The latest with regard to selling some of the Taper Collection of Lincolniana can be found here in today's paper:

https://www.stltoday.com/news/national/a...88e61.html

ALPML staff members started a GoFundMe page to save the artifacts. Thus far they have raised about 11K of their 9.7M goal:https://www.gofundme.com/save-lincoln-artifacts-donate-now

Long way to go...

James Cornelius, curator of Lincoln artifacts at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Museum and Library, has been dismissed by the state

http://www.sj-r.com/news/20180920/alplms...ator-fired

Unfortunately the news article doesn't, or isn't able to give much additional information regarding this action.
It appears the Lincoln Hat, and the debt incurred from purchasing Lincoln artifacts may have significantly contributed to the decision to dismiss Mr. Cornelius.

https://illinoistimes.com/article-20467-in-a-box.html

Wow! Didn't know all this was going down, only that the provenance of the hat was in question and that there was still a large debt to pay off after the acquisition of the Taper Collection. Knowing Louise Taper, that transaction was done in good faith on her part, I'm sure. Of course, there is always hanky-panky behind large deals like this -- and the State of Illinois is not known for running a perfect ship in many areas...

I have had only a few communications with James Cornelius, but I did find him helpful and courteous. In fact, without my contacting him, he offered moral support years back when I was being sued by the owner of a spurious "deathbed" photo of Lincoln. Why do I get the feeling that Mr. Cornelius might be a pawn in the "Lincoln hat" controversy? When that amount of money is involved, someone has to be the sacrificial lamb. I just hope that the ALPLM hss solid evidence to justify this firing.

BTW: The question of DNA testing seems ludicrous at this stage of the game and did come back with no firm conclusion. I have one question - Did Abraham Lincoln use macassar oil to control his hair? Most men of means during the 1800s used it. If he did, would traces of the oil remain in the interior of the hat? Was it detected during the testing? Could residue of it skew the test results? This inquiring mind wants to know...

(09-21-2018 07:36 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Wow! Didn't know all this was going down, only that the provenance of the hat was in question and that there was still a large debt to pay off after the acquisition of the Taper Collection. Knowing Louise Taper, that transaction was done in good faith on her part, I'm sure. Of course, there is always hanky-panky behind large deals like this -- and the State of Illinois is not known for running a perfect ship in many areas...

I have had only a few communications with James Cornelius, but I did find him helpful and courteous. In fact, without my contacting him, he offered moral support years back when I was being sued by the owner of a spurious "deathbed" photo of Lincoln. Why do I get the feeling that Mr. Cornelius might be a pawn in the "Lincoln hat" controversy? When that amount of money is involved, someone has to be the sacrificial lamb. I just hope that the ALPLM hss solid evidence to justify this firing.

BTW: The question of DNA testing seems ludicrous at this stage of the game and did come back with no firm conclusion. I have one question - Did Abraham Lincoln use macassar oil to control his hair? Most men of means during the 1800s used it. If he did, would traces of the oil remain in the interior of the hat? Was it detected during the testing? Could residue of it skew the test results? This inquiring mind wants to know...

I doubt there would be enough surviving uncontaminated nuclear DNA to perform any useful tests

James Cornelius is a fine man. He has been on "administrative leave" for some time, for "insubordination" and for supposedly losing his temper with some ALPLM workers who were creating a display in the Museum. I can't believe that he would be party to anything which would justify his dismissal.

What a great loss! The man is brilliant.

Regarding the hat, Volunteers have been told this week that the hat won't be on display again until questions about its provenance have been settled.

Questions about the hat aside, there remains the problem of the debt. There are a great many items, bloody gloves and all, for which the provenance is unquestioned. These things, if they must be sold, could end up in private hands, something I thought surely could never happen. I was wrong.

I have to echo what Dave said. James and I first met when we were paired together as presenters for a session at the Conference on Illinois History. We've corresponded on several occasions, and I could tell at times that he was frustrated by what was happening in Springfield, but I have to add that not once did he ever say anything disparaging about anyone there. He was always professional.

