Posts Tagged With: Joseph Booth

Joseph Booth’s Photographic Doppelgänger

The Booth family of Harford County, Maryland, is best known for its fame and infamy. The infamous John Wilkes has gone down in history for assassinating Abraham Lincoln, with his crime sadly overshadowing the accomplishments of his relatives. Junius Brutus Booth was a famous actor who spent about thirty years traveling America as a celebrated tragedian. His namesake, Junius Brutus Booth, Jr., followed in his father’s footsteps, and while he never reached the same level of fame as his father, June was still a widely respected actor and theater manager. Edwin Booth eclipsed the fame of both his brother and father. His soft, brooding method of acting revolutionized the stage, and Edwin is still known today as the greatest talent to ever perform the role of Hamlet. Asia Booth, while never one to take to the stage herself, became a devoted chronicler of her family. She wrote books about her father and brothers, including a memoir about her misguided brother, which was published posthumously. In their own way, each of these Booths left a mark on the world.

Yet there are more Booths. They consist of the largely forgotten Booths. Mary Ann Booth, the matriarch of the Booth family, managed to keep her family afloat after her husband’s death and the near-bankruptcy she faced in the mid-1850s. Rosalie Booth, the eldest daughter, lovingly cared for her mother in her old age and supported her siblings’ endeavors throughout their lives. And then there is the youngest child, Joseph. Impulsive, moody, and not having any interest in the “family business” of acting, the youngest Booth was often an enigma to his family. In fact, prior to April 14, 1865, it was Joe, not John Wilkes, who was the black sheep of the family.

Joseph Adrian Booth was born on February 8, 1840, either at the Booth family farm of Tudor Hall in Harford County or at a home they rented in Baltimore. At the time of his birth, his siblings consisted of June (18), Rosalie (17), Edwin (6), Asia (4), and John Wilkes (1). As can be seen, his eldest two siblings were practically adults when their baby brother was born. Joseph was given the middle name of Adrian after his eldest brother June’s performance of Adrian De Mauprat in the play Richelieu. Despite being thus christened into the acting profession, Joseph never shared the spark of his three brothers. When he grew up, he performed on stage only a handful of times, mostly to cover a minor role while traveling as a valet for his brothers, Edwin and John Wilkes.

At times, Joseph was thrust into jobs at theaters, working as a treasurer at the Holliday Street Theatre and later at his brother Edwin’s “Booth Theatre.” But he never developed a passion for the stage or, in fairness, for working in general. Though his early teenage years were a bit rocky after the death of his father in 1852, his life became largely financially stable after his brother Edwin Booth returned as a celebrated star from the West Coast. Despite pressure from his family to pursue a profession, Joe discovered he could live just fine on the resources his brother provided. While it is true that Joseph eventually became a doctor, this did not occur until he was 49 years old.

There is much that can be said about Joseph Booth, especially his travels from 1862 to 1865, when he ran off without telling any of his family members where he was going. However, for the purpose of this article, we’re going to explore the visual record of Joseph Booth.

The main issue we have with the forgotten Booths is the lack of many images of them. While the public clamored for photographs of the acting Booths and the infamous John Wilkes, images of the family members who stayed out of the spotlight are much harder to find. For the longest time, only one photograph of Joseph Booth was known, and that was this one:

This image dates to the 1860s and was taken by photographer Charles D. Fredericks & Co. in New York. It shows a man standing next to a pillar, wearing a light colored suit, dark gloves, and holding a dark hat. While the full body pose makes it difficult to make out facial details, from what we can see, this figure shares the hawk-like Booth nose and far back hairline that was a trait among the Booth men. For comparison, here is a side-by-side of this image of Joseph next to a similarly posed image of John Wilkes Booth.

This particular image of Joseph Booth is in the collection of The Players, the social club that Edwin Booth founded in 1888, in New York City. Supporting the idea that this image is of Joseph Booth was an article that was published in the Baltimore American in 1896. An actor named James Young, Jr., shared his collection of images of the Booths, soon to be presented to The Players. The illustrated article contained several depictions of the Booth family members, including this image of Joseph.

Strangely enough, a CDV of this particular image of Joseph Booth is also in the National Archives in the collection of evidence regarding the assassination of Lincoln. At some point after the trial of the Lincoln conspirators, as the pieces of evidence were being held in the office of the Judge Advocate General, an image of David Herold was erroneously exchanged for this picture of Joseph Booth. How the misfiling occurred is unclear, but the image that is in the envelope labeled as “Herold’s photograph” that was used at the trial of the conspirators has been replaced with this picture of the youngest Booth sibling. This mistake was noted by author Stanley Kimmel as he was consulting the JAG files for his book, The Mad Booths of Maryland in the 1930s. Having already come across the Baltimore American article featuring the Joseph Booth image earlier in his research, Kimmel informed the War Department of the mistake. In the second edition of his book, Kimmel includes the War Department’s letter of thanks for informing them of the mistake. What happened to David Herold’s photograph is not known.

In the late 1970s, Lincoln assassination researcher John C. Brennan began looking into the life of Joseph Booth. His efforts resulted in a wonderful article in the Spring 1983 edition of the Maryland Historical Magazine entitled, “John Wilkes Booth’s Enigmatic Brother Joseph.” In the article, Mr. Brennan discussed his search for images of Joseph Booth, writing, “All the likely places having photographic collections have been canvassed in an effort to locate pictures of Joe.” Unfortunately, all Mr. Brennan could find was this one known image.

Fast forward to 2015. At the annual Surratt Society conference, Booth biographer Terry Alford presented on his book Fortune’s Fool. When discussing members of the Booth family, Dr. Alford surprised those of us in the audience by showing a new image of Joseph Adrian Booth in his slideshow.

Dr. Alford stated he had stumbled across this image as part of an auction listing that had sold during the previous year. My interest was very much piqued by this development. After returning home from the conference, I found the online auction listing. On May 4, 2014, that photograph was part of a lot of “Documents: Four Maryland items” and sold for $80 by Alex Cooper Auctions. It was a random assortment of items. Here is the full photograph, which includes notes in two unknown hands identifying the subject as Joseph Booth.

We were all so pleased to find, after long last, another picture of the youngest Booth brother. And it was such a striking image as well. Rather than a standing pose lacking in quality, here was a strong portrait image. With the written identifications on the image and the figures’ strong resemblance to his brother, Edwin, it was a slam dunk. I added this photo to my online gallery for Joseph Booth, and the folks at Tudor Hall started using this much better image in their promotional materials about the Booths.

 Then just this past week, lightning appeared to strike again. I received an email from a gentleman named David who had recently purchased a collection of unidentified carte de visites off of eBay. In an effort to identify the subjects of the photographs, David photographed the CDVs and tried using the Google Lens search tool to see if there were any matches. This is a form of Google Image search where you provide the image, and Google tries to find matching or similar versions of it. I have used this form of visual search when trying to find higher-quality versions of different illustrations. It can be a useful tool, but it is not always reliable, especially when it comes to facial recognition. Still, in this case, the image search found enough similarities between Dr. Alford’s picture of Joseph Booth and one of the unidentified CDVs that David had purchased. Here is the image:

For once, I tend to agree with the computer here. While the figure is in a different pose and wearing a different suit of clothing, he very closely resembles Dr. Alford’s find from a decade earlier. Even the visible part of the ear matches. I was ecstatic that yet another new photo of Joseph Booth had appeared. 

But David was not done. He also informed me that during his search, another image popped up as a possible match. It consisted of this unidentified daguerrotype taken by the Boston photographer Southworth & Hawes in the collection of the George Eastman Museum in Rochester, New York. 

