Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
"Why? Just because he included details omitted by Alexander Stephens in his account? Or because you disagree with his message?"

I was referring to the website where I found the quote I first posted. That was supposedly quoted from the Stephens' book. So, as there is no reference to the song there, I found the scholarship of the poster worthy of criticism. You seem perhaps to have misundersatood to what I was referring.

As for the disrepancy between the two accounts, I would tend to believe Stephens' account (you will say "of course" - but you attribute much less objectiviity to me than my relative indifference to this issue gives me) because: Stephens was an honorable man, he was writing at most 5 years after the event, and he had little to gain by misrepresenting the story. The other version would appear to have come out only 35 years after the event. Moreover, even if we do suppose McClure recollection of Lincoln's words was accurate, I can easily imagine Lincoln realizing the damage that might result if his candid remark got out and changing the story to make himself look better.

I really had not wished to debate further over which version is the truth. You had suggested that the original source of Stephens' quote should be consulted and since I had posted the questionable quote and had the Stephens' book, I thought it reasonable for me to post the relevent material. This was merely an effort to correct the record. But then you even take exception to my acknowledgement that the quote I originally poste proved to be in error. I don't understand.

68 posted on 10/14/2003 2:59:33 PM PDT by Aurelius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]


To: Aurelius
As for the disrepancy between the two accounts, I would tend to believe Stephens' account (you will say "of course" - but you attribute much less objectiviity to me than my relative indifference to this issue gives me) because: Stephens was an honorable man, he was writing at most 5 years after the event, and he had little to gain by misrepresenting the story.

I certainly don't want to imply that Stephens was not an honorable man. However, you must admit that he does not go into details on the story. I don't believe he is trying to hide anything, I believe that he doesn't go into detail because the story is not germain to the topic at hand.

The other version would appear to have come out only 35 years after the event.

Henry Raymond died in 1869. The story, therefore, must have been written down before then, before Stephens's account even.

Moreover, even if we do suppose McClure recollection of Lincoln's words was accurate, I can easily imagine Lincoln realizing the damage that might result if his candid remark got out and changing the story to make himself look better.

What damage would that be? What possible backlash would Lincoln have faced? Backlash from blacks? You're applying 21st century political correctness to 19th century society. The only possible backlash would have been if it appeared Lincoln was unfeeling or uncaring about the problems of the white population.

I really had not wished to debate further over which version is the truth.

I didn't expect that you would. Well, it's been as enjoyable as always.

69 posted on 10/14/2003 5:44:22 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson