Mary was a leaker

[David Lockmiller]

(10-12-2017 04:12 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Regarding her loyalty, Mary Lincoln withstood a lot of strange rumors - I once read that at least one newspaper wrote that Confederate agents came by ladder to her bedroom window at night where she passed military secrets to them!

Roger, I thought that you might want to consider the following which came first "chicken or the egg" story in Reveille in Washington: 1860 - 1865 by Margaret Leech.

As a measure of self-protection, Mrs. Lincoln ceased to open her own mail. The second assistant secretary, William O. Stoddard, read every letter that came to her, even from her sisters, and examined every package. He could testify that there was no treasonable matter in any of them. Stoddard was a rather stuffy fellow, whom Nicolay and Hay disliked. He admired Mrs. Lincoln, and was angry at the injustice of the charges of disloyalty. Standing at the window of Mrs. Lincoln's sitting-room, the Red Room, he sarcastically reflected that this must be the scene of her betrayal of the Union plans. "The Confederate spies work their way through the lines easily enough, fort after fort, till they reach the Potomac down yonder. The Long Bridge is closed to them, and so is the Georgetown Bridge, but they cross at night in rowboats, or by swimming, and they come up through the grounds, like so many ghosts, and they put a ladder up to this window, and Mrs. Lincoln hands them out the plans."

[RJNorton]

In researching this topic, I came upon a 1973 letter. I thought it was of interest. Here is the text:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

July 6, 1973

Senator Lowell Weicker
U. S. Senate
Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Weicker:

On page 13, the July 9, 1973 issue of Time quotes your allusion to Abraham Lincoln's visit to Congress to vindicate his wife from charges of disloyalty.

You apparently relied on Sandburg, who is, alas, a notoriously unreliable source. We doubt that the incident ever occurred. The only evidence for its occurrence stems from a clipping in the files of the
Lincoln Library and Museum that appeared in a Washington newspaper sometime between 1904 and 1916 (the article was so clipped that the name and date of the newspaper do not appear).

The author of the article, one E. J. Edwards, says the "anecdote" (his word) came from General Thomas L. James. At the time James was Postmaster General in Garfield's cabinet an unnamed "member of the Senate committee on the conduct of the war in Lincoln's first administration" allegedly related the story of Lincoln's surprise appearance.

The anecdote seems very doubtful. For one thing, the Committee on the Conduct of the War was a joint committee, not a Senate committee. The biographies of Senate members of the committee do not mention the incident. Time alleges that the story came from the "committee's chairman." The chairman was Senator Benjamin Wade of Ohio, but his biographers, H. L. Trefousse and A. G. Riddle, make no mention of the incident.

Mary Lincoln's biographer, Ruth Painter Randall, questioned the likelihood that the event ever occurred, and she did this reluctantly because she liked to picture Lincoln's wife as a victim maligned by unfair criticism. The story would have fit Mrs. Randall's argument perfectly, but as an historian she knew she must discredit what, as a Mary Lincoln apologist, she may have wanted to believe.

Yours truly,

The Staff

Lincoln Library and Museum
Lincoln National Life Foundation
Fort Wayne, Indiana

[David Lockmiller]

(10-16-2017 04:30 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  In researching this topic, I came upon a 1973 letter. I thought it was of interest. Here is the text:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

July 6, 1973

Senator Lowell Weicker
U. S. Senate
Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Weicker:



Yours truly,

The Staff

Lincoln Library and Museum
Lincoln National Life Foundation
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Here's another coincidence:

Gerald J. Prokopowicz specializes in Public History and the Civil War era. He received his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Michigan, and practiced law for several years in Chicago. He received his Ph.D. from Harvard University, and served for nine years as the Lincoln Scholar at the Lincoln Museum in Fort Wayne, Indiana, where he co-wrote the award winning permanent exhibit “Abraham Lincoln and the American Experiment,” and edited the quarterly bulletin Lincoln Lore.

[David Lockmiller]

The bottom line on this topic for me is the following analysis which begins with the Hertz version of this story:

"During a crucial period of the war many malicious stories were in circulation, based upon the suspicion that Mrs. Lincoln was in sympathy with the Confederacy. These reports were inspired by the fact that some of Mrs. Lincoln's relatives were in the Confederate service. At last reports that were more than vague gossip were brought to the attention of some of my colleagues in the Senate. They made specific accusation that Mrs. Lincoln was giving important information to secret agents of the Confederacy. These reports were laid before my committee [on the Conduct of the War] and the committee thought it an imperative duty to investigate them, although it was the most embarrassing and painful task imposed upon us.