While obviously taken a few years before the other exemplars, I was once again struck by the visual similarity of this daguerrotype with Dr. Alford’s image and the new CDV image. Once again, I found myself agreeing with the Google search that this image is a match. I truly believe that all three images depict the same person.

I was very excited and even offered to buy the CDV image from David if he was willing to sell it. Before hearing back from him on that, I likewise played around with the Google visual image search using Dr. Alford’s image. It connected me with the Southworth & Hawes daguerrotype as well, but it also found this copy of the same image as Dr. Alford’s.

While this is the exact same pose as Dr. Alford’s photo, I knew this was a completely different copy. There is a noticeable difference in picture quality between the two. But, even more apparent to me was that the photo on Ancestry lacked a small watermark that I snuck into the photo when I uploaded it to my site. At the time, I faintly put the then name of my website, “BoothieBarn.com,” in the figure’s messy hair. This image lacks that small watermark, so it had to come from a different source image. That meant another print of Dr. Alford’s photo existed somewhere.  

I came to find that this image was attached to a FindaGrave page. However, it was not connected to Dr. Joseph A. Booth, as I expected, but rather to a man named Col. Verres Nicholas Smith

FindaGrave is a great resource, but you always have to be careful when it comes to images you might find on there. There is very little moderation for photo uploads, and there are those who mistakenly (or purposefully) upload spurious photographs. The FindaGrave pages for many of the Booths contain images of people who look nothing like them (all from one user who clearly has face blindness). But, I’d like to think the majority of folks try to be honest in their photo uploads, so I sent a message to the user who had attached Dr. Alford’s image to Col. Smith’s page. I asked him where he came across the image and told him that it has been identified as Joseph Booth. I wasn’t sure if I would hear back, but figured it didn’t hurt to send the message.

Luckily for me, the FindaGrave user named Ed got back to me right away in a detailed email. Ed stated that he was a distant relative of Horace Greeley, the noted newspaper editor who founded the New York Tribune. He told me that Col. Smith had married Ida Greeley, one of Horace’s children. He found this different print of Dr. Alford’s photograph attached to Col. Smith in a Greeley family tree on Ancestry.com. Ed was also kind enough to send me another image of Col. Smith, this time as an older man, that was attached to the same family tree.

The same family tree uploaded an image of the back of this photo, on which contained the words, “‘Col.’ Nicholas Smith / U.S. Consul at 3 Rivers [illegible] / about 1891 (Widower) / was married to Horace / Greely’s daughter. Had a / son & two daughters.”

Comparing this older photograph of Col. Smith and Dr. Alford’s photograph of Joseph Booth gave me a sinking feeling in my gut. While the older man has gained a mustache and imperial Napoleon III-style beard, the similarities in the remaining features are uncanny. It would be incredibly difficult to argue that these images don’t show the same man taken years apart. Armed with Ed’s lead, I started researching this Col. Smith fellow. 

What I found proved my fears to be true. A drawing of Colonel Smith was included in an article about him in 1887. It was once again a dead ringer for the images we had come to believe to be Joseph Booth.

Moreover, I found many instances where Col. Smith’s appearance was described in the press. As strange as it sounds, he became well-known for being an exceptionally handsome man. Many articles described Col. Smith’s beauty, with the most referenced comparison being a famous actor of the day:

  • “In appearance he greatly resembles Edwin Booth, and is often taken for that gentleman. One night he entered a box at the theater, when he was immediately the object of all eyes. ‘There is Edwin Booth,’ they all exclaimed, as they leveled their opera glasses at what they supposed to be the great actor.” – The Tennessean, April 30, 1875
  • “He is a fine specimen of refined manly beauty. Our lady readers will believe this when we say that he is ‘a perfect image’ of Mr. Edwin Booth” – Brooklyn Eagle, May 1, 1875
  • “He resembles Edwin Booth, and has often been taken for the great actor, but upon close inspection is always conceded to be a better looking man.” – The Landmark, May 7, 1875
  • “His beauty is of the Edwin Booth type, if that may be called a type of its own.” – Chicago Tribune, May 8, 1875.
  • “Nicholas Smith, Ida Greeley’s husband, is followed in the streets because of his likeness to Edwin Booth, whom he imitates in make-up.” – Springfield Daily Republican, January 28, 1876
  • “He has a clear-cut, handsome face, somewhat after the style of Edwin Booth’s, and dresses himself like a Puritan captain.” – Buffalo Courier, July 3, 1881
  • “His face is as sharp and shaven as Edwin Booth’s.” – The Times-Democrat, February 12, 1883
  • “At Saratoga one summer it was reported that a lady said to him: ‘Colonel Smith, how much you resemble Edwin Booth.’ The Colonel drew his form up to full height, as he responded in a tragic tone of offended dignity: ‘Madame, I am a much handsomer man than Edwin Booth.’” – Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, July 4, 1885
  • “He is tall, strong and athletic, with full and regular features crowned by a wealth of white hair, worn a la Edwin Booth, whom he markedly resembles in expression, although he is a much larger man.” – Brooklyn Eagle, November 30, 1887
  • “He somewhat resembles Edwin Booth and prides himself upon his often being mistaken for the great actor.” – Reading Times, July 13, 1888

Taken together, it seems clear that Dr. Alford’s photograph and the subsequent matching images found by David the eBay collector are not of Joseph Booth but of “Col.” Verres Nicholas Smith. The written identification of Joseph Booth on Dr. Alford’s image was incorrect.

What probably happened was that someone saw this photograph, which was unidentified, and noticed the figure’s strong resemblance to Edwin Booth. Yet, while the future looked a lot like Edwin Booth, there were enough differences to tell that it was clearly not the famous tragedian. Nor did the photo perfectly match Edwin’s father, Junius, or brothers June and John Wilkes, of whom many exemplars of comparison exist. Therefore, someone decided that it must be the forgotten brother, Joseph Booth, of whom only one photo was known to exist. They mistakenly identified the image as Joseph and, due to the strong Booth-ness of the figure’s features, we readily accepted it as the lost Booth brother.

But, in fact, this was an image of Nicholas Smith, a man whose resemblance to Edwin Booth was well documented in the papers, and for whom we have matching identified images in the papers, and in his later life. Rather than being able to announce new pictures of Joseph Booth, I must, unfortunately, report that the number of Joseph Booth photographs has dwindled back down to one. The only confirmed photo we have of Joseph is the standing pose from The Players.


Over the course of my research, I assembled a large amount of information about our would-be Joseph Booth, Nicholas Smith. He lived an interesting life, not without controversy. For those interested in reading more, here is a biography about the man who, during his prime, was claimed to have been the handsomest man in the world:

Verres Nicholas Smith was born in Shelbyville, Kentucky, on December 25, 1836. In his younger years, he sometimes went by V. N. Smith or V. Nicholas Smith. When he was about three years old, his father died. His mother, Mary, did not remarry, and in the 1850 census, she is listed as a farmer with real estate property valued at over $11,000. She passed away in 1854. In 1855, Nicholas went to live with his older sister Kezia, who had married a man named Hamilton P. Johnson. The family left Kentucky and took up residence in Leavenworth, Kansas, in the midst of Bleeding Kansas. It is said that, originally, Hamilton Johnson was a strong pro-slavery man, but after his move to Kansas, he changed his mind and ended up freeing the men and women he had enslaved. It appears that Nicholas Smith also came out against the practice of slavery during this period. 

In the late 1850s, Smith traveled to the East Coast, where he attended Dartmouth College for a time, as well as Harvard Law School. It does not appear that Smith actually graduated from either school, though he was enumerated in the 1860 census as being back in Leavenworth with his sister’s family as an “attorney at law.” For about a four-month period in early 1861, Smith tried his hand at being a newspaper editor for a Lawrence, Kansas, paper called The Republican. This paper heavily supported Kansas Senator James Lane, and it was through this advocacy that Smith became a familiar figure in state politics. 

