DBWI: John Wilkes Booth succeeds?

Well first thing that comes to mind for me, is Lincoln's legacy. If he had been killed by Booth, he never would have had to face Impeachment [1]. Now, even though he was not removed from office, his legacy was tarnished. However, most historians agree that apart from Lincoln's suspending Civil liberties, Lincoln was a fantastic leader. With an assassination, he would acheive Matyrdom. He may even be seen as the best President in US History.


(([1]: Abraham Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, arrested thousands of Confederate Sympathizers without trial and spend Federal Money without Congress' Aproval. My high school, AP History book states that had Lincoln not received Martyrdom, he would most likely have been impeached by a Post-War Congress))

The US Constitution flat out states you can suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus during times of rebelion so there goes that charge. Also considering who was in congress at the time the charge would never go through. Most of them approved of it or thought Lincoln was not harsh enough. He could be impeached over that. Some sort of fight over his over generous terms though even that is doubtful.
 
Of course, I would call that evidence that Johnson was a target, and that Booth wanted the POTUS, the VP, and the SoS all dead so he could wreck havoc on the government.


Though it's curious that as far as we know they made no attempt to kill the President of the Senate, who would succeed in the event of a double vacancy. Or were they simply unaware that one had been chosen on March 7 (Senator Lafayette S Foster of Connecticut) in a special session of the Senate?
 
Though it's curious that as far as we know they made no attempt to kill the President of the Senate, who would succeed in the event of a double vacancy. Or were they simply unaware that one had been chosen on March 7 (Senator Lafayette S Foster of Connecticut) in a special session of the Senate?

Wow -- I did not know that! [1] But somehow, it makes sense. Now I'm wondering why that is...

[comes back later]

Wait a minute -- I think I remember something else -- some really obscure trivia book on presidential assassination attempts, I think -- and one of the weird things investigators (supposedly) learned was that the movement of the attempted killings began on a whim, when Booth heard from a friend earlier that day that the President was going to be at the theater.

And when I think about this, my first thought is "Man, these guys were real amateurs"; my second thought, "But they came so close, this was real different back then, when such powerful figures were so poorly protected"...

Am I confused here? Does anybody know what I'm talking about?

OOC: [1] No, really.
 
I think with the assassination of the President, once the North won, Reconstruction would be much harsher in ATL then OTL.

Think about how Americans were affected by the murder of JFK.

The Northernors would want blood and they'd make the South pay.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the major figures in the Confederate government and military wound up being hanged or imprisoned for life and anyone who fought for the Confederacy would probably never be allowed to vote again.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if most of the major figures in the Confederate government and military wound up being hanged or imprisoned for life and anyone who fought for the Confederacy would probably never be allowed to vote again.

Now that'd be interesting -- black majority governments across the former confederacy; in effect, the whole of the south would end up like South Carolina or more so, especially if they don't stop these punitive measures with the officers.

It would also make for a lot of anger -- in OTL, President Lincoln managed to put the south and the country at large on the path to universal male suffrage by 1870, taking a forgiving stance toward former confederates and starting with limited expansion of the franchise among african american soldiers.

If instead the north decided to punish the former confederacy with disenfranchisement, you'd stir up a lot of resentment and likely violent resistance -- or maybe even rebellion all over again :eek:
 
Wow -- I did not know that! [1] But somehow, it makes sense. Now I'm wondering why that is...

[comes back later]

Wait a minute -- I think I remember something else -- some really obscure trivia book on presidential assassination attempts, I think -- and one of the weird things investigators (supposedly) learned was that the movement of the attempted killings began on a whim, when Booth heard from a friend earlier that day that the President was going to be at the theater.

And when I think about this, my first thought is "Man, these guys were real amateurs"; my second thought, "But they came so close, this was real different back then, when such powerful figures were so poorly protected"...

Am I confused here? Does anybody know what I'm talking about?

OOC: [1] No, really.


Booth's "diary" seems to confirm that the assassination was a last minute decision. The conspirators were part of a long-running plot to kidnap Lincoln and exchange him for Confederate PoWs, but the decision to kill him seems to have been taken almost "on the day".

The attempt on Seward makes sense in the context of a plan to paralyse the government. Under the 1792 Presidential Succession Act (still the applicable law in 1865) it would be Seward's job to notify the State governments of the double vacancy, and set in motion a new election of President and Vice President. However, this need not have been done until October (to allow 60 days for the Electors to be chosen and then meet and vote) by which time he would almost certainly have either died or recovered, so that Acting President Foster would have had ample time to make a recess appointment of a new SoS, should that have become necessary.

My own guess is that Booth and Co had simply never read the Act (was any of them a lawyer?) and that, vaguely remembering that it mentioned the Secretary of State, asssumed that he would be Acting president in such a case. They may also have missed the announcement of a President of the Senate being chosen, and supposed that position to be vacant.


You are so right about the security, or lack of it. Iirc my Bruce Catton, it was not unknown for a casual passer by to just walk into the White House, buttonhole the President and engage "that harrassed official" in conversation for some time. Security as we know it barely existed.
 
You are so right about the security, or lack of it. Iirc my Bruce Catton, it was not unknown for a casual passer by to just walk into the White House, buttonhole the President and engage "that harrassed official" in conversation for some time. Security as we know it barely existed.

That makes me feel nostalgic, knowing there was a time when it was easier to just talk with elected officials, even those at the top :rolleyes:

I also appreciate your mentioning Bruce Catton -- just googled him, now I want to check him out :D [1]

OOC: [1] This is true :D
 
Though it's curious that as far as we know they made no attempt to kill the President of the Senate, who would succeed in the event of a double vacancy. Or were they simply unaware that one had been chosen on March 7 (Senator Lafayette S Foster of Connecticut) in a special session of the Senate?

Is it that surprising? Do you really think those bumbling idiots even thought of that? Not even one of their attacks succeeded. I am surprised those clowns got even as far as they did!
 
Is it that surprising? Do you really think those bumbling idiots even thought of that? Not even one of their attacks succeeded. I am surprised those clowns got even as far as they did!

It seems it was a scary time, when people this incompetent could come so close to doing so much damage.
 
It seems it was a scary time, when people this incompetent could come so close to doing so much damage.


Sometimes the only kind that can.

Sensible, professional types, getting the news of Appomattox, would have just accepted that it was all over, and slipped off home after burning any papers that might incriminate them. Only a bunch of total amateurs would have done what Booth and his "confederates" did.
 
Sensible, professional types, getting the news of Appomattox, would have just accepted that it was all over, and slipped off home after burning any papers that might incriminate them. Only a bunch of total amateurs would have done what Booth and his "confederates" did.

That's a very good point, actually -- it would go a long way toward explaining why, when his policies were so controversial and passion inducing at the time, there was only one other attempt made on his life, and why it also failed. (Though, IIANM, the KKK agents who tried that actually put some decent planning into it)
 
Indeed. If it was bad enought to endure Oliver Stone's "JFK", just imagine if Stone decided to do "Lincolnian" version of the "conspiracy". :D

What, portraying the would-be murderers as caricature feminine southerners with connections to a nefarious intelligence organization? Wouldn't that make the film pretty accurate? :D
 
Indeed. If it was bad enought to endure Oliver Stone's "JFK", just imagine if Stone decided to do "Lincolnian" version of the "conspiracy". :D

OOC: The chances of either JFK or or Oliver Stone being around in this universe is close to zero. Way too much has changed.
 
Top