Preponderance of the Evidence in a Civil Trial

[Steve Whitlock]

With all the questions as to whether or not Herndon's recollection of a carriage ride conversation is accurate or not, why would I then say 'I tend to believe the conversation took place'? The answer is because a main point is true as regards Nancy Hanks Lincoln being born out of wedlock. How else would Herndon know, unless Abe told him?

There was no mtdna testing back then, and Herndon's main informant, Dennis Friend Hanks, was claiming she was Nancy Sparrow, which resulted in Dennis losing his already suspect credibility.

Herndon interviewed John Hanks on the matter of Lincoln's parents, but seems to have missed contacting Sophia (Hanks) Lynch-LeGrand or her sister, Margaret (Hanks) LeGrand for more information. People were still living that could have provided firsthand information about the family of Thomas and Nancy (Hanks) Lincoln after Lincoln was assassinated. Why in the world didn't Herndon seek corroboration from others of the Hanks and Sparrow families? I guess because he was leaving it to Dennis for the research, instead of doing it himself. That makes everything hearsay, other than the letters.

Still, Herndon couldn't have known, at least with enough certainty to go public, that Nancy Hanks Lincoln had an unknown father unless Abe told him. Whether that conversation was on a walk, sitting in a carriage, or elsewhere I can't say with certainty, not to mention the "Lucy Hanks and a well-bred Virginia farmer or planter" part; however, should we ever discover who that well-bred VA farmer or planter is, then that would certainly give more credence to the story as being factual.