughly prove. Ewing did not attempt to refute that event this happened, merely associated it with Spangler’s friendship with Booth and ignorance of what Booth was planning to do.

D. Edman Spangler had made Preparations for Lincoln’s Assassination

While the holding of Booth’s horse was damaging, the government sought to prove that Spangler was involved in other ways in preparing for Lincoln’s assassination. The prosecution cast a wide net in their attempt to prove this possibility. They saw conspiracy in a length of rope found in Spangler’s belongings and implied Spangler had made alterations to the Presidential box earlier on April 14. To counter this, Ewing spent a lot of time finding witnesses who testified that the rope found was pointless, and that Spangler did very little work helping to decorate the box on April 14th. He also proved that the locks to the box, which were determined to have been broken, had failed a month before Lincoln attended the theater. Ewing also showed how Spangler made no attempt to flee or change his routine in the days between Lincoln’s death and his arrest.

E. Edman Spangler Aided Booth Immediately after the Shooting

Two prosecution witnesses testified that immediately after the shooting of Lincoln, Edman Spangler provided a measure of aid to the fleeing assassin. One shakily claimed that Spangler shut the back door of Ford’s Theatre immediately after Booth had passed through, thus slowing down his capture. Another witness, one of Spangler’s coworkers, claimed Spangler slapped him across the face ordering, “Don’t say which way” the assassin went. Ewing brought forth defense witnesses to show that Spangler was no where near the door when Booth exited and that the coworker’s story seemed to change with every retelling.

For the closing argument in defense of Edman Spangler please click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In many instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. For example, many of the workers at Ford’s Theatre, like John DeBonay during his last time on the stand, were asked about many aspects of Spangler’s character and whereabouts on April 14th. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , | Leave a comment

The Testimony Regarding Michael O’Laughlen

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day project documenting the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators. To further support usability of this project for students and researchers, I am releasing individualized tables of the testimony given at the trial relating to each conspirator. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. I have previously released the testimony regarding Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, David Herold, George Atzerodt, Samuel Arnold and continue today with Michael O’Laughlen. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called Michael O’Laughlen Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of O’Laughlen on The Trial homepage. The organized testimony regarding the other conspirators will be published over the next week.


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning Michael O’Laughlen. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of Michael O’Laughlen, I organized the testimony into four categories, labeled A – D. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. Michael O’Laughlen’s Association with John Wilkes Booth & Others

The prosecution had a fairly easy time in connecting Michael O’Laughlen with John Wilkes Booth and some of the other conspirators. During the period of time when Booth was plotting to abduct Abraham Lincoln, O’Laughlen was seen conversing with Booth on multiple occasions. Booth also sent letters and telegrams to O’Laughlen when the conspirator was home in Baltimore. When Samuel Arnold’s confession was testified to, it included the fact that O’Laughlen was part of the conspiracy to kidnap Lincoln.

B. Michael O’Laughlen Targeted General Grant and Communicated with Booth

O’Laughlen had the bad luck of actually being in D.C. on the night preceding (and of) the assassination of Lincoln. The government brought forth witnesses who claimed that O’Laughlen had been seen outside of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton’s home on the night of April 13. Stanton was entertaining Gen. U. S. Grant for the evening and O’Laughlen allegedly asked about the General before being asked to depart by those present. The prosecution also used the testimony of some of O’Laughlen’s friends in their attempt to prove that O’Laughlen was in contact with Booth on April 13 and 14.

C. Michael O’Laughlen was not Arrested at Home 

The weakest aspect of the prosecution’s case against O’Laughlen was the suggestion that he was evading arrest when he was arrested at the home of a friend rather than his own home. Walter Cox, O’Laughlen’s lawyer, showed that, in fact, O’Laughlen had arranged for his own surrender to authorities by way of his brother-in-law. He chose a different location than his home as he did not want his mother to become upset at the sight of his arrest in her home.

