• USA

Blog posts about "University Archives"

Realised prices "University Archives "

Israeli President Zalman Shazar Rare Autograph Letter Signed
Shazar Zalman \n\nIsraeli President Zalman Shazar Rare Autograph Letter Signed\n\nAutograph letter signed "Zalman Shazar", as president of Israel, in Hebrew, one page, 6½" x 8", January 21, 1972. Fine.\n\nIn part: "Before I leave for the funeral of the Danish king, I still want to thank you for you most meaningful gift and apologize for not writing to you sooner. I knew that my staff spoke with you in my name. The picture decorated my study. Over the years big funerals have become a informal international gathering and I saw it as my duty to accept the government's suggestion and go, wish me well. My warm greetings to you and your loved ones. When I return I will use days rest, maybe in your vicinity... "\n\nWE PROVIDE IN-HOUSE SHIPPING WORLDWIDE. University Archives
Abraham Lincoln, important endorsement facilitating loyal Maryland
Lincoln Abraham <br> <br>Autograph endorsement inscribed overall and signed by 16th U.S. President Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865) as <em><strong>"A. Lincoln"</strong></em>. Paper slip in floating mount is matted below a printed portrait of Lincoln, the whole framed behind glass in a mahogany finished frame with gilt filet. The actual size of the frame measures 9.625" x 14.25. Note, image, and frame in very good to near fine condition. Minor darkening to right edge of note does not affect text. <br> <br>On June 10, 1861, President Lincoln wrote this note to Secretary of War Simon Cameron (1799-1889): <br> <br> <em><strong>"Gen. Cooper is desirous of having the Regiment named within, annexed to his command. The testimonials, are very ample.&nbsp; Can it not be done? </strong></em> <br> <br> <em><strong>A. Lincoln</strong></em> <br> <br> <em><strong>June 10, 1861."</strong></em> <br> <br> On April 15, 1861, General James Cooper wrote to President Abraham Lincoln from Frederick, Maryland: <em>“You may command my services to support the laws and preserve the integrity of the Union, in any capacity in which I can be useful. The Union men of the State can be relied on.”</em> On May 3, President Lincoln called for 42,000 volunteers from the Union states to serve for three years. On May 11, Lincoln commissioned Cooper to raise and command one or more regiments in Maryland, not to exceed a brigade usually comprised of 3-5 regiments. On May 14, Maryland Governor Thomas H. Hicks issued a proclamation calling for four regiments to serve for three months’ service. Because of their short term of service, the federal government did not accept any of the three-month volunteers. Meanwhile, Cooper recruited one full regiment by May 20, and it was mustered into federal service on May 28. <br> <br>Confusion abounded over whether the Governor of Maryland or the federal government would appoint officers. Egos also clashed. On May 28, 1861, Cooper wrote to War Department chief clerk John P. Sanderson, <em>“Deputation gone to dictate appointment of officers for Regt. This is McConnell’s folly. Treat the ambassadors as they deserve&nbsp; They are entitled to no respect. They are all friends to me but are tools of McConnell’s who is a fool except as far as he is a knave.”</em> In the same letter to Sanderson, Cooper characterized McConnell as a man <em>"who can scarcely read or write, and who is utterly ignorant not only in military matters but in all others.”