Eva, some cemeteries indicate in their records if there is a marker on the plot. Is there anything in the records? Is so, what did the cemetery do with them? Is there a chance the very efficient German's documented (pictures) it?

That's an excellent question, Martha. Thomas Mallon, if I understand his book correctly, indicates Rathbone had an ambivalent attitude toward both Abraham and Mary. Rathbone was upset at the suffering and huge loss of life in the war. So, when Booth entered the box, Rathbone had mixed emotions. Part of him wanted Lincoln to suffer. The other part wanted Booth to be stopped before firing. This mental conflict caused him a lifetime of suffering.

We discussed this once before, and Joe Beckert brought up an excellent argument why Mallon is probably wrong. But Mallon implies that Rathbone saw Booth out of the corner of his eye and had about 5 seconds to react. But Rathbone sat there frozen. He only reacted after the shot. Mallon seems to argue that Rathbone felt guilty about not reacting in time, but at the same time he "allowed" Booth to shoot Lincoln because he wanted "to hurt all the old men who'd made the war."

In another part of the book Mallon notes that Rathbone was upset at the fact the Lincolns were in such mourning over Willie's death at a time when so many other families were suffering due to terrible injuries and death during the war. Rathbone felt Willie's death was "paltry," and the attention it got was "ill-proportioned" when considering the totality of the carnage going on in the battlefields.

Whether or not the reader agrees with Mallon, I think it's a good read, and I recommend it to others. I believe Mr. Mallon spoke at a Surratt Conference in recent years.

(06-07-2013 07:02 AM)Rsmyth Wrote:  Eva, some cemeteries indicate in their records if there is a marker on the plot. Is there anything in the records? Is so, what did the cemetery do with them? Is there a chance the very efficient German's documented (pictures) it?

Do you mean a gravestone or just a sign with the number? As I said, each gravesite has a little metal plate with the plot number on it, which is noted in the interment registration book, right side. Gravestones are not explicitly documented since they are usually not erected immediately but after a certain period of time, and it's up to the family to organise this. It seems Rathbone's family didn't care a lot, this is my speculation. After the Major's death as well as after the renting period had expired a certain period of time had passed before the cemetery took further action and both, the cem. admin. as well as the Stadtarchiv traced this back to the unsuccessful attempt to contact relatives in the US. As to the question of shipping home the bodies: I haven't checked if this was forbidden, as Martha suggested, but will check, and don't think it was, remember: Abraham Jack Lincoln's body was shipped home, too. If there had been a gravestone it would have been taken away. This is what the cemetery does after the time expires: they level the grave superficially and take the stone away, but they leave the remains in the depth.
One final remark on the bomb raid rumor: The cemetery (due to the admin.) was just slightly affected, some gravestones canted over and were immediatly reerected. After seeing the place I would second this. There are about 35 gravesites of local celebrities (and a lot more of non-celebrities), two of them in section 30, that had been buried before 1911, which still are in original condition, as it is well documented in a brochure for guided tours. Another evidence IMO is that a lot of trees for sure are older than 70 years, and it's unlikely they survived unharmed while the gravesites in between were seriously destroyed down to the depht.

Roger, I really have to get this book, it causes goose-bumps reading this, especially with regard to the "Dr Rosenbach" report and after seeing the church and the former cloister. It was a peaceful, but also somewhat oppressive place and although a modern institution, IMO such a medieval setting is certainly not a place to find closure with one's past. May I repeat Martha's question: does the author just explain the Major's ambiguity and feeling of guiltiness by his war experiences or is there any indication for former abnormalities of behaviour and motion?

Eva, I am not good at book reviews; I hope you can acquire the book. If you cannot acquire it, please email me your address in Germany, and I will be very happy to lend you my copy. Maybe it's just my impression. Henry and Clara have some arguments before the war and also exchange letters during the war. In both the verbal arguments and the letters, Clara seems like a normal thinking person to me, and Henry comes across at times as just plain "strange." The war certainly had an effect on Henry, and I understand that, but I still find him unusual. Clara often tries to reason with him, but his moodiness and emotional swings continue on. I would not call him mentally ill before April 14, but I think the scenario laid out by Mallon gives the impression this man may have been headed for "issues" in the future even if the assassination had not occurred. At least that is my take. Keep in mind, however, this is historical fiction, and nearly all the letters in the book were created by the author.