Yet even at this young age, Smith was known for his eccentricities. As an editor, he wrote in very flowery and Roman-esque prose. “Nick was never heard to use short words when long words would answer,” recalled an associate. “His literature was a little too classical for his audience, and regular ‘corn-field talk’ would have done better,’ recalled another. Smith was also very particular about his appearance. He dressed in the finest clothes he could find and went out of his way to keep them immaculate. Once, Smith refused to cross the street to enter the newspaper office because the road was very muddy and he didn’t want to soil his boots. It also became a regular sight to see Smith, dressed in a white suit, riding his horse with newspapers wrapped around his legs so that his pants would remain clean. For these eccentricities of speech and dress, many in his area of Kansas began calling Verres Nicholas Smith by the nickname “Very Ridiculous Smith.”

That “Very Ridiculous” was handsome, however, no one could deny. Here is a lengthy description of Nicholas Smith’s beauty written in 1886:

“[He] is a handsome man, and he knows it. He has enjoyed this reputation for twenty years, and it does not worry him in the least. His presence is irresistible. His eyes are dark, and have a ravishing glow that would melt the pen of Thomas Moore into a new houri haunted ecstasy… There is an admixture of Greek distinctness and Oriental richness in the lines of his face, the profile being clear-cut and regular and the contour of the oval pattern so much admitted in Asiatic maidens. Smooth-shaven, with rounded cheeks and a pale wine-glow to his skin that helps to brighten the effect, [Smith’s] handsome face is strikingly framed in a profusion of curled and tossed… hair that he evidently cultivates with great care and that is not parted at all, but falls forward upon his forehead in bewitching little beau-catchers, as they are called when girls wear them, that droop to either side… Fully six feet in height, well built, well dressed, and…fully equipped for heart conquests among the other sex, and if all that is said about him be true, is one of the most successful fascinators now before the public.”

At the end of April 1861, Smith sold his interest in his paper. Never one to be humble, Smith  reassured his readers that the new editor was “as clever a fellow as I am.” For the next two months, Smith remained around Lawrence, interacting with members of the anti-slavery political elite as the Civil War began. Likely through the influence of Senator James Lane, Smith received a commission in the regular army. He accepted the position of a Captain in the 19th U.S. Infantry. He reported to Indiana, where he was assigned to recruiting duty in Evansville for a time. He was later transferred from Indiana to Louisville, Kentucky, not far from where he was born, to continue on recruiting and disbursing duties.

While stationed in Louisville, Smith made the acquaintance of Lucinda Pope. She was the daughter of a wealthy farmer and merchant named William Pope. The two courted and married on January 29, 1863, while Captain Smith was still in the service. 

As an Army captain, Smith left much to be desired. In April 1863, Union Maj. General David S. Stanley arrived in Louisville. Not long after, Gen. Stanley wrote a letter to the adjutant general’s department about different reports he had heard from locals and other officers regarding Captain Smith’s conduct:

“It is complained of him that his associations are entirely with people of rebel proclivities. He has married since coming here, and his father in law and wife are outspoken rebels, and ‘tis said… that old Pope his father-in-law would not allow him to visit his house in uniform. He goes habitually in citizens dress, and was married in that costume. No officers of the army being invited to the ceremony.”

In addition to his new wife and in-laws being on the side of the Confederacy, Captain Smith was also not one to work very hard in his recruiting duties. Years later, the newspapers joked that during his two years of service, “he recruited two men at an expense of $6,000 to the Government.” His service record supports that there were issues with Captain Smith’s accounting books. In February 1863, an order went out relieving recruitment officers of the 19th Infantry from their duties and requiring them to return to their regiment. Captain Smith did not obey this command, choosing instead to stay in Louisville. When officers followed up with him after he failed to report, Smith claimed he had been away from Louisville for several weeks on mustering duty and had not seen the order. He was then again ordered to report to his regiment back in Evansville, Indiana. Yet, Captain Smith did not leave, and Maj. General Stanley wrote in his letter that Smith was proven to have said, “he could not go to such a horrid place as Evansville and if ordered there he must resign.”

Gen. Stanley was at a loss for such poor behavior of an officer. Yet he was not without a solution:

“You know such a specimen of humanity brings disgrace on the regular army, and his example is ‘nuts’ for the secessionists. You can use this information as you desire. The only desire anyone in the army here has is to see the fellow moved to the front, to give him an opportunity to learn the principles of outpost duty. As he had never been in the field, this would only complete his elegant military education… One thing is certain, all loyal people are tired of seeing the fellow here.”

Gen. Stanley’s suggestion was acted upon, and on May 11, a new order came in specifically relieving Captain Smith of all duties in Louisville and ordered him to report to the front without delay. Smith responded with a letter of his own writing, “For some time past I have been physically unfit for duty and would have applied for a leave of absence had not my duties been so light and I unwilling to be wholly without employment. But as it is impossible for me, in my present state of health, to go into the field, I have to ask a leave of absence for three months.” Captain Smith included a certificate signed by an army surgeon verifying that Captain Smith was suffering from “external hemorrhoids with irritable rectum.” Unfortunately, the surgeon only recommended a leave of twenty days for his ailment, so Capt. Smith was forced to reduce his leave request. But headquarters denied even a twenty-day reprieve for this wayward soldier, who should have reported back in February, and it was now June. Fearful of having to do real work, Captain Smith submitted his resignation from the Army. Despite it being in the middle of wartime, where drafts were being instituted to keep up the supply of soldiers, even the Union had had enough of Captain Smith. His commanding officers supported Smith’s resignation request, asking the War Department to approve it because Captain Smith was “a burden on the service.”

Secretary of War Edwin Stanton accepted the request, and Captain Smith’s resignation took effect on July 16, 1863.

This would prove to be the end of Nicholas Smith’s military career. While in his later years he would be known as Col. Smith, he never actually attained this rank. Nicholas Smith was as much a colonel as Col. Sanders of Kentucky Fried Chicken fame.

Smith’s whereabouts during the remaining war years are a bit uncertain. He likely remained in Louisville with Lucinda for a time, but eventually he returned to Leavenworth, Kansas. Between 1865 and 1869, Nichaols and Lucinda had three children, all of whom sadly died before the age of three. Lucinda Smith also died in 1871 at the age of 30, leaving Smith a widower.

Still involved in Kansas politics and with connections to those in Washington, Nicholas Smith secured a nomination from President Johnson to be minister to Athens, Greece in 1866. If approved, the 29-year-old would have been the first ambassador to Greece. However, four months later, the President withdrew his nomination. One newspaper account stated this was because the Senate Committee had signaled they were against his nomination due to rumors he had “resigned a Captaincy in the regular army rather than fight the rebels.” However, other papers stated the Senate was against the establishment of a consulate in Athens due to the cost, and the withdrawal was no reflection on Smith. It wasn’t until two years later that the U.S. appointed its first ambassador to Greece.

In the late 1860s and early 1870s, Nicholas Smith became an established figure in Leavenworth. He started a law practice, but as a Kansas paper later recalled, “there was nothing in the firm beyond the gilded sign which creaked on the iron rod at the foot of the stairs. Other work the ‘colonel’ could not or would not do. That would have been deucedly ignoble.”

In time, Smith headed east to New York. There, he became ingratiated into high society, welcomed in by his good looks, elegant manners, and pristine wardrobe. “Col Smith is undeniably the handsomest man anywhere. He is gifted also with that wonderful manner which, for the time being, makes the person to whom he is talking, be it man or woman, think him or herself the one object in the world in which or in whose opinions and ideas he is most interested. He is a picturesque talker, full of that peculiar mixture of originality, chivalry, and honesty which seems to distinguish the natives of the border states.” Smith eventually made the acquaintance of Ida Greeley, also well known for her looks and sophistication.

Ida Greeley

Many a suitor had tried to woo this daughter of the noted newspaper editor who had died in 1872, but none had been successful. Nicholas Smith’s charms won the day, and the two were married on May 1, 1875. The newlyweds took a European honeymoon where they rubbed elbows with the Prince of Wales and, allegedly, Queen Victoria herself. Just a few years after their marriage, the story would emerge that the Queen, upon seeing “Col.” Nicholas Smith at her court, “pronounce[d] him the handsomest man in the world.”

Ida and Nicholas had three children together, the first of whom they named Horace Greeley (without the Smith last name) in honor of Ida’s father. Nichols quickly settled nicely into the Greeley estate in Chappaqua, New York, hoping to once again be able to live the life of a gentleman of leisure. However, the Greeley estate was not as it once was, with the elder editor having lost most of his fortune before his death. Smith, himself, had spent all of his late wife Lucinda’s money over the course of courting Ida. While a friendly newspaper report stated that Nicholas, “made up his mind to marry Miss Ida Greeley, if he ever could get to her, before he ever saw her, from the newspapers accounts of her goodness and devotion to her parents,” it’s likely her assumed wealth also played a role in Smith’s courtship.

Work was anathema to Smith. For a time, he did try his hand at being a professional lecturer. He would trade on his well-known good looks and the Horace Greeley name (though the editor never met his son-in-law) to get crowds in seats, but his lecturing career was uneventful. He also wrote some articles and poems for various magazines, but the payment for these was low, and Smith soon began racking up debts on the Greeley name. 

In 1878, Smith attempted to run for public office. He was nominated by the short-lived Greenback Party for U.S. Representative for New York’s 12th district, located in New York City. The incumbent at the time, Democrat Clarkson Potter, did not run for re-election, and it was believed that the race would be close between Smith and a Democrat named Cobb. In the end, an upset occurred with the Republican candidate, Alexander Smith, receiving the most votes. Unfortunately, this other Smith died the day after election day, just a few hours after being informed he had won. Newspapers back in Kansas and Kentucky clarified to their audiences that it was not their hometown beauty who had died. Nicholas Smith had placed a distant third in the race. A month after the election, an article in The New York Times reported that Col. Smith had refused to pay his bill for the printing of his campaign materials.

Before the elder Greely’s death, he had loaned about $49,000 to Cornelius Vanderbilt, Jr., who had been estranged from his business magnate father. After marrying Ida, Smith began regularly pestering Vanderbilt to repay the debt with interest. Vanderbilt was involved in a legal battle with his brother over his father’s estate, but, in 1879, received his share and moved to pay the Greeleys. Yet Vanderbilt refused to include Smith in the transaction since he was not a true Greeley heir and due to Smith’s “repeated and vigorous attempts to get control of the business of settlement and the funds connected therewith.” 

When it came to the funds specifically earmarked for Ida and her sister, Vanderbilt attempted to protect the ladies from what he felt was Smith’s influence by providing them notes only in their names that they could invest. “These notes, Smith claims, are not negotiable, and he is, therefore, unable to get immediate possession of the money, which, as a friend of Mr. Greeley and his daughter, I feel the Colonel ought not be allowed to do,” Vanderbilt told the newspapers. In the end, however, Smith managed to convince his wife and her sister against Vanderbilt’s plan, and the notes were turned into cash.

On April 11, 1882, Ida Greeley Smith died of diphtheria at the age of 33. Nicholas Smith once again found himself a widower, this time with three young children. He sent the children off to Leavenworth to live with his sister. After she died in November, Smith found a family back home in Shelby, Kentucky, who took in the children. For the next few years, different stories emerged accusing Smith of squandering what remained of the Greeleys’ money, or about rumors he was wooing yet another heiress in hopes of regaining his financial station. He was said to have chased after actress Mary Anderson in an effort to win her heart, but this was unsuccessful. 

In 1887, Smith became the subject of national newspapers when he acted as best man at the wedding of a wealthy china dealer named Edward Ovington. While Ovington had only known Smith for a short period of time, he was charmed by the man and, believing him to be of similar class and wealth, invited him to act as his best man, which Smith did. Knowing that Ovington was wealthy and well-connected, Smith also tried to get the newlywed to endorse a note for him to the tune of $2,000 or $3,000. This Ovington refused. Smith then presented a bill to Ovington of $180 for the costs he incurred as part of his best man duties. Ovington was insulted by the command, but eventually acquiesced to send Smith $100, feeling $180 was too extravagant a cost for the services rendered. But this was not enough for Smith, who continued to hound Ovington for the rest. Fed up with his former best man, Ovington then took the matter to the press, where Smith was lambasted as “a groomsman for money.” 

Smith’s financial situation was dire indeed. He had lost practically all of the Greeleys’ money, forcing Horace Greeley’s sister to live and work at a hotel. Meanwhile, “no business has been predicated of him. He has not been identified with any forms of labor or any public movements.” Unwilling to work, Smith hit a low point in 1888 when he was arrested at the hotel where he was living in New York for failing to pay for his room and meal bills for the past five months. After spending a night in jail, Smith was released on bail paid for by former (and future) New York Senator Tom Platt.

It appears that Senator Platt and other politicians known to Smith took pity on him and once again attempted to find him an ambassadorship. In 1889, President Harrison appointed Smith to become consul of the United States at Three Rivers, Quebec, Canada. For this position, Smith was paid $1,500 a year. Smith brought his three children to Quebec with him, and for a time, he seemed happy with the ambassadorship. Yet he still lived beyond his means. In 1890, the furniture at the consul’s home was seized for non-payment. The accusation was that the U.S. government had sent the money to furnish the home, but that Smith had pocketed it and refused to pay the Canadian furniture dealer.  Then, in 1892, Consul Smith insulted the French Canadians. In describing the residents of Three Rivers in an official dispatch home, Smith wrote, “Seven persons and a pig, which is made to feel at home, constitute the average family.” He went on to insult the sanitary conditions of his Canadian home, accusing the city of being a cesspool for flies and cholera. As a result of his words, a mob of residents in Three Rivers proceeded to break the windows of the consulate where Smith resided.

The whole affair caused a minor international incident with Ottawa calling for Consul Smith’s removal. This was done, but rather than kick Smith from the State Department completely, the ambassador was merely transferred from Canada to Liege, Belgium. During his time in Belgium, Smith is credited with introducing the Belgians to the concept of Kentucky-style cornbread. The Belgians, meanwhile, introduced Smith to the concept of using dogs as draft animals like horses. At the end of 1894 or the beginning of 1895, Smith’s consulship in Liege came to an end, and he returned home to America.

In the 1900 census, Nicholas Smith and his three children (now aged 22 – 17) were all residing in a rented home in Brooklyn, New York. No occupation for Smith is listed. Two years later, Smith made the newspapers once again. He was evicted from his home for failing to pay rent for himself and his two daughters.

In addition to the back rent, his landlady wanted funds to fix her parlor ceiling, which had experienced water damage when the Col. had left the sink above the parlor running with the plug still in it. When the landlady’s husband asked why Smith had allowed the sink to overflow, he allegedly responded with, “My dear sir. I had just washed my hands. You wouldn’t expect me to put clean hands into soiled water just to pull out a paltry plug, would you?” The newspapers discovered that Smith had many unpaid bills throughout the city, he also owing the local grocer and newspaper seller.

