Letters Shine New Light Upon The Lincoln Conspiracy

A great grandmother's letters shine new light upon the Lincoln conspiracy

This old daguerreotype photo is of my grandmother on my father's side, Mary Rosella Lacey, or Mom Mom, who died before I was born. She is wearing a dress she made herself. Her father, John Lacey, was an Irish bootmaker who made boots for President Lincoln, among other people. She is notable for raising five Flaherty children who all turned out well, and that is what defines her life for me.

One day I learned that although my family's ancestors, O'Malley, O'Higgins, Murphy, and Lynch, all had Irish names, I was not entirely one hundred percent Irish, like I thought. The O'Flaherty's had in large part kept to themselves overlooking the pre-historic sea port now called Galway, from the Connemara Mountains of northwest Ireland, an area never surrendered to anyone. But inevitably, around the year 1,000 our blood became mixed with the Norman family Burke. During the Dark Ages it is rather unabashedly written, as though it were not blarney, that some of us removed further from Connemara into the monasteries of northern Scotland, where we almost single handedly kept alive the written word, by reproducing the only remaining copies of Brehon Law, the Bible and other sacred texts.

Once in America, it took the marriage of my grandfather, to unite my O'Flaherty group with another descendant of a Norman and Irish family, William F. Lacey, and his wife, the daughter of an Irish, Scottish, and English family named Wilson. My grandmother Mom Mom's mother, who they called Nana, was a Wilson.

Nana was a nice, well educated young lady, from an established family. Her great grandfather once owned farmland on what is now called Capitol Hill, and her great-great grandfather from England had served on the Revolutionary War staff of General Washington. But according to her letters, that pedigree did not necessarily make Nana think her side of the family was better than the generations who had lost the land before them. The negative thing however, was that the once prosperous Wilsons were beset by the severe economic problems of the time. There were also a few footnotes to her side of the family history that no one spoke about.

Nana's best friend had once started telling everyone what she knew, and they had locked her away for life in the Government Hospital for the Insane. No one wanted to dwell for long on the fighting amongst themselves and the suffering that had created the differences between them. Neither did the family speak about the subject when my father's aunt Katy used to bring it up, for she was regarded as the conspiracy theorist of his generation. Nevertheless, Katy preserved some of the papers that my great grandmother, Mary Rosella Wilson, or Nana, left behind, and those writings in my collection, as well as letters that have been saved by the James R. Dobbyn family, and Frances Flaherty Knox, mention the negative forces and those responsible for the financial pressure that caused our family differences. And no family fight has ever drawn as much attention. Let's be frank about it, and call it what it was. I'm talking about the Civil War.

It was a war fought over the interpretation of the sovereign rights of individual states; a Civil War for state's rights; the individual rights of sovereign states to protect, and defend if necessary, their laws, their enterprises, and their citizens from external powers such as the federal government and their masters at international banks.

Nana wrote that detractors used our family fight, this Civil War of ours, to prophesize the failure of our new form of government. They mistook the reasons why we were fighting amongst each other, and they questioned what we were fighting about. They dramatized the incendiary racial, moral and financial aspects surrounding the issue of slavery. They ridiculed our chances for survival as a nation. They said we were dreaming.

Some people thought we were simply fighting about the abolition of slavery, others insisted it was a rebellion against taxation. They just could not conceive how the sons of the original thirteen colonies could fight each other for a principle that detractors of democracy never knew. They could not comprehend any cause that would make brother take sides against brother, or fathers and sons occupy different positions on the field of battle. They never learned that family fights are not fought to destroy the other side, but instead to compel the other side to be loyal and true.

Nana said slavery would have been abolished without the need of a Civil War, and the timing of the Emancipation Proclamation had been a strategic thing. She said our family fight really started as a conflict forced upon the States, who sought to defend their independence, and the sovereign constitutional rights of their states, from the tyranny of financially motivated federal interests. She said the sovereign states of the South were forced to fight, to prevent the federal bureaucracy of the North, from overriding states laws, and heavy handedly deciding which sectors would prosper or die. She said that both sides were fighting over the interpretation of a document that they both had assisted in writing; a document called the Constitution.

Abraham Lincoln saw into the future. Before he was elected, he visualized himself helping to guide the ship of state though a practically unavoidable Civil War, and into the calmer waters of a unified nation. He recognized the peril in a legislature controlled by financial interests, and so he favored more government control of the currency. He also recognized that the abolition of slavery was close at hand. For those things, and because the North was the seat of federal power, he was vilified as the symbol of tyranny.

