Did Mary Lincoln need committal?

[Liz Rosenthal]

I seem to recall, from reading Jean Baker's biography of MTL, that Mary did have counsel, but that it was pro forma and that no real defense was proffered.

I also remember from the same book that Elizabeth Edwards wrote to Robert when all this was going on and told him he was wrong for doing what he did and that he should have sought an alternative, such as letting Mary live under the care or supervision of the Edwardses. The letter is also supposed to have referred to another member of the Edwards family, who had some sort of nervous condition that prevented her from living a normal life in society, as being cared for by the family rather than committed to an institution.

Now, that isn't to say that all families can take in a crazy relative - whether in 1875 or now. Depending on the family's circumstances and the condition of the patient, caring for him/her could simply be impossible. But in the case of MTL, there apparently were alternatives to commitment that Robert did not care to explore.

In my opinion, Robert was cold-hearted.

A lot of people may not realize that psychiatry was not then much of a science. Plus, the standard for commitment would have been whatever the law provided. But even beyond that, if the patient has no opportunity to present his/her side of the case, whether the standard has even been met in the course of the trial or commitment proceeding is highly questionable.

Nowadays, things are better, but very often the patient's liberty interests are poorly protected. In NJ, for example, the commitment law, on paper, seems pro-patient, but in operation, it isn't so much. My husband is an attorney for the State Division of Mental Health Advocacy - where he has worked for over two decades. Any patient without means whose only option would be a county or state hospital is fortunate to be represented by him or one of his colleagues. Unfortunately, due to a lack of political will on the part of legislators and governors, my husband's division has been chronically under-funded and is only able to provide services for certain parts of the state. A patient without means who doesn't have the services of Stan's office may be left with perfunctory representation by county counsel or a pro bono attorney who knows nothing of mental health law. Then you have the problem of judges who, without the advocacy of someone like Stan, will be too apt to disregard the statutory commitment standard! And even if Stan or one of his colleagues is there, the judge may prove stubborn, disregarding things that ought to be considered and considering things that ought to be disregarded, in which case the matter may go up on appeal. When the appellate court finally hears the case, however, the patient has already been confined for an inordinate amount of time. In other instances, the patient's case may be a moot point, if he/she has since been released, even if the patient had been illegally and involuntarily committed for a particular duration.

So even in 2013, in a state like New Jersey, mental patients face many challenges to their liberty interests and, ultimately, their well-being. It was exponentially worse in Mary Lincoln's time.

(08-26-2013 08:35 PM)Anita Wrote:  ...
Did Mary have legal counsel? Was it proved that she was a danger to the community?

Did Robert ask the Edwards if they could care for Mary before he resorted to having her committed?

...

But that's what I like to think I would have done. Robert did the best he could given the times, circumstances and who he was.

...

[Eva Elisabeth]

(08-27-2013 07:52 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Eva, Tom Emery, Eddie Lincoln's biographer (and author of many other writings as well), made a few comments here. I agree with Tom. Although the book was published way back in 1932 I think it's worth buying. As far as I know it's the only biography of Mary written by a medical doctor. The book also includes a timeline of important dates in her life, her travels, etc.

Thanks Roger, I've purchased it. I was anyway surprised I could get it. My latest experience with Amazon (I wanted to order "Lincoln's animal friends") was the message it's not shipped overseas.

[RJNorton]

I hope you like the book, Eva. The book has a unique image I have never seen in another Lincoln book. There was a short period between when the Lincolns moved out of the Globe Tavern and into the home they purchased from the Rev. Charles Dresser. For several months they lived in a frame cottage on Fourth Street. Dr. Evans' book has a sketch of this dwelling. I have never seen the image anywhere else other than Dr. Evans' book.

[Anita]

Liz,
I agree that Robert was cold-hearted. I think he saw his mother as an embarrassment from the time she went to the White House. She got so much negative press then and after the assassination. But I also think he was poorly advised.

While Mary didn't have adequate legal counsel, that was 1875.

You say that "Nowadays, things are better, but very often the patient's liberty interests are poorly protected." What you describe is a sad state affairs and very scary.

In CA it's always about money and priorities which means mental health issues are at the bottom of the heap along with education.

[JMadonna]

When Mary was committed Robert took over her accounts. When she was released he returned her money with a great deal of interest.

[Ashley Norman]

I still think we need to look at the time of what they dub insane then verses what we dub insane now., it would make some sense that today the standards for insane are different then they were then. I'm saying what if they did not need as much to commit her then as they would now? thoughts>

[Liz Rosenthal]

(08-28-2013 04:03 PM)Ashley Norman Wrote:  I still think we need to look at the time of what they dub insane then verses what we dub insane now., it would make some sense that today the standards for insane are different then they were then. I'm saying what if they did not need as much to commit her then as they would now? thoughts>

It's likely the legal standard for insanity in 1875 was whatever the doctor thought it was.

[Eva Elisabeth]

(08-25-2013 03:36 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  All I have seen is testimony at her trial as reported in newspapers.