Eva -

You can buy a copy of Henry and Clara in paperback from Amazon - (US Site)

http://www.amazon.com/Henry-Clara-Novel-...mas+mallon

Or the Amazon German Site:

http://www.amazon.de/Henry-Clara-Thomas-...+and+Clara

Thanks Betty and Roger, I just found and purchased it!

To all of the contributors to the assassination thread on the symposium:

My prime interest is Lincoln's pre-presidential life. However, you can't be a Lincolnophile without delving into all of aspects of Lincoln including the assassination. I have really enjoyed and learned a lot by reading the recent postings on the Rathbones. It provided the necessary coda to a tragic story that was often dismissed with the facts of Henry murdering Clara and ending his days in an asylum. The work that all of you have done, particularly you Eva, has added much to the narrative. Thanks to all of you.

Joe

I'm a little late in joining in on Mallon's book, but I enjoyed it tremendously. He explains himself very well as to why he had to use fiction in order to put meat on the bones of some missing history, but it is well-worth reading. In a way, it reminds me of Bill Richter's Last Confederate Heroes. Bill tells you right up front that it is historical fiction because he had to fill in some blanks or insert some speculations. However, I would hazard a guess that 90% of each book is based on fact.

BTW: Tom Mallon was an excellent speaker when he presented at one of our early conferences at Surratt House.

I have to agree that Mallon's book is a very, very good one. Aside from very good historical fiction (AKA: Wild Bill's Last Confederate Heroes - a MUST read!) I usually stray from it - but I did enjoy Mallon's Henry and Clara as well. I like a historical novel with a "more than good" historical feel/context and these two MORE than fit the bill! If the author of a novel can fill in the blanks and do it well and adequately, then I see no problem - as long as it is understood that it is fiction. In Wild Bill's case, like Laurie says, his "fiction" is rather more fact!

I've been researching the Rathbones for about ten years now and I think I can help shed some light on the issue of Henry Rathbone's involvement with the State Department.

As has been stated on this forum before Henry Rathbone never had a position within the State Department. http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...10269.html

So how did this mistake get into the record?

Initially, the press accounts in the 1880's stated he held the position and that's where it initially gets confusing. Likely the press confused Henry with his brother. Henry's brother Jared L. Rathbone was a consular officer. http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...10269.html

For the press of that era this seems like a really easy error to make when you have to be on deadline and you do not have access to a State Department spokesperson as the press does today.

However I've found that Jared's position with the State Department is not the only point of confusion clouding up Henry's possible position with the State Department. There is an intriguing alternative for why the press of 1883 thought Henry was with the State Department.

Following the assassination the Rathbones remained fixtures of Washington society. Indeed they owned two homes on Lafayette Park across from the White House. The one we mainly know of today is 712 Jackson Pl, which is now owned by the federal government. They also owned 25 Madison Pl, which the family sold to the Cosmos Club in 1903. http://books.google.com/books?id=JdtJAAA...03&f=false

The Rathbones had very powerful friends and it appears there is a connection between Henry Rathbone and Secretary of State James G. Blaine.

In 1872, about a decade before Blaine became Secretary of State, the Blaines were visitors to the Rathbone home as documented in the letters of Mrs. James. G. Baine: http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&...ne&f=false

Perhaps it is possible that with this connection to James G. Blaine was fleeting. I haven't found any other connections between the Blaines and the Rathbones in the decade that followed.

However it is known that Henry had been trying to gain a federal appointment with with the Hayes administration to no avail. Though he didn't need to work for the money. http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-...l-asylum/4

Perhaps once Blaine became Secretary of State Henry began to rekindle his hopes for an appointment in a potential Blaine administration. Blaine was nominated for president in 1884 and lost to Cleveland.