In the end, Smith’s three children had to take responsibility for him. His son, Horace Greeley, became a doctor; his eldest daughter, Nixola, became a noted newspaper columnist and reporter; and the youngest, Ida, was an actress for a time. Smith spent his final years living with his children.

In 1908, Smith wrote to a newspaper in response to an editorial questioning the legitimacy of the many articles of folks who claimed to have known Abraham Lincoln. Smith decided to connect his own name to the Great Emancipator by claiming he witnessed Lincoln’s first inauguration and was presented to the president two days later at the White House. According to Smith, he and Lincoln spoke of their shared home of Kentucky. In another, much earlier account, Smith claimed that upon meeting the President, “Lincoln placed his paternal hands on [Smith’s] cheeks and said: ‘ Capt. Smith, you are a pretty man; you ought to have been a woman.’” Whether there is any truth in Smith’s claims regarding Lincoln is for you, dear reader, to decide for yourself.

The end came for Nicholas Smith on August 15, 1919. He died at the summer home of his daughter, Ida Smith Geissler, in Fort Salonga, on New York’s Long Island. He was 82 years old and had been suffering from Bright’s disease for some time. His original hometown of Shelby, Kentucky, ran a glowing obituary of Smith, omitting any details that might appear to speak ill of the dead, justified or otherwise. He was not buried next to either of his wives who had predeceased him. Rather, his body was cremated and returned to Kentucky, where he was placed next to his parents in Frankfort Cemetery.

FindaGrave.com

Thus was the life and career of Verres Nicholas Smith, a man whose elegant dress and fine manners allowed him to continually “fall up” into society and politics. He was made a Captain in the Army and an American Ambassador despite having no work ethic. He married into two wealthy families and squandered the fortunes of both. His was a life of flashy appearances with no substance beneath. Had he not been blessed with such a handsome and Booth-like visage, it’s unlikely he would have made any mark on history. But, as one newspaper account related after his dust-up in Quebec, “There is only one Col. Nicholas Smith, and we’ve got him… Smith, Smith is beyond comparison. He is absolutely a new kind of an ass, and we can not afford to have him marred, even if we have to go to war with Canada.” 

“Very Ridiculous,” indeed.

My deepest thanks to Ed Dunscombe and David Cress for helping to solve the mystery of the Joseph Booth/Nicholas Smith photographic mix-up. 

Categories: History | Tags: , , , , | 11 Comments

A Public Service Announcement

Categories: History | Tags: , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

William A. Howell and the Booths

Old actors love to reminisce about the old days. They love to tell stories about great actors they acted alongside and the great one-time performances that they took part in. This is especially true of smaller actors who never rose to the level of fame themselves and instead spent their careers in supporting roles to the star attractions.

William A. Howell was one of those small time actors. Born in Philadelphia in 1831, Howell got his start upon the stage as a $10 a week supporting player at the Arch Street Theatre in that city. By 1860, Howell had been hired by theater owner John T. Ford to work in his Holliday Street Theatre in Baltimore. His career on the stage was relatively short lived and did not extend beyond the Civil War, but during his time, Howell had acted alongside many of the greats.

By 1879, Howell had relocated to San Antonio, Texas where he worked in the railroad industry. But his favorite thing to do while in San Antonio was to reminiscence about his hey day in the theater. In 1906, a series of four articles were published in the San Antonio Daily Express about the life and theatrical memories of William Howell. The veteran actor told stories about many of the great actors of the past including Joseph Jefferson, Edwin Forrest, Charlotte Cushman, and John McCullough. In addition, Howell had a lot to say about the Booth family.

William Howell got his acting training through a private group in Philadelphia called the Boothenian Dramatic Association. The Boothenian was little more than a slap-dash theater school run by a couple former stock actors that operated out of an abandoned building. The group had no connection to Junius Brutus Booth or his kin, but the operators of the association knew that the name of Booth would help attract paying customers who wanted to learn the basics of acting. The Boothenian was one of several such “schools” with others bearing the names of the “Forrestonian”, “Byronean”, and “Shakespearean”. Such schools usually had brief lifespans. Still, in his later years, Howell was always proud to say he had been educated in the “Boothenian” school, thus showing his admiration for Junius Brutus Booth and his family.

What follows are the portions of Howell’s 1906 Daily Express articles that deal with the Booths. The digitized editions of the Daily Express that I had access to are very poor. I tried my best, but several times I was unable to decipher what the text was meant to have said. At those instances I have inserted the word [illegible].


January 7, 1906

Stealing the Family Skeleton: Reminiscences of William A. Howell, the Veteran Actor – Tells About Traits of Character of Some of the Other Actors He Supported and Things They Did.

This was the first of four articles containing Howell’s memories, but aside from mentioning he acted alongside Edwin and John Wilkes, there is nothing in this article that is pertinent to the Booths. Still, if you’re interested the full article can be read by clicking the title above.


January 14, 1906

Duke Saved by Big Bass Drum: Howell, the Veteran Retired Actor, Resumes His Reminiscences of Former Great Actors and Actresses – Joe Jefferson Was Delicate – Met England’s Monarch – Was With Wilkes Booth.

“…To very large and extremely appreciative audiences John Wilkes Booth was playing at the Holliday Street Theatre in Baltimore in 1861 and I was a member of the stock company that supported him. [Note: Booth was not starring in Baltimore in 1861. At the end of May, JWB returned home to Baltimore after a less than stellar starring engagement in the Southern States in which he was accidentally shot. It looks like Booth performed a single night at the Holliday Street Theatre alongside William Howell on May 16, 1861, which may be where this exaggeration comes from.] From his distinguished father, Junius Brutus Booth, he had inherited much of his histrionic talent and genius, but I fear that from the same source he inherited the impulses that made him take the terrible and misguided steps that he did when he murdered the Martyr President, Lincoln. Both he and his father were of moody and gloomy dispositions and morbid temperaments. I was much attached to Wilkes Booth. He and I occupied a room together and he frequently had long conversations with me in which he spoke of his love of liberty and of his father’s patriotism. Even at that time he was endeavoring to raise a military company in Maryland to take to Virginia and place in the cause of the South but I do not believe that he had at the time any idea of undertaking the terrible tragedy which he enacted in the box of Ford’s Theatre in Washington several years later. From what I saw of him and his abstraction, I am entitled to the belief that his mind was unbalanced. His expression at the time of the tragedy – Sic semper tyrannus – was not appropriate or in any way applicable to Lincoln whom he had just slain, because Lincoln was anything but a tyrant. On the contrary, that President was one of the greatest exponents of liberty this country has ever produced. The expression showed the frame of mind in which Wilkes Booth was when he killed the President. The Shakespearian play in which the killing of Caesar is portrayed and which is a very strong one, was one of Wilkes Booth’s favorites. In all probability he had devoted so much earnest study to it that it unhinged his mental balance and made him feel that he was enacting the scene of slaying Caesar when he took the life of Lincoln.

