5 October 1875 • Hartford, Conn.
(Unidentified Hartford newspaper, CU-MARK,
reprinting the Louisville Ledger, UCCL 01267)
I have heard cousin James Lampton speak of his Earldom a good while ago, but I have never felt much interest in the matter, I not being heir to the title. But if I were heir to the title [&] thought I had a reasonable chance to win it I would not cast away my right without at least making enough of a struggle to satisfy my self-respect.
You ask me what I think of the chances of the American heirs.2 I answer frankly that I [think] them inconceivably slender. The present earl of Durham has been in undisputed possession thirty-five years; his father, the first earl, held possession forty-three years. Seventy-eight years’ peaceable possession is a pretty solid wall to buck against before a court composed of the House of Lords of England—backed, as it seems to be, by a limitless bank account. It cost the Tichborne claimant upwards of $400,000 to get as far as he did with his claim. Unless the American Lamptons can begin their fight with a still greater sum, I think it would be hardly worth while for them to go into the contest at all. If the title & estates were in abeyance for lack of an heir you might stand some chance, but as things now are I cannot doubt that the present Viscount of Lampton (lucky youth!), son of the reigning Earl, will succeed to the honors & the money, all in due time. That lad was born lucky, anyhow—for he was a twin & beat his brother into the world only five minutes—& a wonderfully valuable five minutes it was, too, as that other twin feels every day, of his life, I suspect.3
No, indeed. The present possessors are [too] well fortified. They have held their lands in peace for over six hundred years; the blood of Edward III. & [Edward IV.] flows in their veins; they are up in the bluest-blooded aristocracy of England. The [court that] would try the case is made up, in a large measure, of their own relatives; they have plenty of money to fight with. Tackle them? It would be too much like taking Gibraltar with blank cartridges.
I heartily wish you might succeed, but I feel sure that you cannot.
Truly yours.
Jesse M. Leathers, Esq., Louisville, Ky.
Explanatory Notes | Textual Commentary
Caroline Clemens Settle (1806–53) was the sister of Clemens’s father. None of her ten known
children was named “Jerome.” President James Monroe (1758–1831) was the nephew of
Leathers’s great-great-grandfather. No Lampton family connection has been established for Thomas Jefferson or James
Madison. For Henry Watterson’s Lampton connection, see 8? Nov 74 to Watterson, n. 1. The article in the Owensboro Monitor has not been found. The Louisville Ledger, in first printing the present letter,
drew on that article for an explanation of the Lampton family legend (see the next note). The Ledger
presumably got the letter, which Clemens did not write for publication, directly from Jesse Leathers. No form of the newspaper is
known to be extant (Lampton 1990, 3–4, 7, 11, 88,
175–81, 212–13; Selby, 11).
My mother, with her large nature and liberal sympathies, was not intended for an aristocrat, yet through her
breeding she was one. . . . I knew that privately she was proud that the Lambtons, now Earls of Durham, had occupied the family
lands for nine hundred years; that they were feudal lords of Lambton Castle and holding the high position of ancestors of hers when
the Norman Conqueror came over to divert the Englishry. . . . “Col. Sellers”
was a Lampton, and a tolerably near relative of my mother’s; and when he was alive, poor old airy soul, one of the
earliest things a stranger was likely to hear from his lips was some reference to the “head of our line,”
flung off with a painful casualness that was wholly beneath criticism as a work of art. It compelled inquiry, of course; it was
intended to compel it. Then followed the whole disastrous history of how the Lambton heir came to this country a hundred and fifty
years or so ago, disgusted with that foolish fraud, hereditary aristocracy; and married, and shut himself away from the world in
the remotenesses of the wilderness, and went to breeding ancestors of future American Claimants, while at home in England he was
given up as dead and his titles and estates turned over to his younger brother, usurper and personally responsible for the perverse
and unseatable usurpers of our day. And the Colonel always spoke with studied and courtly deference of the Claimant of his
day,—a second cousin of his,—and referred to him with entire seriousness as “the Earl.”
“The Earl” was a man of parts, and might have accomplished something for himself but for the calamitous
accident of his birth. He was a Kentuckian, and a well meaning man; but he had no money, and no time to earn any; for all his time
was taken up in trying to get me, and others of the tribe, to furnish him a capital to fight his claim through the House of Lords
with. (Inds, 86–87)
investigated this Durham business down at the Herald’s office. There’s nothing to it. The
Lamptons passed out of the Earldom of Durham a hundred years ago. There were never any estates. The title lapsed. The present
earldom is a new creation—not the same family at all. (Watterson
1910, 373)
Source text(s):
Previous publication:
L6, 545–48.
Emendations and textual notes:
Hartford • Hartford
Dear Sir • Dear Sir
& • and [here and hereafter]
think • thing
too • to
Edward IV. • Eward IV.
court that • court
Samuel L. Clemens • Samuel L. clemens