The Nov 8, 2013 New York Times Disunion article titled "The Russians Are Coming!" describes the "grand ball" and supper "for the officers of the Russian fleet at anchor in New York."

"The organizers spared no expense. Over 1,200 gas burners illuminated the building’s interior. Dressing rooms for women featured maids to attend to 'the multitude of tears, and rips, and damages which dresses are liable to.'Hairdressers for both men and women were in attendance, as was 'a corps' of bootblacks. The stage on which Ms. Borgia had expired just hours earlier was now enclosed 'in a white ornamented tent, thirty feet high'that framed a trompe l’oeil scene of a “terrace, garden, and lake by moonlight...
"Irving Hall, a building adjacent to and connected with the Academy by a covered walkway, was the setting for a supper catered by Delmonico, the city’s premier restaurant. Beginning at 11 p.m., guests could partake from a menu that, according to an account of the 'principal edibles' in Harper’s Weekly, included 12,000 oysters, 12 'monster' salmon of 30 pounds each, 1,200 game birds, 250 turkeys, 400 chickens, a half ton of tenderloin, 100 pastry 'pyramids,' 1,000 loaves of bread and 3,500 bottles of wine. Each heavily laden table was, in the words of a reporter for The New York Herald, 'triumphant proof of the ability of our great caterer, and excelled all previous displays of the kind.'

"This evening of lavish entertainment was the culminating moment in a series of events – a visit by Mary Lincoln to the Russian frigate Osliaba in New York Harbor on Sept. 16; a Fifth Avenue parade on Oct. 1; and two banquets at Astor House —to celebrate the unexpected arrival of six Russian warships just weeks earlier."

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/201...re-coming/

(11-21-2014 03:59 PM)Linda Anderson Wrote:  "This evening of lavish entertainment was the culminating moment in a series of events – a visit by Mary Lincoln to the Russian frigate Osliaba in New York Harbor on Sept. 16;

Dr. Wayne C. Temple mentions this visit in his article entitled Mary Todd Lincoln's Travels. He writes:

Mrs. Lincoln, who had returned to New York from Manchester some time after September 6, visited the Osliaba on September 16 in a company which included Mrs. Nathaniel P. Banks, General John A. Dix and Russian Consul-General Baron d'Ostensacken. The visitors arrived on board about 2 P.M. and after examining the frigate were taken to Captain Boutakoff's cabin for refreshments. The President's wife offered a toast, "The health of the Emperor of Russia," to which the Captain replied by toasting "The President of the United States." After spending approximately an hour in pleasant conversation, Mrs. Lincoln and party left the Osliaba and returned to shore.

I have been trying for about ten years (off and on) to find an incident concerning the Russian fleet's wintering in New York harbor. I cannot remember where I read about it, but the incident involved a barroom brawl along the docks where a Russian sailor was killed. I cannot remember the reason why either, but U.S. authorities refused to release the Russian's body to his comrades. It became quite a political issue with an appeal finally being made to Mrs. Lincoln (I think) to convince her husband to take action.

Has anyone else read about this, or did I dream it?

Yes Laurie I read the article too,But my memory escapes me.

(11-21-2014 06:22 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I have been trying for about ten years (off and on) to find an incident concerning the Russian fleet's wintering in New York harbor. I cannot remember where I read about it, but the incident involved a barroom brawl along the docks where a Russian sailor was killed. I cannot remember the reason why either, but U.S. authorities refused to release the Russian's body to his comrades. It became quite a political issue with an appeal finally being made to Mrs. Lincoln (I think) to convince her husband to take action.

Has anyone else read about this, or did I dream it?

I remember researching that, Laurie, which is why I found the Times article so quickly. It's probably on the forum but I haven't found it yet.

(11-21-2014 07:56 PM)Linda Anderson Wrote:  

(11-21-2014 06:22 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I have been trying for about ten years (off and on) to find an incident concerning the Russian fleet's wintering in New York harbor. I cannot remember where I read about it, but the incident involved a barroom brawl along the docks where a Russian sailor was killed. I cannot remember the reason why either, but U.S. authorities refused to release the Russian's body to his comrades. It became quite a political issue with an appeal finally being made to Mrs. Lincoln (I think) to convince her husband to take action.

Has anyone else read about this, or did I dream it?

I remember researching that, Laurie, which is why I found the Times article so quickly. It's probably on the forum but I haven't found it yet.

Linda, Herb, Roger, Laurie, et al.:

Thank you for expanding on the Russian Fleet business. Laurie, I never heard of that incident.

