01-19-2015, 06:38 PM
If these letters had been destroyed, how is it known they were affectionate (not that I consider this not possible or not likely)? Was there any "witness" who read them and stated this, or is that just an assumption?
(01-19-2015 06:38 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]If these letters had been destroyed, how is it known they were affectionate (not that I consider this not possible or not likely)? Was there any "witness" who read them and stated this, or is that just an assumption?
(01-19-2015 06:38 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]If these letters had been destroyed, how is it known they were affectionate (not that I consider this not possible or not likely)? Was there any "witness" who read them and stated this, or is that just an assumption?
(01-19-2015 06:49 PM)L Verge Wrote: [ -> ](01-19-2015 06:38 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]If these letters had been destroyed, how is it known they were affectionate (not that I consider this not possible or not likely)? Was there any "witness" who read them and stated this, or is that just an assumption?
If those letters were of a particularly affectionate nature, I'd bet my bottom dollar that's why they were culled and destroyed from the packet before being turned over for public consumption...
(01-19-2015 08:24 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks, Linda. I admit I'm a little confused now, so I'll try again and beg for your patience. You stated they (Seward and Olive R.) wrote affectionate letters to each other. From where do "we" know these affectionate letters actually existed? I sure agree that it would have made sense to burn such letters instead of passing them on, but who was the source of the letters' actual existense? Who saw/had read them to "witness" the affectionate tone?
(01-19-2015 08:57 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote: [ -> ]My own guess is that Seward's feelings toward Olive were more fatherly than romantic--if they had been the latter, I doubt he would have created a quasi-incestuous relationship with her by adopting her, when he could have simply married her and settled his estate in a manner that favored his sons but left her comfortable.
(01-19-2015 10:52 PM)Linda Anderson Wrote: [ -> ](01-19-2015 08:24 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks, Linda. I admit I'm a little confused now, so I'll try again and beg for your patience. You stated they (Seward and Olive R.) wrote affectionate letters to each other. From where do "we" know these affectionate letters actually existed? I sure agree that it would have made sense to burn such letters instead of passing them on, but who was the source of the letters' actual existense? Who saw/had read them to "witness" the affectionate tone?
I don't know what if any letters between Seward and Olive were burned by their relatives. The letters that I was talking about were between the Seward sons expressing their displeasure of Olive and her father.
Seward wrote to Olive, "Why did I ever allow myself to become dependent on you so entirely?" (Taylor) On another occasion he wrote, "...the illegible and ragged manuscripts which I sent to you yesterday will show you how tenaciously I adhere equally to a purpose of my will or an affection of my heart." "A few weeks later he closed his letter by telling Olive he was 'as anxious as you can be that we may meet again and not be separated.'" (Stahr)
"Olive signed her letters 'affectionately yours.'" (Stahr)
(01-19-2015 08:57 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote: [ -> ]My own guess is that Seward's feelings toward Olive were more fatherly than romantic--if they had been the latter, I doubt he would have created a quasi-incestuous relationship with her by adopting her, when he could have simply married her and settled his estate in a manner that favored his sons but left her comfortable.
I wonder if there was a law in Seward's time that determined how much a wife would inherit when her husband died. If there was, Seward may have not been able to favor his sons.
(01-20-2015 06:36 AM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]I've always thought since her husband died without a will, Mary was very lucky to inherit the same share as the two sons (1/3), not less (here she would have inherited 1/4, Tad and Robert 3/4).
(01-20-2015 09:42 AM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ][Note: Mary learned of the settlement only from these newspapers, also of the fact that Robert had received more in advance to finance his bachelor apartment, while Mary, who, too, had asked Davis for more for accomodation but had been denied this.](Considering this and the trial, do you understand my resentments against Robert being a thoroughly faithful, noble son?
(01-20-2015 09:42 AM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]What I don't understand is how the Springfield house was handled in this settlement.
(01-20-2015 06:36 AM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for clarifying, Linda. I agree, these excerpts do sound more than fatherly . . .Did she inherit less than the sons? Wiki reads: "She and Seward's three surviving sons were named joint heirs of the Seward estate", but that still doesn't tell if the portions were equal ones.