Thanks, Herb. Laurie, et all, I wonder why vilify Mary? What was the purpose? Just hateful gossip? Drag down Abraham? Chauvinism? I mean, I understand the points against her, which I don't agree, but she was an outsider, etc. But to what advantage to trash Mary in history?

Maybe an attempt to show a lack of judgement in A. Lincoln in choosing her?

BTW Did Hillary have something to do with finding or recognizing the Soldier's Home? And was that recently?

Mark,

in 1890 John Nicolay and John Hay wrote a 10-volume biography of Lincoln utilizing the papers of Lincoln and strongly watched over by Robert Todd Lincoln. Nicolay felt so protective of what he termed his "territory" that he refused to help Ida M. Tarbell when she began researching her study of Lincoln for McClure's Magazine at the turn of the century.

Their biography has been severely criticized for its partisanship and various other "sins" committed. Here is an article by Michael Burlingame on their history of Lincoln. Burlingame has edited a number of books containing their writings.

Best
Rob

(11-25-2012 12:35 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Mark,

in 1890 John Nicolay and John Hay wrote a 10-volume biography of Lincoln utilizing the papers of Lincoln and strongly watched over by Robert Todd Lincoln. Nicolay felt so protective of what he termed his "territory" that he refused to help Ida M. Tarbell when she began researching her study of Lincoln for McClure's Magazine at the turn of the century.

Their biography has been severely criticized for its partisanship and various other "sins" committed. Here is an article by Michael Burlingame on their history of Lincoln. Burlingame has edited a number of books containing their writings.

Best
Rob

Rob,
It is interesting to note that RTL who had veto power over the biography let the line about Ann Rutledge in volume 1 stand and didn't make Nicolay and Hay erase it as he did other things like critical comments about Thomas Lincoln.

Apperently, he felt with his mother passed away, the truth could be said about that.

---

(11-25-2012 02:56 PM)Mike B. Wrote:  

(11-25-2012 12:35 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Mark,

in 1890 John Nicolay and John Hay wrote a 10-volume biography of Lincoln utilizing the papers of Lincoln and strongly watched over by Robert Todd Lincoln. Nicolay felt so protective of what he termed his "territory" that he refused to help Ida M. Tarbell when she began researching her study of Lincoln for McClure's Magazine at the turn of the century.

Their biography has been severely criticized for its partisanship and various other "sins" committed. Here is an article by Michael Burlingame on their history of Lincoln. Burlingame has edited a number of books containing their writings.

Best
Rob

Rob,
It is interesting to note that RTL who had veto power over the biography let the line about Ann Rutledge in volume 1 stand and didn't make Nicolay and Hay erase it as he did other things like critical comments about Thomas Lincoln.

Apperently, he felt with his mother passed away, the truth could be said about that.

A couple points, and I realize people's feelings run deep here.

It is always hard to question motives of writers. Is it really an attempt to "villify" Mary to try to find the honest truth of the matter with her even if it is not flattering?

Case in point:

Harold Holzer is very much on the side of Mary if one can say that. He defends her in his books and has been critical of Jason Emerson for not being harder on Robert Todd Lincoln for his actions in Mary's
"insanity" trial. I have heard him speak on a few occasions and spoken to him one on one when he defends Mary a lot. I don't think anyone can accuse him of a desire to get Mary or villify her.

However,
In his excellent book about Lincoln as President-Elect, Holzer accounts a troubling scene with Mary and Lincoln on page #238. When a patronage seeker went to the Lincoln home he found Mary "on the floor in a sort of hysterical fit, cause by L's refusal to promise the postion of Naval officer of the NY Custom House to Isaac Henderson." Lincoln remarked to his guest, "Kriesmann she will not le me go until I promise an offfice for one of her freinds." Kriesmann continues, "Mary's fit continued until the the promise was obtained." Henderson had apparently given Mary a diamond brooch to intervene on his behalf for this very profitable job. Is there any other way to look at this than influence peddling and a bribe?

One can't blame this on Herndon or Nicolay or Hay or the other supposedly biased men against her, since they have no hand in recording this.

In the book "At Lincoln's Side: John Hay's Civil War Correspondence and Selected Writings" there is an appendix by editor Michael Burlingame called, "Mary Todd Lincoln's Unethical Conduct as First Lady." There is a wealth there of public corruption. Is it all true? I doubt all of it is true. Burlingame is definitely one who isn't a fan of Mary to say the least. But again, without questioning his motive, what about the evidence he compiles? I don't think there is enough evidence on some of the charges and they would qualify as hearsay. However, there seems to be fairly good evidence of public corruption with Wickoff and groundskeeper Watt in the White House (i.e. padding accounts, fraud, kickbacks, etc.)
Now this is part of the record. Should these matters be suppressed? Parts of family friend and Illinois Senator Orville H. Browing's diaries were suppressed until 1994 because they have a lot of material going over corruption.

