"Our One Common Country" author talk in Stratford, CT

[Eva Elisabeth]

Thank you for posting this link, David!!! I've never seen the entire letter!

[Eva Elisabeth]

(08-29-2014 04:35 PM)LincolnToddFan Wrote:  Judge David Davis thought she was nuts and a natural born thief.
It's never ceases to amaze me. Baffling.

So, what do you think of D. David's character then? He gossiped about her and her finances while being administrator of the latter, and she had to learn from the newspapers instead from Davis himself (or Robert) that Robert had received almost twice of what she had from the inheritance. Is such noble?

[LincolnToddFan]

He was a second father to RTL, but to MTL he was cruel and insensitive. I think Lincoln would have been appalled at the treatment of his widow by this man he called a friend.

[RJNorton]

(08-29-2014 06:07 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Thank you for posting this link, David!!! I've never seen the entire letter!

David, I second Eva. Many thanks for posting more of the letter.

[Eva Elisabeth]

J. Swisshelm was a contemporary, and personally knew and met Mary. It's unlikely Mrs. Florence W. Stanley ever did.

[LincolnToddFan]

BTW Eva., where did you read that Robert received more $$ than Mary? I've always read that since Lincoln died without a will, his estate (roughly $90,000 at the time of his death) was split three ways. With Davis as Administrator it actually grew to $110,000 by the time it was settled, and it was divided equally between Lincoln's three heirs.

When Tad died at 18, Mary inherited Tad's share. But she actually turned it over to Robert because he had a family by then and she felt he needed it more than she did. Very generous of her.

[Eva Elisabeth]

Hi Toia, just to clarify: this was during the 31 months of David's administration till Nov. 1867. One source is Jean Baker's bio, p. 279 paperback ed. (second-to-last page in "Mrs. Widow Lincoln"). Also on p. 323 ("Trial an Confinement") is written: "she had already given this son of hers more than $10,000 in real estate, $6,000 in bonds from her share of Tad's inheritance, $5,000 in cash...for his law library, as well as furniture and jewelry - in all nearly $25,000. Despite that he continually asked for interest-free loans."
The most details, listings, and accounts (letters etc., mostly from the insanity files) I've seen on all her finances, who received what, and the way David and Robert handled all this, and the insanity episode are in Samuel Schreiners "The Trials of Mrs. Lincoln" (I haven't read "Mary Lincoln's Insanity Case" though, but "The Madness of Mary Lincoln"). Did you read Schreiner's book? I'm sure you will LOVE it!!!

[RJNorton]

Regarding the topic of estates, many books report that Mary Lincoln, like Abraham, died intestate. That is really not the case. She had a will, but it was not brought forth at the time of her death.

[L Verge]

The rights of widows in the 1860s may have been determined by individual state laws; but from what we know, when Mr. Surratt died in 1862, he had no will. Mary Surratt could not inherit what was left of his estate, however. The three children inherited what was basically the land and the two houses.

As the kidnap plot unfolded and John left his employment with Adams Express Co., he signed his rights to the inheritance over to his mother - knowing that if he were found to be a "traitor," his property would be confiscated.

Could such a situation have existed when Mr. Lincoln died intestate? Do we know that Mary automatically inherited a portion? I assume the estate was settled in Illinois?

[RJNorton]

I have read that during the 31 months of his administration, David Davis sent Mary only $130 a month from the estate. In November, 1867, the principal of the estate was divided in thirds among the heirs....Mary and sons Tad and Robert. Mary inherited roughly $36,000 when the estate's assets of approximately $108,000 were distributed.

Yes, it was settled in Illinois (Sangamon County). David took an oath as administrator on June 14, 1865.

When Mary died in 1882 her estate consisted of $72,000 in bonds, $555 in currency, $5,000 in personal effects, and $6,480 in bond interest.

[Eva Elisabeth]

Just in case someone is interested in, here are:

1. The cordial letter she wrote to Davis in 1871 instructing him to share all bonds half/half with Robert instead of 2/3 : 1/3
2. The article in the Springfield Journal from which she learned Robert had so far received more than she from Davis, and
3. A detailed inventory of A. L.'s estate filed by Davis (respectively a clerk) on Nov.29, 1866.

Sorry I only took photos instead of typing all this...

1.        

2.    

3.        

[RJNorton]

I decided to contact Jason Emerson to see if he knew anything about Mrs. Florence W. Stanley. Within minutes of writing him Laurie dropped me a note saying she had just written him, too.

Jason kindly replied as follows:

"The name does not ring a bell. I recall off the top of my head only one newspaper article in which it said Robert favored the EP and Mary opposed it....

I just looked through my research files and found the article, by Florence W. Stanley, Needham, MA, to the Christian Science Monitor, Sept 22, 1937, page 2, which states that, according to RTL said his mother opposed it.

The index for the RTL letterpress books has no Florence Stanley listed in there, and I cannot recall the name in any particular relation to RTL. Unfortunately, my thousands of pages of research are not indexed by name, so I cannot search for her.

