July 17, 1909 Saturday

July 17 Saturday — In Redding, Conn. Sam wrote three notes to unidentified persons authorizing Albert B. Paine to take the contents of Sam’s safety deposit box. The second note survives [MTP: AAA-Anderson Galleries catalog 4346, Nov, 11-12 Nov. 1937, item 89]. Note: Hill points out that Paine was made manager of Clemens’ business affairs on this day, and “had the restrictions removed from his use of unpublished material in his biography” [242]. See also July 24,

Sam also inscribed a 9x11” head and shoulders photograph of himself: “To Charles T. Lark 17 July ’09 Mark Twain” [Alexander Autographs, Sale 38 Lot 1337 Nov. 8, 2008]. Note: Charles T. Lark with Collin, Wells & Hughes attorneys, was involved in the Ashcroft investigation and also a witness to Clemens’ will.

Sam also wrote to Lark, listing amounts for services to Ralph W. Ashcroft which he felt were due him:

Mr. Lark, I have examined the synopsized account of the Ashcroft claims which appears in your letter to Mr. Paine. It is but right and proper that I should offset it with some counter claims.

Apparently Ashcroft charges for his services in two ways, according to convenience: sometimes by the day ($10), sometimes by the piece.

Due to Me.

For a letter to Lord Northcliffe, proprietor of the London Times, strongly recommending Ashcroft and vouching for him - - - - - $1,000

For introducing him to Sir Thomas Lipton - - - - - 3,000

For getting him acquainted with the Lord Mayors of London and Liverpool, many M. P.s, and many London journalists - - - 500

But for me he could not have gotten access to these prominent and useful men.

Commission for acquiring a subscription of $12,000 from myself for his hairpin companies, upon his representation that it was a Good Thing - - - - - $2,400

For beguiling Mr. Stanchfield to sink $6,000 in those things 1,200 Debtor to me in $2,500 for 50 shs of Milk Product stock bought for me without my privity or consent 2,500

For entertaining him under my roof in New York in Stormfield an average of twice per week during 8 months per year for two years, at $10 per day 1,200

For concealing from Lipton and the courts and newspapers what in Norfolk, Va., last April, he cheated me out of some money, by fraudulently using another man’s name, and by various falsehoods 5,000

For concealing from the press and the criminal courts that his wife, last spring, embezzled an heirloom greatly valued by my family, and was not able to get away from the fact 5,000

Charging by the piece, and arranging one’s own terms without previous arrangement with the other party, is a system which is acceptable to me.

Memoranda.

[L-A MS]. Note: the “Memoranda” suggests this letter was not sent, or one was prepared from this list,

Sam noted in his after Sept. 25, 1909 letter that on this day, “Ashcroft Turned out of the Lobster Pot,” which was the house Clemens gave to Isabel Lyon. Hill gives particulars on p. 234, but Jean Clemens accompanied attorney Charles T. Lark to Summerfield (the Lobster Pot) to confront Isabel Lyon Ashcroft:

On Saturday, July seventeenth, I accompanied Mr. Lark when he went down to “Summerfield” between 10.30 and 11 o’clock a.m. He wished to see Mrs. Ashcroft, but we were met at the door by Mrs. Lyon, her mother, and told that Mrs, A. was ill and consequently unable to see us. When Mr. Lark asked whether there was any likelihood of his seeing Mrs, Ashcroft in the afternoon, her mother answered that there might be and that she would let him know by telephone.

We had hardly reached “Stormfield’” when that message was sent, that Mrs. Ashcroft would see Mr. Lark between two and half past. At the same time, the request was made that he go alone, which he was unwilling to grant, as he wished me to be there as witness of everything that was said and done.

Immediately after lunch, we again drove down to “Summerfield.” This time we were admitted, Mrs, Lyon being dressed, now, in a black satin or satin waist and black stuff skirt.

Mrs. Lyon said she would call her daughter, but I had not as yet seated myself on the sofa, beside Mr. Lark, when she entered at the other end of the room which runs lengthwise across the width of the house.

Mrs. Ashcroft was very simply dressed in a white waist, skirt and belt. She wore no ornaments of any kind; merely her wedding- and a seal-ring. Mrs. Ashcroft didn’t speak to me. She bowed as she came in, looking at Mr, Lark, while I merely pronounced her name, as I seated myself.

Mrs, Lyon sat down in large arm-chair nearly opposite Mr. Lark, only a few feet away, while Mrs. Ashcroft seated herself in a very small chair a little at my left, so that I was between her and Mr. Lark.

For several moments nothing was said. Then Mr. Lark began by saying that as we had read in the papers that Mrs. Ashcroft had returned from Europe in order to settle the difficulty with Mr. Clemens and was going to Redding for that purpose, it had been considered best for him (Mr. L.) to go down and see her, since she had not appeared at “Stormfield”, Mrs. Lyon broke in, there, and begged Mr. Lark to treat her daughter like a lady, whereupon Mrs. Ashcroft pretty shortly asked her mother to keep still and not interfere, while Mr, Lark answered that he had no intention of treating her otherwise than as a lady. Then he suggested, that, as some of the things he had to say would be trying for her to hear, perhaps Mrs. Lyon would prefer to withdraw. No attention was paid to the suggestion, so he continued with the matter in hand.

For some time Mrs. A. pretended ignorance of what the attachment was made for. Then when she saw that it was useless to deny her knowledge of the cause, she tried to make out that she had been allowed to see no check-books and been unable to prepare any statement whatsoever. Mr. Lark told her that she and Mr. Ashcroft, together, had made a statement of the cost of putting her house in order and that that statement was absolutely incorrect. Mrs. A. then said that if she could have the bills she would prove that the amount stated as above her estimate, was incorrect. Mr. Lark asked by whom most of the work had been done, after telling her that in one instance, when the work on “Stormfield” had amounted to $61.00 and that at “Summerfield” to over $450.— she had paid the whole with one check and written on the stub “for “Stormfield.”” Mrs. A. said that the only people who had worked for both places, were Adams, the carpenter Lounsbury (Jack of all Trades) and Hull, the plumber and that their work had all amounted to very little. To that Mr. Lark answered that it was Hull’s bill of over $400.00 which she had put down as work down at “Stormfield.” That silenced her for a moment and she changed her tack, trying to look Mr. Lark out of countenance with a long, pathetic, absolutely unwinking gaze. She failed, of course, and wearily said she “was “very sorry,” if she had done wrong, In the course of the conversation, Mrs. Ashcroft said, in answer to the accusation that she had drawn checks to pay for the repairs on her house with Father's money, as far back as the summer spent in Tuxedo (1907), that Father had told her to do so. Mr. Lark said Father had no recollection of giving her permission to borrow of him until the summer of 1908, when she had said she would have to mortgage her place, in order to pay for the repairs.

Mr. Lark finally stated that if she Mrs. Ashcroft would deed back the property, he believed Father would drop his suit. That is to say, if she deeded the property and paid the mortgage, which, after what she had once said, she had no right to do. Then he went on to explain that when Father had given her the property, she had suggested that it be only a life possession for herself & her mother, reverting to Clara & me upon their death, which Father had not considered necessary but had not declined, That clause was not in the deed, however, but that Mrs. Ashcroft had said she would never sell the place, whereas in mortgaging it, she had already practically sold it. She answered that there was no paper showing that she mustn’t sell the place, to which Mr. Lark acceded but said she had broken her word in the matter.

Then he drew attention to the amazing checks drawn for “house money” which had amounted to $4000 [inserted by SLC: ($7,000?)] which we had not succeeded in explaining as no such amount had been used before. The servants were almost invariably paid by check and so were all bills of any consequence. Mr. Lark went on to say that if she deeded the property & paid the $1500 mortgage, Father would still be the loser of about $3000 but that, to put in bluntly, what he most wanted, was to get her out of the neighborhood. At intervals, Mrs. Ashcroft said she couldn't give up her home, that she would raise the money to pay everything back with, that she had borrowed from Father with the understanding that she was to pay when she was able to, that she was very sorry, must think a while, first, was unable to do so, must talk it over with her mother, must see her lawyer before deciding.

Mr. Lark asked Mrs. Ashcroft if she was supporting her mother in part of 1907 & ’08 to which she answered that she was, in the winter, that during the summer of 1907 her mother had lived with her sister, (Mrs. Ashcroft’s) in Hartford. When Mr. Lark drew attention to the fact that Mrs. Lyon’s board would use up the greater part of Miss Lyon’s salary of fifty dollars per month, they both answered that the board had never exceeded eight and a half dollars per week. After which he remarked that that left Miss Lyon fifteen dollars to dress on, to which she responded that Father had given her permission to buy such clothing as she needed, because she had several times declined a higher salary. I told Mr. Lark that that permission had not been given in New York but here, last winter.

In reference to the large amount of house money drawn, Mrs. Ashcroft made a feeble effort to make out that she had used a large amount of it in paying for the furnishings of “Stormfield,” which had to be paid for in cash, at Macy’s. She volunteered that she could explain the excess, if only she were allowed to see the books and also, that she never had a bank account that amounted to anything. Mr. Lark caught her at once on the furnishing statement & showed her the item in the accountant’s record of her checks, where she had paid for the furnishing. A little later, he caught her again. When speaking of the mortgage, she said she could pay it all, as she hadn’t touched it since she had deposited it. When asked how it happened that she had just said she hadn’t an account, she explained that she had placed the mortgage-money in the Liberty Bank, whereas her other small account was at the Lincoln.

Mr. Lark explained that Father was making this offer of settling the matter out of court, because Mrs. Ashcroft was a woman, that if the trouble had been with a man be wouldn’t have thought of it and that he, personally believed him far more generous that he would be in similar conditions. He also said that as the matter remained unsettled, Father was growing more and more angry about it, realizing, as he did, the ingratitude of her conduct, after being treated practically as a member of the family for nearly seven years, and that he was also feeling that he was not doing his duty as a citizen. He went on to say that if Mrs, Ashcroft felt unwilling to accept the proposition now made, that the complaint had been made out by the Grand Juror of the district and would be handed in. When she didn’t understand what that meant, he explained that the complaint would be given to the prosecuting attorney of this county. Mrs. Lyon showed that she knew what that meant, but either Mrs. Ashcroft didn’t fully grasp the idea, or she controlled herself admirably.

Once Mrs. Ashcroft seemed on the point of breaking down, whereupon her mother went & soothed her for a few moments.

Mrs. Lyon asked just what would be included in the deed, whether any of the furniture, or not, to which Mr. Lark responded that it meant merely the house, barn and land, which were the same, except for the water improvements, for which Father had paid, as when he gave them.

Mrs. Ashcroft repeated that she was very sorry, at least four times and twice that she would raise the money to pay everything back with, once before, and one after, she had told Mr. Lark to do as he chose, that she and her mother “had each other” and were satisfied with that.

When Mrs. Ashcroft wanted to see her lawyer before deciding & then go in New York to see Mr. Stanchfield, Mr. Lark suggested that that might not be desired, because in doing so, she would be out of the jurisdiction of the state.

Finally, at 3.35 P.M. Mrs. Ashcroft gave in and Mr, Lark said he would return with the deed, for signature, Monday morning, July nineteenth, as we were leaving, they both very nearly had histerics and as it was, were weeping in each other’s arms. Once, after saying she was sorry, Mrs. Ashcroft called on her mother to back up her statement that she had never drawn up any checks falsely, saying: “You know I wouldn’t do such a thing, don’t you, Mother?,” to which Mrs, Lyon of course answered: “No, dear, of course you wouldn’t.”” To which Mr. Lark said: “Mrs. Lyon, you were not the a witness on those occasions, the checks are the witnesses of that fact.”

After we reached “Stormfield,” it was found that the deed could be obtained from Mr. Nickerson at once, thus saving Mr. Lark the trip on Monday.

So once more I went down to “Summerfield,” this time on foot, accompanied by Mr. G. M. Acklom. We were met at their entrance, at 6.15 P.M.. Mr. Acklom remained with the horse, while Mr. Nickerson, Mr. Lark & I went in. We found the ladies quieted down somewhat, but ready to break down.

While Mr. Nickerson read the deed aloud to Mrs. Ashcroft, in the small back parlor, Mr. Lark & I remained in the large room, while Mrs. Lyon did the same, sitting with her back to us, looking out of the window opening down the hill. When the reading was over, Mrs. Ashcroft showed no unwillingness to sign it, or to draw the mortgage-check, although she was very nervous, indeed. She wasn’t sure of the date & for a moment, seemed uncertain how to draw the check. Mrs. Lyon once more asked about the furniture, saying she had brought a lot of it from Farmington. She was again told the furniture would not be taken and then, when they asked how soon they must move out, tearfully remarking that they had nowhere to go to, as the Farmington house was let, Mr. Lark first said they could remain until Sept. 15th, which was the date Mrs. Lyon asked for, but after we stepped outside, I reminded him that Sept. 15, gave them two days of two months and that Sept. 1st seemed sufficient to me, so he stepped back and told them that after all, six weeks ought really to suffice them in finding a place to move to.

When Mr. Nickerson handed Mrs. Ashcroft the dollar bill, necessary, to make such a proceeding legal, she tore it in half, half screaming and exclaiming that she would not take it. So Mr. Nickerson carefully picked the two pieces up and put them in his wallet.

Just before leaving, Mr. Lark told Mrs. Ashcroft that he thought Father now release the lien on their her Farmington house.

Soon after we reached “Stormfield,” Mrs. Lyon again telephoned, asking whether they must still live in daily dread of further trouble. In answering her, Mr. Lark said he was pretty sure that Father would bring no other suit, but that that was of course for him to decide.

Jean L. Clemens.

July 24. 1909 [MTP: L-A MS XXT). Note: see also July 20