DOCSLIB.ORG

The United States, Latin America, and the League of Nations During the Republican Ascendancy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The United States, Latin America, and the League of Nations During the Republican Ascendancy Alternative Vision: The United States, Latin America, and the League of Nations during the Republican Ascendancy A dissertation submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Steven L. Haynes December, 2012 Dissertation written by Steven L. Haynes B.A., Fort Hays State University, 1999 M.A., Wichita State University, 2003 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2012 Approved by _____________________________, Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Mary Ann Heiss _____________________________, Members, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Clarence Wunderlin, Jr. _____________________________, Julio Cesar Pino _____________________________, Stephen Hook _____________________________, Willy Munoz Accepted by _____________________________, Chair, Department of History Kenneth Bindas _____________________________, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Raymond A. Craig ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………….iv Introduction…………….…………………………………………………………………1 Chapter 1 The Triumph of Legal-Internationalism in 1920…………..…………….11 Chapter 2 Charles Evans Hughes, Soft Paternalism, and Latin America…...………57 Chapter 3 Hughes and the Pan American Alternative………………………………95 Chapter 4 Successes and Difficulties during the Coolidge Administration...……..156 Chapter 5 Towards Universal Action: The Hoover Administration………..……..226 Conclusion…..………………………………………………………………………….273 Bibliography...………………………………………………………………………….281 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS After many years of working on this project, I have numerous people to thank for helping me get to this point. First, I would like to thank the History department of Kent State University for the financial support throughout the years. Specifically, I would like to thank Dr. Kenneth Bindas who not only allowed me to teach at Kent State for many years, but also gave his kind assistance during my job search. In addition, many thanks go to Dr. Clarence Wunderlin who continued to push me to improve my work throughout my years at Kent State. I would especially like to thank my advisor Dr. May Ann Heiss. I am grateful to Dr. Heiss for all that I learned from her and for her willingness to give me her advice, perspective, and support throughout my time as a graduate student at KSU. Without her time and support it is unlikely I would be where I am today. I would also like to thank all my friends and colleagues that shared this experience with me throughout the years. I will always remember the triumphs, frustrations, and struggles that I got to share with people like Dr. Julie Mujic, Dr. Matthew Phillips, Dr. Kevin Kooper, Dr. Kyriakos Nalmpantis, Nathan Fry, and Sandy Hopwood. A great deal of thanks goes to Dr. John Henris and Dr. Monika Flaschka who I shared a great number of conversations dealing with this project as well as life. All the hours that we spent talking really helped me keep my sanity and usually ended in a great laugh. iv In addition to all the wonderful people that I met at Kent State, this project could not have been realized without the past and present assistance of my teachers, friends, and family. I owe a great deal of gratitude to my high school history teacher, Mr. Ron Leikam, who believed in me and encouraged me to pursue my interest in history when few teachers saw any potential in me. Thanks go to my old friends, Eric Augustine and Matthew Chaffin who seem to have always been the best friends that anyone could ask for. I would also like to thank my in-laws, Mark and Judy Hantla, who have graciously accepted me into the family and have supported me throughout these years. To my grandparents, Jean and Vernon ―Booby‖ Dechant, who were there every step of my life, even though I wish grandpa could have lived long enough to see me finish this work. To my parents, Gerald and Debra Haynes, who allowed me to grow up in a loving home that taught me the value of hard work, I owe much thanks. Most importantly, I would like to thank and dedicate this work to my loving wife and daughter. My daughter Payton is the source of much joy in my life and I could not imagine life without her. To my wife Darcy, thank you for sacrificing with me in order to accomplish this goal. Darcy deserves much credit for me completing this work, by always giving me her loving support and encouragement throughout this project. I have been a lucky man ever since she came into my life, and I look forward to our future together. I want to thank her for always being there for me, and her never ending support of me. v Introduction As the guns fell silent on November 11, 1918, and World War I mercifully came to an end, the world was left to ponder the cost of the global tragedy. Humanity was confronted with the grim reality that much of Europe was physically and economically devastated, millions of veterans returned home with physical and mental aliments, and an estimated twenty million people had perished as a result of the catastrophe. The horrific cost of the war led the victorious powers to create the League of Nations in an effort to prevent future wars. While the United States refused to join the League, numerous nations flocked to the organization, including many in Latin America. By the time the First Assembly of the League of Nations opened in November 1920, every Latin American nation had entered the League save the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, and Mexico. A number of Latin American nations even became influential in the new organization. During this period, Brazil and Cuba were selected to be members of the Council of the League of Nations, Cuban native Dr. Antonio Sanchez de Bustamante was voted a jurist on the World Court, and Agustin Edwards of Chile was elected president of the Assembly of the League of Nations in 1922.1 Despite Latin America‘s active role in the League of Nations, during the Republican Ascendancy the United States sought to weaken the League‘s influence in the 1 For information concerning Latin American activity in the League of Nations, see Warren H. Kelchner, Latin American Relations with the League of Nations (Boston, MA: World Peace Foundation Pamphlets, 1929); and F.P. Walters, History of the League of Nations. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1952). 1 2 region by thwarting its peacekeeping efforts in the Western Hemisphere. During the presidencies of Warren G. Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover the United States prevented League involvement in settling the region‘s land disputes; such as disagreements between Peru and Chile, Panama and Costa Rica, and Bolivia and Paraguay. Instead, those administrations urged regional states to submit their disputes to the United States for arbitration. This stance changed only late in the presidency of Herbert Hoover, when in 1932 the administration agreed to tolerate League assistance in settling intra-American controversies.2 Coincident with U.S. efforts to limit League involvement in Latin American disputes were initiatives designed to utilize the Pan American movement to conclude peace agreements that would supersede the League‘s peacekeeping machinery in the Western Hemisphere. Beginning with the Gondra Treaty of 1923, the United States led the way in creating two courts of arbitration where threats to hemispheric tranquility were to be taken before any nation resorted to war. It became clear to League advocates that the United States was utilizing Pan Americanism to weaken the League of Nations in Latin America. F. P. Walters, the former Deputy Secretary General of the League of Nations, later wrote ―the United States government was, at this time, doing its best to keep the affairs of North and South America as a field apart [from the League], to be dealt with, whenever international action was required, through the agencies of the Pan 2 For background information concerning these examples, see William Jefferson Dennis, Tacna and Arica: An Account of the Chile-Peru Boundary Dispute and of the Arbitrations by the United States (New Haven, Ct: Yale University Press, 1931 reprint New York: Archon Books, 1967), xi-60; Joe F. Wilson, The United States, Chile and Peru in the Tacna and Arica Plebiscite (Washington D.C.: University Press of America, 1979); Walters, History of the League of Nations, 393-95; and Margaret La Foy, ―The Chaco Dispute and the League of Nations,‖ (Ph.D. diss., Bryn Maw College, 1941), 51-52. 3 American Union. The natural consequence of this policy was that the Pan American Union now began to extend its activities in ways that had never been contemplated at the time of its foundation.‖3 This study will examine two primary questions concerning the foreign policy of the Republican Ascendancy. The first question is what caused these Republican administrations to limit Latin American involvement with the League of Nations from 1921 to 1933. The second is how successful the United States was in achieving its objectives. By examining these two questions, one can see the genesis of U.S. attempts to lead the world to peace that lasted until the deepening of the Cold War in the late 1940s, as well as the ultimate U.S. failure to achieve its lofty objective. The administrations of the Republican Ascendancy labored to weaken the influence of the League of Nations in Latin America in the hope of remaking the world‘s international system in the U.S. image. The basis of this envisioned pax-Americana system was to be constructed on America‘s perceived core domestic value of liberty. The League of Nations seemingly threatened this overriding objective with its reliance on collective security. The Republican administrations argued that the hard paternalistic approach of collective security would fail in bringing peace to the world, because the threat of military or economic punishments would not fundamentally alter humanity‘s 3 Walters, History of the League of Nations, 350-51; U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Treaty of Versailles I
    Treaty of Versailles I. Wilson’s Vision forWorld Peace A. Fourteen Points to End All Wars 1. Wilson’s first goal was to eliminate the causes of wars by calling for an end to secret agreements and alliances, protecting freedom of the seas, and reducing armaments. 2. Wilson’s second goal was to ensure the right to self-determination so ethnic groups and nationalities could live under governments of their own choosing. 3. The last of the fourteen points called for setting up a League of Nations to ensure world peace. B. Wilson’s Unusual Decisions 1. Wilson broke with tradition by traveling out of the United States while president to lead the U.S. delegation to the peace conference in Paris. 2. Wilson weakened his position when he asked Americans to support Democrats in the 1918 midterm elections, but then the Republicans won a majority in Congress. 3. Wilson made matters worse by choosing all Democrats and only one Republican to serve as the other delegates to the peace conference. II. Ideals Versus Self-Interest at Versailles A. Peace Without Victory Gives Way to War Guilt and Reparations 1. Wilson’s vision for a peaceful world was different from the vision of other Big Four leaders. 2. France’s Georges Clemenceau was most concerned about French security. 3. David Lloyd George wanted Germany to accept full responsibility for the war through a warguilt clause and reparations. 4. Wilson tried to restrain from punishing Germany but ultimately agreed to gain support for the League of Nations. B. Self-Determination Survives, but Only in Europe 1.
