Did William Coggeshall Save Lincoln's Life?

[RJNorton]

I am 99% certain this story is spurious, but I am curious if anyone else has read about it.

William Coggeshall said he was on the inaugural train with Abraham Lincoln. In 1908 his wife, Mary, wrote the following:

"Near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the presidential party was to change railroad cars and the train would be switched off to proceed to Baltimore. Lincoln and Coggeshall were the last to go out to the other car. “As they neared the door, they heard a hissing sound and discovered a Hand Grenade just ready to explode. As Mr. Lincoln reached the door, Mr. Coggeshall grasped the shell and hurled it through the open window where it [had] been dropped into the car. As it struck beyond the tracks and exploded, no one was hurt. He sprang into the car where the president awaited him. They took a seat together and with a bound the car leaped forward. Neither spoke for some minutes. Then the President leaned forward and said ‘Did I not tell you I should go safely if you went with me.’”

Mary Coggeshall maintained that the whole incident was kept secret at Abraham Lincoln's request.

William Coggeshall died in 1867.

I have never read any corroboration of this event. As far as I can tell all we have is Mary Coggeshall's word that it happened as she indicated in writing. So she wants us to believe that she kept the secret for 47 years. No one else apparently saw what happened.

Has anyone ever read anything about this claim? Did any eyewitnesses report seeing Coggeshall throw a grenade out the train's window?

[ELCore]

From a quick perusal, I find no reference to William Coggeshall in Donald's biography or in White's, nor in the Fehrenbachers' Recollected Words. He is mentioned twice, though, in Burlingame's biography: he was secretary to the governor of Ohio and a confidante of Treasury secretary Salmon Chase. No mention of any hand grenades.

[L Verge]

I vaguely recall reading about the grenade incident in one of the two recent (within the past 5-6 years) books on the trip east and the Baltimore plot. Right now, my mind is drawing a blank as to either title or author.

Mind just recovered - the two books are The Baltimore Plot by Michael Kline and The Hour of Peril by Daniel Stashower. I also exercised my Google muscles and found this about CW hand grenades, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketchum_Grenade It appears that it was not very effective throughout the war and had to be thrown like a dart and land on its nose in order to detonate. Hopefully, this forum has some military weaponry scholars that can expand on their possible use as an assassination device.

[RJNorton]

(09-08-2016 03:14 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I vaguely recall reading about the grenade incident in one of the two recent (within the past 5-6 years) books on the trip east and the Baltimore plot. Right now, my mind is drawing a blank as to either title or author.

Laurie, I think what you are recalling happened in Cincinnati. Coggeshall was not even on the train yet at that point - he says he got on in Columbus. His "grenade account" happened at Harrisburg.

I think Michael J. Kline found evidence of the Cincinnati grenade and included it in his book.

[John Fazio]

Roger, et al.:

You have heard me say before that we should not reject tradition, nor denigrate evidence, too quickly or easily. Both usually have their genesis in historical truth. Did Judas betray Jesus? We may be nearly certain he did, because reference to the betrayal is contained in the very earliest Christian writings and is never contradicted or altered.

As for Coggeshall's saving of Lincoln, we need to place it in its proper context. The President-Elect was on his journey to Washington from Springfield. His life was in danger from the moment he was nominated and especially after he was elected. Most if not all the food sent to him in Springfield was found to be poisoned. Before the train passed from Illinois into Indiana a condition was found in the track which might have resulted in derailment. The train was thereafter preceded by a pilot engine. Near Cincinnati, a small time bomb concealed in a carpetbag was found in Lincoln's car. And then, of course, there was the infamous Baltimore Plot, foiled by Pinkerton and his agents (among them, one of my favorites--Kate Warne), Frederick Seward and General Winfield Scott's agents in Baltimore. All of this, of course, was merely an outward manifestation of an inward torrent of vilification of Lincoln in the press and in the corridors of power. And I haven't even said anything about the dozen or so later plots and attempts on his life, one of which was successful. Should we then be surprised that there was an attempt on his life in Harrisburg on his way to his Inauguration and that it took the form that it did? Hand grenade? Time bomb? Let's settle on "explosive device". How much difference does that detail make?