Assassins lay in wait for him on his inaugural route. An alarming number of conspirators, from both the North and the South, both men and women, planned his demise. Many individuals and several teams of agents were on call to kill him if and when the opportunity presented. Within the District of Columbia, a city of spies, and foreign financial interests, there may have been more people against President Lincoln than for him.

Cont. Below

[edit on 14-11-2009 by TrainDispatcher]

The Lincoln White House was surrounded by the encampment of a full Union company. A special cavalry unit accompanied the president and his carraige when he traveled outside. Throughout this hideous internal conflict, units from both sides engaged in biological warfare, smuggling food, clothing and other provisions contaminated with viruses such as influenza, yellow fever and small pox amongst the military and civilian populations. The Lincoln's own young son may have been one of the victims. But that kind of information was secret.

Nana referred to President Lincoln's failed efforts to avoid the war and preserve the Union by compensating slave owners, as high-minded. But even though some in her family admitted he had struggled to do the right thing, they were still against him for financial reasons. When it was ordered that all houses on the avenue had to display black in honor of the slain president, they refused. And when a young captain and his squad returned on horseback to give Nana the choice of either displaying something black, or being taken to jail, she defiantly hung an umbrella on the door knob.

The Civil War was clearly fought to make rich men richer. But It appears that people were all mixed up at the time, much like today, when they debate about Health Care, or Taxes, while remaining aloof about the main problem with our country, and the world at the moment, Banking Policy. Financiers in Europe wanted to destabilize our new country in order to profit from both sides of the conflict. Foreign powers such as the English, and the French at our borders in Mexico and Canada, awaited the opportunity to take back what they believed should be their land. Our own legislators, their financial ties, and our enemies too, were strangling the South with tariffs and embargos to keep European goods competitive, even to the extent of interfering with contracts for commodities such as cotton from the South to the North.

Some school books still inexplicably teach that Lincoln's killer, John Wilkes Booth, was just an egotistical actor, or a white supremacist who wanted to go down in history. That may be true. But people like great grandmother NaNa, on the Wilson side of the family, have told a different, more compelling story. The Wilsons knew agents who received money from the Zouaves, through Canada, to help finance the coup.

Now, the blue of the North and the gray of the South have blended into the khaki of a United States army. Both sides of my extended family, once caught up in our family war, lie together. Thomas O'Flaherty and his cousin Mary Surratt, Democrats and Republicans, Union and Confederate agents, those aligned with the financiers, and those aligned with President Lincoln and his Greenback agenda, are all together in their family plot, Section 12, at venerable Mount Olivet Cemetery.


Examin er

Great Find, Thanks for posting it.

It really shows us how much propaganda has been spread throughout the years regarding the causes of the civil war.

Too many people today still believe the war was only about slavery. The whole States rights issue has been forgotten by most. The South was fighting against the federal intrusion into their internal affairs and the evil influence of the Financial Interests in the Federal govt.

Unfortunately, the Civil War effectively spelled the end for the 10th amendment. It' all been downhill for this country since then.

This is a lesson we could learn much from today.

PS. I got bored with the biographical infomation at the beginning of the article and almost didn't make it to the good part. Next time, edit out the boring stuff. If we want to read the whole article for further info, we can always click on the link.

The Civil War did not spell the end of States' Rights. It did, however, begin an era where citizens must fight to regain those rights. We are now on the cusp of a change in focus. We can reclaim the rights of the states to stand up to the Federal government. They want to cut off Federal funding for highways, medicaid, foodstamps? Fine. Let them. When enough people tell them we don't really give a damn what they think, it's our rights that count, they will buckle.

PICTURES!! please post the dag-whatevers. this is interesting though....

reply to post by kettlebellysmith


You are right on the money to correct the other poster on the Civil War ushering an end to the 10th Amendment. For far too long have people assumed that it is government that makes law and we the people who must obey that law. What too many people fail to realize is that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and that all laws must conform to that Constitution or have no force of law. For too long have people relied upon The Supreme Court to rule one way or the other on law passed by Congress, or have come to expect SCOTUS to, in effect, make law themselves, with particular rulings. Laws are not made, but rather exist. The Law of Gravity did was not legislated by Sir Isaac Newton when he wrote down the mathematical equation to it and people had long understood that gravity existed long before Newton wrote down the mathematical equation. Just as the Law of Gravity exists so do laws governing humanity. What constitutes law in regards to those governing humanity is the protection of rights. If a law is legislated in an attempt to protect the rights of individuals then it is law. Any legislation passed that does not accomplish this end is not law but merely legislation in the form of a statute or code or ordinance.