As for the hat, I don't have any evidence to back this up, but I've always believed about 1/4 of the items that collectors believe to be Lincoln-owned or related are spurious. Oliver Barrett once told Carl Sandburg something to the effect that he knew he had been taken several times, but he continued to spend on his collection in the hopes that what he bought was real.

I hope James lands on his feet.

Best
Rob

(09-22-2018 11:20 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  As for the hat, I don't have any evidence to back this up, but I've always believed about 1/4 of the items that collectors believe to be Lincoln-owned or related are spurious.

Alone the amount of alleged strains of Lincoln hair often make me think Lincoln must have been bold by the time he was buried.

(09-23-2018 03:52 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Alone the amount of alleged strains of Lincoln hair often make me think Lincoln must have been bold by the time he was buried.

Eva, David Chambers Mearns, in his book entitled Largely Lincoln, includes an entire chapter called "The Scalping of Abraham Lincoln."

F.B.I. and Expert Reports Cast Doubt That Celebrated Stovepipe Hat Was Lincoln’s

New York Times story - September 24, 2018

Because Lincoln is such a revered historical figure, the public deserves full transparency about his possessions, said Frank J. Williams, a prominent collector of Lincoln artifacts and a former chief justice of Rhode Island’s Supreme Court.

Justice Williams said he worried that a controversy over an alleged Lincoln artifact could raise questions about the authenticity of other Civil War-era relics.

“When you get questions like this, you really worry,” he said. “You get suspicious and concerned about the other treasures.”

I know that many people are more informed than I am, but today's news surprised me: http://www.startribune.com/fbi-and-exper...494083731/

“Did we keep it from the public? Sure,” [Nick Kalm, Vice-Chairman of the ALPLM Foundation] said. “But this isn’t a public issue.”

The private foundation, Kalm said, had no “duty to disclose.”

This remark is disturbing. I can't imagine a more public person than Abraham Lincoln. He is not like Chester A. Arthur or Benjamin Harrison. Everyone who visits the Museum comes through its doors already "owning" Lincoln and believing that the artifacts they will see are genuine. Why? Because the ALPLM places its reputation on the line to support that belief. There is an ax, for example, which has been displayed as "Lincoln's Last Ax," with an accompanying statement that Lincoln used the ax while visiting Grant in Virginia at the end of the War. OK, but it looks pretty much like any other ax, same length and shape. But I know that Lincoln used it because the ALPLM says he did.

So now what? Is some skeptic about to enter the Museum today thinking, "Well, they didn't tell us about the Hat--what else didn't they tell us about?"

Justice Williams is right to be concerned. Although do I believe the provenance for everything else in the Taper purchase is pristine, my belief exists because I find the ALPLM convincing.

(05-18-2018 08:47 AM)davg2000 Wrote:  Those interested in ALPLM's woes regarding the sale of Lincoln artifacts should read the article "Selling Lincoln" in the current Illinois Times.

I think most people did believe that items from the Taper purchase would be transferred to ALPLM ownership (and Illinois ownership) as the debt was paid down. But, as the article points out, this hasn't happened. So now the Foundation--which doesn't "own" anything-- is selling off some of the stuff to keep the rest of the stuff. The only things which can be sold are items from the Taper purchase. But don't look for any of the really big items--Marilyn's dress notwithstanding--to go on the auction block.

Despite all of this, ALPLM itself is healthy, and it consistently attracts many patrons, most of whom have no idea of the above.

I agree that those interested in ALPLM's woes regarding the sale of Lincoln artifacts should read the article "Selling Lincoln."

Illinois Times: http://illinoistimes.com/article-11177-b...eware.html [Thank you, Roger!]


Assuming that you have finished reading the referenced article, you may wonder how much the sale of the entire Louise Taper collection would fetch in a Lincoln memorabilia "fire sale," if need be in the near future (2019). It is my understanding that someone, presumably the citizens of Springfield who approved and financed the bond issuance, must pay back to the bondholders $19 million in 2019. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that such a sale would result in the full price recovery for each of the items purchased at the time of the entire collection purchase in 2007, but with two major exceptions.