All I have in one book are summaries in reported speech of what some newspapers had written. Are any articles printed or filed somewhere? I've unsuccessfully tried to find out.

[Anita]

Eva and Roger, Re: original transcripts/documents Mary's insanity trial. I just found this.
http://12.218.239.52/newsite//GI_NEWS/ne...-TODD1.pdf


"The Illinois Supreme Court Historic Preservation Commission (ISCHPC) and the ALPLM, who planned the Surratt retrial events, decided the next historic legal case to be retried would be Mary Lincoln’s commitment hearing. While conducting research for the 2012 event, Illinois Supreme Court Justices Anne Burke and Rita Garman discovered that the ALPLM only had copies of the trial transcripts, not the original documents. The originals were held by the Cook County Circuit Clerk’s Office. The ISCHPC approached Brown and suggested that the invaluable original court file for the case be moved to a location where it could best be preserved for future generations. Brown agreed, and will release the court papers to the ALPLM, which specializes in preserving original Lincoln and other state historical documents. Illinois Secretary of State and State Archivist Jesse White has agreed with the move. The Mary Lincoln commitment file has been open to public scrutiny for some time and confidentiality laws no
longer apply.
“As State Archivist, I am proud to be a part of this significant transfer. Preserving the rich history of Illinois is an important priority,” said Jesse White, Illinois Secretary of State and State Archivist. “I am pleased to have the original court papers relating to the sanity trial of Mary Todd Lincoln placed in the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum where the expertise of its professionals in preserving documents as old as these is crucial in assuring their availability to future generations."

[RJNorton]

Anita, thank you very much. Am I reading this correctly - the actual trial transcript, such as what we have for the 1865 Lincoln Conspiracy Trial and the 1867 John Surratt trial, is not included? I would love to read the actual testimony of the witnesses, and I am confused whether or not this is available.

[Anita]

(09-02-2013 03:32 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  Anita, thank you very much. Am I reading this correctly - the actual trial transcript, such as what we have for the 1865 Lincoln Conspiracy Trial and the 1867 John Surratt trial, is not included? I would love to read the actual testimony of the witnesses, and I am confused whether or not this is available.

Roger, The way the article reads is unclear about whether this latest acquisition(Oct. 2011)of original docs includes the original trial transcript. I would think it does.

In any case, they have a copy! I would think a transcript of the trial, as it's referred to below, would have the witness statements. I'd like to read it too!

"Typically, mental health records are private, Mr. Cornelius said. But, sometime in the 1920s or 1930s, an Illinois judge who had legitimate access copied the transcript of Mary Todd Lincoln's insanity trial and donated it to the Lincoln presidential library long before the state passed its privacy law covering mental health records."

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sect...z2dmjTqO2r

[RJNorton]

If the transcript exists it wouldn't be lengthy; I think the entire trial lasted only about 3 hours. I would be most curious to see if Isaac Arnold cross-examined any of the prosecution witnesses. If so, what did he ask? From what I can gather he basically just sat there.

[Eva Elisabeth]

According to S. Schreiner, Arnold posed the following question to the second witness, Samuel Turner, director of the Grand Pacific Hotel, after he had reported Mrs. Lincoln had heard a voice speaking through the wall etc.:"Did Mrs.Lincoln look as though she had any fever that day? Was she flushed?" "No. Her face was as white as it is today. There was more an expression of fear than anything else about her - a fear of personal violence."
A second question he alledgedly posed to the last witness, Dr. Smith, was:"To what do you attribute the fact that, as you say, Mrs. Lincoln is not sound of mind?" "To the evidents of her recent past. I was with her at the time of Tad's death, you know, and I was afraid then that, coming on the top of all the other deaths in her family, it might be more than a mortal could bear. So it has proved to be." "Thank you, Dr. Smith."

The verdict Foreman Lyman Judson Gage read was: "We, the undersigned, jurors in the case of Mary Lincoln alledged to be insane, heaving heard the evidence in the case, are satisfied that the said Mary Lincoln is insane, and is a fit person to be sent to a State Hospital for the Insane; that she is a resident of the State of Illinois, and County of Cook; that her age is fifty-six years; that the disease is of unknown duration; that the cause is unknown; that the disease is not with her hereditary; thhat she is not subject to epilepsy; that she does not manifest homicidal or suicidal tendencies, and that she is not a pauper."

[J. Beckert]

It's interesting that they stated Mary was not a threat to herself or others. That's a lynchpin in getting someone committed today. It sounds like she could have been released to her sister with no interference.

[Jason Emerson]

Hey everyone, since I've written three books on Mary's insanity case I can't help but chime in. There is no trial transcript, never was. Closest thing is the newspaper reports from the major Chicago newspapers, which took down the testimony practically verbatim. My latest book, "Mary Lincoln's Insanity Case: A Documentary History" has in it every single known primary source on the case, including all the major newspaper coverage. So anything you want to know about the trial is in there. And yes, according to reports, Arnod did put up a defense and cross-examine witnesses, including Robert Lincoln