John

Hey,that's why we are helping each other learn on this forum!

(11-21-2014 06:22 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I have been trying for about ten years (off and on) to find an incident concerning the Russian fleet's wintering in New York harbor. I cannot remember where I read about it, but the incident involved a barroom brawl along the docks where a Russian sailor was killed. I cannot remember the reason why either, but U.S. authorities refused to release the Russian's body to his comrades. It became quite a political issue with an appeal finally being made to Mrs. Lincoln (I think) to convince her husband to take action.

Has anyone else read about this, or did I dream it?

Maybe this was the sailor?
http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/national_ce...etery.html

"Annapolis National Cemetery is the final resting place for one foreign national who died during the Civil War. N. Demidoff served on board a Russian man-of-war docked in Annapolis, one of two Russian ships participating in a goodwill tour. Supposedly, after a local saloon refused him a drink, Demidoff started a barroom brawl, and someone shot him during the melee. His interment in the cemetery followed a traditional Russian Orthodox ceremony."

He died on Feb. 4, 1864:
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi...d=33012039

(11-21-2014 01:09 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  St. Ptersburg was effectively serving notice on Britain and France that if they intervened on the side of the Confederacy, that she would intervene on the side of the Union. St. Petersburg wanted an American ally because she was then engaged in a major struggle with G.B. and France for the control of Cental Asia.

Why did Russia send its fleets to the US? The following explanations are slightly different. D. Mahin in "One War at a Time" claims that actually the Russian fleets were sent to the US to keep them available in case of war between Russia and Britain due to the Russian suppression of a revolution in Poland. The Russian fleets would have been icebound in the Baltic ports during the winter.

An excellent (and excellently footnoted!) article on the background is here, from which I quote in the following:

https://web.archive.org/web/200902161025...lehaye.htm

"A legend grew up on Russia's gallant gesture to uphold the Union which would persist for more than a half century and only to be completely demolished when historic research in the Russian archives finally brought to light the Tsar's secret order to the fleet.

The thesis of Russia acting for her own self interest by sailing her fleet to America in 1863 is also supported by a Russian scholar, E. A. Adamov. Adamov claims that Russia wished not only to save the fleet from other European powers, but to 'put them in the most favorable position for the opening of warlike activities with maximum of energy and productivity against England and France.' Russia's motives for sending the fleet to America were indeed self-serving. Alexander intended the mission as protection for the fleet. He wanted to get 'the fleet out of the Baltic to distant seas where it could damage the British merchant marine.'

Alexander's reasons for wanting to send the Russian fleet off to America are related to a complicated European situation that began long before the Civil War. The basis ' for Alexander's action was a Polish insurrection in 1863. Poland had been under Russian domination for a long time. The country was partitioned out of existence in the 18th century. It had been given some recognition by Napoleon with the creation of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw. The Poles were not satisfied. They were tired of being ruled by other nations. This desire for independence brought them to open revolt in January 1863.
...Poland was led into revolt by Polish nationalists who would be content with nothing less than the recognition by Russia of Polish nationhood.

The nationalists led the country in revolt in January, 1863, hoping to get outside assistance. France had supported a national unification movement in Italy. The Poles hoped that France would give them assistance. The nationals also hoped that England would aid their cause because she was a traditional enemy of Russia.

Russia refused to compromise with the Poles or any other nations. The situation became very tense. France and England continued to agitate for the Poles, thus aggravating the Russians. The European powers gradually moved closer to war. Russia expected to have to defend her "rights" in Poland because by June, 1863, war seemed inevitable. It was prudent, therefore, for her to make preparations for the ensuing conflict. Russian General-Adjutant Krabbe submitted a contingency plan to the emperor for the navy...

The fleet was very weak, even weaker than it appeared on paper. It was made up of a small squadron in the Pacific, seven war vessels of various descriptions at Cronstadt, and a frigate in the Mediterranean. They were all, or nearly all, of wood, and although they had engines, the principal means of motion was still the sail, the orders being that steam should be resorted to only in case of urgent necessity.

Since the fleet was very weak, Krabbe maintained that a direct confrontation with the superior British navy would not be wise.

Realizing the weaknesses, Krabbe wanted to take advantage of them in the best possible manner. He claimed that the fleet could be best utilized by preying on British and French commerce. Krabbe also realized that (if the fleet remained at home it would probably be blocked in; it was therefore necessary that it should be sent away to some place more conveniently situated for the purpose in mind.' Krabbe submitted his proposal to Alexander II and on July 7, 1863, he accepted the proposal.