The provenance of the story--a letter written by Coggeshall's widow to a daughter, Prockie, on February 25, 1908, reprinted in part in Freda Postle Koch's book, Colonel Coggeshall--the Man Who Saved Lincoln (1985)--is as good as many other sources that pass without criticism. What motivation did the widow have to fabricate a story in 1908 about something that allegedly happened 47 years earlier? And to her own daughter no less. How did either of them benefit from it? How many really cared about something that happened 47 years earlier? How does Freda Postle Koch benefit by publicizing the letter, except to sell a handful of books.

Everything else in the story is verifiable--Coggeshall's position (the governor's secretary and State Librarian), Lincoln's passage through Columbus on his way to Washington, etc. I like, too, the fact that the widow recorded Lincoln's saying to Coggeshall, after the President-Elect addressed the Ohio Legislature and the people: "Come with me to Washington and I shall go safely", which fits nicely with Lincoln's remark to Coggeshall, after the near-miss in Harrisburg: "Did I not tell I should go safely if you went with me".

Bottom line: I accept the story as historical.

John

[Gene C]

John - "Most if not all the food sent to him in Springfield was found to be poisoned" ????

I don't recall reading that. What is the source for that, (as well as the bomb in the carpet bag near Cincinnati) or where can I read more?

As far as the Coggeshall story, I still have my doubts, since the story is from someone not there at the time, can not be corroborated, and is mentioned 40+ years after the fact. It's just as likely or very possible Mrs Coggeshall got her facts mixed up about the event. It would be interesting to read the letter she wrote about it.

The book you mentioned has made me curious. It doesn't seem to be a well known book, with only one review on Amazon. It doesn't help me that the one reviewer says "An enjoyable read & good introduction to history for for pre-teen readers
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0961692901/ref...g=UTF8&me=

Have you read this book, if so would you recommend it, and any idea how much of the book is about the attempt on Lincoln's life?

Thanks

[RJNorton]

(09-09-2016 10:44 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  Everything else in the story is verifiable

Koch's book says, "On Good Friday, April 14, 1865, President Lincoln summoned Colonel Coggeshall to the White House. Why, is unknown. After a private meeting, Coggeshall bade President and Mrs. Lincoln goodbye and left the White House to take the 6:45 B & O express back to Columbus while the Lincolns prepared to attend a stage play, "Our American Cousin," at Ford's Theatre."

This is based on what Coggeshall's wife wrote in 1908: "Mr. C was in the East until the evening of April 14 when he bade the President and wife goodbye...(for the last time)...Reaching Columbus in the early morning he learned news of Lincoln's assassination."

John, can you provide (verify) another source that says Coggeshall really met with Lincoln on the day of the assassination?

Gene, only a few pages are devoted to Coggeshall's grenade story.

[L Verge]

We used to sell the book at Surratt House, and I remember skimming through it quite a few years ago. I don't recall that it was elementary enough to recommend for pre-teens, but it was more family reminiscences, if I recall correctly.

[Gene C]

Roger - Just curious...where did the story/quote from Mary Coggeshall come from?

[RJNorton]

Gene, it comes from a letter Coggeshall's widow, Mary, wrote to her daughter, Prockie, on February 25, 1908.

Regarding how Prockie got her name...According to the book Mary Coggeshall gave birth to a girl on September 20, 1862. At this time William Coggeshall heard that Lincoln had read to the Cabinet a draft of the Emancipation Proclamation. This caused William to insist that the baby not be named until after Richmond fell. He now knew what he wanted to name her. So it was 2 1/2 years before the little girl was named - the name given her was Emancipation Proclamation. So her full name was Emancipation Proclamation Coggeshall, and she was called "Prockie" as a nickname. (I am not making this up - it's in the book)

[John Fazio]

(09-09-2016 12:35 PM)Gene C Wrote:  John - "Most if not all the food sent to him in Springfield was found to be poisoned" ????

I don't recall reading that. What is the source for that, (as well as the bomb in the carpet bag near Cincinnati) or where can I read more?

As far as the Coggeshall story, I still have my doubts, since the story is from someone not there at the time, can not be corroborated, and is mentioned 40+ years after the fact. It's just as likely or very possible Mrs Coggeshall got her facts mixed up about the event. It would be interesting to read the letter she wrote about it.

The book you mentioned has made me curious. It doesn't seem to be a well known book, with only one review on Amazon. It doesn't help me that the one reviewer says "An enjoyable read & good introduction to history for for pre-teen readers
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0961692901/ref...g=UTF8&me=

Have you read this book, if so would you recommend it, and any idea how much of the book is about the attempt on Lincoln's life?