For example, in the unredacted version of the diary, in March 1862 Browning wrote, "That Watt's wife was nominally stewardess at a salary of $100 per month, all of which, by private arrangement went into Mrs. Lincoln's pocket."

Again what do we call this? Is history served better by these things remaining redacted?

---

(11-25-2012 02:56 PM)Mike B. Wrote:  

(11-25-2012 12:35 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Mark,

in 1890 John Nicolay and John Hay wrote a 10-volume biography of Lincoln utilizing the papers of Lincoln and strongly watched over by Robert Todd Lincoln. Nicolay felt so protective of what he termed his "territory" that he refused to help Ida M. Tarbell when she began researching her study of Lincoln for McClure's Magazine at the turn of the century.

Their biography has been severely criticized for its partisanship and various other "sins" committed. Here is an article by Michael Burlingame on their history of Lincoln. Burlingame has edited a number of books containing their writings.

Best
Rob

Rob,
It is interesting to note that RTL who had veto power over the biography let the line about Ann Rutledge in volume 1 stand and didn't make Nicolay and Hay erase it as he did other things like critical comments about Thomas Lincoln.

Apperently, he felt with his mother passed away, the truth could be said about that.

---

(11-25-2012 02:56 PM)Mike B. Wrote:  

(11-25-2012 12:35 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Mark,

in 1890 John Nicolay and John Hay wrote a 10-volume biography of Lincoln utilizing the papers of Lincoln and strongly watched over by Robert Todd Lincoln. Nicolay felt so protective of what he termed his "territory" that he refused to help Ida M. Tarbell when she began researching her study of Lincoln for McClure's Magazine at the turn of the century.

Their biography has been severely criticized for its partisanship and various other "sins" committed. Here is an article by Michael Burlingame on their history of Lincoln. Burlingame has edited a number of books containing their writings.

Best
Rob

Rob,
It is interesting to note that RTL who had veto power over the biography let the line about Ann Rutledge in volume 1 stand and didn't make Nicolay and Hay erase it as he did other things like critical comments about Thomas Lincoln.

Apperently, he felt with his mother passed away, the truth could be said about that.

A couple points, and I realize people's feelings run deep here.

It is always hard to question motives of writers. Is it really an attempt to "villify" Mary to try to find the honest truth of the matter with her even if it is not flattering?

Case in point:

Harold Holzer is very much on the side of Mary if one can say that. He defends her in his books and has been critical of Jason Emerson for not being harder on Robert Todd Lincoln for his actions in Mary's
"insanity" trial. I have heard him speak on a few occasions and spoken to him one on one when he defends Mary a lot. I don't think anyone can accuse him of a desire to get Mary or villify her.

However,
In his excellent book about Lincoln as President-Elect, Holzer accounts a troubling scene with Mary and Lincoln on page #238. When a patronage seeker went to the Lincoln home he found Mary "on the floor in a sort of hysterical fit, cause by L's refusal to promise the postion of Naval officer of the NY Custom House to Isaac Henderson." Lincoln remarked to his guest, "Kriesmann she will not le me go until I promise an offfice for one of her freinds." Kriesmann continues, "Mary's fit continued until the the promise was obtained." Henderson had apparently given Mary a diamond brooch to intervene on his behalf for this very profitable job. Is there any other way to look at this than influence peddling and a bribe?

One can't blame this on Herndon or Nicolay or Hay or the other supposedly biased men against her, since they have no hand in recording this.

In the book "At Lincoln's Side: John Hay's Civil War Correspondence and Selected Writings" there is an appendix by editor Michael Burlingame called, "Mary Todd Lincoln's Unethical Conduct as First Lady." There is a wealth there of public corruption. Is it all true? I doubt all of it is true. Burlingame is definitely one who isn't a fan of Mary to say the least. But again, without questioning his motive, what about the evidence he compiles? I don't think there is enough evidence on some of the charges and they would qualify as hearsay. However, there seems to be fairly good evidence of public corruption with Wickoff and groundskeeper Watt in the White House (i.e. padding accounts, fraud, kickbacks, etc.)
Now this is part of the record. Should these matters be suppressed? Parts of family friend and Illinois Senator Orville H. Browing's diaries were suppressed until 1994 because they have a lot of material going over corruption.

For example, in the unredacted version of the diary, in March 1862 Browning wrote, "That Watt's wife was nominally stewardess at a salary of $100 per month, all of which, by private arrangement went into Mrs. Lincoln's pocket."

Again what do we call this? Is history served better by these things remaining redacted?

