At the end, did MTL have a sense of vindication

[STS Lincolnite]

All this certainly seems to call into question the veracity of Stackpole's claim - especially in the time frame it was claimed to have happened. Once again, the group here is a true wonder!

[RJNorton]

(04-24-2015 04:04 PM)LincolnToddFan Wrote:  Anyway, my understanding is that MTL returned to Washington

You are correct, Toia. According to Lincoln-Day-By Day she returned to Washington on April 1. However, she departed Washington to go back on April 5 (leaving Washington at 11:00 A.M.) accompanied by Senator Sumner, Senator Harlan and family, Mrs. Keckly, and Marquis de Chambrun. She stayed until April 8 at 11:00 P.M. when the Presidential party departed City Point for the return trip to Washington. Still absolutely no mention of Stackpole on Mary's second trip!

All we have on this is Herndon's handwritten notes from an interview with Ward Hill Lamon. I do wonder if either Herndon or Lamon were confused...perhaps putting (creating?) words in Stackpole's mouth?

[STS Lincolnite]

Am I correct in remembering that the River Queen was a commercial vessel that was chartered by the War Department and captained by a steamer line employee (not the military)? If this is true, is it possible that Mr. Stackpole was a member of the crew of the River Queen (maybe the Captain's steward or some such position) and thus would not be listed as one of the party aboard the River Queen?

[Eva Elisabeth]

Stackpole was fired in 1865 - but when? Before or after the incident? By whom and why? I wonder if this influenced memories..

As for Lamon, Lamon's account of Lincoln's premonitious dream is questionable as well as his Gettysburg reminiscences, about which David Donald wrote:"Lamon's detailed acccount of the Gettysburg ceremonies is highly unreliable, but the quoted sentence ['Lamon, that speech won't scour!'] does sound like Lincoln." Who knows how accurate his memories were in this case?

In any case I consider both, Lamon and Herndon, capable of being great story-tellers and describing and re-telling incidents and memories (also those of third parties) purposefully in a more dramatical way than appropriate.

[RJNorton]

(04-25-2015 03:44 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  In any case I consider both, Lamon and Herndon, capable of being great story-tellers and describing and re-telling incidents and memories (also those of third parties) purposefully in a more dramatical way than appropriate.

I second you, Eva. IMO, anyway, someone made a mistake here - personally I do not believe Stackpole was aboard with the Presidential party on the River Queen (although Scott's scenario cannot be ruled out based on what I have read).

[LincolnToddFan]

I have considered Scott's theory too Roger. It is possible that Stackpole was aboard the River Queen as a member of the crew.

But if he was indeed fired in 1865 that leaves a very brief window for it to have taken place...Lincoln was dead roughly about 2 weeks after City Point/River Queen, right?

[RJNorton]

I have searched for the date in 1865 when Stackpole was fired, but so far I have drawn a blank. I cannot find a date - frustrating!

[Eva Elisabeth]

Regarding Mary blamed quite a lot of people for less (or even unjustly), isn't it strange that she never (to my knowledge - or did I miss/forget anything?) namely blamed JWB or one of the other conspirators (while she e.g. blamed Johnson for being involved)? Did she ever comment on the verdict, the hanging, or the Ft. Jefferson party's release?

[LincolnToddFan]

Yes, Eva I agree. I always thought it odd that there is no published reference that MTL makes to her husband's killer by name, or even the conspirators. The closest she came was when she wrote to Francis Bicknell Carpenter on Nov15 1865, exactly seven months to the day of Lincoln's death:

"....I firmly believe, that if he had remained at the W.H. on that night of darkness when the fiends prevailed, he would have been horribly cut to pieces-Those fiends, had too long contemplated this inhuman murder to have allowed him to escape[/i]." MTL Letters, Anthology pg# 285

She seems to have believed he would have met Seward's fate even if he'd stayed home that night.

In any case, MTL's silence on the subject of her husband's assassin isn't really unique. JFK's widow dismissed Oswald as "that silly little Communist" and during the trial of Sirhan Sirhan who assassinated RFK, his widow Ethel forbade anyone to mention his name or the trial in her presence. "Anyone who does is not a friend" is what she is said to have remarked. (The Kennedys: An American Drama, Peter Collier& David Horowitz)

[Juan Marrero]

That's right. Mrs. Kennedy said that, if her husband had to be murdered, she regretted that it was not for civil rights, rather than by "a silly, little Communist". Consciously or not, she was in line with the Johnson Admistration's efforts to downplay Oswald's Communist affections, particulary for the Castro regime. No one wanted WW III.

Mrs. Lincoln, by not accusing the Confederacy and J. Davis in particular as being de facto co-conspirators, also helped avoid further bitterness. Her silence can be taken as admirable discretion by one whom could really have made a national scene at that juncture.

I find it interesting that late in her widowhood she travelled to Florida for a "cure", traversing the Deep South by herself. Even if travelling under an assumed name, she manifested a lack of resentment towards the South and, also physical and moral courage.

She doesn't get half the respect she deserves. Mary Lincoln: "Frequently wrong on the small things; mostly right on the big things."

[L Verge]

Excellent points, Juan. I just wish that Herndon and Burlingame (and others) could read them.

[Eva Elisabeth]

(04-27-2015 01:08 PM)Juan Marrero Wrote:  I find it interesting that late in her widowhood she travelled to Florida for a "cure", traversing the Deep South by herself. Even if travelling under an assumed name, she manifested a lack of resentment towards the South and, also physical and moral courage.

As for the courage - she had always loved traveling and was fearless in this regard. Even in Frankfurt she wasn't frightened by the Franco-Prussian war and reluctant to leave.

She travled to Florida for the climate, to escape the cold, depressing winter that worsened her ailments (a desire which I can understand more than well) - and where else could she have gone for this purpose? To me, Florida has certainly great potential to be a "curable" place, and Mary obviously felt the same when she wrote to Myra Bradwell from St. Augustine on Feb. 20, 1875:
"...I have so often wished we could be together in this "Sunny clime". I am now looking down upon a yard with its roses, white lilacs and other flowers...On the 11th of Feb. we started for this place. If...the most charming scenery on the celebrated Ochlawahs river could give pleasure, then it was certainly mine. Words would fail in description going from the broad St. John's into the narrow streams. With scenery such as is seldom met with in this world..." [Agreed!]
I do not think it came to Mary's mind to blame the climate and landscape for being a one-time Confederate state...
   
Also as for her lack of resentment towards the South, she was well in line with her husband who didn't consider the southern citizens enemies, just resented "some rebels", and considered "Dixie" Union property with the end of the war. So - why should Mary not have seen Florida the same way?