Sorry, I'm sure that does not help..."

[David Lockmiller]

Lincoln scholar, Professor Allen C. Guelzo, wrote in his book, “Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America,” Simon & Schuster, Copyright 2004, 2005 (paperback edition), pages 204 -05:

Professor Michael Burlingame published his material containing the very same Mary Lincoln quote in 2008, in “Abraham Lincoln: A Life,” Vol. Two, pages 468-69. This was four years after Professor Guelzo’s book was first published in 2004.

I do not have access to the footnote source reference used by Professor Guelzo since I used Google books and the footnote material was not available to me.
[/quote]

Last week, I went to the San Francisco Public Library and did a microfiche search for The Christian Science Monitor article. It turns out the Professor Guelzo had the wrong date source for the story (September 27, 1937) and Professor Burlingame had the correct date (February 12, 1935). [It just goes to show that not everybody is perfect.]

[The above is from a previous posting that I had made]

Well, I have some good news for all of the "dislikers" of Professor Michael Burlingame on this website.

I wanted to find out the truth regarding the alleged Robert Lincoln statement that his mother, Mary Todd Lincoln, was against President Lincoln signing the Emancipation Proclamation. I was able to find an email address for Professor Guelzo by means of a Google search. So, I sent him an email:

Dear Professor Allen Guelzo:

On page 181 of your book, "Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation," you make reference to a conversation between Mary Lincoln and President Lincoln that took place early on the morning of New Year’s Day of 1863, the day that President Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. The text indicates that Mary Lincoln “was very much opposed to the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation.” This information came indirectly from Robert Todd Lincoln.

I went to the San Francisco Public Library to check the footnote source of your information, which was listed in footnote 38 of chapter four as The Christian Science Monitor, September 22, 1937. The date apparently was a mistake; the correct date was February 12, 1935. Four years after you published your book, Professor Michael Burlingame made reference to this same Emancipation Proclamation signing incident (“Abraham Lincoln: A Life,” Vol. Two, pages 468-69) and his footnote indicated the correct date. I was able to locate the microfiche copy of the story which included the entire letter of Mrs. Florence W. Stanley.

My question to you is: How were you able to establish the credibility of Mrs. Stanley?

In response, Professor Guelzo sent me an email which began with a big surprise:

David:

My citation in Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was based on a note sent to me by Michael Burlingame; I gather that afterwards he corrected the attribution, but that was too late for me!

In other words, Professor Guelzo published the material that Professor Burlingame provided to him, but used the wrong source date for The Christian Science Monitor article that was provided by Professor Burlingame. I has assumed that Professor Guelzo had made the date mistake because he published first.

Unfortunately, Professor Geulzo was of no additional assistance as to the authenticity question regarding Mrs. Stanley. He did say a couple of other things that might be of interest:"I am sympathetic to a large degree with Prof. Burlingame's take on Mrs. Lincoln, although not perhaps to quite the degree he takes things." And, he did relate the John S. Bradford story (previously posted on this thread) that ended with Mary saying: "Well, one thing is certain; if Mr. Lincoln should happen to die, his spirit will never find me living outside the boundaries of a slave State."

[Eva Elisabeth]

Very cool, David, that you emailed Professor Guelzo, and what an amazing outcome! The same goes for the inquiry about Mrs. Florence W. Stanley, Roger and Laurie - thanks to all!

[David Lockmiller]

Last night, I was reading more from Professor Guelzo's book Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and came across a paragraph that may yield new information as to whether or not Mary Todd Lincoln was against President Lincoln signing the Emancipation Proclamation.

On pages 184-85 of Professor Guelzo's book, there is the following paragraph:

In Boston, the epicenter of abolitionism, two great meetings were organized at Music Hall and Tremont Temple, the first largely for whites and the second for Boston's black community. Tremont Temple hosted the elite of black abolitionism--Frederick Douglass, Charles Lenox Redmond, William Wells Brown, John S. Rock. Ascending the rostrum, Douglass thanked God that he was alive to see the end of slavery. . . . It was not until Douglass was finished, however, that the news of the Proclamation was rushed into the church, and it was not until another seven speakers had taken their turn at the rostrum that the full text of the Proclamation was hurried in to be read. "The joyous enthusiasm manifested was beyond description. Cheers were proposed for the President and for the proclamation, the whole audience rising to their feet and shouting at the tops of their voices, throwing up their hats and indicating the gratification in every conceivable manner." "It was a day & an occasion never to be forgotten," wrote Eliza Quincy to Mary Todd Lincoln. "I wish you & the President could have enjoyed it with us, here." (Footnote 45 reads: Eliza S. Quincy to Mary Todd Lincoln, January 2, 1863, Abraham Lincoln Papers, Library of Congress.)

Presumably, Mary Todd Lincoln would have responded by mail to Eliza Quincy within a month. Does anyone have access to a copy of such a letter written by Mary Todd Lincoln?