Help Roger, if you could so I could reply without quoting myself...lol

Since Lizzie Keckly was mentioned, I have to mention a wonderful book about her and Mary:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0767902...TTHX5NK4NK

"Mrs. Lincoln and Mrs. Keckly: The Remarkable Story of the Friendship Between a First Lady and a Former Slave" by Jennifer Fleischner. The book came out about 10 years ago, and I think never got the influnece it deserves.

And Kudos to Laurie V. who I believe raised money to mark Lizzie K.'s probable resting site.

Mike, if I understand your question correctly, click on the NEW REPLY button, not the Reply button.

(11-25-2012 02:56 PM)Mike B. Wrote:  And Kudos to Laurie V. who I believe raised money to mark Lizzie K.'s probable resting site.

Yes, indeed, Mike. I was not present, but I have a copy of the program for the dedication. Laurie can correct anything I say that is incorrect. The project sponsors are listed as the National Harmony Memorial Park, the Surratt Society, Black Women United for Action of Fairfax County, Virginia, and the Lincoln Forum. Our own Rich Smyth was the Project Originator and gave the opening remarks.

Thanks for the acknowledgement of the Keckly project. She was a very special lady, IMO. We were able to raise $6000 for an impressive bronze marker. And, as a result of the publicity that the Washington Post gave us, the National Park Service contacted me for assistance in getting Mrs. Keckly added to their initiative on Trails to Freedom - recognizing the Underground Railroad as well as those who helped to aid the war's contraband. Our research librarian at Surratt House, Mrs. Sandra Walia, wrote the nomination papers, and we received word this past March that Mrs. Keckly is now part of that initiative. P.S. The photo of Mrs. Keckly that you see above is one that is not usually shown. We received the anonymous assistance in receiving this from someone that Roger recommended.

I also agree that Jennifer's book on the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth should be highly touted. I was somewhat dismayed to see that a new book is coming out on the same subject, but appears to be a mixture of fact with fiction. Why the fiction when Ms. Fleischner handled the facts so well?

And, Mike, thank you for a tremendous posting above. Your points are very well taken. I just wish that some of the authors who went before had included a bit more of Mary's sweeter points along with the sour points. This new Enigma book that you were involved with is certainly living up to what I would like to see written about Mrs. Lincoln - both sides of the story.

Your posting also saved me from posting a new thread. You mention John and Jane Watt and the obvious shenanigans that went on with them and Mary. Does anyone know how deep this graft was?

---

(11-25-2012 05:38 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Thanks for the acknowledgement of the Keckly project. She was a very special lady, IMO. We were able to raise $6000 for an impressive bronze marker. And, as a result of the publicity that the Washington Post gave us, the National Park Service contacted me for assistance in getting Mrs. Keckly added to their initiative on Trails to Freedom - recognizing the Underground Railroad as well as those who helped to aid the war's contraband. Our research librarian at Surratt House, Mrs. Sandra Walia, wrote the nomination papers, and we received word this past March that Mrs. Keckly is now part of that initiative. P.S. The photo of Mrs. Keckly that you see above is one that is not usually shown. We received the anonymous assistance in receiving this from someone that Roger recommended.

I also agree that Jennifer's book on the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth should be highly touted. I was somewhat dismayed to see that a new book is coming out on the same subject, but appears to be a mixture of fact with fiction. Why the fiction when Ms. Fleischner handled the facts so well?

And, Mike, thank you for a tremendous posting above. Your points are very well taken. I just wish that some of the authors who went before had included a bit more of Mary's sweeter points along with the sour points. This new Enigma book that you were involved with is certainly living up to what I would like to see written about Mrs. Lincoln - both sides of the story.

Your posting also saved me from posting a new thread. You mention John and Jane Watt and the obvious shenanigans that went on with them and Mary. Does anyone know how deep this graft was?

*********


I should explain Roger's commendation of Rich Smyth as the Project Originator. Mrs. Keckly had originally been buried in a D.C. cemetery that was abandonned in the mid-1900s and sold to a developer. Thousands of graves were moved by the developer, but not the gravestones. We had a photo of her original stone and only information that she had been re-interred at New Columbian (now National Memorial) Park in Landover, Maryland.

Rich became a member of the Surratt Society about the time he was grave sleuthing. His original efforts to get information from National Memorial Park were fruitless. However, cemetery management changed over the years, and a much more cooperative staff member located all of the paperwork - including the section and lot numbers for locating Mrs. Keckly. Once that happened, the fundraising began with the bulk of it being raised from private donors of the Surratt Society.

That success led us to embark on another project this past year. Christine Christensen of this forum and Utah became interested in Mrs. Surratt's lawyer, Frederick Aiken, when she learned that her favorite actor, James McAvoy was playing him in The Conspirator. There was very little known about Aiken until Christine started digging. About thirty, single-spaced pages later, Christine had produced a wonderful biography of the man. She also had developed a desire to see his grave marked. He had been in D.C.'s wonderful Oak Hill Cemetery for over one hundred years without a marker. This time, the Surratt Society undertook the fundraising all by themselves and raised over $3000 in a short period of time. The marker was dedicated this past June.

The Surratt Society has been instrumental now in marking three graves related to Lincoln and/or the assassination. The first was in the late-1970s with a joint project with the Mudd Society to mark Edman Spangler's grave in old St. Peter's Cemetery near the Mudd home. Then came one for Mrs. Keckly, and the next for Frederick Aiken.

When my turn comes, I hope they erect one a little smaller than the Washington Monument!!!

Kudos, indeed, Laurie! Imagine how many people in the future can come to know the Keckly story through your work. Thank you!

Laurie, thanks to your tireless work, they should name a National Holiday after you!!!!

Bless you, my child; but I fear that there are quite a few people who would protest against it! I have made hundreds of friends through my love of history, but I have also made some enemies. It's nice to hear words of appreciation, however.

While searching for something else, I came across this entry in the Lincoln Log concerning Mary Lincoln:

"Mrs. Lincoln prepares to serve Christmas dinner to wounded in hospitals." Philadelphia News, 24 December 1862.


She was a caring and compassionate person. Did she behave badly at times? Yes-and so do all people. Her negative reputation is certainly undeserved and unfair.

The secretaries called her "Her Satanic Majesty." You have to do something to deserve such a tribute. She seems to be at least disturbed or plagued by demons, headaches, poor health, very capable but maybe over active mind. The David Donald Lincoln biography attributes her behavior to jealousy. Jealousy is a very ugly human trait.

I'm looking forward to reading Enigma.

Jealousy is a very good point. This made me think of Hillary Clinton and some of the firsthand stories I've heard from staffers about her aloof behavior and the way she treats people. I remember an interview with her in 2008 when she slipped up and said "When I'm in the White House again......." it's interesting to think if Mary, with her high level of intelligence, secretly harbored a desire to be in Lincoln's place.

Rob, thanks for the link to Burlingham, very interesting.

I think she may have jealousy for the attention to Lincoln and Lincoln's attention. Maybe the "Her Majesty" comment points to her desire to be treated as Queen. What is the First Lady anyway if not Queen? Are there protocols and rules regarding her and what she is (or was) due?

(07-16-2012 10:58 AM)J. Beckert Wrote:  I think you summed that up very well, Laurie, but one thing I can't excuse is the story she once hit Lincoln in the face with a piece of firewood when he was having trouble starting a fire. Her Springfield behavior was so over the top, I really believe some kind of imbalance was going on with Mary before the stresses of the war.

According to new research, this particular story was told by a woman who worked for the Lincoln family. However, there is no historical evidence that the woman ever worked for them or even really knew them. For more information, read Richard Lawerence Miller's chapter in The Mary Lincoln Enigma.

(12-24-2012 07:39 AM)ReignetteC Wrote:  

(11-08-2012 12:29 PM)HerbS Wrote:  Tom,I agree with you 100%.After reading"Mary Todd Lincoln"by Jean Baker,my eyes were opened to "Give Mary A Break"!

Hi, Herb,

I'm in the "Give Mary a Break" camp, too!

Well-read and educated, Mary Lincoln was simply "born before her time."

ML endured tragedy that far exceeded Victorian expectations: She lost her mother at seven; half-brothers were killed in the Civil War; three of her four sons died in their youth; her husband was shot while she was holding his hand. And her son Robert was a greedy snob who cared not for his mother during her widow years, but for her money.

Mary Lincoln deserves a break!

Does defending Mary warrent accusing her son of being "a greedy snob who cared not for his mother during her widow years, but for her money?"

Robert was a wealthy man from his young adulthood because of his partnerships with his father's friends like David Davis who were also financial geniuses. He eventually became head of the Pullman Car Company and was quite wealthy when he died. Whether he was a snob, is a matter of opinion. He certainly was very reserved.

The time he was conservator for his mother he increased her wealth by $8,000 dollars, but refused the fee he was entitled to for acting as conservator.

He even suggested that she write him out of her will, so that she would not feel threatened that he was trying to steal her money which she was convinced. Ninian Edwards, Mary's brother-in-law even wrote to Robert, in 1874 at the height of the controversy, "I am sorry to say that your mother has for the last month been very much embittered against you, and has on several occasions said that she has hired two men to take your life."

I seriously doubt Mary did this, but I think it shows at this point she was clearly in need of help and her views on Robert and money were not really rational at this point.