The Otto Eisenschiml Theory
The Otto Eisenschiml Theory
Otto
Eisenschiml was an Austrian born chemist that immigrated to the US in 1903,
where he began his quest in solving the Lincoln Assassination. Otto was the
type of man that was fascinated with history, especially with American history.
Otto questioned the relevant facts about the Lincoln assassination, and for
that he dug deeper looking for more answers. In his book, “Why was Lincoln Murdered?”, he suggests an alternative theory to
why Lincoln was killed. So why the speculation of bigger hoax? Otto suggests
that the main player in the Lincoln assassination was Edwin Stanton, the
Secretary of War.

Another
claim that Otto, was concerned with was the Ulysses S. Grant was also in on the
plot to kill Lincoln. President Lincoln invited Grant to the theater the night
he was killed, as a chance to speak with him about the ending of the Civil War
and to see the new ideas of the Union. Ulysses, cancelled the plans the day of,
since his wife was ill, and wrote Lincoln that he could not be in attendance
with him. Now is this solely by chance his wife was sick or was this a planned
day not to go? This is what Otto wanted to further investigate. Grant may have
been in on the plot and knew what was happening, but how could a noble man go
against the man that gave him his fame and glory? Through all the acquisitions
that were made, Otto still believes that Grant had involvement in the plot to
kill Lincoln.
So the
real question is do you believe in a theory that was written 66 years later
after the death of Lincoln? Or do you believe the primary documents that were
accounted for during the time period? I will leave this up for discussion.
Feel free to Comment below your response!
-Tim Mitchell
Sources: https://www.fords.org/blog/post/misinformation-and-conspiracy-theories-about-the-lincoln-assassination/
, http://spartacus-educational.com/USAeisenschiml.htm
, https://archive.org/details/whywaslincolnmur00eise
I think you can make a theory out of anything if you dig deep enough into it. I am not saying his theory is not a possibility but how much time do you think he spent looking for any detail during this night that could have made for a different motive or story to tell? It is hard to take his theory as sound when there are people that were present that did not publicly speak out about some sort of possible "foul play." This is hard to distinguish as this chemist is a fan of Lincoln and in loosing him he likely lost an idol of his. I think if that were to happen to anyone, the explanation they are provided with is not enough closure for them. He probably found his closure in questioning the actions that led to the death of Lincoln and the repercussions following.
ReplyDelete