Still the Pendelton Act would've been a barrier to service for Henry. The patronage system as seen in the film "Lincoln" was ended under the Pendelton Act of 1883 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendleton_Act. This would've been a significant shift for someone like Henry who previously could've relied on wealth and connections as a quick conduit to government service.

Inability to easily obtain a government appointment and the end of the spoils system could've potentially strained Henry's nervous system. Anyone looking for work can state how stressful it is when you can't find any work. Living across the street from the White House in 1881 after another presidential assassination could not have helped. There are many intriguing possibilities for why Henry snapped when he did so many years following the assassination.

While I have not found more information of the Rathbone connection to that the Blaine family it's possible that if there is more to this angle that the Blaine family worked to distance themselves from the Rathbones rapidly following the news of Clara's murder in 1883. If they were closely connected then the connection could've been a threat to Blaine's presidential aspirations.

Likely the main reason that journalists of the 1880's incorrectly printed that Henry was a State Department consular officer was Henry's brother obtained a consular appointment and that caused confusion. It follows that an 1880's journalist could've made this mistake quite easily and not had time for a correction if it came up later at all.

However it is intriguing to think that Washington society may have thought of Henry as a Blaine man and that society chatter that he could've held a position in a potential Blaine administration was known by the press which would've made the mistake easier to make.

Hopefully more on this angle will come to light.

(06-01-2013 01:07 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I remember not too long ago being chastised by a member of the Surratt Society for referring to Rathbone's position in the American Consulate in Germany. I was told that Henry never held such a post - period. However, this article and others that I have read since then certainly keep reiterating the fact that he was on diplomatic service in Germany. I'm so confused!

(06-16-2013 10:53 PM)chrishunter Wrote:  So how did this mistake get into the record?

Chris, it obviously didn't get into the record and I stated this in post #36.
To find out about the Major's position, I first contacted two archives, both in charge of preserving the city's historic documents, by email. The information I shared in the first post refering to this (post#31) was the exact and entire reply by email from the "Niedersächsisches Landesarchiv", but they did not refer to documents. (Nevertheless, at that point of time I had no reason to doubt this statement's credibility, so I shared it.) The "Stadtarchiv Hannover" replied they generally filed assignments but I would have to come myself for specific research or to copy documents. So I did, and afterwards doubted my first statement myself:

(06-05-2013 01:48 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  It remains strange that in none of the documents Rathbone is referred to as a consul, but always as a retired Major. The archive had a register for consuls assigned but the documents of 1881+1882 were missing.The only confirmation he should have held this position was in an email from the State Archive of the State of Lower Saxony (“Niedersächsisches Landesarchiv”), but it’s like with the creation of secret service on April 14, by now no documents came up to prove.

After returning from Hannover I emailed the "Niedersãchsisches Landesarchiv" again, casting my doubts on their former statement and asking for documented evidence. By now I just got the formal answer they will double-check.

I'm neither a professional historian nor had ever done anything similar before. I shared the outcome in the order I came to it myself and I'm generally careful with statemens and judgements and try to prove them by facts and evidence as far as possible. Still I learned a lot, espechially from the research in Hannover. I didn't doubt the first email due to the assumption the archivists were the experts.
If there are any further doubts or questions, please tell, I'll be pleased to comment as far as I can. About the other outcome regarding the air raid and the handling of the remains I'd like to add: I commented and reasoned the consequences of the air raid in detail, but this is also documented in an official brochure published by the cemetery administration. The Rathbones definitely had been buried in plot 30D16 and this is definitely the one I photographed, as I reasoned in detail, too. The way of dealing with the remains is "just" a (written) statement by the cemetery administration, too, but here IMO the credibility is a much different one and most likely given compared to the "consul issue", it is their daily and only business and they practise it day by day. I also asked two gardeners, one of them has been working there for over 30 years and they didn't know of any other handling.

Hi Eva,

First, I want to say I'm in awe of the material you have found. To uncover that the Rathbones' bodies were not dug up and disposed of is a huge relief to those of us like myself who have taken as fact that their final resting place would be lost forever. I'm so grateful to you for looking deeper into this and I can't wait to see if you uncover more.