    [Show full text]
  • September 1, 2015 Dear Colloquium Members: in a 1990 Supreme Court
    September 1, 2015 Dear Colloquium Members: In a 1990 Supreme Court case, Justice Brennan highlighted the global scope of the American regulatory state. “Foreign nationals must now take care not to violate our drug laws, our antitrust laws, our securities laws, and a host of other federal criminal statutes,” he wrote. “The enormous expansion of federal criminal jurisdiction outside our Nation’s boundaries has led one commentator to suggest that our country’s three largest exports are now ‘rock music, blue jeans, and United States law.’” In just a few decades, the relatively weak American state that existed at the dawn of the twentieth century began to regulate conduct around the world. My dissertation, Regulating the World: American Law and International Business, traces this transformation and describes efforts to regulate foreign and multinational businesses using American law. I seek to recover what Sam Moyn has called “the forgotten radicalism” that led U.S. policymakers to extend U.S. law overseas to reform foreign legal systems and to regulate foreign actors. Yet my research has led me to a deeper appreciation of the limits on this radicalism. Like the New Deal within the United States, which required its own compromises with the continued sovereignty of the southern states over race, the spread of American law effected important changes only because it left the basic structure of the international system intact. As I researched the emergence of a global regulatory state during the New Deal, I began to appreciate the deep relationship between U.S. law and U.S. foreign relations. As historian Mary Dudziak has recently pointed out, scholars of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Election Division Presidential Electors Faqs and Roster of Electors, 1816
    Election Division Presidential Electors FAQ Q1: How many presidential electors does Indiana have? What determines this number? Indiana currently has 11 presidential electors. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States provides that each state shall appoint a number of electors equal to the number of Senators or Representatives to which the state is entitled in Congress. Since Indiana has currently has 9 U.S. Representatives and 2 U.S. Senators, the state is entitled to 11 electors. Q2: What are the requirements to serve as a presidential elector in Indiana? The requirements are set forth in the Constitution of the United States. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 provides that "no Senator or Representative, or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector." Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment also states that "No person shall be... elector of President or Vice-President... who, having previously taken an oath... to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. Congress may be a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability." These requirements are included in state law at Indiana Code 3-8-1-6(b). Q3: How does a person become a candidate to be chosen as a presidential elector in Indiana? Three political parties (Democratic, Libertarian, and Republican) have their presidential and vice- presidential candidates placed on Indiana ballots after their party's national convention.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defence of the Court's Integrity
    In Defence of the Court’s Integrity 17 In Defence of the Court’s Integrity: The Role of Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes in the Defeat of the Court-Packing Plan of 1937 Ryan Coates Honours, Durham University ‘No greater mistake can be made than to think that our institutions are fixed or may not be changed for the worse. We are a young nation and nothing can be taken for granted. If our institutions are maintained in their integrity, and if change shall mean improvement, it will be because the intelligent and the worthy constantly generate the motive power which, distributed over a thousand lines of communication, develops that appreciation of the standards of decency and justice which we have delighted to call the common sense of the American people.’ Hughes in 1909 ‘Our institutions were not designed to bring about uniformity of opinion; if they had been, we might well abandon hope.’ Hughes in 1925 ‘While what I am about to say would ordinarily be held in confidence, I feel that I am justified in revealing it in defence of the Court’s integrity.’ Hughes in the 1940s In early 1927, ten years before his intervention against the court-packing plan, Charles Evans Hughes, former Governor of New York, former Republican presidential candidate, former Secretary of State, and most significantly, former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, delivered a series 18 history in the making vol. 3 no. 2 of lectures at his alma mater, Columbia University, on the subject of the Supreme Court.1 These lectures were published the following year as The Supreme Court: Its Foundation, Methods and Achievements (New York: Columbia University Press, 1928).
    [Show full text]
  • Presidents Worksheet 43 Secretaries of State (#1-24)
    PRESIDENTS WORKSHEET 43 NAME SOLUTION KEY SECRETARIES OF STATE (#1-24) Write the number of each president who matches each Secretary of State on the left. Some entries in each column will match more than one in the other column. Each president will be matched at least once. 9,10,13 Daniel Webster 1 George Washington 2 John Adams 14 William Marcy 3 Thomas Jefferson 18 Hamilton Fish 4 James Madison 5 James Monroe 5 John Quincy Adams 6 John Quincy Adams 12,13 John Clayton 7 Andrew Jackson 8 Martin Van Buren 7 Martin Van Buren 9 William Henry Harrison 21 Frederick Frelinghuysen 10 John Tyler 11 James Polk 6 Henry Clay (pictured) 12 Zachary Taylor 15 Lewis Cass 13 Millard Fillmore 14 Franklin Pierce 1 John Jay 15 James Buchanan 19 William Evarts 16 Abraham Lincoln 17 Andrew Johnson 7, 8 John Forsyth 18 Ulysses S. Grant 11 James Buchanan 19 Rutherford B. Hayes 20 James Garfield 3 James Madison 21 Chester Arthur 22/24 Grover Cleveland 20,21,23James Blaine 23 Benjamin Harrison 10 John Calhoun 18 Elihu Washburne 1 Thomas Jefferson 22/24 Thomas Bayard 4 James Monroe 23 John Foster 2 John Marshall 16,17 William Seward PRESIDENTS WORKSHEET 44 NAME SOLUTION KEY SECRETARIES OF STATE (#25-43) Write the number of each president who matches each Secretary of State on the left. Some entries in each column will match more than one in the other column. Each president will be matched at least once. 32 Cordell Hull 25 William McKinley 28 William Jennings Bryan 26 Theodore Roosevelt 40 Alexander Haig 27 William Howard Taft 30 Frank Kellogg 28 Woodrow Wilson 29 Warren Harding 34 John Foster Dulles 30 Calvin Coolidge 42 Madeleine Albright 31 Herbert Hoover 25 John Sherman 32 Franklin D.
    [Show full text]
  • Panama Treaty 9 77
    Collection: Office of the Chief of Staff Files Series: Hamilton Jordan's Confidential Files Folder: Panama Canal Treaty 9/77 Container: 36 Folder Citation: Office of the Chief of Staff Files, Hamilton Jordan's Confidential Files, Panama Canal Treaty 9/77, Container 36 NATIONAL ARCHIVES ANO RECORDSSe'RVIC'E ~~7'",,!:.;, WITHDRAWAL SHEET (PRESIDENTIALLlBR~~IESj FORM OF CORRESPONDENTS OR TITLE DATE RESTRICTION DOCUMENT caDle American Imbassy Panama to Secretary of State '/27/77 memo Panama Canal treaty negotiations (S PP.) ca. '/27 A memo aicE Inderfurth to IJ '1'/77 A memo Elmer T. Irooks to ZI '1'/77 A ..,b thomson to 3C ..... ~~ I} ~tI~o '/2'/7~ ...... - ----"------,----,---,-,-,---,- ----'-1---'"--''' FILE LOCATION Chief of Staff (Jordan)/lox , of • (org.)/Panama Canal Treaty~Sept. 1'77 RESTRICTION CODES (A) Closed by Executive Order 12065 governing access to national security information. I B) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the document. IC) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in the donor's deed of gift. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION GSA FORM 7122 (REV. 1-81) MEMORANDUM THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINCTO!': MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT FROM: HAMILTON JORDAN 1-1.9. DATE: AUGUST 30, 1977 SUBJECT: PANAMA CANAL ENDORSEMENTS 1. The AFL-CIO Executive Council officially adopted :::::',:-·· :.... ·;;h~i: -: a strong statement in favor of the new Panama .~'",. , .:.; Canal Treaties today. Mr. Meany, in a press con­ ference afterwards, said that the resolution "means full support, using whatever influence we have on Fi· Members of Congress - it certainly means lobbying." In addition, we have a commitment from John Williams, ...... President of the Panama Canal Pilots Association, and from Al Walsh of the Canal Zone AFL-CIO, to testify q~11 ~llli, at Senate hearings that the employee provisions / -~ ...