The sessions of the committee were necessarily secret. We had just been called to order by the chairman, when the officer stationed at the committee-room door opened it and came in with a half-frightened, half-embarrassed expression on his face. Before he had the opportunity to make explanation, we understood the reason for his excitement. For at the foot of the table, standing solitary, his hat in his hand, his tall form towering above the committee members, Abraham Lincoln stood. Had he come by some incantation, thus appearing of a sudden before us unannounced, we could not have been more astounded.

The pathos that was written upon Lincoln's face, the almost unhuman sadness that was in his eyes as he looked upon us, and above all an indescribable sense of his complete isolation--the sad solitude which is inherent in all true grandeur of character and intellect--all this revealed Lincoln to me and I think to every member of the committee in the finer, subtler light whose illumination faintly set forth fundamental nature of this man. No one spoke, for none knew what to say. The President had not been asked to come before the committee, nor was it suspected that he had information that we were to investigate the reports, which, if true, fastened treason upon his family in the White House.

At last Lincoln spoke, slowly, with infinite sorrow in his tone, and he said:

"I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, appear of my own volition before this committee of the Senate to say that I, of my own knowledge, know that it is untrue that any of my family hold treasonable communication with the enemy."

Having said that, Lincoln went away as silently and solitary as he came. We sat for some moments speechless. Then by tacit agreement, no word being spoken, the committee dropped all consideration of the rumors that the wife of the President was betraying the Union. We had seen Abraham Lincoln in the solemn and isolated majesty of his real nature. We were so greatly affected that the committee adjourned sine die."


To the very best of my knowledge, there has never been made in any Lincoln scholarly work a reference to a report made by the Committee on the Conduct of the War on the subject of the "specific accusation that Mrs. Lincoln was giving important information to secret agents of the Confederacy." Why not? There was no investigation? I think that there were just the beginnings of such a legitimate investigation. The only logical explanation to me that the Committee's investigation went no further than it did is the alleged appearance before the Committee on that fateful day by President Lincoln that properly resulted in no more consideration of the subject by the members of the Committee.

As to other scholarly analyses that have concluded there is no precedent for the President of the United States to appear before a Congressional Committee to give testimony, I also believe that there was no precedent for the President of the United States to attend the Hampton Roads Conference to discuss with high-ranking members of the Confederacy an end to the Civil War. The bottom line for consideration is that President Abraham Lincoln was a pragmatic Man.

[Gene C]

Great comments David.

I would like to add, it seems to me that according to Hertz, the committee was somewhat embarrassed by their behavior and chose to refrain from commenting about the event. I feel sorry for Lincoln just reading this, imagine the impact on those attending the meeting (if true)

[JMadonna]

Mary had some kin in high places.

http://www.mrlincolnswhitehouse.org/resi...-grimsley/

“Cousin Lizzie,” Mary Todd Lincoln’s cousin, came to the White House with the Lincolns and described her temporary home as being “in a perfect state of readiness for the incomers—A competent chef, with efficient butler and waiters.” Mary Todd Lincoln was fond her cousin: “She is a noble, good woman & has been purified, through much trial.”

Another relative (through Mrs. Lincoln’s stepmother), former Vice President John C. Breckinridge, took a different approach when he visited the White House in the spring of 1861. Like Mrs. Lincoln, he was a Kentuckian with a tendency toward biting sarcasm. Unlike Mrs. Lincoln, Breckinridge sided with the Confederacy and told their mutual cousin: “Cousin Lizzie, I would not like you to be disappointed in your expected stay at the White House, so I will now invite you to remain here as a guest, when the Confederation takes possession.”

[RJNorton]

Dr. Mark E. Neely, Jr. is a non-believer. He authored an article in the January 1975 Lincoln Lore entitled "Abraham Lincoln did NOT Defend His Wife Before the Committee on the Conduct of the War."

Dr. Neely concluded his article by writing:

"The myth of Lincoln's defense of his wife before Ben Wade's Committee is based on flimsy evidence and a great deal of desire — desire to make the abolitionists look bad, desire to make Mrs. Lincoln's critics seem at once unreasonable and influential, and desire to prescribe a standard of political behavior for today's Presidents. Whatever the merit of these desires, no cause is well served by making precedents from shoddy anecdotes. We have been watching the birth of a myth; let us hope soon to see its quiet demise."

https://archive.org/stream/abrahamlincol...c_djvu.txt

[David Lockmiller]

(10-17-2017 10:01 AM)Gene C Wrote:  Great comments David.