D. Michael O’Laughlen was Nowhere Near Sec. Stanton’s Home

Walter Cox had multiple witnesses who testified that O’Laughlen was nowhere near the home of Secretary Edwin Stanton on April 13 and could not have threatened Gen. Grant in anyway. There was nothing nefarious in O’Laughlen’s visit from Baltimore to D.C. on that day. He and his friends wanted to take part in the end of the war celebration that was going on. Many of O’Laughlen’s friends testified that the group drank and partied consistently on April 13 and a great deal on the 14. O’Laughlen was still with his merry band when the news of Lincoln’s assassination reached them, thus was not actively participating in the crime. While it was true that O’Laughlen had made efforts to see Booth on both the 13 and the 14, there was no evidence that either of these meetings were successful and were likely related to money Booth owed O’Laughlen’s brother.

For the closing argument in defense of Michael O’Laughlen please click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In many instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. For example, O’Laughlen’s brother-in-law, Philip Maulsby, covered many different aspects of the government’s case against the conspirator. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , | 1 Comment

The Testimony Regarding Samuel Arnold

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day project documenting the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators. To further support usability of this project for students and researchers, I am releasing individualized tables of the testimony given at the trial relating to each conspirator. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. I have previously released the testimony regarding Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, David Herold, George Atzerodt and continue today with Samuel Arnold. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called Samuel Arnold Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of Arnold on The Trial homepage. The organized testimony regarding the other conspirators will be published over the next couple of weeks.


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning Samuel Arnold. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of Samuel Arnold, I organized the testimony into four categories, labeled A – D. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. Samuel Arnold’s Association with John Wilkes Booth

The first step in establishing Samuel Arnold’s connection to the crime of assassination was to connect Arnold to the assassin. The prosecution brought forth witnesses who testified about Booth making contact and being seen with Arnold in the months prior to the assassination.

B. Samuel Arnold was Part of Booth’s Conspiracy

Compared to some of the other conspirators, the prosecution had no problem connecting Arnold to John Wilkes Booth’s conspiracy. A letter had been found in Booth’s hotel room letter written by Arnold, expressing his uncertainty in an undisclosed plot. Moreover both the prosecution and Arnold’s defense brought forth a detective to speak about the confession Arnold had given when arrested by authorities admitting to his involvement with Booth.

C. Samuel Arnold was an Armed, Former Confederate 

Perhaps the weakest tactic by the prosecution to implicate Arnold further was to point out that a revolver had been found in his bag when he was arrested and that he was formerly in the Confederate army. The prosecution attempted to equate Arnold’s limited service in the Confederate army with the treasonous crime of assassination.

D. Samuel Arnold Left Booth’s Plot in March

The entirety of Arnold’s defense was based on his own confession (B). Arnold freely admitted he had been part of a plot by Booth to abduct President Lincoln and turn him over to the Confederacy. However, when the possibility of successfully carrying out such a plan ended, Arnold left Booth’s plot completely. The defense showed that Arnold ended his association with Booth in March and that, at the time of the assassination, he had been working at a store in Virginia for almost two weeks.

For the closing argument in defense of Samuel Arnold please click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In many instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , | Leave a comment

The Testimony Regarding George Atzerodt

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day project documenting the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators. To further support usability of this project for students and researchers, I am releasing individualized tables of the testimony given at the trial relating to each conspirator. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. I have previously released the testimony regarding Mary Surratt, Lewis PowellDavid Herold and continue today with George Atzerodt. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called George Atzerodt Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of Atzerodt on The Trial homepage. The organized testimony regarding the other conspirators will be published over the next couple of weeks.


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning George Atzerodt. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of George Atzerodt, I organized the testimony into five categories, labeled A – E. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. George Atzerodt Planned to Kill Andrew Johnson

In attempting to prove their case that Atzerodt intended to kill Vice President Andrew Johnson at the Kirkwood House hotel, the prosecution pointed to the weapons found at the conspirators rented room. They also brought forth a witness who claimed that Atzerodt had asked about the VP’s whereabouts in the hotel. William Doster, Atzerodt’s lawyers, countered these claims by trying to show that the weapons in Atzerodt’s room did not belong to his client and that no one was seen lying in wait to kill Johnson when Lincoln was shot. The hope was to show that Atzerodt posed no threat to Johnson as he had never agreed to a murder plot. While the weapons and some of the items in George Atzerodt’s rented room at the Kirkwood House hotel may have belonged to David Herold and Booth, this did not change the fact that Atzerodt had tossed his own knife into the gutter and pawned his revolver on April 15.