In regards to your reply, what I meant to when I referred to the "record" were the stories originating in 1883 by American media/press, not the city archives. Sorry if my previous post created the implication that I meant the German archives had started the chain.

I work in a press office and so when I refer to "the record" I use it in the on the record/off the record media context.

I still believe that the American press upon learning about Clara's death in 1883 first created misperception Henry's employment with the state dept and it has carried forward for the last 100+ years in some cases. I don't think it was intentional.

It may look sloppy but the press in the U.S. in 1883 would've gotten the reports via the telegraph and likely someone in the U.S. press would've had to expand a telegram containing the news of Clara's murder into a full blown news story.

I have copies of several 1883/1884 stories of the murder from various papers in the U.S. and because they are using a wire service to transmit the story of Clara's murder across the country they almost all read roughly the same with only slight modifications.

Before the murder there is no mention of Henry working for State at all in the American press which is strange since if he was appointed his appointment would've been news in Albany, NY where his family is from.

However several books written after 1883 that I've read relate that Henry was a consulate employee or ran a consulate. Likely they are relating what they've read in the 1883 articles. That's understandable.

Now, here's where some of my own background comes in since I was raised on a U.S. consulate and I currently work in Washington, D.C. with former State Dept folks.

The official record of his involvement with the U.S. Dept of State would be in Washington, D.C. not in Germany.

To become an ambassador or consulate general of a U.S. Embassy or Consulate that position would've had to be confirmed in Congress as his brother's position was.

I've seen records of a nomination to U.S. Senate for Jared, but not for Henry. The official record of nominations to the U.S. Senate are very easy to find. This leads me to believe that he was never nominated for a consular position.

He could not have just gone there unless it was a recess appointment, which for a position such as this would have been unlikely. Recess appointments would likely garner more press than an actual appointment since in the U.S. they are controversial, so I believe the media of 1883 likely got confused about Henry's role.

It was still uncommon at that time for an American just to pick up and move overseas so I think the 1883 American press was asking themselves why he was over there and did the best they could to report based on the info they had.

-Chris

(06-17-2013 02:50 AM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  

(06-16-2013 10:53 PM)chrishunter Wrote:  So how did this mistake get into the record?

Chris, it obviously didn't get into the record and I stated this in post #36.
To find out about the Major's position, I first contacted two archives, both in charge of preserving the city's historic documents, by email. The information I shared in the first post refering to this (post#31) was the exact and entire reply by email from the "Niedersächsisches Landesarchiv", but they did not refer to documents. (Nevertheless, at that point of time I had no reason to doubt this statement's credibility, so I shared it. The "Stadtarchiv Hannover" replied they generally filed assignments but I would have to come myself for specific research or to copy documents. So I did, and afterwards doubted my first statement myself:

(06-05-2013 01:48 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  It remains strange that in none of the documents Rathbone is referred to as a consul, but always as a retired Major. The archive had a register for consuls assigned but the documents of 1881+1882 were missing.The only confirmation he should have held this position was in an email from the State Archive of the State of Lower Saxony (“Niedersächsisches Landesarchiv”), but it’s like with the creation of secret service on April 14, by now no documents came up to prove.

After returning from Hannover I emailed the "Niedersãchsisches Landesarchiv" again, casting my doubts on their former statement and asking for documented evidence. By now I just got the formal answer they will double-check.

Chris and Eva, thank you both for your interesting research in this area, and for sharing it with us.

(I have got to learn how you folks do this, but I am afraid I don't have the patience for it)

Chris, thanks. I was just adding some further comment refering to my research to my last post when you posted yours. Please, take note of this, too. My personal opinion by now, since I've seen no proving document yet but all the others which entitle Rathbone as a "retired Major" is that I doubt, too, he was assigned as a consul.

Eva - I should have asked this days ago, but would you be willing to write an article on what you have discovered on the Rathbones' burials for publication in the Surratt Courier?