</em> Cooper also wrote to Secretary of War Simon Cameron on the same day about the <em>“election”</em> that had taken place through the <em>“intrigues and scheming”</em> of <em>“Capt McConnell”</em>, who was elected colonel of the regiment. (Colonel John C. McConnell of Frederick, Maryland was the commander of the 3rd Maryland Infantry until the War Department removed him as unfit in February 1862.) <br> <br>After Cooper raised the first regiment, Secretary of War Cameron suspended further recruiting until the latter part of June. Because wages became more attractive at harvest-time and Congress authorized the raising of a “Home Guard” which allowed soldiers to stay at home with their families while drawing pay and rations, recruiting became much more difficult. Cooper managed to raise a second regiment by September 21, 1861, and subsequently a third. In early January 1862, he completed the organization of a cavalry regiment as well. Cooper expected the four regiments to be united into a brigade under his command, but unfortunately, the first was <em>“cut to pieces at Front Royal”</em>, the second was sent to General Ambrose E. Burnside, and only the third and the cavalry remained in Baltimore under Cooper’s command.In May 1862, Cooper took his command to Virginia, where the 109th and 111th Pennsylvania regiments and two batteries of artillery filled out his brigade. <br> <br>In July 1862, Cooper heard a rumor that there were plans to give his command to a junior brigadier general. He wrote to President Lincoln on July 14, 1862, outlining his previous service, and observed, <em>“Your Excellency, who has not only always been just, but likewise kind in all our intercourse, will probably recollect, even amongst the multitude of things which burden your memory, the circumstances under which my connection with the army commenced.”</em> Cooper continued, <em>“I did not in the first place, seek a position in the Military service. Genl Cameron invited me to Washington, and proposed to me to raise a force in Maryland. I told him my military experience was small, and that I had always been averse to undertake the performance of any thing, which I did not thoroughly comprehend. He insisted that I had a capacity to learn, and was in possession of other qualifications, that [he] thought fitted me for the position he designed I should fill.”</em> <br> <br>On July 15, the day after Cooper wrote this letter, General John Pope relieved Cooper of the command of his division and briefly replaced him with Brigadier General George S. Greene. Cooper was ordered to Frederick to await orders. When the Confederate army crossed the Potomac River, Cooper fled to Frederick to avoid capture. He telegraphed the War Department offering his services and was first ordered to Harrisburg and then to Columbus, where he was placed in command of Camp Chase. On December 4, 1862, Cooper appealed to Lincoln to <em>“give me a command, that will relieve me of the disgrace and ignominy I have suffered.”</em> <br> <br>James Cooper (1810-1863) was born in Maryland, and graduated from Washington and Jefferson College in Washington, Pennsylvania.He was admitted to the bar in 1834 and opened a practice in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. He served as Attorney General of Pennsylvania briefly in 1848 and represented Pennsylvania as a Whig in both the U.S. House of Representatives (1839-1843) and the U.S. Senate (1849-1855). When the Civil War began, he lived in Frederick, Maryland, and raised a brigade of volunteers in Maryland. In May 1861, President Abraham Lincoln appointed Cooper as a brigadier general. His brigade served in the Shenandoah Valley Campaign in 1862, but because of his poor health, Cooper was reassigned as commandant of Camp Chase near Columbus, Ohio. He died there in March 1863. <br> <br>WE PROVIDE IN-HOUSE SHIPPING WORLDWIDE University Archives
Decl. & Const. signer, George Clymer, ALS as important bank director.