I would like to add, it seems to me that according to Hertz, the committee was somewhat embarrassed by their behavior and chose to refrain from commenting about the event. I feel sorry for Lincoln just reading this, imagine the impact on those attending the meeting (if true)

Thanks for your comments, Gene, and I agree with the comments that you made with the exception that I believe that the members of the Committee now understood President Lincoln's perspective on the importance of the subject matter which they were considering upon the actual Union war efforts.

But you must remember this: If you side with me, you are opposing virtually all eminent Lincoln scholars (Yes, including Roger) that have ever considered this subject matter.

You seem to be forgetting your own standard signature on all of your posts:

"So when is this "Old Enough To Know Better" supposed to kick in?"

[kerry]

I'm doing research into the newspaper articles of that time. I was keeping my eye out for this issue. I have to go back and look but I think the story originated much earlier than that in some form.

It may be conflated with the fact that during February 1862 with the Wikoff issue, Lincoln was widely reported as personally appearing before the committee investigating it. He did so voluntarily. Apparently there are no records of what he said in the archives, so it was off-the-record. None of the papers reported on the content of the speech or questioned it, which is odd. I don't know why they'd suddenly agree to stop probing when they'd been after revealing Mary as the culprit. Willie was dying at the time, so maybe Lincoln went in and begged them not to go further. The reports could have been wrong, but it does seem like Lincoln appeared before a committee in defense of his wife.

[Steve]

It turns out the story is true! On page 1 of the 14 February 1862 edition of the Philadelphia Inquirer, a dispatch of the previous day by one of their reporters in Washington says:

"President Lincoln attended the session of the Committee, this morning, and made a statement which proved conclusively that it was by no connivance with any member of his family that the document was permitted to be read."

Here's a copy of the entire article:

   

[kerry]

Yup, that's one of the articles I saw too - it was widely circulated, but no one reported what he said. I don't understand why Sickles was taking care of it and being Wikoff's lawyer - it seems like he had other things to do at the time, and his presence just drew attention. The articles also report that once Lincoln spoke, Wikoff gave Watt's name, and Watt was brought in, but it isn't clear what exactly he said or what his punishment was. It doesn't appear there ever was one - the Committee was after political points by revealing Mary as the culprit. They lost interest in the outrage over the message once they were defeated. Wikoff claims he was grilled as to everything that went on in the Lincoln home (I think he dodged the questions). I've seen bribery stated as Mary's motive, but I always thought it seemed more like she was sharing it with a supposed friend (how much of the message leaked? Wikoff made it sound like a few lines). Wikoff was someone who liked to talk politics and literature so he could have made it seem like an innocent request. If it was bribery, that was obviously a big problem and one Lincoln knew about early on. If Mary wanted to make money selling White House secrets, I think we'd have a lot more newspaper reports than the ones I've found. I've been typing up the articles trying to make sense of the saga. It's also possible that Lincoln told the truth to the committee and Mary was not involved, but the Committee thought she was. I imagine he had some clever way of not lying while still "proving conclusively" no one in his household was involved. This did not involve charges of disloyalty, but there were implications that the leaker was disloyal, and the House kept trying to accuse White House servants of being disloyal. It should also be noted that Wikoff was good friends with Seward and worked for Lincoln's 1864 reelection. He definitely had a reputation, but tons of top people socialized with him because he was quite interesting. He wasn't a pariah as he is painted in the stories of this incident. Mary probably should not have trusted him, but it doesn't appear he fell out with the Lincoln administration, despite reports of him being thrown out by Lincoln himself. The whole story is crazy.

[Steve]

Although the Inquirer article doesn't quote Lincoln directly, I would still imagine that he made a denial similar to "it was by no connivance with any member of his family that the document was permitted to be read". It mirrors the wording of the traditional account but emphasising more on a denial of Mary's leaking rather than any perceived disloyalty on her part. Although, the Inquirer leaves open if Lincoln then went more in-depth than that.

I've seen several articles mentioning Lincoln going to the committee but as far as I can tell the Inquirer article is the only one that describes what he said.

[RJNorton]

From Lincoln Day By Day for February 13, 1862:

"President appears before House Judiciary Committee in matter of premature publication of last Annual Message." N.Y. Tribune, 14 February 1862.

I am confused - is this also the same date as Lincoln's alleged visit to the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War?

[kerry]

It seems like he appeared before the House Judiciary Committee and it has been reported incorrectly as the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War. Some people were probably members of both. I think someone got the story mixed up years later when it resurfaced a decade or more later.