    [Show full text]
  • The 19Th Amendment
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Women Making History: The 19th Amendment Women The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. —19th Amendment to the United States Constitution In 1920, after decades of tireless activism by countless determined suffragists, American women were finally guaranteed the right to vote. The year 2020 marks the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment. It was ratified by the states on August 18, 1920 and certified as an amendment to the US Constitution on August 26, 1920. Developed in partnership with the National Park Service, this publication weaves together multiple stories about the quest for women’s suffrage across the country, including those who opposed it, the role of allies and other civil rights movements, who was left behind, and how the battle differed in communities across the United States. Explore the complex history and pivotal moments that led to ratification of the 19th Amendment as well as the places where that history happened and its continued impact today. 0-31857-0 Cover Barcode-Arial.pdf 1 2/17/20 1:58 PM $14.95 ISBN 978-1-68184-267-7 51495 9 781681 842677 The National Park Service is a bureau within the Department Front cover: League of Women Voters poster, 1920. of the Interior. It preserves unimpaired the natural and Back cover: Mary B. Talbert, ca. 1901. cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this work future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecumenical Movement and the Origins of the League Of
    IN SEARCH OF A GLOBAL, GODLY ORDER: THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT AND THE ORIGINS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, 1908-1918 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by James M. Donahue __________________________ Mark A. Noll, Director Graduate Program in History Notre Dame, Indiana April 2015 © Copyright 2015 James M. Donahue IN SEARCH OF A GLOBAL, GODLY ORDER: THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT AND THE ORIGINS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, 1908-1918 Abstract by James M. Donahue This dissertation traces the origins of the League of Nations movement during the First World War to a coalescent international network of ecumenical figures and Protestant politicians. Its primary focus rests on the World Alliance for International Friendship Through the Churches, an organization that drew Protestant social activists and ecumenical leaders from Europe and North America. The World Alliance officially began on August 1, 1914 in southern Germany to the sounds of the first shots of the war. Within the next three months, World Alliance members began League of Nations societies in Holland, Switzerland, Germany, Great Britain and the United States. The World Alliance then enlisted other Christian institutions in its campaign, such as the International Missionary Council, the Y.M.C.A., the Y.W.C.A., the Blue Cross and the Student Volunteer Movement. Key figures include John Mott, Charles Macfarland, Adolf Deissmann, W. H. Dickinson, James Allen Baker, Nathan Söderblom, Andrew James M. Donahue Carnegie, Wilfred Monod, Prince Max von Baden and Lord Robert Cecil.
    [Show full text]
  • Preface Chapter 1
    Notes Preface 1. Alfred Pearce Dennis, “Humanizing the Department of Commerce,” Saturday Evening Post, June 6, 1925, 8. 2. Herbert Hoover, Memoirs: The Cabinet and the Presidency, 1920–1930 (New York: Macmillan, 1952), 184. 3. Herbert Hoover, “The Larger Purposes of the Department of Commerce,” in “Republi- can National Committee, Brief Review of Activities and Policies of the Federal Executive Departments,” Bulletin No. 6, 1928, Herbert Hoover Papers, Campaign and Transition Period, Box 6, “Subject: Republican National Committee,” Hoover Presidential Library, West Branch, Iowa. 4. Herbert Hoover, “Responsibility of America for World Peace,” address before national con- vention of National League of Women Voters, Des Moines, Iowa, April 11, 1923, Bible no. 303, Hoover Presidential Library. 5. Bruce Bliven, “Hoover—And the Rest,” Independent, May 29, 1920, 275. Chapter 1 1. John W. Hallowell to Arthur (Hallowell?), November 21, 1918, Hoover Papers, Pre-Com- merce Period, Hoover Presidential Library, West Branch, Iowa, Box 6, “Hallowell, John W., 1917–1920”; Julius Barnes to Gertrude Barnes, November 27 and December 5, 1918, ibid., Box 2, “Barnes, Julius H., Nov. 27, 1918–Jan. 17, 1919”; Lewis Strauss, “Further Notes for Mr. Irwin,” ca. February 1928, Subject File, Lewis L. Strauss Papers, Hoover Presidential Library, West Branch, Iowa, Box 10, “Campaign of 1928: Campaign Literature, Speeches, etc., Press Releases, Speeches, etc., 1928 Feb.–Nov.”; Strauss, handwritten notes, December 1, 1918, ibid., Box 76, “Strauss, Lewis L., Diaries, 1917–19.” 2. The men who sailed with Hoover to Europe on the Olympic on November 18, 1918, were Julius Barnes, Frederick Chatfi eld, John Hallowell, Lewis Strauss, Robert Taft, and Alonzo Taylor.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of War Aims and the Treaty of Versailles Callaghan, JT