Russia's plan of action was set. Krabbe picked Captain Lisoskii to lead the fleet out of the Gulf of Finland. He was ordered to 'proceed directly to New York.' Krabbe also told Lisoskii to try to keep all the ships in New York Harbor, if the Americans permitted it. The same orders were given to Rear-Admiral Popov, with the exception that he was to bring his fleet to San Francisco.

Although the Russians were very confident of their success in the event of a war, they still felt a need to justify the movements of their fleet. M. N. Katkov, editor of the Moscow Viedomosti (Gazette), justifies the fleet movement by placing the blame on France. He writes:
'The Polish problem, which was exploited against us by France with so much enmity, has compelled us to send a part of our military forces into American waters. We anchored there without either aggressive or altruistic intentions. We don't wish to interfere in American affairs; we went there merely for our own convenience, while the Americans can appreciate these conveniences as well as ourselves.'

The Russian flagship Alexander Nevskii arrived in New York harbor on September 24,1863. The arrival of the fleet delighted the Lincoln administration. An excerpt from the diary of Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles is an example of the jubilation felt by many Americans. He writes that:

'In sending them [the fleet] to this country there is something significant. What will be its effect on France and the French policy we shall learn in due time. It may be moderate; it may exasperate. God bless the Russians.'

The president sent Mrs. Lincoln with other dignitaries to New York to greet the Russians. The president's wife drank a toast to the czar. The New York Sun wrote that Mrs. Lincoln's visit with the Russians was important because Russia was 'the only European power that has maintained a hearty sympathy with the United States during our present troubles.' The New York Herald commented that 'Mrs. Lincoln knew what she was doing' because she knew it would create 'a hearty response throughout the country.' Mrs. Lincoln's toast was symbolic of the new hope felt by the Union with the arrival of the Russian fleet.

The arrival of the fleets meant hope for the Union, and therefore the Americans were ready to show their gratitude to the Russians. A reception was held in New York City and then the Russian visitors were paraded down Broadway where American and Russia flags were displayed. Tiffany and Company decorated their building with a huge banner that stretched from the roof to the sidewalk. Cheering New Yorkers lined Broadway as the Russians rode by in carriages.

On November 5, the New Yorkers gave the Russians a ball at the Academy of Music. It was a very important affair attended by leading society people. Harper's Weekly ran several pages of illustrations of the dancing ladies and their Russian partners. A Harper's Weekly reporter commented that 'the Russian guests from the fleet were worn out by the expressions of friendship and affection extended to them.'

During all of the balls and banquets, each country toasted the other. Alexander was hailed as the emancipator of the serfs and the friend of America. Lincoln was toasted as the friend of Russia. All references to the European situation (i.e. Poland) were, purposely avoided...It is not clear if the Russians purposely intended to hide the reasons for their visit. It seems very probable that many Americans suspected their true motives, but wanted to think otherwise to help the morale of the Union.

In April, 1864, orders were sent to the fleet in America by Alexander telling them to return home."

Great post on the Russian fleet, Eva! Also, that was the Russian sailor I was thinking of.

Thank you, Eva. That is exactly the theme that has been running through most of the sources I have looked at online trying to remember where I had seen the reference to the dead sailor. I remember thinking that the American press and politicians probably played up the "Russian ally" story line in order to make it seem like the Russians were committed to the Union cause.

BTW: Part of the Russian fleet wintered in San Francisco, and among the sailors on board was a future famous composer by the name of Rimskii-Korsakov.

If I ever get tired of the Lincoln assassination, Russian history under the Tsars will be my next project.

Hope you will not forget him as he was born in my hometown Kiel (and assassinated due to a plot by his wife): http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_III_of_Russia
I think the Russians did basically side with the Union and sought an alliance with her, and demonstrating this was a nice, welcome side effect of the action, but not the reason. I think Russia would never have intervened nor "invested" any efforts in any kind of active support as I believe by the time of the Union victories at Antietam, Vicksburg and Gettysburg, British and French interest in invention was zero. At that time neither of the belligerents was worth taking any risk or costs regarding the explosive situation at home (in Europe).

In October 1862, the Russian vice chancellor, Prince Gorchakow, had assured the US chargé d'affaires, Bayard Taylor, in writing, that Russia would not participate in any form of European intervention in the American conflict. ("Proposals will be made to Russia to join in some plan of interference. She will refuse any invitation of the kind.")

(11-22-2014 10:24 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Hope you will not forget him as he was born in my hometown Kiel (and assassinated due to a plot by his wife): http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_III_of_Russia
I think the Russians did basically side with the Union and seeked her allyship, and demonstrating this was a nice, welcome side effect of the action, but not the reason. I think Russia would never have intervened nor "invested" any efforts in any kind of active support as I believe by the time of the Union victories at Antietam, Vicksburg and Gettysburg, British and French interest in invention was zero. At that time neither of the belligerents was worth taking any risk or costs regarding the explosive situation at home (in Europe).

In October 1862, the Russian vice chancellor, Prince Gorchakow, had assured the US chargé d'affaires, Bayard Taylor, in writing, that Russia would not participate in any form of European intervention in the American conflict. ("Proposals will be made to Russia to join in some plan of interference. She will refuse any invitation of the kind.")

Eva,

These are fascinating and edifying posts you have contributed.

I had certainly heard of the Russian fleet in the U.S., but nothing to the extent which you have related.

Well done.

Rick

Thank you so much, Rick! (And I just realized a linguistic fauxpax...should read "sought alliance with her"!)

International affairs is an interesting topic to me, also the question how serious the threat of foreign intervention from any side actually was. Due to sickness I had a lot of boring resting time to fill, so I apologize in advance if I bore y'all now with another lengthy post on Gene's recent question whether the Confederate government gained any official recognition. Please ask for (further) sources if you are interested in.

As for international recognition - Jefferson Davis himself wrote in his memoirs: "The course of action adopted by Europe...was a refusal to treat us as an independent government." (J. Davis: "The Rise and Fall of the Confed. Government II", p.370.)

The Confederate government sent repeatedly delegations to Europe, e.g. James M. Mason to London and John Slidell to Paris. They were unofficially interviewed, but neither secured official recognition for the Confederacy. The Union victories at Antietam, Vicksburg and Gettysburg, and abolitionist opposition in Britain put an end to any British and French interest in recognition or even at least mediation of the war.

However, several European nations maintained diplomats in place who had been appointed to the US (e.g. the United Kingdom and France maintained consular offices in Charleston, St Louis and in Texas, but limited their activities to diplomatic protection of their own nationals), but no country appointed any diplomat to the Confederacy. But those nations did recognize the Union and Confederate sides as belligerents. Both Confederate and Union agents were allowed to work openly in British territories. Also European military "advisors" and observers were appointed to both sides, both official and unofficial, to assess the de facto establishment of independence, but it is uncertain the extent to which those officers represented an attempt to keep a foot in both camps - just in case the Confederacy won. In 1863, the Confederacy expelled the European diplomatic missions for advising their resident subjects to refuse to serve in the Confederate army.

The closest Confederate government probably came to recognition was in 1863, when the Confederacy appointed Ambrose Dudley Mann as special agent to the Holy See on September 24. After a meeting, Mann received by His Holiness Pope Pius IX a letter addressed to the “Illustrious and Hon. Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, Richmond,” that concluded with a hope for a union in “perfect friendship".Mann, in his dispatch to Richmond, interpreted the letter as "a positive recognition of our Government."
The pope's letter to Jefferson Davis was accompanied by an autographed picture of the pope.

Davis interpreted this communication as a form of recognition and hoped that this letter would be the first step towards widespread European recognition. The letter was reported in Southern newspapers with the implication that Pope Pius IX supported the Confederacy.

Judah P. Benjamin, however, interpreted it as "a mere inferential recognition, unconnected with political action or the regular establishment of diplomatic relations" and thus not as formal recognition. (See his letter of Jan. 29, 1864, last passage and next side - but I'm afraid you have to go to p.1013 first, doesn't work to post a "direct link":
http://digital.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t...t;size=100 Letter of Pope Pius IX to Jefferson Davis in: Varina Davis: "Jefferson Davis: Ex-President of the Confederate States of America: A Memoir By His Wife Varina Davis", Vol. 2, p.448.)

General Robert E. Lee kept a portrait of the Pope in his house, and referred to him as "the South's only true friend during her time of need".

I agree with both of you 100%.

The master bedroom at Surratt House has a Currier and Ives engraving of Pius IX hanging on the wall also -- longest serving Pope in history, I believe. It was through him that the U.S. was finally able to retrieve John Surratt and bring him back to stand trial. If I remember correctly, he was willing to comply because the U.S. promised him naval support in fleeing Italy if the tides of war against the Holy See turned against him.