[kerry]

In late February or early March 1862 (I found it quoted in an issue of Crisis), the Herald published the following, which shows the politicized aspects of the inquiry. The Herald was sort of pro-Lincoln but would do it in an over-the-top way that caused backlash. I believe that it was the main purpose of the meeting. He "voluntarily" appeared, so he wasn't called. The committee was holding hearings on that issue, and according to later reports that misreport it as the Conduct of War Committee, was apparently stunned and embarrassed when Lincoln appeared, and let the matter drop.

“Beau Hickman’s Kitchen Committee is making progress. It has finished its examination of the contemptuous Chevalier Wykoff, and is now engaged with the floral Watts. Watts used to be the gardener of the White House, and Beau Hickman expects to get a great deal of information from him. We hope he may. What Watts don’t know about flowers and kitchen gardening is not worth knowing, and the longer the Paul Prys of the committee pump Watts the better they will be able to rival Linnaeus or keep a hot-house on their own books. Naturally enough, the first questions Beau Hickman proposed to Watts were about the flowers used at the White House ball. It is amusing to observe how interested and curious these long-haired, uninvited abolitionists are about that ball, and how anxiously they endeavor to glean the particulars in regard to it. The committee smelled treason stratagems or spoils in every flower that adorned the White House tables upon the night of the ball; and if this had been the old War of the Roses revived, Beau Hickman could not have been more minute in his inquiries about the White House garden. We are told in Scripture that gratitude things sometimes come out of a grain of mustard seed; and the Kitchen Committee evidently applies this principle to flower and vegetable seeds as well. The relation between turnips and treason, raiders and rebellion, salad and State secrets, is as clear as amber to the inquiring mind of the investigating Hickman. To him camellias suggest contracts; dahlias, dangerous delays to advance; japonicas, jealousies of McClellan; and lilacs, Mrs. Lincoln’s influence with the President. Particular attention was directed to cabbages, their culture and use: for to the wise heads of the Kitchen Committee, the subject of cabbages includes Cameron, Cabinet conferences, closets, coteries, and circumstance generally...By his shrewd device Beau Hickman succeeded in eliciting many important facts, which may be included in the agricultural volumes of the Patent office reports…He learned, also, that upon one memorable day, Watts, having occasion to read up a little on the abstruse subject of dandelions, went to to the Presidential Library for that purpose, and saw lying upon the table the forthcoming message of the president. The message being written in a good round hand, and Watts having enjoyed the blessings of a public school education, the gardener was enabled to read the document in question; and he forthwith culled the sweet flowers of the President’s rhetoric, formed them into a bouquet and turned them in the flowerstand of memory….The proclivities of servants to pry into their master’s affairs is a fact so new, so unheard of and so startling, that Beau Hickman expects to be hailed as a sort of kitchen Columbus, and will patent his discovery as soon as possible….Nor is the matter to end here. All the servants of the White House are to be brought before the Kitchen Committee. President Lincoln was overheard repeating certain portions of his message to the partner of his bosom while dressing, and so all the pretty chambermaids of the White House are to be examined. The bill of fare for the White House dinner, was written one day, upon the back of an unfinished draft of the message, and therefore the White House cook and other members of the genuine Kitchen Cabinet are to be questioned by Hickman….There never was such a chance of becoming acquainted with the kitchen, the laundry, the chambers, the closets….the cellar, and every other private department of the White House, before, and Beau Hickman knows it…..Such fellows as Hickman and his tribe of bigoted, spiteful abolitionists … indulge a petty malice against a lady whose position and sex alike should shield her from insult….Congress authorizes and encourages this indecent, malicious, and ill-timed investigation, during the crisis of a struggle for national existence…"

I didn't gather the positive reports about Mary yet, but one thing I noticed is that people who had everyday contact with her were generally positive. Servants, soldiers, bodyguards, and close neighbors might mention her temper, but would say she was a basically good person. That's nearly universal, which I think says something. People living in Springfield or Washington but who did not know her well generally were quite negative, because they would know of the most volatile incidents only. Press coverage during the War was mixed - the bad press coverage was everywhere after the ball/Wikoff issue, which happened at the same time, but Willie died during that time, so I doubt they ever processed it much. The other round of attacks was October 1864 - intended as an October Surprise. After Lincoln's death it was bad, but she had a few defenders. Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote, in 1867 I believe, “Her unfortunate organization, a tendency to insanity (for which she is not responsible), increased and aggravated by the great sadness of her husband, which rested like a dark cloud most of the time on his household, furnish a sufficient excuse for many of her idiosyncrasies of character.” This was obviously a while before she was found insane. I also found an interview in which Harriet Tubman said she wouldn't meet with Lincoln because she did not believe him to be serious about racial equality, but she would meet with Mary. She gave no details.