In the course of my professional career I met quite a number of prominent and distinguished people. Among those [illegible line] was the present King of England. I was introduced to him in company with John Wilkes Booth at Barnum’s Hotel in Baltimore by the Mayor of that city. This prominent [illegible] was then merely the Prince of Wales and only the heir apparent to the throne of Great Britain. He was quite a young man then, probably about my own age. But I noticed that he was even then a man of quick discernment. I heard him observe to the Mayor of Baltimore that Wilkes Booth appeared to him to be a very fascinating man. On that remark the young Prince was then eminently correct, for Booth exerted off the stage the same fascination he possessed on it. The Prince did not long remain in Baltimore. The Civil War had broken out and it was thought best for him to get out of the country before getting into any diplomatic entanglements that might possibly be presented. [Note: As intriguing as this story is, there is no way that JWB made the acquaintance of the Prince of Wales in Baltimore. The Prince only spent about 24 hours in Baltimore on Oct. 8-9, 1860. On those dates, JWB was performing in Columbus, Georgia.] Excitement was very high, too, about that time, and there was a very tough element in and around Baltimore just about then, which was in a very ugly mood. This element was very properly called the plug uglies. The sudden entrance into Baltimore of federal troops stopped Booth’s movement of raising a Confederate company. Soon after the Federal troops took possession of Baltimore, I returned to Philadelphia on a wood boat. I found Philadelphia also ablaze with excitement and war preparations were in progress.”


January 21, 1906

Was Not Sunset But Burning Opera House: Howell, the Actor, Resumes His Reminiscences of Booth, McCullough, Barrett, and Other Eminent Actors

The text of this article is very faded, making it difficult to decipher. Despite the title hinting that there was to be more about Booth, I was unable to find anything in this article that seems relevant. But perhaps I just couldn’t read the applicable parts. The article can be read by clicking the title above.


January 28, 1906

Booth and Howell Were Going to War: Wilkes Booth was to Have Been the Captain and Howell the Lieutenant. Booth’s Confederate Friends Captured Cannon to Fire on New York Troops – Edwin Booth’s Sore Trial.

This is the fourth and final of Howell’s 1906 articles. It is almost entirely about the the old actor’s connection to the Booths. As a result the entire article is transcribed below. As with the other articles, you can view the original text by clicking the title above.

“William A. Howell, the veteran retired actor, being still in a reminiscent vein, was asked by me to continue his relations of incidents connected with the careers of the various prominent people with whom he had appeared in the stage and did so:

“Just after the fall of Fort Sumter,” he said, “and after Baltimore was fairly ablaze with excitement, as I was going down the street I met Joe Booth. He was the youngest brother of John Wilkes Booth, and the youngest of the Booth brothers, of whom Edwin was the oldest [Note: Junius Brutus Booth, Jr. was the eldest of the Booth siblings]. Joe had been serving in the army as a surgeon at Charleston under the Confederacy. He was a quiet, dreamy, indolent sort of a fellow, who was always planning for something out of the usual trend of events for his own special benefit. He was the finest architect and constructor of air castles that I ever knew. He was chockfull of romance. He, however, had not inherited any of the histrionic talent of his father, Junius Brutus Booth. By Joe’s looks and manners I at once discovered he had something he considered of great importance to tell me. He acted as though he were afraid to speak of it on the street, fearing that someone in Baltimore might overhear it. My impression was at once confirmed by his asking me to come with him to his room at Barnum’s Hall.

Joseph Booth

As soon as we entered the room Joe locked the door. After satisfying himself that one one was peeping or prying he opened his trunk. Then he exposed to my view such a heterogenous make of trophies of war as I had never seen or hardly dreamed of, many of them horrible to contemplate. They gave me an idea of what a horrible affair war is. Joe showed me balls of rifles, pistols, and even of cannon. He had shells, and fragments of them. He also had pieces of human anatomy, bones and parts of skulls and other gruesome and [illegible] objects of grim-visaged war before its wrinkled front was in anywise smoothed out. These he had secured from the battlefield after the fight at Sumter between the fort and the ships. [Note: The fall of Fort Sumter was not a bloody battle, therefore it is likely the pieces of anatomy Joe had with him were specimens from the medical school where he had been studying when the conflict broke out]

His mother has sent Joe to attend the medical college at Charleston. He was there when the hostilities commenced, and he was able to get on the medical staff. Soon after I met him in Baltimore, I lost sight of him, for he made his way to Philadelphia, where his mother lived.

Very soon after Joe had gone from Baltimore to Philadelphia, John Wilkes Booth, his brother, made his appearance in Baltimore. He knew that I was playing in one of the theaters there so he came around to the theater to see me. John Wilkes Booth and his brother Joe were entirely dissimilar in disposition, and in every other way. Joe was [illegible] stupid or counterfeited stupidity to such perfection that I never was able to learn that he was otherwise. Wilkes was one of the brightest and most intelligent men in the theatrical world. He was quick, impulsive, fiery, big-hearted, [illegible], and magnetic. You could not resist his captivating manners. His heart and soul seemed to beam out of his eyes. They lighted up every lineament of his countenance. His voice was seductive and his manners captivating. A more generous man I have never met. He was worshiped by his mother and sister to whom he was most kind and most women fancied him. But there was one instance in which his attentions to one of that sex met with a [illegible words].

Howell and Booth Went a Mashing

He and I, as long as we roomed together, were inseparable companions. At the time we were rooming together he was suffering from a knife wound he had received from a jealous girl who had stabbed him because she had caught him flirting with another girl. [Note: Fellow actress Henrietta Irving stabbed JWB on April 26, 1861 after witnessing him come out of her sister’s hotel room] We both boarded at the house of a family named Brown. On our way we had to pass the establishment of a [illegible] who had a very pretty girl working for her. She was really a very beautiful girl. Baltimore was famed for its beautiful women, and I believe is still, but this girl was unusually lovely. Wilkes and I both became smitten with her. We got in the habit of passing the place very often, and ogling her. We would wait on the street until she came out, and follow her. Finally, Wilkes said to me, ‘Howell, her bright eye has me still. We must contrive some way to be introduced to her.’

She would look at [illegible words] gave [illegible words] very great amount [illegible words]. Acting on Booth’s hint I questioned an old gentleman who was a reporter on one of the Baltimore papers, who seemed to know nearly everyone in Baltimore. From him we learned her name and that she was in the habit of attending the Methodist Church where she sang in the choir. Of course we went to the church and waited after the service for her to come out. As she gracefully descended the stairs Booth whispered in my ears.

‘See where my love appears
Darting pale luster
Like the silver moon
Through her veil of sorrow.’

To our chagrin as she reached the foot of the stairs, a group of young men who were also standing there formed a circle about her and walked away with her like a special and privileged bodyguard. To make the matter all the worse as they went off with her down the street I heard them tittering at us.

The next morning’s mail brought us an anonymous letter, It was addressed to ‘J. Wilkes Booth & co’ it read thus:

‘Sirs: Your impudent attention to and constant following of Miss Blank has been observed by a number of her gentlemen friends who will give you what you richly deserve in case you persist in trying to force yourselves upon the lady’s presence. A word to the wise is sufficient. HER FRIENDS’

While neither of us were frightened at the note or its writers we came to the realization that our attentions were annoying to the lady herself and she might have inspired its having been written to us. Booth was as gallant as he was handsome, and he never intended to do anything to annoy a lady. Both of us saw her afterwards only in our dreams, except a single time when she happened to come to the theater where we were both playing. She was [illegible]ly dressed and sat in a very expensive box. We feasted on her beauty but never annoyed her by our attention. I was in love with her almost as much so as I was with Charlotte Cushman when the latter kissed me. But Miss Cushman was then old, although a very handsome woman, while the beautiful Baltimorean was barely more than a slip of a girl, just budding into womanhood.

After a Yankee Regiment

While Booth and I were rooming together he belonged to a Confederate organization, that sallied forth one night and captured a lot of cannon that were at St. Timothy’s College. These they brought to Brown’s back yard, where our boarding house was, and secreted them and held them in readiness to carry out on the York road and fire them on the famous New York Seventh Regiment. This regiment was expected to pass through Baltimore on its way from New York to Washington. Sometimes the Yankees got wind of the project. At any rate, the purpose of the Confederates was thwarted the Seventh Regiment of Gotham going around by way of Annapolis instead of coming through Baltimore.

