Search

This collection is made up of correspondence related to the McClintock family of New York City and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. John McClintock corresponded with his family about his life in New York City in the 1820s, and later wrote about his life in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, where he worked as a professor at Dickinson College. Other family members discussed social and family news, including the situation of a brother who was incarcerated for insanity.

The McClintock family collection (114 items) contains correspondence related to the McClintock family of New York City and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. John McClintock corresponded with his family about his life in New York City in the 1820s, and later wrote about his life in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, where he worked as a professor at Dickinson College. Other family members discussed social and family news.

The Correspondence series (107 items) contains letters that John McClintock, Jr., wrote to his parents and his sister Jane from 1829-1845, as well as additional family letters dated until 1850. McClintock's letters pertain to his life in New York City (1829-1835) and Carlisle, Pennsylvania (1837-1845). In his earlier letters, he commented on religious matters, his attendance at Methodist services, and his other social activities. He inquired about his father's success selling books, and provided updates about his health and finances. The collection also contains two letters that McClintock received during this period.

McClintock's later letters concern his life in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, where he worked as a professor at Dickinson College. He often discussed the health of his wife, his children, and other relatives. The remaining letters relate to other members of the McClintock family; a few relate to the family of Carolina Augusta Wakeman, John McClintock, Jr.'s first wife. The series includes correspondence between McClintock's sisters, Martha, Margaret, and Jane McClintock; 3 letters from Martha McMackin McClintock; and a letter from McClintock's brother, James McClintock, which concerns their brother Robert's incarceration for insanity and other familial misfortunes (March 22, 1842). In a letter to Jane McClintock, a family member commented on the military presence in Philadelphia in the aftermath of the Nativist riots of 1844. (July 15, 1844).

The Documents, Ephemera, and Miscellaneous series (7 items) contains invitations to the funerals of Rebecca McMackin and Martha McClintock (3 items); a manuscript obituary for Martha McClintock, focusing on her religious life; an affidavit signed by Benjamin Broughton of Bradford, England, and by Emory McClintock during the latter's consular service; a biographical sketch of Rebecca McMackin; and a lock of Emory McClintock's hair, with a partially completed needlepoint design.

This collection consists of documents related to Civil War enlistment in Parishville, New York, after the institution of conscription in 1862, including 48 affidavits claiming medical ineligibility.

This collection (52 items) consists of documents related to Civil War enlistment in Parishville, New York, after the institution of conscription in 1862. The collection contains 48 affidavits signed by Ansel S. Smith and Daniel Dagget, justices of the peace in Parishville. In these affidavits, many of which include sworn statements from physicians, men declared themselves medically ineligible for military service. The collection also includes three lists naming men from Parishville who were enlisted during the war, as well as one bound volume entitled "Enrollment of Persons Liable to Military Duty." This volume, dated September 6, 1862, provides the names of adult men living in Parishville, New York, their occupations, and remarks concerning their eligibility. Many, for example, had already enlisted prior to the draft; others held exempted jobs, and some were considered "alien."

This collection is made up of briefs, arguments, lists of precedents, manuscript form affidavits, and other documents related to the trial of William S. Bergin for the murder of Thomas J. McBride, barkeeper and proprietor of the Bergin House hotel in Mount Vernon, Ohio, on June 15, 1877. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity (i.e. he was intoxicated when committing the murder), but the jury convicted him and he was sentenced to death. These papers appear to have been compiled by Bergin's defense counsel during the process of seeking a retrial in August 1877.

This collection is made up of briefs, arguments, lists of precedents, manuscript form affidavits, and other documents related to the trial of William S. Bergin for the murder of barkeeper and proprietor of the Bergin House hotel in Mount Vernon, Ohio, on June 15, 1877. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity (i.e. he was intoxicated when committing the murder), but the jury convicted him and he was sentenced to death. These papers appear to have been compiled by Bergin's defense counsel during the process of seeking a retrial in August 1877.

The collection includes two briefs; witnesses' statements about the language used in the confrontation, a 14-page document with statutes on first degree murder and evidence in the Bergin case; a 9-page argument; a list of points made by the plaintiff; and an organized list of precedent cases for drunkenness, homicidal impulse, homicidal mania, insanity with apparent sanity, hereditary insanity, sane today--insane tomorrow, murder in the 2nd degree, and the number of the insane in Ohio.

The collection's 18 affidavits appear to be manuscript forms for Bergin's defense to use in arguing for a retrial. They include several different handwritten forms produced by a clerk. With only three exceptions, the affidavits do not identify a particular individual, leaving blanks for their name and for the date of the sworn statement. Despite their incomplete state, some of these were still signed and stamped by a notary. The incomplete forms include duplicate text focused on different arguments for a retrial. For example, six of the affidavits discredit Sarah Rose as a witness; several of them are sworn statements by jurors that they had already formed their opinions of the case before the trial; and others claim the jurors were allowed to separate into their own boarding houses or mingle with crowds of people without police supervision.