May 17, 1865

Wednesday, May 17, 1865

Previous Session       Trial Home       Next Session


The court convened at 10 o’clock.[1]

Present: All nine members of the military commission, the eight conspirators, Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt, Assistant Judge Advocates Bingham and Burnett, the recorders of the court, lawyers Frederick Aiken, John Clampitt, Walter Cox, William Doster, Thomas Ewing, and Frederick Stone.

Absent: Reverdy Johnson

Seating chart:

“At ten o’clock the prisoners were brought in and placed in the same order as yesterday. First came Arnold and his guard, Mudd and guard, Spangler and guard, O’Laughlin and guard, Payne and guard, Herold and guard, all of whom were seated in the prisoner’s dock, occupying the same seats as indicated in our columns yesterday.”[2]

“Mrs. Surratt… was sitting in the corner at the end of the prisoners’ dock and next to Herold…”[3]

The reading of the prior session’s testimony began:

“The reading of yesterday’s proceedings were then entered upon by Mr. Murphy, but were suspended by the court to afford one of the prisoners (Herold) an opportunity to leave the room temporarily. On his return the reading was again proceed with.”[4]

Reading of the testimony was completed at 12:30 pm.

General Thomas Harris of the commission then rose from his seat and announced his desire to have a letter written by Reverdy Johnson entered into the record. Harris had been the one who had initially objected to Johnson being admitted to the court as a counselor on May 13, due to the Maryland Senator’s actions in 1864 where he spoke out against Marylanders being required to take an oath of allegiance before being able to vote. Harris had accused Johnson of not recognizing the “moral obligation” of an oath. As a sitting Senator, Johnson had taken some offense at this claim, entered into an explanation of his actions in 1864 and made it clear that he did recognize the moral obligation of an oath. Harris subsequently removed his objection. In the press, this interaction made it appear that Johnson was victorious over the petulant Harris which evidently bothered Harris. The letter Harris asked to be read in court was one written by Johnson in 1864, where he advised Marylanders that the state constitutional convention which required the oath of allegiance had overstepped their authority and that citizens should have no qualms in taking it and then ignoring it. Harris announced that, as this was the basis for his objection to Johnson’s admittance, he felt it should go on the record.

The letter from Reverdy Johnson, dated October 7, 1864, was read to the court by Benn Pitman and was entered into evidence as Exhibit 33.[5]

Testimony began

William Williams, a detective with the D.C. provost marshal, testified about his involvement in the questioning of Dr. Mudd. Williams had accompanied Lt. Lovett and Joshua Lloyd when the men visited the Mudd farm and interviewed Dr. Mudd on April 18 and April 21. Williams’ testimony was very similar to that of Joshua Lloyd of the prior day. Like Lloyd, Williams claimed that Dr. Mudd denied any persons had stopped at his house when he was first interviewed on the 18th. He then recounted the manner in which Booth’s boot was found on April 21st, how Dr. Mudd was subsequently taken into Bryantown, and the doctor’s horseback confession of having met Booth previously in 1864. The defense cross examined Williams, repeatedly asking him about the interview with Mudd on the 18th. Williams continually asserted that Mudd denied any persons had been to his house. However, the defense was able to get Williams to contradict himself by having him describe in detail the way in which he attempted to retrace Booth and Herold’s tracks across the Zekiah Swamp and to Parson Wilmer’s home on the 18th and 19th.[6] Since Dr. Mudd was the only source that the fugitives asked about Parson Wilmer’s home, it’s clear that the doctor must have told them about his visitors. In addition, in a statement Williams’ made on May 1st, he very clearly stated that, “…in answer to the question if any strangers had been in the vicinity for the past few days he said that he had seen none, but upon being questioned closely in regard to the two men reported as having been at his house on Saturday morning Apr. 15th, he acknowledged that two men came to his house about daybreak that morning, one with a broken leg which he wished him to set.”[7] It appears that William Williams took the same route as Joshua Lloyd in misrepresenting important details in order to incriminate Mudd further.