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Salford Institutional Repository The problem of war aims and the Treaty of Versailles Callaghan, JT Titl e The problem of war aims and the Treaty of Versailles Aut h or s Callaghan, JT Typ e Book Section URL This version is available at: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/46240/ Published Date 2 0 1 8 USIR is a digital collection of the research output of the University of Salford. Where copyright permits, full text material held in the repository is made freely available online and can be read, downloaded and copied for non- commercial private study or research purposes. Please check the manuscript for any further copyright restrictions. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected] . 13 The problem of war aims and the Treaty of Versailles John Callaghan Why did Britain go to war in 1914? The answer that generated popular approval concerned the defence of Belgian neutrality, defiled by German invasion in the execution of the Schlieffen Plan. Less appealing, and therefore less invoked for public consumption, but broadly consistent with this promoted justification, was Britain’s long-standing interest in maintaining a balance of power on the continent, which a German victory would not only disrupt, according to Foreign Office officials, but replace with a ‘political dictatorship’ inimical to political freedom.1 Yet only 6 days before the British declaration of war, on 30 July, the chairman of the Liberal Foreign Affairs Group, Arthur Ponsonby, informed Prime Minister Asquith that ‘nine tenths of the [Liberal] party’ supported neutrality.
    [Show full text]
  • Nicolay Collection Finding
    LINCOLN LIBRARY Lincoln Financial Foundation Collection at Allen County Public Library For additional material on Helen and John G. Nicolay, NICOLAY COLLECTION see the manuscript collection Lincoln’s Secretaries— 6 boxes; 3.8 cubic feet Hay, Nicolay, Stoddard; 1 box, 0.5 cubic feet. For extensive correspondence between Helen Nicolay Biographical Notes and others regarding a copy of the Gettysburg Address, see Gettysburg Address Correspondence; 1 box, 0.25 cubic feet. Helen Nicolay (1866-1954) Helen Nicolay was born in 1866 to John G. Nicolay and Therena Bates Nicolay in Paris, where her father served as American Consul. In 1869, the Nicolay family returned to the United States. Helen’s academic training was overseen by her father as well as private tutors. Little is known about Helen Nicolay as a young woman, other than that she helped her father and John Hay write their 10-volume Lincoln biography by taking dictation. She began writing her own books after her father’s death in 1901 and had a summer retreat studio in New Hampshire she used for painting and writing. Her best known work is Lincoln’s Secretary: A Biography of John G. Nicolay. In all, she wrote more than 20 books, mostly history and biography, many of which were intended for children. She described her reason for writing in a letter to a young fan—she wrote books to make “history seem alive and interesting to young people.” Helen Nicolay was also a recognized artist. The Lincoln Museum Collection includes two oil paintings of John G. Nicolay painted by Helen Nicolay.
    [Show full text]
  • Race, Migration, and Chinese and Irish Domestic Servants in the United States, 1850-1920
    An Intimate World: Race, Migration, and Chinese and Irish Domestic Servants in the United States, 1850-1920 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Andrew Theodore Urban IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Advised by Donna Gabaccia and Erika Lee June 2009 © Andrew Urban, 2009 Acknowledgements While I rarely discussed the specifics of my dissertation with my fellow graduate students and friends at the University of Minnesota – I talked about basically everything else with them. No question or topic was too large or small for conversations that often carried on into the wee hours of the morning. Caley Horan, Eric Richtmyer, Tim Smit, and Aaron Windel will undoubtedly be lifelong friends, mahjong and euchre partners, fantasy football opponents, kindred spirits at the CC Club and Mortimer’s, and so on. I am especially grateful for the hospitality that Eric and Tim (and Tank the cat) offered during the fall of 2008, as I moved back and forth between Syracuse and Minneapolis. Aaron and I had the fortune of living in New York City at the same time in our graduate careers, and I have fond memories of our walks around Stuyvesant Park in the East Village and Prospect Park in Brooklyn, and our time spent with the folks of Tuesday night. Although we did not solve all of the world’s problems, we certainly tried. Living in Brooklyn, I also had the opportunity to participate in the short-lived yet productive “Brooklyn Scholars of Domestic Service” (AKA the BSDS crew) reading group with Vanessa May and Lara Vapnek.
    [Show full text]