B. George Atzerodt Associating with John Wilkes Booth and the other the Conspirators

In establishing Atzerodt’s role as a member of Booth’s conspiracy against the President, the prosecution had witnesses place George Atzerodt with the other conspirators in the months prior to Lincoln’s assassination. Atzerodt had frequently visited with the conspirators present at Mrs. Surratt’s boardinghouse and had helped to hide the carbines later used by Booth at the Surratt tavern in Maryland. William Doster acknowledged that Atzerodt was party to Booth’s initial abduction plot against the President and did not refute these associations. He did, however, dispute the reliability of witness Marcus Norton who’s testimony against Dr. Mudd was easily disproved.

C. George Atzerodt’s Movements After the Assassination

In the hours after Lincoln was shot, George Atzerodt took a room at the Pennsylvania House hotel with a stranger named Samuel Thomas. The prosecution believed that Samuel Thomas was an alias for one of the other conspirators but their own witnesses failed to identify any of those on trial. While the prosecution hoped to show complicity on the part of Atzerodt after the assassination, Doster provided witnesses to show that Atzerodt returned his rented horse and naturally took a room on April 14, showing no additional connection to Booth’s plot.

D. George Atzerodt Threatened Gen. Grant after the Assassination

After making his way to Montgomery County, Maryland, George Atzerodt took part in an Easter lunch where the topic of discussion was Lincoln’s assassination. According a prosecution witness, Atzerodt made mention that man on Grant’s train had failed in his task to kill the general. The officer who arrested Atzerodt also stated that George never asked the reason for his arrest. William Doster countered with his own defense witnesses who stated that Atzerodt’s comment regarding Grant was misremembered by the prosecution witness. He also attempted to get a confession Atzerodt made regarding his acknowledged participation in the abduction plot put on the record.

E. George Atzerodt was a Coward

To further defend his client against the charge that he had posed a threat to the life of Vice President Johnson, William Doster provided character witnesses who testified that George was a notorious coward. It was the defense attorney’s hope that this would show that Booth would never have entrusted the crime of assassination to the cowardly Atzerodt.

For the closing argument in defense of George Atzerodt click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In some instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , | Leave a comment

The Testimony Regarding David Herold

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day project documenting the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators. To further support usability of this project for students and researchers, I am releasing individualized tables of the testimony given at the trial relating to each conspirator. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. I have previously released the testimony regarding Mary SurrattLewis Powell and continue today with David Herold. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called David Herold Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of Herold on The Trial homepage. The organized testimony regarding the other conspirators will be published over the next month.


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning David Herold. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of David Herold, I organized the testimony into five categories, labeled A – E. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. David Herold’s Whereabouts in February of 1865

One of the prosecution’s perjured witnesses, James Merritt, claimed to have seen David Herold in Canada around the middle of February, 1865. This testimony was meant to connect Herold (and Booth) to Confederate agents in Canada in order to prove a connection between the Confederacy and Lincoln’s death. Herold’s defense then brought witnesses to show that Herold was at home in D.C. during the month of February.

B. David Herold Associating with the Conspirators

In establishing Herold’s role as a member of Booth’s conspiracy against the President, the prosecution had witnesses place David Herold with the other conspirators in the months prior to Lincoln’s assassination. There was no countering these associations except from Dr. Mudd’s defense since no prior relationship between Herold and Mudd could be drawn.

C. Escaping with John Wilkes Booth

The largest part of the government’s case against Herold was that he had escaped and assisted John Wilkes Booth during the twelve day manhunt following Lincoln’s assassination. Herold’s defense made no attempt to counter the way in which Herold aided and abetted the assassin after the fact.

D. Evidence in George Atzerodt’s Rented Room at the Kirkwood House Hotel Belonged to Herold

This aspect of the case against Herold actually came from one of the other defense attorneys. In attempting to downplay his own client’s involvement in the assassination plot, William Doster implied that some of the physical objects (such as a knife and coat) found in George Atzerodt’s rented room belonged to Herold. The actual prosecution did pursue this matter, preferring that evidence be used against Atzerodt.

E. David Herold was Boyish and Easily Influenced

Aside from countering the claim that Herold had been to Canada, the only actual defense attempted by Frederick Stone was to convince the court that his client was immature for his age and easily influenced. In this way, Stone hoped to save Herold from the gallows by showing that he was merely clay in the hands of the charismatic and manipulative John Wilkes Booth.

For the closing argument in defense of David Herold please click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In some instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , | 1 Comment

The Testimony Regarding Lewis Powell

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day project documenting the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators. To further support usability of this project for students and researchers, I am releasing individualized tables of the testimony given at the trial relating to each conspirator. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. I have previously released the testimony regarding Mary Surratt and continue today with Lewis Powell. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called Lewis Powell Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of Powell on The Trial homepage. The organized testimony regarding the other conspirators will be published over the next month.


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning Lewis Powell, known as Lewis Payne during almost the entirety of the trial. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of Lewis Powell, I organized the testimony into four categories, labeled A – D. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. Lewis Powell’s Association with other Conspirators

The first witness to discuss Lewis Powell at the trial was a prosecution witness who claimed to have seen him in Canada plotting the assassination of Lincoln with Confederate agents. While this testimony was later found to be perjury, the prosecution did work to establish Powell’s connection to the other conspirators, mainly through his lodging at Mrs. Surratt’s boardinghouse two separate times before the assassination. Powell’s subsequent arrest at the Surratt boardinghouse was testified to several times, mostly in regards to Mrs. Surratt. This all worked to show his connection to John Surratt, Mrs. Surratt, and the other conspirators who filtered into her home.

B. Lewis Powell’s Connection to John Wilkes Booth

While going hand-in-hand with the prior descriptor, the prosecution also made sure to establish Powell’s connection with John Wilkes Booth outside of the other conspirators. The horse Powell used and the boots he wore on the night of April 14th belonged to Booth. Booth also took an active role in helping to get Powell accommodations when he was staying in D.C.

C. The Attack of Secretary Seward and his Household

The case against Powell was the strongest out of all of the conspirators. The prosecution brought forth many witnesses to identify Powell as the man who viciously attacked William Seward and other members of his household. To drive the point home, the government even had two of Seward’s doctors testify about the carnage that was wrought by Powell’s gun and knife attack. Powell was even forced to stand up and dress in the blood-stained clothing he wore on the night of April 14th for further positive identification.

D. Debate over Lewis Powell’s Sanity

The only defense that Lewis Powell’s lawyer, William Doster, attempted was that of trying to have his client declared insane. Doster first tried to show this by showing the drastic change in temperament Powell experienced between his service in the Confederacy and his time with Booth. Doster then enlisted medical experts to assess his client. Unfortunately, this plan backfired when four doctors brought in by the prosecution (one of which had been one of Doster’s witnesses) testified that Powell was not mentally insane. Doster tried to spin this to mean that his client was more likely morally insane, but this gambit failed to change the minds of the commissioners.

For the closing argument in defense of Lewis Powell please click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In some instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , | 6 Comments

The Testimony Regarding Mary Surratt

155 years ago on this day, four of the eight conspirators tried in the death of Abraham Lincoln ascended a hastily constructed set of gallows. Just one week earlier they had been convicted and sentenced to their death but had only learned about their fates the day before. The three men and one woman who climbed those stairs to meet their maker were Lewis Powell, David Herold, George Atzerodt and Mary E. Surratt. When the drop fell right around 1:25 in the afternoon, Mrs. Surratt became the first woman executed by the federal government.

Over May and June of this year, I presented a day-by-day look at the Trial of the Lincoln Conspirators that led to this execution. I tried to make sense of the military trial that saw different witnesses haphazardly take the stand against different conspirators one after another. Today, I’m releasing the first of eight helpful resources that organizes the trial not chronologically as we experienced before, but this time based on the testimony against each of the individual conspirators. Rather than having to look through the entirety of the trial to gain an understanding of the specific evidence against a single person, all of the relevant testimony regarding each conspirator has been organized into an easily accessible and hyperlinked table. For the anniversary of her execution, I have decided to start with the testimony regarding Mary Surratt. The text that follows this paragraph contains the same information that will always be found on a standalone page of the trial project called Mary Surratt Testimony and can be accessed by clicking the picture of Mrs. Surratt on The Trial homepage. The organized testimony regarding the other conspirators will be published over the next month.


The following table shows all of the testimony given at the Lincoln conspiracy trial concerning Mary Surratt. Clicking on any of the witnesses’ names will take you to their corresponding testimony in the chronological Trial project.