Clymer George 1739 - 1813 Declaration and Constitution signer George Clymer as important bank director, long letter. Bi-fold ALS, 8" x 9.5". Signed by important Revolutionary War era politician George Clymer (1739-1813) as "Geo Clymer" on top of second page. Penned entirely in the hand of Clymer, the reverse of the second page blank and docketed on the fourth page. Dated on docket "February 10, 1810". Neat separation at fold with additional tape repair to fold line. Small corner piece missing not affecting text. Lightly toned. A letter drafted to Philadelphia Bank questioning the eligibility of one of the directors, citing such issues as "no other but a stockholder (illegible) shall be a Director". Bears the lovely signature of Founding Father and Philadelphia Bank Director George Clymer (March 16, 1739- January 23, 1813) who was one of the first Patriots to advocate complete independence from Britain. As a Pennsylvania representative, Clymer was, along with five others, a signatory of both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. He attended the Continental Congress, and served in political office until the end of his life. A grandson of one of the original settlers of the Penn colony, George Clymer established himself as a major figure in both the struggle for independence and then the formation of a new nation. He was an ardent and vocal advocate of independence from Britain and a tireless proponent of a strong, united central government - both views putting him in frequent conflict with the more cautious Quaker-led powers of the Pennsylvania colony. During the war, he served twice in the Continental Congress, chairing committees that addressed the various and pressing issues of maintaining a constant flow of materiel and food for the perpetually undersupplied army, often volunteering to make trips at great personal risk to ascertain first-hand the conditions on the battlefront when others refused to go. When, Congress left Philadelphia for Baltimore during the winter of 1776 in panic at the advance of the British, Clymer stayed as one of three in an Executive Committee to ensure that the army was supplied and the government continued to function. In 1803, at the age of 64, he became the president of the newly chartered Philadelphia Bank, remaining in that post until his death in 1813.In his service to his country, Clymer proved to be quintessentially American: eminently pragmatic and practical, but with a vision of the future to match. University Archives
Sack of Rome - First 16th C
Rome Sack of \n\nFirst 16th C. Transcription of Buonparte's Account "Sacco Di Roma" (Sack of Rome)\n\nA lovely bound manuscript circa 16th century, 8" x 11." Bound in hard boards from a later unknown date, which show expected edge wear. Contains 56 leaves of manuscript representing 112 pages, of an accounting of the Sack of Rome, with a reference at the end of the book that the original author was Jacques Buonaparte (Jacopo Buonaparte), and that this was a first extraction of the original. Manuscript titled "Sacco Di Roma ? Clement VII de Medici L'Anno 1527" (Pope Clement VII). Excellent bright condition with a few scant handling marks.\n\nA fantastic transcription manuscript of Jacopo Buonaparte's accounting of the Sack of Rome, with a note at the end of the book that this is the  first copy to have been extracted from the original archives of the Buonaparte family at St. Miniato in Tuscany. The inscription to the front of the book was written much later in another hand, and was inscribed in French, whereas the entire accounting of the Sack of Rome manuscript is in Italian. The front inscription in French reads:\n\n"To my much respected friend M. [Theodore Lyman, Citizen of Boston, A. Nibby gives this manuscript of the story of the Sack of Rome by Jacques Buonaparte, extracted from the archives of the Buonaparte family at S. Miniato in Tuscany.\n\n"The character of the handwriting in this manuscript proves that it had been written in the 16th Century. Some one says at the end of the work that the author of it is Jacques Buonaparte and that the handwritten manuscript is at S. Miniato in the family archives . They add again that this is the first copy to have been extracted. M. Nibby received the manuscript from the Comte de St. Leu in 1817."\n\nHistory shows that Jacopo Buonaparte of San Miniato was a friend and advisor to Medici Pope Clement VII. Further research documents that Jacopo was also a witness to and wrote an account of the sack of Rome, which is one of the most important historical documents recounting that event. The San Miniato branch of the Buonapartes extinguished with Jacopo in 1550, thus his accounting would obviously predate his death, but after the military event, thus making the original manuscript dated between 1527-1550. This first extraction has been dated 16th century based on the manuscript content and character of the handwriting.