The time being 1 o’clock, the court took a recess for lunch during which time the conspirators were returned to their cells. At 2 o’clock, the court reassembled.[8]

Testimony resumed

Simon Gavacan, a detective with the D.C. provost marshal, was one of the detectives who was present during the interviews of Dr. Mudd at his farm. Gavacan accompanied Lt. Lovett and fellow detectives Joshua Lloyd and William Williams to the Mudd farm on April 18th and 21st. Gavacan’s testimony was very similar to that of Lt. Lovett, recounting the interviews they had with Dr. Mudd. Importantly, Gavacan more accurately testified in regards to the conversation that occurred during the first visit when the men inquired if Dr. Mudd had seen any strangers lately: “We made inquiries if there were any two men passed there on Saturday morning: that was the Saturday after the assassination. He said, ‘No.’ Then we asked him more particularly if there were two men came there, one of them having his leg fractured. He said, ‘Yes.’”[9] Unlike Detectives Lloyd and Williams, Gavacan appeared to testify to the best of his ability regarding what he witnessed and heard while interviewing Dr. Mudd.

Emma Offutt, John M. Lloyd’s sister-in-law, testified that she was with her brother-in-law on two different occasions when he interacted with Mary Surratt. The first interaction took place on April 11, when Lloyd and Mrs. Offutt were in a carriage riding near Uniontown, which is in the southern part of D.C. near its border with Maryland. Offutt testified that they had passed a carriage bearing Mrs. Surratt and that Lloyd hopped out of their carriage and walked over to hers. Lloyd and Mrs. Surratt talked for few moments and then Lloyd returned. Mrs. Offutt did not hear the conversation between them. Offutt also testified that Mary Surratt arrived at her tavern on the evening of April 14th, looking for Lloyd who was out. Mary waited in the parlor and, when Lloyd returned, Mrs. Offutt observed Mrs. Surratt and Lloyd talking out in the yard. Mrs. Offutt did not hear this conversation either.[10] This testimony was used by the prosecution to support John M. Lloyd’s earlier testimony that Mary Surratt discussed shooting irons with him on these occasions.

Willie Storke Jett, a Confederate soldier, testified about his interactions with John Wilkes Booth and David Herold when the two men were on the run from Union authorities. Jett, along with two other Confederates named Mortimer Ruggles and Absalom Bainbridge, happened upon Booth and Herold in Port Conway, Virginia on April 24 as the fugitives were waiting to cross the Rappahannock River. Herold conversed with the Confederates and eventually confided to them that “We are the assassinators of the President.” Herold asked Jett for help in getting Booth further South. Jett assisted in so much as making inquiries in Port Royal for people willing to take in a wounded stranger. Jett successfully found Booth lodging at the farm of Richard Henry Garrett. Jett testified about his run in with Booth and about David Herold’s movements and statements during their time together.[11]

Everton J. Conger, a detective in the National Detective Police, was one of the leaders who took part in the manhunt and capture of John Wilkes Booth and David Herold. Conger, along with fellow detective Luther Baker, accompanied a detachment of the 16th NY Cavalry on the manhunt for Booth and Herold in the northern necks of Virginia. This group successfully traced the fugitives to the Garrett farm where David Herold was taken prisoner and Booth was shot and killed. Conger testified at length about the manhunt and the standoff that occurred at the Garretts’ tobacco barn where Booth and Herold were discovered. After finishing his narration of the events, Conger was asked to identify some of the belongings that were removed from John Wilkes Booth as he lay dying. Some of the items, like the knife and carbine Booth carried, had already been entered into evidence.[12]

The following new items were identified by Conger as being found on John Wilkes Booth’s body and were entered into evidence as exhibits.

