He Served in Place of Abraham Lincoln

[Gene C]

(01-24-2016 08:25 AM)maharba Wrote:  When he filed for a small pension, it is appalling that the cronies who had prospered so well under Lincoln and Grant merely lounged idly by. The War office shuffling papers and losing them, and no one at all there seeming to notice or hear Summerfield whose War service standing in the place of Abraham Lincoln, was unprecedented and totally unique.

In all of the links posted I must have overlooked where it stated Larner was aware of Summerfield's pension request and was instrumental in it being denied. The quote attributed to Larner regarding Summerfield is independent of Summerfield's pension problems.
What purpose or motive does Larner have in having this pension request denied?
Other than Larner, what cronies are you referring to?
What are their names?

Since Summerfield's claim comes 20 years after the war, unfortunately but not unique to Summerfield, the burden of proof that his disability was due as a direct result of his service in the war rests with Summerfield, not the War Dept.

Why do you refer to him as Summerfield when his last name was Staples?
Is all this attention to his pension request another Fractured Fairy Tail?

[L Verge]

That's not a "chase," sir or madam; that's just another skipping down the path of suppositions and personal opinions that you are so good at. Please show us how Larner benefited from securing Staples (whom you have now decided to call by his middle name, btw) as a substitute for Lincoln. Is there a paper trail that we fail to see? Did he get promoted to the top of the heap of political supporters? Where's the evidence of cronyism?

If Larner was anything like thousands of survivors of the Civil War, his experiences (as civilian or military) stuck with him He might still be prone to making sarcastic remarks to cover memories. Frankly, Staples did nothing out of the ordinary during his brief service in Lincoln's stead to be remembered for - other than having papers that listed him as Lincoln's representative. Personally, I feel that the historians who have traced the facts of Staples's service have done him justice, and you are making a mountain out of a mole hill in your never-ending pursuit of digging up dirt on Abraham Lincoln and his associates - or chastising historians for having to omit parts of history that are sidebars to the BIG picture.

BTW: Are you a Mr. or Mrs. or Ms so that I may address you properly? Also, do you live in the U.S.? Just curious, so I apologize if I offend with these questions.

[Susan Higginbotham]

Other than being denied a pension (which he may not have been entitled to anyway), what was disgraceful about Staples' treatment? He wasn't exposed to combat during his time as Lincoln's substitute. He was buried with military honors, and his service was noted by a number of newspapers in the days following his death. He didn't die in poverty, and the cause of his death, a heart attack, doesn't appear to have been related to his service. He was commemorated by a plaque on a bridge in 1933 (lost when the bridge was destroyed in a flood in 1955) and by a plaque at the cemetery in which he was buried in 1941, and the DAR arranged to have his weathered tombstone replaced in 1987. He may be an obscure figure today, but he certainly hasn't been erased from history.

[RJNorton]

(01-24-2016 11:51 AM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  but he certainly hasn't been erased from history.

I agree. Based on my work with students over the past 20 years this is a very common extra credit question given by teachers: to find the name of Lincoln's representative recruit.

[maharba]

but he certainly hasn't been erased from history.>

I agree. Based on my work with students over the past 20 years this is a very common extra credit question given by teachers: to find the name of Lincoln's representative recruit.>

Really. And this was easily done by students, before the net? Before I made my initial post on Summerfield, I 'searched' this forum for any prior mention of him. In the many thousands of postings, not one mention found for Summerfield that I could find at all.

[Susan Higginbotham]

(01-25-2016 10:52 AM)maharba Wrote:  but he certainly hasn't been erased from history.>

I agree. Based on my work with students over the past 20 years this is a very common extra credit question given by teachers: to find the name of Lincoln's representative recruit.>

Really. And this was easily done by students, before the net? Before I made my initial post on Summerfield, I 'searched' this forum for any prior mention of him. In the many thousands of postings, not one mention found for Summerfield that I could find at all.

Maybe because the man's name was Staples? In any case, he's mentioned in Sandburg's biography, so a student should have been able to find that reference easily enough sans Internet. There's also an article about him in the November 1991 issue of America's Civil War, which a check in the Index to Periodical Literature would have revealed in the good ol' days.

[L Verge]

(01-25-2016 10:52 AM)maharba Wrote:  but he certainly hasn't been erased from history.>

I agree. Based on my work with students over the past 20 years this is a very common extra credit question given by teachers: to find the name of Lincoln's representative recruit.>

Really. And this was easily done by students, before the net? Before I made my initial post on Summerfield, I 'searched' this forum for any prior mention of him. In the many thousands of postings, not one mention found for Summerfield that I could find at all.

Maybe because you kept searching under "Summerfield??" Sarcasm aside, just because you found no one on this forum mentioning Staples, doesn't mean that none of us knew about him. Are you now judging us on how much we know and don't know? True education is always ongoing.

[Eva Elisabeth]

Re.:"Really. And this was easily done by students, before the net? Before I made my initial post on Summerfield, I 'searched' this forum for any prior mention of him. In the many thousands of postings, not one mention found for Summerfield that I could find at all."

Maharba, since it is you who wants this to be discussed and wants this to be a quality educational forum (which includes appropriate reliable wording and information) please DO discuss with us, i.e. kindly reply and help to keep this a place where students can learn (also social and communicative skills, not libel and slander) and rely on.

I repeat my questions form my post #59 (and some other members had posted similar to no avail) in hope to receive an answer from you this time. Thanks.

1. Re: "Poor Summerfield and family got to hear of the sneering comments directed against him by Lincoln's crony, and that "he was a ne'er' do well who probably died in the Wilderness'."

What were supposed to be the sneering comments? Or "scorning comments", as you said now? From the newspaper article I cannot see he knew about the pension request/issue nor that he was still alive at all. From where do you evidently know he knew? It seems to me, Larner just reported what he knew at the time the interview was held. So, what sneering/scoring comments do you refer to?

2. Who is the other of the both supposed to be in "Do you not see the irony in both their treatment of Summerfield and that they refused him even a small pittance of a pension?" (Lincoln was long dead.)

3. What influence could Larner have had at all on a pension had Larner known of the issue?

Re.: "Could this whole disgraceful episode have been so embarrassing, that is a principal reason it is never included in histories?"

My thinking: The war was "long" ago and emotions/interest in it had faded as it had already been the case at Surratt's trial. I think someone just made a legal, emotionally neutral decision.

[maharba]

What were supposed to be the sneering comments? Or "scorning comments", as you said now? From the newspaper article I cannot see he knew about the pension request/issue nor that he was still alive at all. From where do you evidently know he knew? It seems to me, Larner just reported what he knew at the time the interview was held. So, what sneering/scoring comments do you refer to?>

Eva, did you read the articles Roger linked to, the fuller narrative in many details? After "the Grand High Priest" made his outrageous claim of Summerfield being a loser, it got in the newspaper. The family and Summerfield apparently DID find
"Noble's" assertion to be sneering, dismissive. And the family apparently sent a correction of sorts to newspapers, stating that Summerfield was gainfully employed and not as the High Priest so glibly asserted. I agree with the Summerfield's
family. But I can see that others may think the exalted Priest was blameless in his comments, and I and the Summerfield family just might be wrong.

Who is the other of the both supposed to be in "Do you not see the irony in both their treatment of Summerfield and that they refused him even a small pittance of a pension?" (Lincoln was long dead.)>

You also said in this thread, Eva,
As for the pension - I am sure Lincoln would have taken care of that had he been alive. >>

Well, that explains it. Lincoln would have stepped forward, shook Summerfield's hand, perhaps prayed with him, and made good the DENIED pension. But, who might the several plurals be? Folks who certainly remembered that Lincoln did have
a Stand-In for him, folks at the War office who denied his pension, etc.

My thinking: The war was "long" ago and emotions/interest in it had faded as it had already been the case at Surratt's trial. I think someone just made a legal, emotionally neutral decision. >>

That must explain it. Why Summerfield is never taught.

[Susan Higginbotham]

(01-29-2016 06:56 PM)maharba Wrote:  What were supposed to be the sneering comments? Or "scorning comments", as you said now? From the newspaper article I cannot see he knew about the pension request/issue nor that he was still alive at all. From where do you evidently know he knew? It seems to me, Larner just reported what he knew at the time the interview was held. So, what sneering/scoring comments do you refer to?>

Eva, did you read the articles Roger linked to, the fuller narrative in many details? After "the Grand High Priest" made his outrageous claim of Summerfield being a loser, it got in the newspaper. The family and Summerfield apparently DID find
"Noble's" assertion to be sneering, dismissive. And the family apparently sent a correction of sorts to newspapers, stating that Summerfield was gainfully employed and not as the High Priest so glibly asserted. I agree with the Summerfield's
family. But I can see that others may think the exalted Priest was blameless in his comments, and I and the Summerfield family just might be wrong.

Who is the other of the both supposed to be in "Do you not see the irony in both their treatment of Summerfield and that they refused him even a small pittance of a pension?" (Lincoln was long dead.)>

You also said in this thread, Eva,
As for the pension - I am sure Lincoln would have taken care of that had he been alive. >>

Well, that explains it. Lincoln would have stepped forward, shook Summerfield's hand, perhaps prayed with him, and made good the DENIED pension. But, who might the several plurals be? Folks who certainly remembered that Lincoln did have
a Stand-In for him, folks at the War office who denied his pension, etc.

My thinking: The war was "long" ago and emotions/interest in it had faded as it had already been the case at Surratt's trial. I think someone just made a legal, emotionally neutral decision. >>

That must explain it. Why Summerfield is never taught.

I think you're overlooking something: the Pension Office was a bureaucratic maze that was swamped with applications in the postwar years. Whoever denied it was probably a low-level clerk who handled numerous applications at once and had no reason to single out Staples' (why do you keep calling him Summerfield?) for special attention.

You are also assuming that Staples met the requirement for eligibility that his disability be service-related. If he wasn't eligible and had been granted a pension anyway simply because he had been Lincoln's representative recruit, chances are that you would be decrying this as an example of favoritism by Lincoln's old cronies.

As for the "Grand High Priest's" comment, whether it was malicious, thoughtless, or simply the product of a mistaken memory, the fact that it was corrected by Staples' family without any protest on the part of Larner or anyone else weighs against the notion of some sort grand conspiracy to eliminate Staples from history.

[Eva Elisabeth]

Couldn't agree more, especially on the assumption that if Staples had been granted a pension although he wasn't legally eligible (is that a tautology?), you, mahabra, would most likely have criticized it as a wrong, too.