\n\nThe Buonaparte family lineage (later called Bonaparte) were patricians in the Italian towns of Sarzana, San Miniato and Florence. The various family lineages were all related, however the San Miniato branch extinguished with Jacopo in 1550. The most famous of the Buonaparte lineage was none other than Napoleon, the French military leader of Italian heritage who had risen to notability out of the French Revolution and who in 1804 transformed the First French Republic into the First French Empire.\n\nAlthough Rome technically was sacked 6 times, this sacking dated 6 May 1527, and was considered by scholars to mark the end of the Italian Renaissance. This military event was carried out in Rome (then part of the Papal States) by the mutinous troops of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor. It marked a crucial imperial victory in the conflict between Charles and the League of Cognac (1526?1529)?the alliance of France, Milan, Venice, Florence and the Papacy.\n\n?They wept a lot; all of us are rich.? That was how one of the participants summed up the events of May 1527, when a mutinous army under the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V savaged the city of Rome. The imperial troops were fresh off a campaign against the League of Cognac?with whom Pope Clement VII was allied?but they hadn?t been paid in months. To keep them on the march, their commander, the Duke of Bourbon, had promised them a chance to plunder Rome. The impoverished soldiers arrived on May 6 and launched an assault. The Duke was killed during the fighting, but his men breached the defensive walls and poured into the city. The Vatican?s Swiss Guard was all but annihilated during a famous last stand near St. Peter?s Basilica. Pope Clement, meanwhile, was forced to escape via a secret tunnel and barricade himself in the impregnable Castel Sant?Angelo. Once inside Rome, the leaderless army devolved in a bloodthirsty mob. Buildings were looted and burned; men and children were tortured and killed; and women?even Catholic nuns?were raped or auctioned off at public markets. By the time the imperial army finally left the city, Rome was stripped bare and half of its 55,000 inhabitants were either dead or homeless. The cultural blow was equally severe. Scores of artists had been killed, and many priceless artworks were destroyed or missing. Some scholars have since used the 1527 sacking as the official end date of the Italian Renaissance.\n\nWE PROVIDE IN-HOUSE SHIPPING WORLDWIDE! University Archives
Grant Inserts Himself into a Major Political Controversy...
Grant Ulysses \n\nEx-President Grant Inserts Himself into a Major Political Controversy While in Mexico Developing Railroads and Building New Markets for the U.S.\n\nSingle Page Autograph Letter Signed, to [John P.] Jones. [Mexico City] [April 24, 1881]. 4.5" x 6.75" . Penned to recto and verso. A lovely bright, clean example with single center fold.\n\nAfter James Garfield?s election, opposing factions of the Republican Party jockeyed to have their favorite candidates appointed to Cabinet and other patronage jobs. Garfield remained unmoved about his choices, even ignoring appeals by his own vice president, Chester Arthur. While in Mexico City, Grant criticized the sitting president?s choices in a letter sent via Nevada Senator John P. Jones. Two days after receiving the letter, Garfield wrote Grant a blistering response, stating he would appoint whom he wanted. The following day, New York Senators Conkling and Platt resigned in protest and Vice President Arthur was banished from Cabinet meetings. The Grant-Garfield controversy played out in the press for months, ending only after Garfield was assassinated in July.\n\nDear Jones\n\nI write to you in answer to the letter of the 30th of March, signed by the Vice President, Senator Conkling, & yourself, and only just rec ?d. I regret exceedingly I did not get it at Galveston, in time possibly to have had some effect.?Please read my letter to you, and the one to Garfield, to the signers of the letter of the 30th, and use your combined judgment as to whether the latter should be delivered or not. I am likely to remain here another month. The work I am engaged upon is one which I believe is to result in great benefits to my own country, and of course to this. No personal consideration would tempt me to engage in what I am now doing, but I believe sincerely that by building these people up we will establish a market for our products which will stave off, for years at least, a panic which is otherwise inevitable from the rapidity with which we are going in.?My kindest regards to all my friends in Wton [?] [Washington].\n\nYours,\n\nU.S. Grant\n\nHistorical Background\n\nWe believe that this is an unrecorded, private note from U.S. Grant to Nevada Senator John P. Jones written while Grant was in Mexico City. It accompanied two official letters written on April 24,1881. One letter was to President Garfield and the other is a formal letter to ?Senator Jones.? Both are mentioned here: ?Please read my letter to you, and the one to Garfield, to the signers of the letter of the 30th, and use your combined judgment as to whether the latter should be delivered or not. ? Both letters are recorded in the Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, Volume 30: October 1, 1880-December 31, 1882. [URL and images below].