The default arrangement of the witnesses in the table is by Relevant Testimony. This organizes the witnesses based on what specific aspect of the conspirator’s case was discussed. In the case of Mary Surratt, I organized the testimony into seven categories, labeled A – G. Descriptions of what each category means can be found after the table. The tabs on the bottom of the table allow you to view the witnesses arranged by Date and Alphabetically by last name.

Mobile users: Due to the smaller screen size on mobile devices, you will likely have to scroll left and right on the table to see the Relevant Testimony column.

Relevant Testimony descriptions:

A. John Wilkes Booth and the other Conspirators’ Presence at Mrs. Surratt’s Boardinghouse

In establishing Mrs. Surratt’s connection to John Wilkes Booth’s plot, the prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of Louis Weichmann, one of the lodgers at Surratt’s D.C. boardinghouse. Weichmann testified at length about the presence of Booth and some of the other conspirators at the boardinghouse and how Mrs. Surratt sometimes met with Booth when her son, John, was not at home. The defense tried to show that, as a boardinghouse owner and hospitable woman, Mrs. Surratt’s interactions with Booth and the others was nothing more than politeness.

B. Mrs. Surratt’s Trips to her Tavern in Surrattsville on April 11th and April 14th

The other key witness against Mary Surratt was the tenant of her tavern property in Maryland, John M. Lloyd. Lloyd testified about Mrs. Surratt traveling down to Southern Maryland on April 11th and telling him that weapons hidden at the tavern would be needed soon. On April 14th, the day of Lincoln’s assassination, Mary traveled to her tavern with a package she had been given by Booth. She gave that package to Lloyd and allegedly told him to, “have the shooting irons ready, a party will call for them tonight.” Mrs. Surratt’s defense brought evidence to show that Mrs. Surratt was attempting to settle some debts during this period of time and that was the reasons she made these journeys.

C. The Reputations of Louis Weichmann and John M. Lloyd

As the two key witnesses against Mrs. Surratt, the defense made a great effort to show the questionable reliability of Weichmann and Lloyd. Evidence was presented to suggest that Weichmann may have been disloyal (or even part of Booth’s plot), while Lloyd was portrayed as a drunk of dubious trustworthiness.

D. The Reputations of Defense Witnesses Joseph Knott and John Zadoc Jenkins

In the same way that the defense attacked the credibility of two prosecution witnesses, the prosecution spent a lot of time attacking the character and loyalty of two defense witnesses, one of whom was Mrs. Surratt’s brother.

E. Pictures of John Wilkes Booth and Confederate Generals Found in Mrs. Surratt’s Boardinghouse

During the manhunt for Booth, Mrs. Surratt’s house was searched multiple times and during one of these searches images of Confederate leaders and a hidden photograph of John Wilkes Booth was found in Mrs. Surratt’s room. The prosecution wanted to use this to show Mrs. Surratt’s disloyalty. The defense got Mrs. Surratt’s daughter, Anna, to testify that the photographs belonged to her.

F. The Arrest of Lewis Powell at the Surratt Boardinghouse

Conspirator Lewis Powell, who had attacked Secretary of State William Seward, had been arrested at the Surratt boardinghouse on April 17th, while detectives were there searching and making plans to take Mrs. Surratt and the rest of the household into custody. During this arrest, Mrs. Surratt denied ever having seen Powell before. It was later shown that Powell had stayed at the boardinghouse for a few days. The defense attempted to show that Mrs. Surratt suffered from bad eyesight in an attempt to explain her lack of identification.

G. Mrs. Surratt’s Loyalty and Christian Character

Mary Surratt’s defense called several individuals to testify about her reputation as a good, Christian woman and about times where she had demonstrated pro-Union attitudes. The purpose was to persuade the commissioners that Mrs. Surratt was not capable of being involved in such a plot as the assassination of Lincoln.

For the closing arguments in defense of Mary Surratt please click here.

Please remember that the Relevant Testimony descriptor is not meant to be definitive. In some instances, a witness might cover material from more than one category. For example, many of the witnesses were asked about Mary Surratt’s eyesight in the course of their other testimonies. Still, the attempt has been made to determine the most applicable category for each witness’s overall testimony.

Categories: History | Tags: , , | 9 Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.