It is my impression that all of the sons of Junius Brutus Booth were born in Maryland where he owned a farm. I believed that at one time it was his intention of making farmers of all of them, but two of them at least, Edwin and John Wilkes, would not suppress the histrionic genius they inherited from him. I believe that they buried him on the farm when he died. But no matter where he sleeps I hope he rests gently and peacefully. He was one of the grandest actors I ever saw and his two sons possessed [illegible] of great talent as he did. Of them I was most intimate with his son John Wilkes than with Edwin because Wilkes was about my own age and was [illegible words] and companion. [illegible sentence] Wilkes was going to raise a company in Harford County where his father’s farm was and among the youth with whom [illegible words], and I was to have been an officer of the company. Wilkes was to have been in the service of [illegible] of the Confederacy. While we were waiting [illegible words] from Richmond [illegible words] Federal troops took possession of Baltimore and thwarted our patriotic plans. Often I have pondered on what would have [illegible words] had we gone into the [illegible]. Whether we would have won the [illegible words] in gray uniforms or slumbered under the [illegible] of a battlefield? Poor Wilkes came to a terribly tragic end so I have thought it would have been better for him to have been slain in battle not killed as he was. I am not one of those who believes that Booth escaped after killing Lincoln. I am convinced Booth was pursued and killed by troops in the barn, and that identification of his body at the time was complete. I have often read the stories of his survival and alleged subsequent death thirty years later but I knew they were fictions because I was so intimate with John Wilkes Booth that I know if alive he would have found a way of communicating with me and I would have gone thousands of miles to have been with him once more.

Edwin Booth’s Trying Time

It was not a great while after the terrible tragedy that Edwin Booth had to undergo a trying ordeal. I was not with him then and I get my account of him from John Marion Barrow [Barron], himself an actor of great power, who frequently appeared in the same plays with and supported Edwin Booth. This was the first night that Edwin Booth appeared on the stage in Philadelphia after the death of Lincoln. The play was Othello. Booth was cast for the part of Iago, and Barrow that of Roderigo. [Note: John M. Barron was a small actor at the Walnut Street Theatre in Philadelphia when Edwin Booth returned there in April of 1866. He did support Edwin in Othello but he did not play the role of Roderigo]

‘Before the curtain arose,’ Barrow said, ‘I found Edwin Booth literally quaking in his boots. He was standing in the wings waiting for his cue. The orchestra was playing, and I stood next to him. I had never seen Edwin Booth appear nervous before. I could not help [illegible] his condition. He said to me ‘Barrow, I don’t know whether I am going to get bricks or roses tonight.’

I assured him as best I could, although I had some misgivings myself. I told him that the people of Baltimore [sic] held him in high esteem and did not hold him responsible for his mentally unbalanced brother. I assured him they were as staunchly loyal to him then as they were before that unlucky Friday night. We had but a few brief moments to wait, during which the tension was great on Edwin. The music ceased; the curtain rose. The cue came and I went on the stage, going to the right while speaking my lines. In a moment, Edwin Booth followed. If the vast audience had possessed but a single voice it could not have shouted in more perfect unison. The men waved their hats and the ladies their handkerchiefs. Both shouted a loyal welcome while flowers fairly rained upon the stage.

Booth stood in the center of the stage. He removed his hat as only he could do – while the showering of flowers continued. The audience cheered and cheered again. Finally, from exhaustion it subsided. Booth had nerved himself and was himself again. Never did he act so grandly. Gratitude made him magnificent. The play had been splendidly cast. ‘The performance, I think,’ said Barrow, ‘was the grandest that I ever appeared in and the best that Edwin Booth ever acted and participated in. I know I never saw him to better advantage than upon that night.’

Edwin Booth’s Liberality

In the last interview I told you the hard luck of Tim Murphy and his companions when the opera house in which they were to play in Arkansas burned. It was a humorous thing. Now I shall tell you one of the most pathetic ones. I do not wish to name the actors connected with it. It occurred in Logansport, Ind. There an unfortunate theatrical troupe had stranded. One of its principal members had died. They had no funds to bury him nor any with which to return to Chicago, from whence they came, and whence they wished to return. The same John Marion Barrow [Barron] to whom I have just alluded was then with Edwin Booth and the latter company in the same place. Barrow went around among the members of Booth’s company and from them obtained donations in the amount of $[illegible]. He called on Booth last. He said to him, ‘Ned I want $5 or if you can spare it, $10.’

Booth handed him the largest amount and then asked Barrow what he wanted with the money. Barrow told him he wanted it to bury the dead man with. He told Booth the amount he had raised and from whom. Booth then said ‘John, you give that money, every cent of it, back to the members of this company. They need every cent they have themselves. I insist on it. You leave this whole matter to me. Let me know what it will not only cost to bury the poor fellow, but also what it will take in addition to carry the whole company back to Chicago.

Barrow returned the money to the actors who had raised the $[illegible]. Edwin Booth buried the dead one at his own expense and sent the live ones home with lots of gratitude and blessings.

This reminds me that poor Billy Williams is ill and hard up here in San Antonio and the newspaper men and others are getting up a benefit for him. I have not been on the stage for many years, but I would be willing to go to aid him and I would give money, too, if I had it. I tell you, though, I am of the opinion that the people who ought to do most for Billy in this his hour of trouble are those at Memphis. I have been told that Williams, during the yellow fever plague that was a terrible visitation to that city, being at that time in good financial circumstances, gave the Memphians many thousands of dollars. This being the case, I think it the duty of Memphis people to come to his relief now. They could come across with a couple thousand dollars and ought to do it. If they let him die here in poverty as he is apt to, and [illegible] aid only from generous San Antonians, it will be a reproach on Memphis. I believe that if they knew the condition that Williams is in here they would hasten to his aid. I hope they will. [Note: William “Billy” Williams was a minstrel performer who gave a great deal of money to aid in a Yellow Fever epidemic that struck Memphis in 1879. At the time of this article Williams was in poor health and living in San Antonio. The locals did a benefit performance for him and he eventually made his way North before dying in 1910]

All actors have their sorrows. I have had my share of them. When but a very young man I married one of the most loveable women on earth. After bearing me two children, a boy and a girl – she died and left me alone with them to look after which I have done as best I could. Her death broke my heart. It made me leave our home that had been so happy. That was the cause of my coming to Texas and intimately to San Antonio, to get away from the scene of my sorrow. I left and wound up here. I worked even as a day laborer on a railway. Finally I became crippled and unable to do hard physical labor but even now, in my old age, I am not idle. I earn an honest living and am as cheerful as possible and am oftener seen smiling than frowning or grieving for I don’t care to force my thoughts on anyone else. I believe as a great poet says:

‘Laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep, and you weep alone.'”


As with most reminiscences, there is a fair amount of exaggeration and fiction in some of Howell’s stories regarding the Booths. But there are also some fascinating nuggets of truth in these memories of the assassin and his family. I especially appreciate Howell’s rebuttal of the “Booth escaped” stories that permeated Texas during his lifetime and beyond.

William Alexander Howell died in San Antonio on February 26, 1913. A member of the International Order of Odd Fellows for over 50 years, Howell was laid to rest in San Antonio’s IOOF cemetery. During a recent visit to San Antonio, I took the time to seek out Mr. Howell’s grave in the corner of the cemetery.

I’m grateful for William Howell’s memories of his time on the stage. While his stories need to be taken with a grain of salt, they still help us to flesh out the lives of John Wilkes, Edwin, and Joseph Booth. In appreciation, I’m going to end this post with a final Howell and Booth story.

