![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
so i just realized that i have 33 days left to write this book ~ hmmm....
where did all the time go?
and so what am i doing? looking for 19th century moravian resources? and why?
that, and an email conversation with moomsy this morning about historical accuracy, offending the living and the dead, and writers who make silly choices (without the benefit of silly hats) has got me queasy. i need to stop frittering away on this dingbat and just hammer it out.
~ * ~
i read John W. Clampitt's account this morning (it had been sitting on my desk for weeks being completely ignored). there's nothing earth-shattering in it, which i knew before i read it, but i've been trying to get a finger on some of the other counselors to see who i could send to Willard's with Poppet and originally i had picked Mr. Ew (Gen. Thomas Ewing, Jr., bro-in-law to that Sherman guy who liked to burn things) and Mr. Pebblehead (Frederick Stone, esq.) ~ but Ewing seems too stodgy (so say i, though can't really justify the accusal) and anyway too focused on his own case to bother with a whelp like Poppet. and Stone seems so indifferent to the proceedings that he doesn't even bother showing up for the closing arguments (wow, that's bad).
so Clampitt probably makes the most sense because: 1.) he's young (Clampitt's the youngest in fact, i think, at 26). and 2.) his temperament is so radically different (from Poppet's). and 3.) he probably has the most dramatic final 24 hours (racing around in a last minute bid for clemency) ~ so he's kinda the most inneresting. not sure where Aiken was all this time (Clampitt mysteriously never mentions him).
anyway, Clampitt strikes me as indignant and perhaps self-assured. with Reverdy in his pocket, i think he presumed an acquittal. his horror of the military system also makes him a good choice to sit around arguing the jurisdiction issue with some intemperance. i'm thinking he and Poppet might butt heads at the start (your client is screwing up my client's case!), but i can see them trying to work together (if not toward the same goal then at least to an understanding).
the things i don't know and really wish i did:
we're back to: this is a story about Poppet sitting under the tree peeling apples with the made-up dog during lunch sessions while Chammy pitches quoits with Capt. Rath, and Hanty endures government lunch with the crabby commissioners. it avoids the details of all the legal crap and doesn't interfere with the story. i say whatever happens on that lunch hour is open season.
: o p
the latest title in the running: In Pursuance of Said Conspiracy
picture of the day: (in the spirit of who's who, here's Ewing about that time). his pictures seem to show a man much older than his 36 years and he's kind of a rumpled dresser.
this shouldn't amuse me, but it does:
General Ewing was hit by a bus in 1896
and subsequently buried in yonkers.
where did all the time go?
and so what am i doing? looking for 19th century moravian resources? and why?
that, and an email conversation with moomsy this morning about historical accuracy, offending the living and the dead, and writers who make silly choices (without the benefit of silly hats) has got me queasy. i need to stop frittering away on this dingbat and just hammer it out.
~ * ~
i read John W. Clampitt's account this morning (it had been sitting on my desk for weeks being completely ignored). there's nothing earth-shattering in it, which i knew before i read it, but i've been trying to get a finger on some of the other counselors to see who i could send to Willard's with Poppet and originally i had picked Mr. Ew (Gen. Thomas Ewing, Jr., bro-in-law to that Sherman guy who liked to burn things) and Mr. Pebblehead (Frederick Stone, esq.) ~ but Ewing seems too stodgy (so say i, though can't really justify the accusal) and anyway too focused on his own case to bother with a whelp like Poppet. and Stone seems so indifferent to the proceedings that he doesn't even bother showing up for the closing arguments (wow, that's bad).
so Clampitt probably makes the most sense because: 1.) he's young (Clampitt's the youngest in fact, i think, at 26). and 2.) his temperament is so radically different (from Poppet's). and 3.) he probably has the most dramatic final 24 hours (racing around in a last minute bid for clemency) ~ so he's kinda the most inneresting. not sure where Aiken was all this time (Clampitt mysteriously never mentions him).
anyway, Clampitt strikes me as indignant and perhaps self-assured. with Reverdy in his pocket, i think he presumed an acquittal. his horror of the military system also makes him a good choice to sit around arguing the jurisdiction issue with some intemperance. i'm thinking he and Poppet might butt heads at the start (your client is screwing up my client's case!), but i can see them trying to work together (if not toward the same goal then at least to an understanding).
the things i don't know and really wish i did:
1. who paid the bill??? some of the other lawyers were kinda nasty about insisting on being paid, but as the only government assigned defense counselor, i still wonder who footed the bill for Poppet or whether he did the work pro bono.my fabulous solution: avoid all the particulars of the legal profession.
2. whose firm was Poppet working for? or was he an independent? he had gone home to recover from typhoid (or malaria) and then returned to washington, but it's not clear anywhere why. i'm thinking he must have had a job offer (with a firm?).
3. what sort of staff did these guys have under them? copyists? secretaries? runners? Clampitt says they had to wrangle their own witnesses and spent half their nights chasing people down throughout the trial. we know from the transcipt that the court ordered Hartranft to arrest people who were failing to show, but otherwise it seems the attorneys personally had to do all the work to bring their witnesses in. the government paid for the prosecution witnesses (travel and per diem) ~ i'm sure they didn't pay for the defense.
Stone had secretaries (who read his closing argument). so it's perhaps safe to assume that Poppet had at least a secretary? maybe that's not so safe to assume. if he was in private practice and serving out of his living room, he might have been doing all the work himself (i think probably not the case, but certainly not unheard of in that time).
4. This one isn't a frameable question, just a pondering: Poppet and Ewing, to my knowledge, were the only defense lawyers on the case who actually served in the war. also, as a former provost marshall, Poppet specifically had experience with the jurisdiction of the courts martial, etc. i wonder how his status as a brigadier-general (even just a brevet) affected his relationship with the other counselors and the commission. the commission strikes me as particularly nasty toward his case and toward Ewing ~ coincidence? i suppose it that could be for a lot of reasons, but the two seemed singled out for a lot of contention. all of the counselors had "known" southern sympathies (Ewing had been much criticised for taking "rebel" cases). Poppet, however, had no such stigma (leastways before the trial).
we're back to: this is a story about Poppet sitting under the tree peeling apples with the made-up dog during lunch sessions while Chammy pitches quoits with Capt. Rath, and Hanty endures government lunch with the crabby commissioners. it avoids the details of all the legal crap and doesn't interfere with the story. i say whatever happens on that lunch hour is open season.
: o p
the latest title in the running: In Pursuance of Said Conspiracy
picture of the day: (in the spirit of who's who, here's Ewing about that time). his pictures seem to show a man much older than his 36 years and he's kind of a rumpled dresser.
this shouldn't amuse me, but it does:
General Ewing was hit by a bus in 1896
and subsequently buried in yonkers.
Tags: