Roger,

It seems to me that one possibility could be that at the time no one thought much about Stanton's comments because of the overwhelming emotions wrought by Lincoln's death. If I'm not mistaken given that Hay did most of the writing of the Lincoln, and that he had a flair for the dramatic in his writing, that he knew that Stanton's words were a fitting coda to the Lincoln drama. What seems equally telling is that very few people tried to refute the quote even though Stanton was long dead and couldn't verify or refute any utterance. I cannot think of anyone who said that Stanton never said anything after Lincoln died, although at this time of the morning my thinking isn't the clearest.

Best
Rob

What Scott did not know when he proposed the topic for a presentation to the Surratt Society, is that I jumped on it because I (and I suspected many others) have a great interest in it. About five years ago, a professor at MIT (who happens to be my younger brother) asked me the "ages" or "angles" question, which prompted me do research on the topic and respond. While I did not know what Scott's findings or conclusions were in advance, I was confident that they would be well-researched and well-documented. My research was nowhere as near comprehensive as Scott's, but based on his presentation, i believe that he and I are in the same camp (although, as Scott suggests, we may have taken different paths to get there). I look forward to reading his published manuscript. In the meantime, I join with those thanking and congratulating Scott for a excellent presentation.

I saw the Society meeting & most of Ed's presentation but I was at work and missed Scott's portion. I would really like to see the recording of the entire conference.

(04-21-2021 10:31 AM)Wesley Harris Wrote:  I saw the Society meeting & most of Ed's presentation but I was at work and missed Scott's portion. I would really like to see the recording of the entire conference.

Wes - As I noted earlier, both speakers graciously gave us permission to record their presentations; however, both contain information that is subject to copyright, which limits our ability to post them at this point. When we are able to do so, we will make them available and I will announce that on this site.

Thank you to Steve Williams for sending this article. Regarding the article, Steve writes, "It's from page 2 of the April 26, 1865 edition of the Quincy Daily Whig (of Quincy Illinois) and contains a letter dated April 15, 1865 from Col. George Rutherford describing his participation in the events of that night.

Thanks to Steve Williams for sending this article. Steve writes, "It's an account of Lincoln's deathbed by A. F. Rockwell from page 14 of the 04 March 1888 edition of the Saint Paul Globe (MN).

(04-20-2021 12:37 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  However, Colonel George V. Rutherford stated he placed the coins, and the Chicago History Museum has an affidavit.

https://images.chicagohistory.org/asset/29269/

Many thanks to Steve Williams for attempting to find a legible version of the affidavits for the coins George Rutherford said he placed over the President's eyes. Steve's filtered version is still difficult to read; if anyone has access to a more readable version, please post!

Many thanks to Steve Williams for sending this account. Steve writes, "It's part of an undated account by Dr. Ezra W. Abbott of his actions during the night of the assassination. Unfortunately the auction site that sold the original letter only posted images of two pages (1st and 3rd?) of the four page account. It may have been written for a talk he gave

https://historical.ha.com/itm/autographs...14-61117.s

Dr. Abbott says that he was in Ford's Theatre during the assassination. He describes heading down stairs and then heading around the box, which would indicate Abbott had been sitting in the Family Circle. His description of Laura Keene already in the box by the time he got there would indicate that he got to the box well after Drs. Taft and King had entered the box. From the lack of description of his involvement in the care of Lincoln in the box, it's possible they were already preparing to move the President by the time he arrived at the box. He does say that he was one of six people to carry Lincoln across to Petersen House."

**********************************************************************

Although Dr. Abbott lists himself as one of those who carried the stricken President to the Petersen House, I have seen accounts in which Abbott is not listed at all. I know he is the doctor who kept track of Lincoln's pulse readings during the long night.

We seem to have another eyewitness who claims, years later, to have heard Stanton utter a version of the ages quote. According to the New Hampshire Historical Society, Dr. Ezra Abbott wrote:

During the entire night I kept the record, and the only one, of the president’s respiration and pulsation, noting them every half hour. At 3 a.m. I went to the office of the National Intelligencer and left a copy of my memoranda up to that time. I resumed my position at the foot of the sufferer’s bed, and remained there until he breathed his last, at 7:22 a.m. Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton immediately exclaimed, ′He now belongs to the ages.′

I don't know if this quote comes from one of the missing pages from the above account or another, or when it was written - the NHHS doesn't provide this information. They do say that a scrap of the sleeve of Lincoln's coat which had been cut off in the box and subsequently pocketed by Dr. Abbott was donated to the Society in 1921 by Abbott's niece.

Here's an article about Dr Abbott:

http://www.cowhampshireblog.com/2015/04/...ssination/

I've probably thought too much about this whole "coins on the eyes" question. Here's another account from 1914, by Lt. John Bolton who claimed he was the officer in charge of the Provost Guard at Ford's Theatre the night of the assassination:

A few minutes after seven o'clock on the morning of April 15th, Mr. Lincoln breathed his last. Mrs. Lincoln was summoned from the front parlor, where she had been waiting all night, to the death chamber. At this time I was in the hall and I recall very vividly the words she said as she passed me; they were; "Oh; why didn't you have me to him." (sic) After he died, Colonel Vincent — since promoted to General — asked me if I could get him a silver half-dollar; one of the officers had one and he wanted another to place over the President's eyes, to keep them closed after death. I obtained one from the landlady of the Falstaff House next door, giving her a dollar greenback for it, which was then the value of silver as compared with paper currency. This coin is still in my possession.
Forming my guard in line, we presented arms to the body of the President as it was carried past us to the hearse, after which I was relieved from duty.

(04-19-2021 05:21 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  I apologize to Scott if he clearly answered this question in his excellent talk. What surprises me is that there is even a debate on this. All 3 primary sources (John Hay, Dr. Charles Sabin Taft, and James Tanner who were present at the death scene) agree on Stanton saying "ages." No one who was present when Lincoln died claimed Stanton said "angels." So why is there a debate? In many instances what we know of the details of the Lincoln assassination saga is due to only one primary source, but in this case we actually have 3. So can someone clearly enunciate why the 3 primary sources are questioned?

Scott mentioned the names of many authors who use "ages" and many of whom use "angels." But somehow I missed the root cause of the debate.

Sorry about using a thread from 4 years ago out of the blue, especially about the 2021 Surratt Conference. But a thought about the whole "Ages" quote by Stanton came to me. It first appeared quoted by Hay in 1890, followed by Dr. Taft in this 1893 article in Century magazine, right?:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The...frontcover

Taft said he composed the article using notes he made the day after Lincoln's death. Has anybody examined Taft's original notes to see if they include the quote? I know it's a small detail that could've just been added to article based on memory (or what Taft thinks is a memory of his). But we won't know for sure until someone looks (if the original notes survive).

(03-06-2025 06:40 AM)Steve Wrote:  

(04-19-2021 05:21 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  I apologize to Scott if he clearly answered this question in his excellent talk. What surprises me is that there is even a debate on this. All 3 primary sources (John Hay, Dr. Charles Sabin Taft, and James Tanner who were present at the death scene) agree on Stanton saying "ages." No one who was present when Lincoln died claimed Stanton said "angels." So why is there a debate? In many instances what we know of the details of the Lincoln assassination saga is due to only one primary source, but in this case we actually have 3. So can someone clearly enunciate why the 3 primary sources are questioned?

Scott mentioned the names of many authors who use "ages" and many of whom use "angels." But somehow I missed the root cause of the debate.

Sorry about using a thread from 4 years ago out of the blue, especially about the 2021 Surratt Conference. But a thought about the whole "Ages" quote by Stanton came to me. It first appeared quoted by Hay in 1890, followed by Dr. Taft in this 1893 article in Century magazine, right?:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The...frontcover

Taft said he composed the article using notes he made the day after Lincoln's death. Has anybody examined Taft's original notes to see if they include the quote? I know it's a small detail that could've just been added to article based on memory (or what Taft thinks is a memory of his). But we won't know for sure until someone looks (if the original notes survive).

Steve - Great question, which I have researched and written an article that is far too long to post here (but I would be happy to send it to you privately). You are correct. The source of "Ages" is Nicolay and Hay in 1890; and Dr. Taft concurred in 1893. Of those present in 1865 at Lincoln's death, and who were still alive 25 years later, I have not found an original source that refutes Nicolay and Hay. In 1965, the Kunhardts published Twenty Days with "Angels." Unfortunately, they did not cite their source. If Dr. Taft's original notes from April 15, 1865 still exist, I have not seen them or even know where they might be. It may be a case of where "If the legend becomes fact, print the legend." Bill

(03-06-2025 01:04 PM)wpbinzel Wrote:  

(03-06-2025 06:40 AM)Steve Wrote:  

(04-19-2021 05:21 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  I apologize to Scott if he clearly answered this question in his excellent talk. What surprises me is that there is even a debate on this. All 3 primary sources (John Hay, Dr. Charles Sabin Taft, and James Tanner who were present at the death scene) agree on Stanton saying "ages." No one who was present when Lincoln died claimed Stanton said "angels." So why is there a debate? In many instances what we know of the details of the Lincoln assassination saga is due to only one primary source, but in this case we actually have 3. So can someone clearly enunciate why the 3 primary sources are questioned?

Scott mentioned the names of many authors who use "ages" and many of whom use "angels." But somehow I missed the root cause of the debate.

Sorry about using a thread from 4 years ago out of the blue, especially about the 2021 Surratt Conference. But a thought about the whole "Ages" quote by Stanton came to me. It first appeared quoted by Hay in 1890, followed by Dr. Taft in this 1893 article in Century magazine, right?:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The...frontcover

Taft said he composed the article using notes he made the day after Lincoln's death. Has anybody examined Taft's original notes to see if they include the quote? I know it's a small detail that could've just been added to article based on memory (or what Taft thinks is a memory of his). But we won't know for sure until someone looks (if the original notes survive).

Steve - Great question, which I have researched and written an article that is far too long to post here (but I would be happy to send it to you privately). You are correct. The source of "Ages" is Nicolay and Hay in 1890; and Dr. Taft concurred in 1893. Of those present in 1865 at Lincoln's death, and who were still alive 25 years later, I have not found an original source that refutes Nicolay and Hay. In 1965, the Kunhardts published Twenty Days with "Angels." Unfortunately, they did not cite their source. If Dr. Taft's original notes from April 15, 1865 still exist, I have not seen them or even know where they might be. It may be a case of where "If the legend becomes fact, print the legend." Bill

I am still working on my article (mentioned earlier in this thread) on this topic. Part of the problem has been that as I continue to chip away at some research threads, I am actually finding some new things - so I am hesitant about finishing up the article in fear I might find something critical after I have submitted for publication. I would say my final conclusion remains the same but one of the things I have found since my talk is quite important and I think strengthens my conclusion. That said, I have couple more threads to pull on and who knows what I will find. But I hope to have my final draft ready for publication by the end of 2025.

Anyway, I thought I would chip in here too. In doing so, I will reiterate/agree with a lot of what Bill said.

As far as I have found, "ages" first appearance is indeed the Nicolay and Hay biography of Lincoln from 1890. Though Twenty Days (1965) was the work that gained the most traction with respect to the use of "angels," Dorothy Kundardt wrote an earlier article that espoused the same idea that it was "angels" not ages. And I found while doing research that "angels" actually shows up as early as 1899 in a newspaper article and several other places in the early 20th century. But, as Bill said above, there are no accounts from people actually (or at least purported to be) at Lincoln's deathbed that use "angels." Or at east none that I have yet found. Twenty Days uses James Tanner as it's source (though the written account they re-produce is not actually cited, so we can't verify it or its origin). However, in my research, I have found at least 3 accounts by Tanner, all signed in ink by him, and in all of them he uses "ages."

As far as Taft goes, he went from publishing an early account where he did not make any mention of Stanton having said anything to then much, much later giving his version of the "ages" line in 1893. Like Bill, I have never come across any original notes from Taft. If they do exist, I would speculate they are in a private collection somewhere.

Lastly I feel like I should mention that my original talk was about "ages" vs "angels" because they are the most commonly cited as being part of what Stanton said. BUT there are other words that have been attributed to Stanton at Lincoln's deathbed (not having ages or angels in their construction) in other published accounts. And one such account was from someone who was purportedly in the room. So that does contradict (though not enough to refute) Nicolay and Hay.

(03-06-2025 04:08 PM)STS Lincolnite Wrote:  I am still working on my article (mentioned earlier in this thread) on this topic. Part of the problem has been that as I continue to chip away at some research threads, I am actually finding some new things - so I am hesitant about finishing up the article in fear I might find something critical after I have submitted for publication. I would say my final conclusion remains the same but one of the things I have found since my talk is quite important and I think strengthens my conclusion. That said, I have couple more threads to pull on and who knows what I will find. But I hope to have my final draft ready for publication by the end of 2025.

Anyway, I thought I would chip in here too. In doing so, I will reiterate/agree with a lot of what Bill said.

As far as I have found, "ages" first appearance is indeed the Nicolay and Hay biography of Lincoln from 1890. Though Twenty Days (1965) was the work that gained the most traction with respect to the use of "angels," Dorothy Kundardt wrote an earlier article that espoused the same idea that it was "angels" not ages. And I found while doing research that "angels" actually shows up as early as 1899 in a newspaper article and several other places in the early 20th century. But, as Bill said above, there are no accounts from people actually (or at least purported to be) at Lincoln's deathbed that use "angels." Or at east none that I have yet found. Twenty Days uses James Tanner as it's source (though the written account they re-produce is not actually cited, so we can't verify it or its origin). However, in my research, I have found at least 3 accounts by Tanner, all signed in ink by him, and in all of them he uses "ages."

As far as Taft goes, he went from publishing an early account where he did not make any mention of Stanton having said anything to then much, much later giving his version of the "ages" line in 1893. Like Bill, I have never come across any original notes from Taft. If they do exist, I would speculate they are in a private collection somewhere.

Lastly I feel like I should mention that my original talk was about "ages" vs "angels" because they are the most commonly cited as being part of what Stanton said. BUT there are other words that have been attributed to Stanton at Lincoln's deathbed (not having ages or angels in their construction) in other published accounts. And one such account was from someone who was purportedly in the room. So that does contradict (though not enough to refute) Nicolay and Hay.

I'll look forward to reading your article when it eventually comes out. When/were was Taft's earlier account published? I wasn't aware that he published an earlier account prior to 1893.

(03-07-2025 05:48 AM)Steve Wrote:  I'll look forward to reading your article when it eventually comes out. When/were was Taft's earlier account published? I wasn't aware that he published an earlier account prior to 1893.

I'm not at home right now, but as I recall, Taft wrote an article for a weekly medical magazine. It was published in late April 1865 (so VERY early after the assassination). I will look in my files when I get home and try to find the exact date and publication...