Exhibit 34 – one pistol
Exhibit 35 – another pistol
Exhibit 36 – a file with a cork attached to one end, a pipe, a spur, and 22 cartridges
Exhibit 37 – triplicate copies of a bill of exchange from The Ontario Bank, dated October 27, 1864
Exhibit 38 – a printed map of the state of Virginia found on David Herold and a compass (pictured above) found in Booth’s pocket

Boston Corbett, a sergeant with the 16th NY Cavalry, was asked to testify about his actions in the capture of John Wilkes Booth and David Herold. Corbett narrated the actions that led to him shooting Booth as the assassin was trapped in the Garretts’ burning tobacco barn. He was also asked to identify David Herold. Corbett testified that, when Herold surrendered himself, Booth attested that Herold was innocent of any crime.[13] This assertion did not help Herold case much. As the slayer of Booth, Corbett’s appearance and behavior on the witness stand were readily commented on in the press: “Sergeant Boston Corbett was here put on the stand. He came up with smiling face and hair parted smoothly straight up the middle, as noticed in prints of him. On being sworn he responded ‘I solemnly swear,’ and proceeded to narrate the story of the capture and death of Booth with a volubility indicating that it was one he had been called upon many times already to relate.”[14] “[Boston Corbett] came up to the stand smiling and grinning, and went through his testimony as a boy reciting his lesson which he knew by heart, or as the actors say he was ‘letter perfect.’”[15]

John Fletcher, a stableman in D.C., testified about his interactions with George Atzerodt and David Herold. Fletcher first met Atzerodt on April 2, 1865, when Atzerodt brought two horses to Nailor’s stable where Fletcher worked. Fletcher testified about how his stable took care of the horses, one of which only had one eye, until Atzerodt removed them on April 12th stating he was going to sell them. On the day of Lincoln’s assassination, George brought a different horse to Fletcher asking if he could get it ready for that night. David Herold also hired a horse for that evening. Fletcher testified that he went and got a drink with Atzerodt at around 10:00 pm before watching him go to the Kirkwood House hotel. While walking back to the stable, Fletcher witnessed David Herold riding his overdue horse. Fletcher hallooed to Herold, who sped away. Fletcher went back to the stables and mounted another horse, chasing Herold to the Navy Yard Bridge. He was told there that if he crossed the river in pursuit of Herold, he would not be able to return until morning. Returning to the city, Fletcher learned of the assassination and went to report the loss of his horse. Fletcher gave the names of David Herold and George Atzerodt to the authorities and was then asked to identify a saddle and bridle that had been found on a rogue horse on the outskirts of the city. He identified them as having belonged to the horse that was half blind – the horse Atzerodt had told him he had sold. In reality, the blind horse and saddle had been used that night by Lewis Powell during his attack on Secretary of State Seward. The horse had been found wandering in the hours after the attempt on Seward’s life. At the end of his testimony, Judge Advocate Holt requested that Fletcher visit the government stables in order to see if he could identify any of the horses in their possession. Fletcher left the courtroom and proceeded to the government stables.[16]

During John Fletcher’s testimony, he was asked to identify the saddle and bridle that he had been shown in the early morning hours of April 15th. He identified at as the saddle and bridle that had been used on the horse that was blind in one eye. The saddle and bridle were entered into evidence as Exhibit 39.

John Greenawalt, the proprietor of the Pennsylvania House hotel, testified about his interactions with conspirator George Atzerodt. Greenawalt recalled that George Atzerodt first took a room in his hotel starting on the 18th of March and that John Wilkes Booth had been a frequent visitor to the hotel during Atzerodt’s occupancy. When Booth would come, he and Atzerodt would go out and talk outside the hotel or walk down the street together. Once in early April, when Greenawalt joined Atzerodt for a drink, the conspirator said to the proprietor that he was going to be coming into a lot of gold someday soon but he would not elaborate. Atzerodt had checked out of the hotel earlier in the week of Lincoln’s assassination, but showed back up at the Pennsylvania House at between 2 and 3 o’clock in the morning on April 15th. Atzerodt took a room with another gentleman named Samuel Thomas. Both men left separately of each other early in the morning.[17] At the time, the prosecution believed that Samuel Thomas was an alias for one of the other conspirators and tried to get Greenawalt to identify either Michael O’Laughlen or Edman Spangler as the man. Greenawalt could not identify Samuel Thomas among the conspirators because he was a stranger to Atzerodt who merely agreed to take a room with him. Greenawalt’s testimony worked to connect Atzerodt with Booth prior to the assassination and to provide Atzerodt’s location in the hours after Lincoln was shot.