An item was left out of the exchange of money for Lincoln memorabilia from Louise Taper collection; it was a copy of the emancipation proclamation. It was supposed to have been transferred and its market rate valuation was included in the $23 million 2007 appraiser valuation. In the Illinois Times article, it is noted that Julie Cellini, former Illinois Historic Preservation Agency board chairwoman and current secretary of the agency, had questioned, but to no avail, why it was not included in the transferred ownership items. The article does not present an individual 2007 appraisal valuation for the copy of the emancipation proclamation; so, the 2007 appraisal valuation is unknown at this time.

However, there is a separate 2007 appraisal valuation for the Lincoln hat at the time of the collection purchase - $6.5 million.

The problem is that according to many of the posts made on this thread regarding the authenticity of the hat, I would predict that the actual current market valuation for the Lincoln hat is much closer to $0.00 than it is $6.5 million.

In addition to the information posts on this thread regarding the provenance of this particular "Lincoln hat," there is also an April 15, 2012 article from the Chicago Sun Times that discussed the provenance of the hat in this fashion:

"[The hat] remained in the possession of the family of farmer William Waller until 1958. That’s when James Hickey, then head of the Illinois State Historical Library and overseer of the state’s Lincoln artifacts, bought it for himself in a move that today would almost assuredly spark conflict-of-interest questions.

The hat changed hands again in 1990, when Lincoln collector Louise Taper bought it from Hickey for an undisclosed price. She, in turn, parted with it in 2007, selling it to the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library Foundation as part of a $23 million haul of Lincoln memorabilia in 2007.

The museum won’t say how much the hat cost but, for the first time, it has produced a 2007 appraisal valuing it at $6.5 million."

The purchase in 2007 of the Louise Taper "Lincoln memorabilia" collection was for a total of $23 million. The remaining debt due on the bonds in 2019 stands at $19 million. [I do not know anything about the apparent pay-down of $4 million of principal debt.]

If the Lincoln hat is not now worth $6.5 million on the free market, the difference in this value reduces the amount available to pay back the $19 million debt on a million dollar for million dollar basis. And, there is no copy of the Emancipation Proclamation available for sale because it was excluded from the Lincoln memorabilia transfers from the Louise Taper collection in 2007.

In the 2013 Illinois Times article, it was disclosed that an appraiser by the name of Seth Kaller raised the alarm about the value of the Lincoln hat and other items. He had been asked to provide an appraisal of the Louise Taper collection as the items were "genuinely" described, but he was not asked to verify authenticity of the items. Mr. Kaller raised provenance issues on various items, specifically including the Lincoln hat, in a March 15, 2007 email to Tom Schwartz, then state historian, and Louise Taper, the seller of the collection.
According to the article, this communication was made "before the deal went through."

The bank currently holding the note for the amount left on the Taper Collection purchase debt merely wants its money, a year from now. The bank doesn’t care about the Hat’s appraisal, its worth in 2007, or its worth now. So, in the “fire sale” that David alludes to, the Foundation would sell whatever it takes—and it may take everything—to come up with the money.

Since soon after the Foundation purchased the Taper Collection, visitors to the Museum have constantly been solicited to purchase membership in the Foundation to “ensure that ALPLM remains the ‘permanent home’ of the articles.” Early on, the Foundation knew what the future could hold.

The irony is that the Hat may be genuine. James Hickey, Louise Taper, and the experts from ALPLM who vouched for it surely thought so. Provenance doesn’t make something genuine—it merely makes an item’s genuineness easier to accept.

In Springfield I don’t think it was common knowledge that, as the debt was being retired, items were not being transferred to the ALPLM’s permanent ownership.

James Cornelius’s dismissal, Volunteers were told last week, was not tied to any of this, despite how it may appear. Apparently dismissing anyone from the service of the State of Illinois is a protracted process, which for Doctor Cornelius began several months ago.

(09-29-2018 10:18 AM)davg2000 Wrote:  James Cornelius’s dismissal, Volunteers were told last week, was not tied to any of this, despite how it may appear. Apparently dismissing anyone from the service of the State of Illinois is a protracted process, which for Doctor Cornelius began several months ago.

What people are told and what is the truth are sometimes entirely different things.