SMF - Just Installed!
Username  
Password
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: Today at 10:22:32 AM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Rob Wick
My whole problem with this line of thought is that there is no documented proof. It all boils down to opinion. If someone came up with a diary entry, letter or some type of documentation that showed the pursuer's point of view before the chase (limited to the Garrett Farm Patrol), then I would concede that the point is possible. In my own instance, I took known fact (Conger couldn't walk very quickly and in battle had to ride; he was declared unfit for military service; he had to rest on the way to Garret's Farm; he spent much of his entire life battling addictions to morphine and alcohol because he was always in pain; he had to sleep sitting in a chair because he couldn't stretch out in bed; his political enemies used his wounds as fodder to remove him from the Montana Supreme Court) and applied that to what happened that night. They were constantly threatening Booth and yet nothing ever happened. Finally, Conger took it upon himself to set the barn on fire. There had to be a reason. To me the only one that makes sense is his body was hurting intensely. I also agree with Dan that he was growing tired of Booth's demands. Would it stand up in a court of law? I don't know. But it would have a far better chance than stating that pure greed drove their actions.

With that, the plaintiff rests.

Best
Rob

 2 
 on: Today at 09:08:29 AM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Randal
We can always agree to disagree Rob. No biggie, this is a hobby for me (LAS). My talent is wrangling dangerous animals.  Wink I always respect your opinions and I think you know that.
Now, everyone, BUY THIS BOOK!

 3 
 on: Today at 06:55:47 AM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Randal
Point taken. Greed changes peoples behavior though. That generous offer of Big Bucks had people coming out of the wood works to claim their share. How many people were denied the rewards? Hundred's probably.

Ed Steer's wrote: "The claims for the reward money was so great that a committee of two was established to hear all the claims and recommend how and to whom the money should be distributed."

 4 
 on: August 26, 2014, 08:03:57 PM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Rob Wick
Well, given that it's categorically impossible to prove a negative, I can't. I can't even prove that Conger's war wounds caused him to set the barn on fire with ABSOLUTE certainty. However, based on the 20 or so years I've studied Conger, I think I know him pretty well and I think given the uncertainty about whether distribution of the rewards would even take place (a point Ed Steers agrees with me on, by the way), anyone who would have started out with the notion they would soon line their pockets would be on a fool's errand.

Besides, as I said in the article I published in the Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association, to say that men who just a month before were willing to die for Lincoln would be on the trail of his killers just to line their pockets seems pretty insulting to their memory.

Sorry, but that's my opinion, and it won't change.

Best
Rob

 5 
 on: August 26, 2014, 07:55:45 PM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Randal
Good point, Dan.
Now Mr. Wick, ahem.. Prove that the rewards were NOT an incentive to go above and beyond their normal charges. (duties).

 6 
 on: August 26, 2014, 07:36:17 PM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Dan
Here is my take and I have nothing to support it other than human nature.  They have this Rat cornered who has caused a great deal of the nation pain with his cowardice act. They have been tracking, him, sleep deprived, hungry, adrenaline pumping, and very angry, and now he refuses to surrender, and tries to dictate the terms of how it is going to end? In my opinion, I don’t think it was greed that initiated the torching of the barn just an attempt to bring this to a conclusion.

 7 
 on: August 26, 2014, 06:39:53 PM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Rob Wick
If you're talking about the rewards being an incentive for Conger, Baker et al before they went into the field, then you're absolutely wrong. They were ordered by Lafayette Baker, who was ordered by Edwin Stanton, to find the assassin of the president. Unless you can prove from a letter or diary entry or some other primary source that they would have stayed in Washington if a reward hadn't been issued, I'm not sure exactly what else you're trying to prove. As for your "proof" I'm sorry, but all they mentioned in their work (none of which in Mogelever's case was even footnoted, and Swanson....it just as well hadn't been) shows no evidentiary proof either.

Thanks for the concern on my health, but I'm feeling just fine.

Best
Rob

 8 
 on: August 26, 2014, 06:29:24 PM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Randal
You totally missed the point. Booth wasn't dead at the time the Rewards were issued. Your point was the Rewards had nothing to with the incentive of capturing Booth, when I said it was an incentive. You asked for proof and I delivered. I said I'm also looking at other sources, some you might agree with. Greed started when Adam and Eve left Eden. Reward claims were rejected on other people that were not connected with the Gubmint, (detectives/soldiers, etc., because that was their duty to assist) because they became greedy when the Reward for capture was announced. Are you feeling ok? I'm getting worried.

 9 
 on: August 26, 2014, 05:43:51 PM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Rob Wick
Why would money have been an issue at that point? Booth was dead, Herold captured, and it was time to bring the body back so Stanton would know what happened. Others could have claimed it (and did) but their claims were ignored.

Using Roscoe, Swanson and Mogelever as sources?  Cry

Best
Rob

 10 
 on: August 26, 2014, 11:49:47 AM 
Started by Randal - Last post by Randal
Question: If money was not at issue, why were Baker & Conger so anxious to finish business at Garrett's, clear the area and get back to DC with their reports and with the Body?
 
Answer: Because, there were at least 9 other groups looking for Booth who were bearing down on them and if they arrived on the scene while Baker & Conger, et al were there, they could claim a share of the reward which would mean reduced claims for the Bakers, Conger, Dougherty & the 16th NY.
 
References where the Reward Money became a catalyst for the search of Booth.

Roscoe, Theodore, “The Web of Conspiracy”. Pg. 188, 333-334, 368, and 402
Swanson, James, ”Manhunt” Pg. 221
Jacob Mogelever, “Death to Traitors” (The Story of General Lafayette C. Baker, Lincoln's Forgotten Secret Service Chief)   pg.351
And I’m working on more sources, just juggling this and work at my facility.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10