John F. Coyle, the editor of the National Intelligencer newspaper, briefly testified regarding his acquaintanceship with John Wilkes Booth. Coyle was also asked whether or not he or his newspaper possessed a letter that Booth had written on the day of the assassination in which he put forth his reasons for assassinating Lincoln. Coyle stated emphatically that he never possessed such a letter.[18] On the day of the assassination John Wilkes Booth gave a sealed envelope containing the letter to John Mathews, an actor friend, with instructions to turn it over the Coyle the next day. After the assassination, Mathews opened the envelope, read the letter, and then burned the contents in order to avoid being implicated. While on the run, John Wilkes Booth was given newspapers but noticed that his manifesto had not been published. He then turned to his small pocket diary and wrote about having left a letter for the Intelligencer. Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt knew about the letter because Booth’s diary was in the possession of War Department. While the diary was never entered into evidence at the conspiracy trial, according to a later account by Coyle, the pocket book was actually in the courtroom on this day: “Mr. Holt examined me, particularly about the letter, and then for the first time the diary of Wilkes Booth was produced…Mr. Holt read from the diary what Booth had written about having written a letter to me for publication in the National Intelligencer.”[19] The exact language Holt used in posing his question to Coyle supports the idea that the Judge Advocate General was reading from Booth’s diary.

Hezekiah Metz, a farmer in Montgomery County, Maryland, testified about George Atzerodt joining his family for lunch on April 16, 1865. Atzerodt was known as Andrew Atwood to most of the residents of Montgomery County and he was invited to share Easter lunch with Metzes and some of his neighbors. Metz testified that during the meal the discussion at the table was regarding the assassination of Lincoln and that many questions were directed towards Atzerodt as he had just come from Washington. The rumor had come up that General Grant had been assassinated while on his train to New Jersey and when asked about it, Atzerodt said he had not heard that to be the case. However, according to Metz, Atzerodt claimed that if the man who was supposed to have followed Grant had done so, then it was possible the rumor was true.[20] William Doster, Atzerodt’s defense attorney, pressed Metz to try and recall the exact nature of Atzerodt’s words, believing the phrasing to have been more innocent. Later in the trial when the defense proceeded with their witnesses, Doster would call two men who had attended the meal and heard Atzerodt’s words differently.

John Fletcher, the liveryman, returned to the courtroom and took the stand once again. He had visited the government stables as ordered and had examined the horses in the government’s possession. He identified that one of the horses in the government’s possession was the same one that George Atzerodt had told him had been sold. This was the horse that was blind in the right eye and was used by Lewis Powell on the night of the assassination.[21]

Zachariah W. Gemmill, a sergeant with the 1st Delaware Cavalry, testified regarding his arrest of George Atzerodt on the morning of April 20th. Knowledge of Atzerodt’s attendance at Hezekiah Metz’ Easter lunch on April 16th had slowly made its way to the authorities and Gemmill was tasked with going to the home of George’s cousin, Hartman Richter, in order to locate and arrest the conspirator. Gemmill testified that when he arrived at the Richter home, Hartman denied his cousin was there and it wasn’t until Gemmill told him that the house would be searched that Richter admitted his cousin was asleep in an upstairs bedroom. Gemmill claimed that Atzerodt at first gave him a fake name, leading him to take George to the home of a neighbor who positively identified him. According to Gemmill, during the time he was conveying Atzerodt around Montgomery County and then to Washington, George never inquired as to the reason he was being held.[22] Gemmill’s testimony is largely in line with his original reports except for the fact that George did not give him a fake name. Gemmill was under the mistaken impression that George’s last name was Lockwood. When woken up, George gave his true name as Atzerodt leading Gemmill to believe he had been given a fake name. When Gemmill took George to the neighbor’s house to be identified, George again stated his name was Atzerodt. However, in Montgomery County, most of the residents knew him as Atwood, adding to the confusion.[23]