On February 26, 1887, Edwin Booth made his first appearance in San Antonio. The celebrated actor performed a matinee of Richelieu followed by an evening performance of Hamlet. In the hours between his arrival in the city and the afternoon’s matinee, Edwin Booth did what everyone does when visiting San Antonio, he went to the Alamo where he “asked many questions” according to the papers. The later performances were well anticipated with ticket prices being raised for this one-time event.

Edwin was lauded by the San Antonians (though one critic thought Booth’s performance of Hamlet seemed a bit apathetic) and all were happy they managed to see the famous tragedian in what would surely be his only performance ever in the city. Booth, himself, complained of the struggle he had in the trip from San Antonio to the west coast making it seem a repeat performance would never occur. However, a year later, Booth was on tour once again. He needed funds for his fledgling social club, The Players. The group was looking to purchase a building somewhere in New York City. This need for money outweighed Edwin’s own discomforts in a national tour. As a result, he planned a return to Texas and scheduled two dates in San Antonio. This time Edwin was joined by fellow player Lawrence Barrett as a co-star. On February 22 and 23, 1888, the men performed in Othello and Julius Caesar. Prices were increased again with one newspaper lamenting, “It takes nearly ten dollars to take your girl to see Booth and Barrett tonight.” Still, the performances were completely sold out (though, again, critics felt that Booth may have been phoning it in). After these two dates, Edwin Booth departed San Antonio, never to be seen there again.

The reason I bring this all up is because there is an 1891 article that states while Booth and Barrett were in San Antonio they shared a dinner with their fellow veteran actor and friend, William Howell. According to the article the three men, “had a long chat…about the old times when they were all neophytes”. Then, according to the article, Edwin Booth stated to his host, “What a fool you were Howell not to have stuck to the stage. You would have been not only famous, but wealthy.” While the source of the article could only have been William Howell himself, I’m still willing to grant him the kindness of closing on the claim that Edwin Booth thought the veteran actor in San Antonio had the talent to have been a successful actor, worthy of the Boothenian name, after all.

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

The Lincoln Assassination On This Day (July 4 – July 31)

Taking inspiration from one of my favorite books, John Wilkes Booth: Day by Day by Art Loux, I’m documenting a different Lincoln assassination or Booth family event each day on my Twitter account. In addition to my daily #OTD (On This Day) tweets, each Sunday I’ll be posting them here for the past week. If you click on any of the pictures in the tweet, it will take you to its individual tweet page on Twitter where you can click to make the images larger and easier to see. Since Twitter limits the number of characters you can type in a tweet, I often include text boxes as pictures to provide more information. I hope you enjoy reading about the different events that happened over the last week.

This post is an especially long one, comprising of almost an entire month of tweets. It will take quite a long time to load.

NOTE: After weeks of creating posts with multiple embedded tweets, this site’s homepage now tends to crash from trying to load all the different posts with all the different tweets at once. So, to help fix this, I’ve made it so that those viewing this post on the main page have to click the “Continue Reading” button below to load the full post with tweets. Even after you open the post in a separate page, it may still take awhile for the tweets to load completely. Using the Chrome browser seems to be the best way to view the tweets, but may still take a second to switch from just text to the whole tweet with pictures.

Continue reading

Categories: History, OTD | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Lincoln Assassination On This Day (May 9 – May 15)

Taking inspiration from one of my favorite books, John Wilkes Booth: Day by Day by Art Loux, I’m documenting a different Lincoln assassination or Booth family event each day on my Twitter account. In addition to my daily #OTD (On This Day) tweets, each Sunday I’ll be posting them here for the past week. If you click on any of the pictures in the tweet, it will take you to its individual tweet page on Twitter where you can click to make the images larger and easier to see. Since Twitter limits the number of characters you can type in a tweet, I often include text boxes as pictures to provide more information. I hope you enjoy reading about the different events that happened over the last week.

NOTE: After weeks of creating posts with multiple embedded tweets, this site’s homepage now tends to crash from trying to load all the different posts with all the different tweets at once. So, to help fix this, I’ve made it so that those viewing this post on the main page have to click the “Continue Reading” button below to load the full post with tweets. Even after you open the post in a separate page, it may still take awhile for the tweets to load completely. Using the Chrome browser seems to be the best way to view the tweets, but may still take a second to switch from just text to the whole tweet with pictures.

Continue reading

Categories: History, OTD | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Lincoln Assassination On This Day (February 28 – March 6)

Taking inspiration from one of my favorite books, John Wilkes Booth: Day by Day by Art Loux, I’m documenting a different Lincoln assassination or Booth family event each day on my Twitter account. In addition to my daily #OTD (On This Day) tweets, each Sunday I’ll be posting them here for the past week. If you click on any of the pictures in the tweet, it will take you to its individual tweet page on Twitter where you can click to make the images larger and easier to see. Since Twitter limits the number of characters you can type in a tweet, I often include text boxes as pictures to provide more information. I hope you enjoy reading about the different events that happened over the last week.

NOTE: After weeks of creating posts with multiple embedded tweets, this site’s homepage now tends to crash from trying to load all the different posts with all the different tweets at once. So, to help fix this, I’ve made it so that those viewing this post on the main page have to click the “Continue Reading” button below to load the full post with tweets. Even after you open the post in a separate page, it may still take awhile for the tweets to load completely. Using the Chrome browser seems to be the best way to view the tweets, but may still take a second to switch from just text to the whole tweet with pictures.

Continue reading

Categories: History, OTD | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Lincoln Assassination On This Day (February 21 – February 27)

Taking inspiration from one of my favorite books, John Wilkes Booth: Day by Day by Art Loux, I’m documenting a different Lincoln assassination or Booth family event each day on my Twitter account. In addition to my daily #OTD (On This Day) tweets, each Sunday I’ll be posting them here for the past week. If you click on any of the pictures in the tweet, it will take you to its individual tweet page on Twitter where you can click to make the images larger and easier to see. Since Twitter limits the number of characters you can type in a tweet, I often include text boxes as pictures to provide more information. I hope you enjoy reading about the different events that happened over the last week.

NOTE: After weeks of creating posts with multiple embedded tweets, this site’s homepage now tends to crash from trying to load all the different posts with all the different tweets at once. So, to help fix this, I’ve made it so that those viewing this post on the main page have to click the “Continue Reading” button below to load the full post with tweets. Even after you open the post in a separate page, it may still take awhile for the tweets to load completely. Using the Chrome browser seems to be the best way to view the tweets, but may still take a second to switch from just text to the whole tweet with pictures.

Continue reading

Categories: History, OTD | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

The Lincoln Assassination On This Day (February 14 – February 20)

Taking inspiration from one of my favorite books, John Wilkes Booth: Day by Day by Art Loux, I’m documenting a different Lincoln assassination or Booth family event each day on my Twitter account. In addition to my daily #OTD (On This Day) tweets, each Sunday I’ll be posting them here for the past week. If you click on any of the pictures in the tweet, it will take you to its individual tweet page on Twitter where you can click to make the images larger and easier to see. Since Twitter limits the number of characters you can type in a tweet, I often include text boxes as pictures to provide more information. I hope you enjoy reading about the different events that happened over the last week.

NOTE: After weeks of creating posts with multiple embedded tweets, this site’s homepage now tends to crash from trying to load all the different posts with all the different tweets at once. So, to help fix this, I’ve made it so that those viewing this post on the main page have to click the “Continue Reading” button below to load the full post with tweets. Even after you open the post in a separate page, it may still take awhile for the tweets to load completely. Using the Chrome browser seems to be the best way to view the tweets, but may still take a second to switch from just text to the whole tweet with pictures.

Continue reading

Categories: History, OTD | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com.