The Lincoln Lectures - The Assassin's Accomplice: Mary Surratt and the Plot to Kill Abraham Lincoln

Kate Clifford Larson tells the story of Mary Surratt, a little-known participant in the plot to kill Abraham Lincoln, and the first woman ever to be executed by the Federal Government. The Assassins Accomplice describes the Lincoln conspiracy through the eyes of its only female participant using interviews, confessions, and court testimony.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• national archives
• NARA
• washington dc
• abraham lincoln
• assassination
• john wilkes booth
• frederick douglass
• mary surratt
• kate clifford larson
• john surratt
• emanciptation
• civil war
• lecture
• fords theater

[Ebeneezerable]

I guess the borders, who were also in the house, must have known what was going on too if Mary S. just being in the house did.

[kcdkplays]

oops... it was Hinkley... not Fromme...

[kcdkplays]

sorry about the double postings!- for some reason Youtube is taking along time to accept postings, or internet service is breaking down..

[kcdkplays]

was supposedly mainly Southern sympathizers - I agree with you on Reverdy Johnson having a point, and he was passionate about it. All I am saying is I understand why they proceeded with it the way they did . The Supreme court ruling you refer to about Lambdin Miligan wasn't made until 1866- way after the Lincoln conspirators trial- ( in case you folks are wondering, Milligan was planning to lead armed revolts at Union prison camps and free the rebel prisoners

[kcdkplays]

was supposedly mainly Southern sympathizers - I agree with you on Reverdy Johnson having a point, and he was passionate about it. All I am saying is I understand why they proceeded with it the way they did . The Supreme court ruling you refer to about Lambdin Miligan wasn't made until 1866- way after the Lincoln conspiritors trial- as a matter of fact Millligan and his cronies were tried by a military tribunal and sentenced to hang ( for you folks wondering what this about...

[kcdkplays]

with Lincoln) Mrs Grant described his face and stare as "chilling" when he approached their carriage on his horse and peered inside. I understand what you are saying about you only try an actual soldier- combatant in a military tribunal, not a civilian, but those are the actions of a soldier- enemy-combatant- or at least that's what they obviously determined- John Surratt got lucky by being in Canada during the murder- his aquittal in his civilian trial was a travesty- the jury ...

[kcdkplays]

@matrixrenegade1971 so If an American citizen decides to murder our Commander in Chief, President Obama, in the name of Al Qaeda , he should be tried in a civilian court.? Aiding and abetting is one thing, murdering the Commander in Chief and the planned attempted murders of the Vice-President, Secretary of State, and even the Commanding General of the US Army Grant ( Booth was incredibly angry when he saw Grant and his wife leaving town that day-he had hoped he would be in the box at Fords

[jmatrixrenegade1971]

@kcdkplays The fact they wanted to help the Confederacy doesn't make it "of military nature" for the purposes of making them liable for a military tribunal. A military tribunal would be to try solidiers or perhaps where the army is in occupation and not civilian courts were operating. The use they used it for was controversial. Reverdy Johnson had a point.

[jmatrixrenegade1971]

@kcdkplays The US Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan held that a civilian who was accused of aiding and abetting the Confederacy must be tried in civilian court if the courts were operating. Surratt's son benefited from the ruling when he returned from home. I read her book.  Military tribunals are for actual military, not civilians, even those who help the military cause in some fashion, especially if they aren't working in concert.

[kcdkplays]

@jmatrixrenegade1971 intention of proving Mary Surratt was innocent, but once she read ALL the police interrogations, trial transcripts, and studied the evidence fully, she thought she was guilty. I know your point is not whether she was guilty or not, but whether she should have been tried as a civilian and not in a military tribunal, and as I said, they obviously thought back then that Booth, Surratt, & all the other conspirators actions were of a military nature- they were right

nature