\n\nAlthough Grant did not receive the ?letter of the 30th of March, signed by the Vice President, Senator Conkling, & yourself? (Chester Arthur, New York Senator Roscoe Conkling, and Jones) in a timely fashion, he nevertheless agreed to write to President James Garfield regarding his political appointments. With this letter, the former president and Union general inserted himself into a feud over political patronage that stemmed from the Republican presidential nominating convention of 1880.\n\nThe 1880 Republican convention was deeply divided between the ?Half-Breed? faction candidate Maine Senator James Blaine and the ?Stalwart? faction?s attempt to nominate Grant for an unprecedented third term. The nomination eventually went to dark horse candidate James Garfield of Ohio after 29 ballots. To balance the ticket, the delegates added New York Stalwart Chester Arthur as vice presidential candidate. After his election, Garfield had the unenviable task of putting together a Cabinet that would unite the fragmented Republican Party.\n\nAttempts by Arthur and Stalwart leader Conkling to convince Garfield to appoint (mostly) New York Stalwart Republicans to political office largely failed, with Garfield instead filling most positions with Midwestern and Southern Republicans. (New York Stalwarts got the Postmaster Generalship as small consolation.) Further fanning the flames, Garfield?s appointment of Conkling?s nemesis Blaine as Secretary of State was particularly onerous. The situation came to a head on March 23 when Garfield, at Blaine?s urging, nominated William Robertson, another of Conkling?s political enemies, as Customs Collector of the Port of New York?a position previously held by Arthur.\n\nWith the sitting president on one side and the vice president and Conkling on the other, Grant wrote to Garfield on the problem of appointing the ?wrong? Republicans to patronage jobs. The former president urged Garfield to fill the offices with the type of Republicans who would help the Republican party retain power in the 1884 presidential election. In this private note to Senator Jones, Grant left it to the three to decide if they thought it worth delivering: ?Please read my letter to you, and the one to Garfield, to the signers of the letter of the 30th, and use your combined judgment as to whether the latter should be delivered or not. ? Apparently they did, as Jones personally delivered Grant?s letter to Garfield on May 13. 1881.\n\nGrant had concluded the letter to Garfield with his reason for sending it through Jones: ?I shall send this letter through my friend Senator Jones, of Nevada, to insure it reaching your hands without going through the hands of a Secretary, to be read perhaps before it reaches you.? On May 15, Garfield responded to Grant and affirmed that ?Yours of the 24th April was handed to me by Senator Jones the night before last.? The president then launched into an uncompromising and lengthy rebuttal in which he asserted he would not be bound by the spoils system and would appoint anyone worthy of Republican service regardless of special interests. Conkling and fellow New York Stalwart Thomas Platt resigned in protest the following day, and Garfield forbade his vice president from attending Cabinet meetings out of spite.\n\nRegarding the railroad, Grant had been interested in developing Mexican rail lines since his visit to Mexico the previous year. On April 3,1881, Grant departed Galveston, Texas, for Mexico to negotiate a contract for the Mexican Southern Railroad Company. He was joined by former Mexican Treasury Secretary (and future Mexican minister to the United States) Matias Romero in the railroad project. A year earlier, in September 1880, Mexican President Porfirio Diaz began granting concessions to American railroad builders. At Grant?s urging, Romero had wined and dined about 20 railroad magnates at Delmonico?s in New York City in November 1880. The group agreed to form a committee with Grant as its chairman, and proceeded to work developing Mexican rail lines. On March 23,1881, the Mexican Southern Railroad Company was incorporated with Grant as its president, and on May 11,1881, Grant signed a contract with Mexican government official laying out terms and gaining concessions for the railroad. As he stated, he earnestly believed that the proposition would improve the economies of both nations: "I believe sincerely that by building these people up we will establish a market for our products which will stave off, for years at least, a panic which is otherwise inevitable" and help mitigate the effects of the financial panics so prevalent in the late 19th century America.\n\nWE PROVIDE IN-HOUSE SHIPPING WORLDWIDE! University Archives
University Archives has 0 objects in the categories.

Find address and telephone number to University Archives