It is in understanding that law that people will learn how to be free again. I would like to say you are also on point in pointing out, or suggesting, that states are far too reliant on federal funding. It is that reliance on federal funding that has brought most of the states, if not all of them, into compliance with the federal governments intrusive legislation that too often amounts to nothing more than an obstruction of justice. Great points made by you!

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

For far too long have people assumed that it is government that makes law and we the people who must obey that law. What too many people fail to realize is that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and that all laws must conform to that Constitution or have no force of law.

On the purlely philosophical side, you have a compelling arguement.

However, try disobeying one of those laws not having it's authority from the Constitution, and see how long it takes for men with guns show up on your doorstep to make you comply with the "unconstitutional law".

Through generations of ignorance and inattention we, and our ancestors, have brought us to the point in history where the Constitution is, for all intents and purposes, a meaningless piece of paper.

We are going to have to fight hard to bring back the rule of law through the Constitution back to this country.

reply to post by FortAnthem


The people of the U.S. have a long history of disobeying legislation abhorrent to the Constitution. The fiasco known as Prohibition is just one example of many people blatantly and willfully disregarding bad legislation in order to enjoy their life with liberty in the pursuit of happiness. Today many people ignore the legislation on drug laws in favor of that same ideal. Parents across the country have rejected the tyranny of their own states in terms education and have embraced homeschooling over the public school system. Many of those parents have had to fight long and hard in the court system to keep the tyrants at bay but are winning the battle not loosing it.

In the state of California, for example, the 9th Circuit of Appeals overturned their own ruling requiring parents to become "board certified" as teachers in order to home school their own children or hire a teacher approved by the state. At first, the courts had sided with the state but then after review changed their minds and sided with the parents. They did so based on language within the Constitution for the State of California that made clear that parents have natural rights and do not need permission from the state to teach their own children.

While I understand your frustration at ignorance and the appearance that the Constitution for the United States can some times seem like a "meaningless piece of paper". It is very meaningful to many, many, people who reside within the U.S. and those people, who may have been guilty of indifference or inattention in the past are not so inattentive today and becoming more and more active in securing the blessings of liberty.

It has always been a long hard battle to secure freedom and it will always be as the ambitions of tyrants knows no bounds and is long enduring but not nearly as enduring and abundant as those who cherish freedom. Do not loose hope and do what you can as an individual to secure your own liberty.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Don't know how you keep up your optimism with the NWO barreling down on us like a freight train. Keep it up!



I hope those of us who still find the Constitution meaningful can indeed band together to stop the ambitions of these tyrants.

reply to post by FortAnthem


"They" might be able to kill us, and indeed they might, but they can never kill and idea. Long before the Declaration of Independence was written, there were prophets and "Bravehearts" who fought against tyranny and perhaps as longs as there are "we" there will be tyrants, but they will never win. Whether we band together or not, and at some point those who cherish freedom will band together in a meaningful way, it is not what "we" do that matters as much as what you do and what I do as individuals. In the end, freedom is an individual right and is best obtained by fighting for it with or without the approval or support of others.

There is much you and I can do as individuals to secure the Blessings of Liberty, and while it is never easy and can often times be very lonely, but it is well worth fighting for. You will prevail if that is what you choose to do. We will all prevail if that is what we all choose to do.

this is to everyone who has posted or followed this thread.
Contact The Heritage Foundation. Obtain a pocket sized copy of the constitution. Better yet, if you can afford it, spend 25 bucks and get 25 copies and spread them around to your friends and enemies, so they will at least know what they are talking about when they say something is unconstitutional.
Sit down, take a couple of hours a week and read the consitution(it's only 17 pages long on regular typing paper) and read the Declaration of Independence while you are at it. Just a coupe of hours a week, every week, will give you much to think about, and will allow you to confront your lawmakers when they want to propose a new law that is not mandated by the constitution. (The Healthcare Bill is unconstitutional because it requires US citizens to purchase insurance. If you can find something in the constitution that makes legal, please U2U me and let me know.)
We can take this country back. We can downsize the government, cut waste and corruption and restore the rights of the citizens, but we have to be willing to take chances. If it means standing up to the police, then so be it. If it means spending a night in jail, then so be it. Civil disobedience has accomplished some wonderful things.
"Invictus!"