Thomas Llewellyn Gardiner, a farmer in Charles County, testified that he was residing with his uncle, George Gardiner, in 1864 when John Wilkes Booth visited his uncle’s farm in the company of Dr. Mudd. The Gardiners and the Mudds were next door neighbors occupying adjacent farms. While at the Gardiner farm, John Wilkes Booth surveyed three horses George Gardiner had for sale, purchasing a dark bay horse that was blind in one eye. Thomas Gardiner was responsible for taking the horse to a stables in Bryantown the next day. Prior to his testimony, Gardiner had identified the same horse in the government’s custody.[24] This same horse was the one conspirator Lewis Powell used on the night of Lincoln’s assassination. The government used Gardiner’s testimony to show that Dr. Mudd had known John Wilkes Booth prior to the assassination and had helped him in acquiring a horse later used in the plot.

John J. Toffey, a lieutenant with the Veteran Reserve Corps, testified that on the night of Lincoln’s murder he was near Lincoln Hospital when a horse without a rider galloped up and was stopped by a sentry. The horse was dripping with sweat and possessed a saddle and bridle despite no rider being on its back. Toffey, who had actually been at Ford’s Theatre and had witnessed Lincoln’s assassination, thought the horse might have something to do with the murder and took possession of it later turning the animal over to General Augur’s headquarters. It was while Toffey was at General Augur’s that it was pointed out to him that the horse was blind in one eye. During Toffey’s testimony he was asked to look at Exhibit 39, the saddle identified by John Fletcher, and Toffey stated it was the same saddle the horse he found was equipped with.[25] This horse was the same one sold to John Wilkes Booth by Dr. Mudd’s neighbor, George Gardiner, and was the one used by Lewis Powell on the night of the assassination. It is believed that, during his flight, Lewis Powell was thrown from the horse and the animal galloped away.[26]

At the conclusion of Lt. Toffey’s testimony, the commission adjourned at 5:30 p.m.[27] While the rest of the conspirators were taken back to their cells, David Herold was permitted to stay in the court room in order to consult with his attorney, Frederick Stone. At 6:15 p.m., David Herold was returned to his cell.[28]


From General Kautz’ diary:

“We did not hold so long a session today and adjourned about half past five. The weather was quite warm.”[29]

John F. Coyle, the editor of the National Intelligencer newspaper who testified on this day, later wrote that he had not been summoned as a witness and that his attendance at the trial on this day was purely by chance. In an article he wrote in 1898, Coyle stated that, “led by curiosity, I rode down to the arsenal, where the trial was held, in company with Mr. Randolph Coyle. I had not taken my seat when the judge advocate called Mr. Coyle to take the witness stand. Presuming it was my friend who was called, as he had, as city surveyor, made diagrams of the theater for the use of the commission, I kept my seat, when I was called by my full name, and took the stand.”[30]

Newspaper Descriptions

“The prominent personage of the court is Judge Holt, who thus far, has managed the trial according to his liking. He puts principal interrogatories, orders the witnesses, and seems to be working very hard at the case.”[31]

Mrs. Surratt

“Mrs. Surratt, who was sitting in the corner at the end of the prisoners’ dock and next to Herold, had her veil over her face, was leaning her head against the wall, and fanning herself with her handkerchief. Occasionally she would rest her head on the railing in front of her, and remain in that position for some time.”[32]

“Mrs. Surratt, with the exception of a period spent in conversation with her counsel, Mr. Aiken, rests her head in her hands, with eyes closed, and seems to suffer from the heat, fanning herself with a newspaper.”[33]