Thanks

Gene:

Reference to congratulatory gifts of packaged food to Lincoln after his election, which were found to be poisonous, appears in many works, including Decapitating the Union (p. 26). I frankly haven't the time to dig them out, but a casual search turned up a reference in The Battlefield and Beyond, by Clayton E. Jewett ("Secessionists tried to poison the President-Elect by sending ostensibly congratulatory gift packages of food to Springfield, Illinois. The suspicious mailings were quickly discovered and disposed of.")

As for the carpetbag bomb near Cincinnati, it too is referred to in Decapitating. The reference cited is Robert S. Harper's
Lincoln and the Press (p. 91) Harper gives his own reference.

Freda Postle Koch's book is indeed an obscure work, self-published in1985. I cannot recommend it, not because I doubt its veracity, but because the business about Coggeshall and Lincoln comprises only a small part of it, the greater part given to Coggeshall's later life and particularly his experiences in South America as U.S. Minister to Ecuador, which I believe will not interest most people very much. Nevertheless, I accept the parts of it that relate to Coggeshall's relationship with Lincoln as historical, for reasons I have already given.

If we raise the bar of historicity too high, such figures as Hammurabi, David, Socrates and a thousand other worthies, as well as the Exodus, the Conquest and a thousand other events, would fade into legend.

John

[Wild Bill]

John,

If we raise the bar of historicity too high, such figures as Hammurabi, David, Socrates and a thousand other worthies, as well as the Exodus, the Conquest and a thousand other events, would fade into legend.

If I start agreeing with you as I do in this comment I will have to go out and shoot myself. Although that might please numerous society members it would make the forum a boring place indeed.

Bill

[J. Beckert]

(09-10-2016 09:41 AM)Wild Bill Wrote:  If I start agreeing with you as I do in this comment I will have to go out and shoot myself. Although that might please numerous society members it would make the forum a boring place indeed.

Bill

Ain't that the truth!

[John Fazio]

(09-10-2016 09:41 AM)Wild Bill Wrote:  John,

If we raise the bar of historicity too high, such figures as Hammurabi, David, Socrates and a thousand other worthies, as well as the Exodus, the Conquest and a thousand other events, would fade into legend.

If I start agreeing with you as I do in this comment I will have to go out and shoot myself. Although that might please numerous society members it would make the forum a boring place indeed.

Bill

Wild Bill:

My perception, unlike yours, apparently, is that we agree on quite a lot. I have read your books so I know that we both believe the highest levels of the Confederate government engineered the assassination and attempted assassinations on April 14, 1865. It follows from that conclusion that the conventional wisdom about Booth's planning to kidnap Lincoln is wrong, per my presentation on April 8 at which you were present, i.e. that kidnapping was a gigantic ruse used by Booth and his handlers to facilitate recruitment and deceive their enemies. We also agree that both sides were guilty of wretched excesses of black flag warfare and that the conditions in both Union and Confederate prisoner of war camps were despicable in the extreme.

We do not agree, however, on the justice of the respective causes. Your books would have their readers believe that the issue was freedom; that the Lincoln Administration sought to deprive the South of its freedom. Kid stuff. What freedom did the North seek to deprive the South of and why would it wish to do so, apart from the freedom to own (and often abuse) slaves? Recall that all the major countries in the world and most of the minor ones had already abolished slavery. The institution was therefore anachronistic at that time and place and dreadfully inconsistent with the lofty principles enunciated in the Declaration of Independence. In other words, it was time to go; the locomotive of history had already passed it up. Those defending it were not defending their freedom, they were defending, rather, their political independence, their wealth and property and the lifestyle and culture that had emerged from these. If you doubt this, you have only to read the state ordinances of secession, the state declarations of their causes of secession and Stephens's Cornerstone Speech, wherein nothing whatsoever is said about states rights, railroads, homesteading or tariffs, but only slavery, slavery, slavery!As for their independence, all the arguments favoring the legality of secession (and I know at least 15 of them) are outweighed by the reality of Balkanization of the country. That is to say: let one state secede because it doesn't like what is going on in Washington and it will not be long before there are dozens of countries where there was previously only one. That is the keystone that supports the entire edifice of understanding. When that stone is in place, the edifice becomes all but indestructible. And when you put it in place, we will have nothing left to disagree about.

John

[Gene C]

If only the federal government had better understood the power of a selective tax policy and unethical IRS practices.
Aren't we lucky they figured it out.