“Mrs. Surratt rests her head on her hands as she did yesterday.”[34]

“Mrs. Surratt was quite melancholy all day, averting her face or holding her head down most of the time, and paying no attention whatever to the proceedings.”[35]

Lewis Powell

“Payne sat as yesterday, with his head thrown back against the wall and gazing at the reader.”[36]

“Payne sat erect, with that same stolid, half-stupid air that has characterized him during the trial.”[37]

“Payne, who is generally described as a ferocious looking person, has rather a stolid bestial looking countenance than one of malevolence; he has great strength, is brawny muscular and brutal, but he seems incapable of appreciating any motives of revenge or ambition. Nor does he seem to be a very apt hireling cut-throat. He seems to pay but little attention to what goes on at the trial, manifests no emotion, intelligent shrinking, culpable or otherwise.”[38]

David Herold

“Herold was conversing with his counsel, Mr. Stone, for some time during the reading of the proceedings of yesterday.”[39]

“Harrold was quite depressed also, holding down his head, and looking out through his eyebrows.”[40]

“Herold, also, during the testimony of the young man Jett, and that of Corbett, seemed to have shaken off his indifferent demeanor, and displayed an earnestness of attention for which his character, as hitherto described, little prepared us.”[41]

“Herold is a boyish-looking young fellow, far from handsome, and incapable of great mischief. He was, doubtless a kind of humble satellite to Booth, as every star draws around him a kind of plebeian lot of followers.”[42]

George Atzerodt

“Atzerodt sat gazing about the room, with his hands resting on his knees.”[43]

“Abzerott is the meanest face of the lot. He looks as few of his half German descent do, capable of a crawling, damnable infamy. He has no passion to gratify, and it is not unnatural that his courage failed him. Abzerott’s complicity in the plot is beyond all possibility of doubt.”[44]

Dr. Mudd

“Mudd sat with his hands resting on his knees, and gazing about the room.”[45]

“Dr. Mudd paid strict attention to the evidence relating to him.”[46]

“The testimony received after the reading of the record most nearly concerned Dr. Mudd, who seemed unusually alive to its vital importance. He frequently conferred with his able counsel, Mr. Ewing, of Ohio, and there was in his demeanor an eager attention, a watchfulness of the varying testimony, which differed much from his usual seeming indifference to the proceedings of the court.”[47]

“Mudd wears a white handkerchief loosely about his neck, as if to protect his throat from any possible draught. The other prisoners either think their throats hardly worth saving, or in instinctive dread of any suggestion of pressure thereon go collarless and cravatless.”[48]

Samuel Arnold

“Sam Arnold seems quite indifferent now as there has been so little evidence against him.”[49]

“Arnold sat in the corner and seemed very restless. The greater portion of the time he was gazing through the open window at the end of the prisoners’ dock.”[50]

“Arnold, as usual, heads the line as they enter the room and file along the long, narrow walk of their dock. Thus he occupies the desirable seat at the end of the bench near the open (but grated) window. The fact that the evidence thus far has borne on him less heavily than on most of his fellows seems to give him confidence, and he occupies much of his time gazing out the window or in stubbling a newly turned out mustache with his left hand.”[51]

Michael O’Laughlen

“O’Laughlin sat erect, with his head thrown back against the wall and gazing on the reporter who was reading.”[52]

“O’Laughlin, dressed in deep black, cushions his manacled hands upon a silk handkerchief, placed upon his knee. His name was involved in much of the evidence yesterday, it will be remembered.”[53]

“O’Laughlin seems to be more of a southerner in appearance; his expression is dark and vindictive; he stands abundantly convicted of a general knowledge of the plot, and complicity in its details.”[54]

Edman Spangler

“Spangler sat with his eyes fixed on the floor, the same as yesterday.”[55]


“The court room, which was almost wholly divided between the officers and the press, to-day contained about twenty civilians. Every facility is afforded to the newspapers. No person is admitted without the written permit of General Hunter, and as the dimensions of the room are limited, it follows that the public must have a small representation.”[56]

“Quite a large number of spectators were present, including several ladies.”[57]

“Among the spectators present this morning were Senators [Solomon] Foote and [Benjamin] Wade, Maj. Gen. [Winfield Scott] Hancock, Judge [Timothy O] Howe, and Col. [Timothy] Ingraham.”[58]

“This morning Hon. Solomon Foote, of Vermont, and Judge [John S] Watts, of New Mexico, Hon. Ben Wade, of Ohio, Colonel [Absalom H] Markland of the Post Office Department, were among those present.”[59]

“[D.C. Water Registrar and civil engineer] Mr. Randolph Coyle[60]

Previous Session        Trial Home       Next Session

[1] John F. Hartranft, The Lincoln Assassination Conspirators: Their Confinement and Execution, as Recorded in the Letterbook of John Frederick Hartranft, ed. Edward Steers, Jr. and Harold Holzer (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 2009), 98.
[2] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[3] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[4] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[5] William C. Edwards, ed., The Lincoln Assassination – The Court Transcripts (Self-published: Google Books, 2012), 237.
[6] Edwards, Court Transcripts, 237 – 242.
[7] William C. Edwards, ed., The Lincoln Assassination: The Reward Files (Self-published: Google Books, 2012), 332.
[8] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[9] Edwards, Court Transcripts, 242 – 245.
[10] Ibid., 245 – 247.
[11] Ibid., 247 – 250.
[12] Ibid., 250 – 257.
[13] Ibid., 257 – 260.
[14] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[15] Daily Constitutional Union (Washington, D.C.), May 18, 1865, 1.
[16] Edwards, Court Transcripts, 260 – 270.
[17] Ibid., 270 – 278.
[18] Ibid., 278.
[19] John F. Coyle, “New Story of Wilkes Booth,” Kansas City Times (Kansas City, MO), May 6, 1898, 11.
[20] Edwards, Court Transcripts, 278 – 281.
[21] Ibid., 269 – 270.
[22] Ibid., 281 – 284.
[23] William C. Edwards and Edward Steers, Jr., ed, The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2009), 589 – 590.
[24] Edwards, Court Transcripts, 284 – 287.
[25] Ibid., 287 – 289.
[26] Betty Ownsbey, Alias “Paine”: Lewis Thornton Powell, the Mystery Man of the Lincoln Conspiracy, Second Edition (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co., 2015), 71.
[27] Hartranft, Letterbook, 98.
[28] Ibid., 99.
[29] August V. Kautz, May 17, 1865 diary entry (Unpublished diary: Library of Congress, August V. Kautz Papers).
[30] John F. Coyle, “New Story of Wilkes Booth,” Kansas City Times (Kansas City, MO), May 6, 1898, 11.
[31] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[32] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[33] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[34] Daily Constitutional Union (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2
[35] New-York Tribune (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[36] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[37] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[38] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[39] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[40] New-York Tribune (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[41] Daily Morning Chronicle (Washington, D.C.) May 18, 1865, 1.
[42] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[43] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[44] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[45] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[46] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[47] Daily Morning Chronicle (Washington, D.C.) May 18, 1865, 1.
[48] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[49] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[50] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[51] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[52] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[53] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[54] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[55] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[56] The World (New York, NY), May 18, 1865, 1.
[57] Boston Daily Advertiser (Boston, MA), May 18, 1865, 1.
[58] Daily National Republican (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[59] Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), May 17, 1865, 2.
[60] John F. Coyle, “New Story of Wilkes Booth,” Kansas City Times (Kansas City, MO), May 6, 1898, 11.
The drawing of the conspirators as they were seated on the prisoners’ dock on this day was created by artist and historian Jackie Roche.

1 Comment

One thought on “May 17, 1865

  1. Pingback: The Trial Today: May 17 | BoothieBarn

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: