Despite the radio silence on my part and this website, scholarship on Sonia has not wavered. In this special post, I wanted to highlight an article recently published in The Fossil, and newly discovered newspaper clippings, all of which adds another layer to the portrait of Sonia. Additionally, I’ll conclude the post with an update on An Ardent Recruit.
The Horror at Martin’s Beach
One evening while walking along this esplanade—the full moon reflecting its light in the water, a peculiar and unusual noise heard at a distance as of a loud snorting and grunting, the shimmering light forming a moon-path on the water, the round tops of the submerged piles in the water exposed a rope connecting them like a huge spider’s web—gave the vivid imagination full play for an interesting, weird tale.
Two Hearts That Beat as One, Sonia H. Davis, p. 99.
The object was some fifty feet in length, of roughly cylindrical shape, and about ten feet in diameter. It was unmistakably a gilled fish in its major affiliations; but with certain curious modifications, such as rudimentary forelegs and six-toed feet in place of pectorial fins, which prompted the widest speculation. Its extraordinary mouth, its thick and scaly hide, and its single, deep-set eye were wonders scarcely less remarkable than its colossal dimensions…
“The Invisible Monster”, Sonia H. Greene, H.P. Lovecraft, Something About Cats and Other Pieces, 1949, pp. 19–20.
The invisible monster in “The Horror at Martin’s Beach” has rarely been dissected in terms of scholarship. Even Sonia, when describing the night which inspired the story, failed to reveal what animal had caused the loud snorting and grunting sounds. “Sonia Greene and the Cape Ann Sea Serpent” by David Goudsward is the answer to the mystery. Despite the short length, the article fantastically compares and contrasts the Invisible Monster to the Cape Ann Sea Serpent. Not wishing to give too much away though, I believe the story needed this kind of analysis for some time, and with David’s knowledge in cryptozoology, the article brings a fresh perspective to “The Horror at Martin’s Beach”.
The newspaper was to Sonia, and to others of her time, what social media is to us. The newspaper was not only a platform for breaking news and/or information about current events, but it was also a space where the locals could announce or advertise to others. It was through newspaper clippings that we were able to learn what really happened between Racille and Solomon Moseson. [Rachel Moseson]. It’s the same way we’re getting to know Sonia as well, beyond the confines of her marriage to H.P. Lovecraft. There are periods in Sonia’s life that are still unaccounted for, much of which she remained silent about in her autobiographical writings.
The following clippings shed insight on Sonia in 1930 after her divorce from Lovecraft, and in 1935, when she was then living in California. A huge thank you to Bobby Derie for finding the clippings and sharing them with me.
Transcript:
“HAND PAINTED CARDS for all occasions. Sonia Greene, 368 E. 17th St. Flatbush 5632.” Brooklyn Eagle, Brooklyn, New York, Fri, Apr 25, 1930, page 29. [Newspaper.com]
Transcript:
Noisy, Needless ‘Extras’
“From time to time the streets of the Ditmas Park section are aroused late at night or just before midday on Sundays with “Extras” hawked by newsmen that are neither important nor interesting enough to warrant such nerve-wracking alarm at a time when the neighborhood is entitled to peace and quiet.
At 11 o’clock Sunday morning newsmen for another paper were shouting the “Extra” that I had already read both in the Times and the Brooklyn Eagle at a much earlier hour.
Cannot some measure be taken to check this needless attack by newsmen upon peaceful, quiet neighborhoods? Besides alarming the neighborhood needlessly it is an imposition that obtains money under false pretenses. I trust it can be curbed in the future.” Sonia H. Greene, Brooklyn Eagle, Brooklyn, New York, Wed, Jun 25, 1930, page 18. [Newspaper.com]
Transcript:
“MILLINERY—Hats of the highest grade imported, velour soleil, velvet or French felt, made to fit your head; copied after original models; also your own hats cleaned, blocked and remodeled equal to new at very reasonable prices, Sonia Greene, 809 Ocean ave., near Cortelyou rd. Flatbush 5632, Apt. 1-D” The Brooklyn Citizen, Brooklyn, New York, Sat, Oct 11, 1930, page 9. [Newspaper.com]
“The current events class of the Redondo Union Evening high school is to hear a talk on “National Progress” by Mrs. Sonia H. Greene, of the Utopian’s speakers bureau, in the library, tonight at 7 o’clock.
Everyone is cordially invited to attend this class, which is instructed by Miss Alma Squires. Many speakers have enlightened the students on current economical problems during the past semester. Mrs. Greene is one of the outstanding speakers of the Utopian society and consequently is expected to bring a message of vital importance to everyone.” The Daily Breeze, Torrance, California, Thu, Apr 25, 1935, page 2. [Newspaper.com]
An Ardent Recruit
With Two Hearts That Beat as One now being in the wild, the natural course was to begin the next book, An Ardent Recruit. An Ardent Recruit focuses on Sonia’s contributions to amateur journalism. Seven months into the writing process, I wish I was further along in the manuscript than where I’m at currently. However, the journey has been interesting, especially as materials emerge along the way, bringing more depth to the overall progress. The following image is the table of contents for the book, and while some of the chapter titles may be subjected to change, the order in which the information will be presented will remain the same.
I’m wrapping up Chapter 1.2, taking on additional reading to supply extra particulars to the chapter. I would like to clarify, though, An Ardent Recruit will not give an in-depth history on amateur journalism. I’m providing a bare-bones summary to give context. By understanding some key historical moments of amateur journalism, we can then understand the struggles of what Sonia dealt with as a participant in publishing her journal and later as president.
An Ardent Recruit is still very much in its infancy stage, but once the bulk of the historical context is written, the rest of the writing should be relatively easy. I will certainly post an update on the next milestone.
Although 2025 is halfway over, considerable progress has been made for Sonia this year. As much as I try to give Sonia some renown of her own outside of her association with Lovecraft, it’s through that very relationship which has kept her from falling into complete obscurity. As long as there’s interest in Lovecraft, so will there be for Sonia.
She was, first and foremost, a milliner. When the slow seasons between the high demand came around, Sonia had side jobs. The side jobs were either still within her trade, i.e., creating hats for neighbors and friends, or seasonal positions elsewhere. The Wall Street Crash of 1929, however, was the prelude to the Great Depression, and this was a season in which Sonia had not calculated into her financial security:
After I returned from Europe in 1932 where I went both for a business as well as a vacation trip, I found, upon my return to N.Y., that many of my heretofore successfully financial patrons had at last been caught up by the Wall St. debacle of 1929 + 30s and many of them were no longer able to pay the prices of my exclusive merchandise that they had enjoyed heretofore. While visiting many places of interest in Germany, England, + France I did not neglect the buying of millinery models to take back home with me; thinking that both French merchandise and copies of my models would more than pay for the expensive trip, but I calculated without the climate of the times. Many fashionable women among my clientele were no longer able to pay the prices they once did. Many of them owed me money and could not pay, and I did not feel that I wanted to sue them, since many of them were my friends.
Sonia H. Davis, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 7, John Hay Library, Providence, RI.
In a country when needs would suddenly outweigh the wants, Sonia took a hit in her millinery. With no work, her funds were certainly dwindling, and she described a meeting with her banker that ultimately changed her trajectory:
My own misfortune did not pass me by until 1933, when I returned from Paris.
My banker, having noticed the depletion of my account, after having liquidated all my debts, called me into his office and asked me what I intended to do. Facetiously, I replied, “Not what several of the tycoons did when they lost their entire fortunes in Wall St. or elsewhere. I love life in all its phases. He asked what education did I have. I told him I had taken a cultural course at Columbia, but have no degree.
Did I know anything about early American history. “A little” I replied.
“How would you like to do some historical research, for a Diorama that is being planned by the members of the Metropolitan Museum?” he asked.
“I wouldn’t know how to go about it.” I said.
“I am one of the supporters of the Metropolitan Museum of History, and we are engaging artists and researchers for Early Colonial History.” You will get all the help you need from the Librarian of the children’s department which is in a separate building in Brooklyn.”
“I can try,” I said. “Very well” and he gave me a card with his name and occupation, and I went to Brooklyn’s Museum of Natural History, where I was engaged.
Sonia H. Davis, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 8, John Hay Library, Providence, RI.
The dioramas were planned for the Brooklyn Children’s Museum, and according to the museum’s guide to the “Photograph Collection”, one folder contains photographs of dioramas that were created through the WPA. (1.2.4: Dioramas, 1906 – 1936, p. 7) The Works Progress Administration was a program created by Franklin Roosevelt on May 6, 1935, to help provide work during the Great Depression. (History) The exact month and day of when Sonia was hired as a historical researcher is unknown, but it was certainly in 1933.
Her scribbled notes as a historical researcher are included in the “Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers” over at Brown University Library, but the notes themselves are not organized together in one specific folder. The first three pages, including the envelope, are in “Prose – M – R, Box 1, Folder 29”, while the last three pages are in “Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 1.” Nowhere else has her research papers been presented in their entirety—not even in her autobiography—until now:
Transcript:
The Roger Williams Historical Group
A plea for its completion according to the original plan.
In any series of historic groups chosen on the principles implied in the B’klyn [sic] Children’s Museum’s list, it is difficult to see how proper completeness can be attained without the inclusion of the model entitled
“Roger Williams speaks out for liberty before the New England Divines”
as provided for in the original plan.
It seems clear from the given list that the intention is to present certain typical, crucial moments and events in the formation of the American nation and attitude as they are today, and that the chief standard of selection is (apart from pictorial or dramatic vividness) the importance of these moments or events as decisive factors in the historic stream.
Thus there are groups representing the Indian background, the coming of the European, the victory of English civilization, the fixation of African Slavery, the vindication of a free press, the revolution, the establishment of the constitution, the enthronement of a democratic ideal under Jefferson, and so on down the years of the age of mechanical invention and wholesale immigration. Each of these groups depicts whatever active event seems most decisive or symbolic in connection with the national characteristic to be illustrated.
Now it would be difficult to name a national principle more basically, distinctively, importantly and influentially American than that of the separation of church and state. In its purest form it is an original product of American Soil, and one aspect or another of it has been dominant in the whole process of colonization and social and governmental development. More than anything else it is the distinguishing mark of this continent’s peculiar culture; and it has, in addition, reached back to the Old World to form a (monumental??), human attitude whose value is increasingly (illegible/missing word) every fresh historic development.
Above all other institutions which the sojourn of Europeans on American soil has produced, this assertion of the individual’s freedom of thought and opinion stands out as a salient landmark in the history of the United States and of world civilization alike. It is, then, unthinkable that some illustration of it should not be included within the present series of groups.
Now it is clear that any effective illustration of this all-important principle must come from the life of Roger Williams, whose precedence in proclaiming it in its entirety, and with all its implications, is plain and unchallenged. There is no ambiguity whatever about Williams’s place in history as a major pioneer in human thought and institutions, as the presence of his figure on the great international monument of the Reformation at Geneva, and of his bust in the American Hall of Fame, amply attests. The only real question concerns the particular episode in his career to be shown.
But even this question would be very easy to decide, for what scene could possibly be more directly, visibly and dramatically related to Roger Williams’s championship of the libertarian ideal than that of his open confrontation of the procedure at Newtown in October 1635? Here he dispelled all doubt of his position, openly defied the ruling powers of the Puritan Theocracy and publicly outlined his conception of the separate functions of church and state with a full realization of the consequences. This—unmistakably and conspicuously—was the Rubicon whose crossing led ultimately to the establishment of soul-liberty as a cornerstone of American governmental policy and a prime ideal of advanced humanity as a whole.
In the planning of the original museum list by Dr. Fox, this line of reasoning was very obviously followed; and it is hard to see how its cogency can be successfully challenged. Of all the long list of proposed groups, this one would seem to be the least capable of omission, substitution or variation. What then is the cause of the proposed departure from the original design?
The change, we are told, results from the reluctance of artists to model the substantial number of figures needed to represent the history-making scene at Newtown. It is alleged that something simpler in composition, and therefore easier of mechanical execution, would be a preferable choice. But has it been shown that these objections are valid enough to warrant the abandonment of anything as vital and pivotal as Roger Williams’s great dramatic moment as a subject for exhibition in a pageant of American historic essentials?
The list of titles prepared by Dr. Fox is a deeply and sensitively intelligent one—one obviously prompted by a profound understanding of history and a keen perception of its vital moments. Nothing on it ought to be changed without the maturest reflection; least of all this crucial item which concerns not only an unique and paramount principle in American and worldwide thought, but one of the great colonizing geniuses who established the nation and helped to give it its solid foundation of material and spiritual life.
The writer therefore asks, with all due humbleness that the scene of Roger Williams’s great ordeal be not excised from the museum’s programme unless the really gravest objections be found to stand in the way of its inclusion.
It represents something supreme and not to be replaced, and deserves from researchers, artists and planners alike a willing, indomitable, constructive zeal reflecting something of the vision and stamina of its great subject.
S.H.G.
John Fiske “The Dutch + Quaker Colonies in America”
Isaac Sharpless “History of Quaker Government”
Johns Hopkins University Studies of “Pennsylvania History”
Vol. 10, pp. 381 – 464 “Quakers in Pennsylvania
J.F. Sachse “German Protists of Provincial Pennsylvania.”
J.F. Sachse “The Fatherland” 1450 to 1700
John T. Faris “Old Churches + Meeting Houses” Lib. Bklyn Ch. Mus.
American Architecture (A.R. 727 – 12) 3” flr. Pratt Lib.
+Early Domestic Architecture of Pennsylvania by Eleanor Raymond 3 flr. Pratt
American Architecture (724.9 – E. 15) 3 flr. Pratt.
Phila. Academy of Fine Arts (A.R. 708.1 – L857) 3” flr. ”
Phila. Historic Houses, Colonial Homes 917.48, E. 16 “ ”
*Mitting “Furniture of the Pilgrim Century” 3 flr. Pratt
Suggestion for (possible) living-room or “saal” in home of Pastorius
Two-armed bench standing against wall.
Single board seat and single board back.
Either two-board table with heavy, unfinished legs or table of trestle-board and frame.
Reference for the former
(Pl. 2) (Plate 5 + 7) (Plate 51)
“Early Domestic Architecture of Pennsylvania” E. Raymond+
Ref. for latter “Furniture of the Pilgrim” Mitting* pages 214, 343, 438
Suggested desk, page 116.
Beams exposed in ceiling (suggestion)
Floor probably sand-covered, or rugs woven by the Indians.
The excerpt from Whittier on former page might suggest a more elaborate household; if used for model, probably the “kitchen from Müller House, Millbach, Lebanon County, Pa. German 1752.” Card appended.
But if Penn called on Pastorius while he was still a bachelor, his home probably was furnished in more primitive taste.
Of his life of ‘domestic felicity’ is portrayed, then it will be required that his wife—and at least the first child—(a boy) be included, on a little bed or in a cradle; and Van Wyck clock on stone hearth. Fire.
If Penn visits Pastorius while he is a bachelor it would probably be in the house he built that was “30 ft. long + 15 ft. wide with oil-papered windows” probably gambrel-roofed+, (+ or primitive Gothic) made of the rough logs of wood, from the trees hewed down on the spot where it stood. These logs were probably exposed inside the house as well as outside.
Over the door reads the legend “Procul Este Prophani.”
See “Old Churches + Meeting Houses” by John T. Faris opposite page 176. (Library, Bklyn Children’s Museum)
“The Log College of Reverend William Tennent near Hartsville”
“Old Churches and Meeting Houses in + Around Philadelphia”
The Germans are very fond of garden-seats; and nearly all their homes have benches, stools or chairs, and tables—either directly—outside the door or removed, some feet, from it, in the centre of the garden where there is a shelter or rest.
Might not Penn have been received outside the door, if he called on him in summer? Perhaps seated at either side of table with tankards of beer?
Pastorius was seven years younger than Penn.
For design of house see “The Log College of Rev. William Tennent near Hartsville”, in “Old Churches and Meeting – Places” by John T. Faris opposite page 176. Lib. Bklyn Chld. Mus.
The Germans are very fond of garden seats. Two might be shown in front of the house on either side of the entrance.
Pastorius is seven years younger than Penn and Anna is 7 years younger than Pastorius.
The floor was probably made of huge, broad beams hewn from the same timber as the logs from which the rest of the cottage was built.
It may have been covered daily with clean sand, a utilitarian custom of that day; but it is also not unreasonable to believe that may have been adorned with rugs supplied by the friendly Indians who owed much to Pastorius’ knowledge of medicine.
Sonia was not silent about her experience as a historical researcher, and she described her impressions of the work itself and working with the Curator-in-Chief, Miss Anna Billings Gallup:
I was given a sheet of paper with subjects named, for which I was to search out all I could regarding “Roger Williams Speaks Out for Liberty Before the New England Divines.” I must have read at least 20 books on the life of R.W. I found it most interesting and enchanting. The Banker, Mr. P, told me it did not pay much, but enough to keep the wolf from the door. I accepted the job with alacrity and loved it. When I read all I could find on the subject, beside the reading matter, I drew a chart to illustrate the scene.
The Trial took place in “Newtown.” Well, I was obliged to find where “Newtown” was, once upon a time. It was on the ground where Harvard University stands. The courtroom was a wooden building with a sand floor. It had two diamond-paned windows in the eastern wall, if I remember. Between the windows, fastened to the wall was the Union Jack.”
For a lecturn [sic], before which the Judges sat, I sketched a line, in back of which were their chairs. From there I drew nine lines Thus:
on each I had placed the name of the Judge in the order in which they sat. The presiding Judge behind the table.
I had to find the page in a certain volume describing the age, and gown of each, etc. When all was finished, the Curator, Miss Gallup, said “You have too many figures.” Why don’t you have R.W. run away through the woods? That would be enough. I couldn’t change her mind. I pleaded with her. I said “This was his big moment; standing before the Divines and before his accuser, Thomas Hooker.
But she had it her way.
My second subject was intensely interesting “Francis Daniel Pastorius” meets William Penn in Germantown, Pa.”
This time the ‘personae dramatis were properly dressed and the scenery was correct except the Skulkill [sic] River was left out. The third subject was “Patrick Henry” in “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death.
Sonia H. Davis, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 8, John Hay Library, Providence, RI.
Sonia was adamant about her group’s research on Roger Williams, and her written plea from her research notes verifies her disagreement with Gallup in the autobiographical account. In the midst of this opportunity, Sonia felt the need to reconnect with H.P. Lovecraft. It is thus we have these excerpts from her memoir:
Upon my return to the U.S.A. I became quite ill. Upon recuperating I took a trip to beautiful Farmington, Conn. I was so enchanted with this beautiful Colonial built city that I wrote to Howard at once to join me there which he did. We explored not only the rare city of Farmington whose architecture, at that time even the newest, such as the Library and the new Bank and Chamber of Commerce, was of the early eighteenth century, but we went to Weathersfield, [sic] that ancient shrine where we paid our homage to the Church where George Washington worshipped, and to Thomas Hooker’s grave and other graves and places of historic character and interest.
[…]
Where was I? Oh, yes, back from Europe and once more in New England with Howard at my side exploring the grounds and places of cities more than three hundred years old. Yes, I believe I must have still loved Howard very much, more than I cared to admit even to myself.
[…]
When Howard and I parted for the night I said “Howard, won’t you kiss me goodnight?” His reply was “No, it is better not to.” The next morning we met again and explored Hartford.
At that time I was doing some historical research work for the Brooklyn Children’s Museum. Among the several pieces I was delegated to do was was [sic]one called “Roger Williams Speaks out for Liberty before the New England Divines.” Much of the research was done in the Fifth Ave. and Forty-Second St. Librarry [sic] in N.Y.C. But when I told HP what I had been doing along this line and would like more data he graciously led me to the Hartford Library and at once got busy inquiring for original books and hawling [sic]down tomes for me from the shelves. The sculptors at the Brooklyn Museum were then to make the figurines and the other scenery depicting the history included in my research. In parting for the night, I no longer asked for the kiss. I’d learned my lesson well. I did several pieces of research for the Museum, which is a branch of the Metropolitan; among others was one of great interest yet hardly heard of in the public High Schools, namely: “Francis Daniel Pastorius meets William Penn in Germantown, Pa. But since at that time historical research was not properly remunerative work, I returned to my own.
Sonia H. Davis, The Private Life of Howard Phillips Lovecraft, unedited manuscript, John Hay Library, Providence, RI.
As much of a blessing this job might’ve been for Sonia, especially at time when there was little work to be had, the pay wasn’t enough for long term means.
On my free time I was still seeking a millinery Buyership, found one at a much better figure than that as a historical researcher worker, and accepted it.
Both Miss Gallup and the Librarian expressed their sincere regrets at my leaving. I accepted my new job in August, in Newberg, N.Y. in 1933, worked there until one day before Christmas.
Sonia H. Davis, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 8, John Hay Library, Providence, RI.
What followed after that Christmas of 1933 would be Sonia’s decision to visit California, leaving for that trip on January 6, 1934. (FamilySearch) While visiting, she decided to remain in California and after settling and remarrying, her life in New York would remain a distant memory. What was past, however, would inevitably become her present again. After Nathaniel Davis’s death, Sonia was financially struggling. Coincidence or not, Sonia penned the following letter to Anna Gallup during the time she began her reminiscences of Lovecraft. In fact, she wrote this very letter while visiting New York on the same day she was responding to August Derleth’s threats about not publishing her memoir The Private Life of H.P. Lovecraft.
Transcript:
Sept. 13, 1947
My Dear Miss Gallup: —
First of all I wish to apologize for using this paper, but there is none other available at this moment.
You will be utterly surprised when you will see the signature of the writer.
Fourteen years ago I did some historical research work in the Brooklyn Children’s Museum at the time you were the curator.
You gave me a list of captions that I researched. I left the museum because once more a good buyership in my own line was open to me.
However, I was able to finish the “Roger Williams speaks out for Liberty before the New England Divines”
“Patrick Henry”, and Francis Daniel Pastorius meets William Penn.
You were very kind to praise these pieces, and you asked me which I liked best. I told you I loved historical research and was glad to be privileged to work for you.
I loved all the pieces I wrote but my favorite character was Roger Williams.
I said I hoped you would find it feasible to have the scenes made as I had written them.
You read it, told me it was fine, but instead of concentrating on the court scene when he was tried before the N.E. Divines, that it would entail less work to show him as he was fleeing from his enemies.
I pleaded with you to give his memory the full meed of credit that he deserved, that the trail scene depicted the “Big Moment” in his life and was the most interesting part of his life and history. I wonder whether you recall it!
However, I came back to N.Y. after 14 years, for a visit, a very short one, only two weeks.
I had wondered whether these scenes were ever made. What was my delight and surprise upon visiting the museum two days ago to find the three scenes there, even if you did order the one of R.W. with the least number of figures.
I just love the Pastorius + Penn, it is utterly splendid.
And the Patrick Henry is almost faultless! (The pulpit was up high in the actual church, but the artist made it on a level with the floor. But all in all they are splendid.
I spent a pleasant half-hour with Miss Sheppen and asked her for photograph reproductions, but she had none.
However, she promised to try to get them. Now here is where I wish to ask you for a very great favor, would you be good enough to state on paper, i.e. in a letter to me that I was the researcher? It would probably mean a life time job for me in the cinema field, a field most difficult to enter.
If you will be good enough to make your statement on this sheet and also return the rest of this letter I would appreciate it abundantly. (This would be my credential.) I would consider it a great favor indeed.
With every good wish for your health and prosperity, and many thanks in anticipation of your favor, I am
Very Sincerely Yours
Sonia (Greene) Davis.
P.S. You will see by the added surname that I was married. My dear late husband passed away two years ago. And please write me about yourself!
Mrs. Sonia (Greene) Davis, according to her own statement was one of the research workers on a series of historical groups in American History. I cannot recall the circumstances but I believe Mrs. Davis is correct because she recalls in detail the composition of the groups much better than I can do. I sincerely hope this statement will help her because I know she had to do good work in order for us to make the groups.
I was Curator-in-Chief of The Brooklyn Children’s Museum at the time the groups were made and we had consultants who helped us with the details of accuracy.
Very truly yours,
(Miss) Anna Billings Gallup
Sonia direly needed a job, and she was lining up whatever opportunity she could that would bring the necessary funds. Not only was she corresponding with Derleth during the trip, but they met also with her hopes of selling her memoir for as much as she could.
Meanwhile, did I tell you Sonia Lovecraft Davis turned up with some laughable idea of cashing in on HPL’s “fame” and the desire to publish a “frank” book, entitled THE PRIVATE LIFE OF H. P. LOVECRAFT, and quoting generously from his letters. She read me part of the ms. in New York, and in it she has HPL posing as a Jew-baiter (she is Jewish), she says she completely supported HPL for the years 1924 to 1932, and so on, all bare-faced lies. I startled her considerably when I told her we had a detailed account of their life together in HPL’s letters to Mrs. Clark. I also forbade her to use any quotations from HPL’s letters without approval from us, acting for the estate. I told her by all means to write her book and I would read it, but it was pathetically funny; she thought she could get rich on the book. She said it would sell easily a million copies! Can you beat it! I tried to point out that a biographical book on HPL by myself, out two years, had not yet sold 1000 copies, and that book combined two well-known literary names. She thought she should have $500 advance on her book as a gift, and royalties besides! I burst into impolite laughter, I fear.
August Derleth to R.H. Barlow, October 23, 1947, Wisconsin Historical Society.
Returning to the main thread, however, Sonia’s letter to Anna Gallup perfectly correlates with what has been written in her autobiographical writings. It’s unclear what aspect of cinema Sonia was trying to break into, but if I had to speculate, it likely had to do with set designing since her job as a historical researcher was a foundation for the creation of the dioramas. What’s sad about the letter is Anna’s reply. Given the scale of the project, it’s easy to understand why Anna might’ve forgotten Sonia. The Brooklyn Children’s Museum, however, remembered Sonia and her work, for they had her research papers in their archives for some time prior to sending them back to her.
Anna was still kind of enough to respond to Sonia:
Transcript:
Dear Mrs. Davis:
Please forgive this long delay in answering your letter. I went to Boston—and did not order my mail forwarded because I knew I would be moving about. All the accumulation during my absence just had to wait and I am sorry your letter was among the others. I do hope you will get the position you are seeking.
I have been retired ten years and I am sorry I cannot remember you or your work. There were so many—but I feel pretty sure you are correct in all you say.
I went to live with my brother who had a beautiful home. He had just lost his wife and I went right in there and took charge of everything. He had two excellent Swedish maids and a good farmer. We lived in the country, had a car and a very pleasant life. I really expected to stay with him always. He was younger than I but had an exceptional flair for making the land produce bountifully and was quoted in many papers all over the land. In the Middle West and East he did much catering and had a book started for which the New York Editors were pushing him. My sister too, in Waterbury, Conn. (we lived in North Stonington Conn.) was a widow and we planned trips together. We did take some but in 1945 both dropped off very suddenly within a few months of each other. I was heartbroken and came here to Mystic to live. I didn’t wish to stay in a log house in the country and I didn’t know how to drive a car. I came to Mystic because I know some people here and I thought a small town would be fine. Now I have my own apartment and I like it very much though my brother and sister were two people too choice to lose. I have two nieces and a nephew and four grand nieces and nephews. I was much recuperated by coming to Mystic and now am all right. I very much want to go to California and shall do it when I find the right companions. There are people out there whom I know. I have been once.
Now I do hope you will have excellent success with your undertaking.
Yours very truly,
Anna Billings Gallup
Anna Billings Gallup was born on November 9, 1872, in Ledyard, Connecticut. Her parents were Christopher Milton Gallup and Hannah Eliza Lamb. (FamilySearch) Christopher was a farmer while her mother took care of the household. (FamilySearch) Anna was the middle child, with an older sister and a younger brother. Her sister, Harriet Tooker Gallup, was born on March 29, 1869. Harriet married Darragh de Lancey on October 30, 1897, having three daughters and a son. (FamilySearch) Although, that bit of information conflicts with what Anna wrote about having two nieces and a nephew. Anna’s brother, Christopher Milton Gallup III, was born on February 10, 1876. He married as well, marrying Christine Richmond Ewing on October 28, 1899, and it appears the couple didn’t have children. (FamilySearch)
Anna remained single but pursued a career as curator. In the 1905 New York Census for the Brooklyn, Kings borough, she was rooming with Florence Kilburn and was already listed as a curator for the Brooklyn Children’s Museum. (FamilySearch) Then in the 1910 census, she moved in with her mother, Hannah Gallup, residing in Brooklyn, Kings. (FamilySearch) As her letter reveals, Harriet passed away May 16, 1945, while her brother, Christopher, passed away on December 27, 1945. Yale University published an obituary for Christopher (FamilySearch):
Transcript:
CHRISTOPHER MILTON GALLUP
PH B 1897
Born February 10, 1876, in Ledyard, Conn
Died December 27, 1945, in Westerly, RI
Father, Christopher Milton Gallup, a farmer in Ledyard, son of Christopher Milton and Anna Stanton (Billings) Gallup of Ledyard Mother, Hannah Eliza (Lamb) Gallup, daughter of Samuel Stillman and Eliza (Gallup) Lamb of Groton, Conn Yale relatives include Nathan Gallup (B A 1823) (great -uncle), Herbert S Griggs, ’82, C Milton Griggs, ’83, and Everett G Griggs, ’90 S (cousins), Darragh de Lancey (B F A 1925) (brother-in-law), Darragh de Lancey, Jr (LL B 1932) (nephew)
Norwich (Conn) Free Academy
Enlisted as seaman Second Division Naval Battalion, Connecticut National Guard, April, 1897, served aboard receiving ship Minnesota, Boston harbor, discharged August 6, 1898, on staff City Engineer (in charge of pavements), Hartford, Conn, 1898–1903, free lance writer and editor Somerset Independent, Skowhegan, Maine, 1903–05, editor Maine Farmer, Augusta, 1905–10, underwriter Travelers Insurance Company, Hartford, 1913 until retirement 1928, resided in North Stonington, Conn, 1928–45, experimented with new biochemical methods of agriculture especially suited to Connecticut, promoted radio weather service for farmers, secretary New London County Farm Bureau, representative from Connecticut on forestry committee of New England Council, member board and president Connecticut Forest and Park Association 1940–45, president West Hartford Chamber of Commerce 1922 and on advisory council Proportional Representation League, West Hartford, acting secretary Norwich Chamber of Commerce 1931–33 and vice-president, chairman board of assessors North Stonington 1941–45, in World War I chairman West Hartford Savings Committee and in World War II vice-chairman Selective Service Board 20B, organized, and president Gallup Family Association for several years, trustee Denison Family Association, on forty-five year Class reunion committee, member First Church of Christ Scientist, Boston.
Married (1) October 28, 1899, in Hartford, Christine Richmond, daughter of the Honorable Henry C Ewing and Rachael Whittier (Root) Ewing No children Mrs Gallup died June 17, 1937 Married (2) February 28, 1940, in Norwich, Ruth Kinney Gaines, daughter of Charles Newcomb and Julia Huntington (Hutchinson) Kinney
Death due to coronary occlusion Buried in Gallup Cemetery, Ledyard Survived by wife and a sister, Anna Billings Gallup (B S Massachusetts Inst Technology 1901) of Mystic, Conn.
At the age of 83, Anna Billings Gallup passed away on October 21, 1956.
Ultimately, Sonia neither got the cinema job nor her hundreds of dollars for her memoir of H.P. Lovecraft. Instead, she studied to become a nurse:
With Ann’s And [sic] Sid’s frequent help I got along. I went to a nursing school and was so glad when I could write to Sid and Ann that I thanked God I could now make my own living as a nurse. I worked until I was seventy two years old.
Sonia to Sidney, Florence, and Leonore Moseson, August 25, 1964, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, File 1, John Hay Library, Providence, RI.
Even after everything came and passed, Sonia certainly loved her job as a historical researcher because she loved learning. We can now see how much work she incorporated into the simple position, and because of it, we also get to learn about Anna Gallup and her role as curator. Moreover, this opportunity gave Sonia another chance to spend with Lovecraft, which sadly would be the last. Sonia’s time as a historical researcher was both the closing of one chapter of her life and the promise of a new chapter.
Very little has been said, or written, about Florence Carol Greene. Even her own mother, Sonia H. Davis, had imparted minuscule crumbs of information about her. In Sonia’s autobiographical writings, Florence is only specifically mentioned during the turbulent years of Sonia’s marriage to Samuel Greene, and she’s majorly referred to as the “little girl”, “baby”, or “child”. Of the twenty-two times that Florence is mentioned by Sonia, only nine times does Sonia use her actual name. In Sonia’s letters to her family, which also contain autobiographical matter, Florence is mentioned again only in passing as “child” or “baby girl”.
However, this is only one side of the coin, figuratively speaking. In two essays regarding children’s behavior and manners, Sonia gave further insight:
Transcript:
HOW I OVERCAME CHILD’S FEAR OF THE BOOGIE MAN
A detailed description how a diffficulty [sic] was met and dissipated, might be helpful to some mothers in vanquishing a young child’s bedtime fear.
At three and a half years of age my little girl suffered from fright caused by the maid, who, in seeking to get away from her quickly after putting her to bed, told her that if she didn’t go to sleep at once, the Boogie Man would get her.
On the maid’s night out, I put the child to bed and as soon as I was about to leave the room and put out the light she started to whimper, and then to cry. Upon asking the reason, she told me she was afraid of the Boogi [sic] Man; that Mary said the Boogie Man would get her if she didn’t go to sleep right away.
I realized at once what the child was suffering and forthwith tried to conquor [sic] the fear.
“What does the Boogie Man do, darling?” I asked her.
“When Mary puts out the light he knocks on the bed. I’m afraid of the dark.”
While the light was still on, I rapped on the bed with my knuckles.
“Is this the noise he makes?” “Yes.” Then I shaped her hand into a fist and had her knock on the bed.
“See, darling?” This is no Boogie Man. Its your own hand making the noise when you knock.” Then I took her in my arms and put out the light, holding her tightly to convey assurance, I knocked on the bed again. At this she clung to me very hard. Turning on the light, I requested her to put it out.
“See, dear? It was you who put out the light. Now give me your hand.” Here I brought her hand into contact with the bed.
“See? It was your hand knocking on the bed that made the noise.
There is no Boogie Man.”
“Now get into bed like a brave little girl and knock on the bed.”
This was done, while I spoke to her softly and reassuringly, and I put on the light once more. “Now I’m going to put out the light again and you knock on the bed. While she did this I kept on talking to her caressingly, constantly impressing upon ger mind that there is no Boogie Man and that there was nothing whatsoever to fear in the whole house; that everything and everybody was safe, and that Mary was only fooling.
I followed this practice several evenings for nearly a week, reassuring her each time of the true facts. I found that she both understood and appreciated the fraud that was practiced on her by Mary. Gradually she outgrew all childich [sic] fears and became a self-confident and self-reliant young woman. I need hardly state that the maid was dismissed.
Transcript:
EXAMPLE CREATES BEST OF MANNERS IN CHILDREN
The excessive effort brought to bear upon a child in order to develop politeness is often wasted, and the ostensible intention is often resented by the youngster, especially when it is coerced, shamed or bribed into being forcibly polite. This attribute the child must acquire from habitual observation of his family elders in his own home.
Unless he sees and hears the best only, in and from his parents and home environment he usually acts like the street urchin. Parents, or other members of the family, cannot be constantly quarreling, arguing, acting or speaking sarcastically without producing decidedly malevolent effects upon the children.
My little girl of three years of age came to me one afternoon and asked me to give her a piece of bread and butter. When I think of it now, I realize that this is what I should have done; but instead, I sent her to the maid in the kitchen, telling her to ask Mary for it. She soon returned, munching the morsel. “Did you say ‘Thank you’ to Mary? I asked her. Silently and not looking at me, she continued munching.
After waiting a few seconds I repeated my question. Still not looking up at me, she slowly shook her head in the negative. “What?” I asked with pretended indignation, “Didn’t you say “Thank you” to Mary?” Pouting a while, she then answered “Don’t have to say “Thank you” to Mary.”
“Why not, dear?”
“‘Cause Mary don’t know how to say “You’re welcome”, any how.”
This was said almost protestingly; Mary had lately landed and could speak no English.
If one must have a maid or a nurse, it is best to acquire one who speaks English unless another language is to be part of the child’s education. Then it is desirable that the governess or tutor be a purist in the language the child is to learn.
The last point is particularly to be observed. A European gentlewoman who speaks several Mediterranean languages, is constantly horrified in this country by the bad accent and ungrammatical French of nurses who are engaged by American mothers.
Many mothers seem to think that as long as her child speaks a desirable secondary language, that the mantle of distinction descends upon it.
A Young American, who, for three years, had studied French in one of our mid-western universities, told me, upon his return, that he was unable to understand the language when he visited France, that he remained their two years to acquire the correct pronunciation and accent.
Another great source of information about Florence was Sonia’s letter to the Special Collections Librarian, Christine D. Hathaway. Sonia openly shared anecdotes about Florence, from her cutest moment to her ultimate rebellion. The following is only an extract from the several-page letter.
When “Carol Weld” whose real name is “Florence Carol Greene,” was a child of about ten, I was engaged to an extremely handsome young Italian of excellent family, education and breeding, but I, being of Jewish heritage, and he, of Catholic, our mothers, his and mine objected to our marriage. We were both obliged to renounce the thought and action.
I’ve always sought a man of education, culture, and inquiring mind, good family and other virtues. I was 24—he was 22. I studied the Italian language and learned to read, write and speak a little. He often ate at my mother’s table and I, at his mother’s who liked and admired me very much, but she did not quite guess whether her son and I intended to marry. When both mothers found out there were the usual objections on both sides. Neither of us would do the usual—elope. We at last gave up the thought.
One day Florence met him on the street; he grabbed her up, folded her to himself and ‘boo-hood’ like a hurt animal. When she came home and told me what happened, I felt sorry for both of them. She asked me, aren’t you going to marry F.B?
I said “No, his mother and grama have great objections.” I’m getting over my part, but evidently, he is still badly hurt.
The child was very young but had sense enough to say—for she was very fond of him—Well! if he’ll wait for me I’ll marry him!” As she grew up I obtained a good music-teacher for her, but she wouldn’t practice. Her lower teeth were crooked, but she missed many sessions with her orthdontist [sic].
In both cases I scolded and we became more and more apart. I wanted her to go to college, but she didn’t want a local college. She had a girl-friend who urged her to join her at a girls’ college in Rochchester [sic]N.Y. where they were taught games and rode horses. I told her we had Columbia U, here in N.Y. and I can’t afford to pay for her pleasures. We quarrelled again over that girl. At last she left me and I hadn’t heard from her in years. She learned stenography + typewriting and made her own living.
I looked for Florence everywhere. I heard she went to Chicago. I took a job so I might find her, but I didn’t.
I had a friend who worked in the Hall of Records in N.Y.C. I asked her whether she could obtain some important information for me so I told her I was looking for my daughter; giving her the name and age. She found the name in the Hall of Records. She went to Paris where she became a newspaper writer for the Hearst newspaper, lived there for seven years. On the Boat, going there, she met a young American newspaper-man and they married; but it seems that her temper was unable to hold on to the man, so they were divorced in Paris, but she stayed on. He came back to America, married and now has a newspaper of his own, and interests in a moving picture project.
My daughter still carries his name. She no longer writes, but has formed a Woman’s Club of some sort, and lives in Florida. I’ve obtained her address and have written to her several times. The first two letters were returned to me unopened and unanswered. But I wrote several others, which she accepted but has not answered. She is now 67 years old, never married again. That’s all there is.
Sonia H. Davis to Christine D. Hathaway, October, 8, 1968, Autobiographical Writings (Box 9, Folder 1).
It is only through this letter and the personal essays that we get a real glimpse into Sonia’s relationship with Florence. It would seem their mother-daughter relationship had once been solid, but as years progressed and with that inner rage (or sheer stubbornness) of youth within Florence, their relationship began to come apart. While no one openly claimed it, except by Sonia, Florence seemed to have a temper.
Yet, how much of her temper was a result of years of unresolved trauma? As a child, Florence had not only lived under the roof of Samuel Greene, but had also been sent to live with her grandmother, Racille, aka Rachel Moseson, while Sonia tried to separate from Samuel. We can only imagine what she had witnessed living under the roof of two abusive men: first with her father, Samuel, and later with her grandfather, Solomon Moseson. The former abused her mother, and the latter, her grandmother.
Eventually, Sonia collected Florence and they lived together once again. In spite of the turbulence between Sonia and Florence through the latter’s adolescent years, Sonia wrote and dedicated a poem to her daughter in the first volume of her journal, The Rainbow:
Sonia H. Greene, “Ode to Florence”, The Rainbow, Vol. 1. No. 1, 1921, p. 3.
Transcript:
ODE TO FLORENCE
When the sun sinks in the west, dear,
Birds and babes have gone to rest, dear,
Then I know I love you best, dear
Baby mine.
When the stars break in the blue, dear,
Then with love my heart beats true, dear,
Then I sadly think of you, dear
Baby mine.
When the moon is brightly beaming,
On the night her radiance streaming,
Then, dear heart, of you I’m dreaming,
Baby mine.
When Aurora greets the morn, dear,
When sweet zephyrs cool are born, dear,
I feel lonely and forlorn, dear
Heart, for you.
There’s no denying the unspoken heartache of Sonia’s words. The poem was printed in October 1921, but one can only wonder just how long Sonia had been constructing these poetic lines to help ease the strain between her relationship with Florence. 1921 was a pivotal year for Sonia, from joining amateur journalism in January, to meeting H.P. Lovecraft in July, then publishing her own amateur journal in October. Lovecraft certainly harbored some impressions about Florence:
At dinner—about one-thirty—were Loveman, Theobald, Long, Mme. Greene, and the latter’s flapper offspring, yclept Florence—a pert, spoiled, and ultra-independent infant rather more hard-boiled of visage than her benignant mater.
H.P. Lovecraft to Maurice W. Moe, Lord of a Visible World, May 18, 1922, p. 115.
But one thing Mme. Greeneva says quite desolates me—she avers that her fair & frivolous offspring is not to be captivated by the charms of any highbrow, not even the otherwise irresistible Bolingbroke!
H.P. Lovecraft to Rheinhart Kleiner, Letters to Rheinhart Kleiner and Others, p. 187.
Whether intentional or not, once Sonia’s relationship with Lovecraft deepened, Florence had dropped out of the picture. It’s unclear when Florence moved out of her mother’s house, but once Lovecraft moved in with Sonia in March 1924, she was gone. Thereafter, Florence went by her middle name, Carol. On September 3, 1927, Carol Greene had returned to New York from Havre, France. (FamilySearch) It’s hard to say how long her stay was at Havre, but this trip would only be the beginning of her extensive travels to Europe. Only ten days after her return, on September 13, 1927, Carol married John Weld. (FamilySearch)
So, what really happened? What caused the ultimate division between Sonia and Florence? The truth is no one really knows. There’s only Sonia’s truth and speculation.
In 1983, the one and only publication that has ever fully focused on Florence was Lovecraft’s Daughter by R. Alain Everts. “Lovecraft’s Daughter” comprises of three, extremely thin, stapled pamphlets. Legally, Florence was Lovecraft’s stepdaughter when he married Sonia. However, it was an empty title, a role that Lovecraft never truly stepped into, nor one that Florence fully accepted. The journal, in my opinion, does well to inform the reader of who Florence really was, and her achievements in life. While it’s the most anyone has done for her, it still isn’t enough, but that’s no fault of the publication given that Florence worked hard to distance herself from her past and live privately.
I have only the first and second volume in my possession since these were the only two that emerged for sale on eBay.
Transcript:
LOVECRAFT’S DAUGHTER
When Carol Weld died, the newspaper reported the following facts about her long life:
MRS. CAROL WELD, COVERED ABDICATION
Carol Weld, former foreign news correspondent, who claimed to be the first American to report the Prince of Wales-Wallis Simpson romance years before the Prince’s abdication as King Edward VIII, died Saturday in Cedars of Lebanon Hospital.
Mrs. Weld, 70, reported from Paris to The Chicago Tribune on the abdication. She was the only American reporter who met the Prince’s train at a small village railroad station as some 200 other newsmen, misled by offical-released [sic] rumors, waited miles away at Chaumont.
During her career, Mrs. Weld wrote for The New York American and The New York Herald-Tribune, the Paris staff of The Chicago Tribune, Universal and International News Services, United Press International and The London Sunday Express.
She came to Miami as southeastern director of advertising and publicity for RKO Radio Pictures, setting campaigns for RKO, Samuel Goldwyn and Walt Disney Productions.
Services will be at 10 a.m. Thursday in Miami Memorial Park. Reid-Lowe Funeral Home is handling arrangements.
Not only is the notice pitifully brief and lacking in factual information, but the information that was there is for the most part toally [sic] inaccurate. The inaccuracies were not, however, the fault of the newspaper or the author of the obituary, but were carefully perpetrated by the subject of the notice—Carol Weld. For Carol Weld had a secret that she protected and hid for over 50 years.
No mention is made above the parentage ofCarol [sic] Weld, who was in fact the daughter—albeit the step-daughter—of Howard Phillips Lovecraft. She was born Florence Carol Greene in New York City on 19 March 1902, of Samuel Greene and Sonia Haft Shafirkin. Her mother, Sonia Shafirkin, was barely 20 years old, and had been married for four years to her despotic and drunken husband, who was a salesman. Some years after the birth of their only child, Greene killed himself, leaving Sonia destitute—she and her daughter went to live with Sonia’s mother, who had married a second time and had children not much older than Florence.
By 1919, when Sonia first became acquainted with the Amateur Press movement and with James Ferdinand Morton, junior, her 17 year old daughter was living with her in New York City, and was beginning to show signs of rebellion against her mother’s stern rule as puberty overtook the young woman. When Sonia met Lovecraft in 1921 and began her earnest courtship of him in 1922, Florenne [sic] was there—the 19 year old “flapper” as HPL referred to her also began to have problems of a more serious nature with her mother. Sonia recalled to me various dinners at her apartment with both Lovecraft and Samuel Loveman present, where she and Florence would host them for an evening of food and conversation. On some occasions, Sonia and Florence would disagree so strongly that they would fight in front of their guests. By the time of Sonia’s marriage to Lovecraft in March of 1924, Florence had left her mother’s apartment and her mother’s life for good—it is likely even that she left the day she turned 21 on 19 March 1923.
What was the cause of this terrible breach that was never ever healed or repaired, even after 50 years? The facts lay in the marriage of her mother to Lovecraft, and the adamant denial of permission for Florence to marry the man she loved. Some years earlier, I believe Sonia mentioned to me that Florence was about 18, she had fallen in love with a nice man with background credentials of impeccable quality—they should have been, for the man was Sonia’s half-brother, by her mother’s second marriage. Florence was practically raised with her half-brother Sydney, [sic] and it was fairly easy for her to fall in love with him. However, Sonia was furious, not only with the prospect of her own daughter marrying at a young age as did Sonia with the resultant disasters, but the fact of her daughter marrying a near full brother made Sonia so livid that she absolutely forbade the match. This argument was a topic for several years, but by the time Sydney turned 21 in middle 1919, Florence was still obeying her mother’s wishes.
Further more, [sic] as Sonia reported to me, such a marriage is not allowed under the Orthodox Jewish faith which both Sonia and her daughter were at this time. Florence though told her mother that she would elope, and Sonia told her that she would have the marriage annulled if Florence did elope before she was 21. These demands of her mother were very bitter for Florence, who was genuinely in love with her half-uncle Sydney—but the final straw was Sonia’s own marriage to Howard P. Lovecraft in early 1924. This convinced Florence that she must separate from her mother, and she did—never again did she ever communicate with Sonia. When I wrote on Sonia’s behalf in 1967 to Carol Weld (as she then styled herself), the letter was returned to me, opened, with a handwritten message that the envelope had been opened by mistake. I will never forget Sonia’s expression when I showed her this envelope, and she replied sadly that the handwriting was Florence’s.
From this period onward, Florence dropped her first name, and went under the name of Carol Greene, until she met a 22 year old newspaper man named John Weld and they wer e [sic] married in New York City in October of 1927. They separated by mutual agreement (they never had children) in Paris in 1932 and in 1933, John Weld obtained a divorce on the grounds of incompatability [sic] in Los Angeles. Carol Weld however stayed in Europe, never remarried, and never discuss her relationship with her mother, not even with John Weld. He told me that “Carol was in no wise a flighty of rebellious girl” when they met in 1927, but that her relationship with her mother seemed to be a closet that Carol preferred to leave closed.
From then on, Carol Weld made her name as a writer and reporter—she was indeed the first American reporter to cover the romance between Mrs. Simpson and the Prince of Wales, and during the War, she covered many stories, organised a Red Cross Ambulance Fund in Los Angeles (where ironically her mother was then living) and had her photo appear in the May, 1945 issue of The New York Times—a clipping that Sonia proudly showed me in 1967. An attempt to contact her daughter at this time went unanswered.
But Sonia followed the career of her daughter from afar and seemed to have some idea of what she had done during the years. For about the last 30 years of her life, Carol Weld worked for RKO in Miami—and significantly enough, her half-brother Sydney was living there when Carol moved there, although he had married and raised a family. Surely this was the reason that Carol Weld moved to Florida—for over 30 years they lived only blocks apart. But, Carol never would contact her own mother or have anything to do with her, even after nearly a half-century. And when she died, nothing at all about her parents, and nearly nothing factual appeared in the obituary.
She was 77 years old when she died on 1 April 1979—even though The New York Times gave her age as 65. For a brief while, she had been nearly a daughter to Lovecraft, and from 1924 until her marriage to John Weld, she was his step-daughter.
Transcript:
LOVECRAFT’S DAUGHTER – II
In the first part of my essay on the daughter of Sonia Greene Lovecraft, and the step-daughter of Howard Phillips Lovecraft, I discussed some of the efforts at subterfuge by Carol Weld, actually Florence Carol (Greene) Weld (1902 – 1979) to hide her parentage and to avoid any reference to her origins. Erroneously, I stated that her date of death was 1 April 1979 which would have, under the circumstances, been a very fitting date for her to have died on—April Fool’s Day— as Carol was so set on fooling everyone about her background.
Her death certificate indicates that she in fact died on 31 March 1979, less than a fortnight after her birthday, her 77 th [sic] birthday, not her 71 st [sic] birthday. March if you recall was the very month that Sonia and HPL were married in, and that was the month that HPL died in. At the time of her death, Carol trimmed 6 years from her date of birth, and after spending one week in the hsopital, [sic] she declined to provide any information for their records, although she must have known that this bout with her serious emphysema might prove fatal. After her demise, it was her lawyer who provided the information on her death certificate, and Carol’s parentage was apparently not known to her personal lawyer.
Her lawyer also indicated to me that she did not know of any surviving kin to Carol, totally unaware that Carol’s half-brother Sydney was living in Miami.
Carol’s lawyer could only give me one name of a friend of Carol—her literary agent. The lawyer did however send me two snapshots of Carol Weld, which I have reprinted. Shortly before her death, Carol did donate her papers to the University of Wyoming, where they considered her to be “Miss” Carol Weld, and conspicuously there is no biographical information about her life in the Carol Weld Collection in the Archive of Contemporary History. In the Collection however are a number of books autographed to Carol Weld, from Evan Allen Bartlett (LOVE MURDERS OF HARRY F. POWERS), Edna Lee Booker (NEWS IS MY JOB), George Seldes (CAN THESE THINGS BE!), and many paperbacks from Paris during the 1930’s and many items from the Overseas Press Club that Carol had been a member of for so many years.
There are also several booklets in the Collection written by Carol Weld, amazingly enough along the exact same topics that Carol’s mother had written about. SECRETS OF BEING WELL-DRESSED was published by Carol in 1937, and quite a few of her unpublished manuscripts also repose in the Carol Weld Collection: DEADLINE, 114 pages, THE ‘DUMB’ CELEBRITIES, 233 pages, about animals in the news, a topic that Carol was fascinated with her entire life, THE FRENCH CAFE, 279 pages, MARIGOLD, OR THE PINK ELEPHANT, 181 pages, THE WANDERERS, 31 pages, WINGS OF MERCY, co-authored with Kenneth Higgins, 36 pages, and WOMAN’S PLACE IS IN THE HOME, 27 pages. The sole published hardcover book that appeared in Carol’s life was ANIMALS ARE LIKE THAT! (New York, McBride and Co., 1939) that she wrote with the famous hunter Frank Buck.
Evidence in the Weld Collection indicates that Carol was very well known in the American Expatriate Colony that lived in Paris during the 1920’s and 1930’s. Lastly, there are 6 uncatalogued and unindexed scrapbooks of her writings and articles—these round out the last few items of Carol’s long life and career. And, nary a clew [sic] to her true origins, nor any hint of her parents or her most famous step-father.
This is the first source, and perhaps the only source, in which we get this theory of Florence being in love with her uncle, Sidney Moseson—Sonia’s half-brother. I can’t neither accept nor deny this notion to be true, only because Sonia never claimed it to be the reason why they had their fallout. However, Sonia had been interviewed by Everts, and she had spent enough time with him that just maybe this theory was a hard truth she revealed in confidence. There’s also the likelihood of a slight confusion since Sidney had fallen in love and married a young woman named Florence Stone on March 25, 1923. (FamilySearch) Could Everts have easily confused one Florence for another? Probably or probably not. One thing is true: Carol had moved down to Miami, which was not far from Sidney and his family. However, this doesn’t mean she was in love with him but could easily mean she valued him as her closest family. They were practically raised together.
Another interesting anecdote is the argument between Sonia and Florence while Lovecraft and Samuel Loveman were visiting. The only time this incident could’ve occurred with both Samuel Loveman and H.P. Lovecraft around was in April 1922. Sonia had initially invited Loveman to visit New York, and when he did, but did not find it enticing enough to stay, she invited Lovecraft to keep him company. Sonia had turned over her place to them, while she stayed over at her neighbor’s home. This could mean that Florence had also joined Sonia in staying with their neighbor or somewhere else at a friend’s house, or Florence had already moved out, but was still visiting Sonia. Sadly, we’ll never knew what drove these two women to disagree with one another to the point of argument in front of others.
After marrying, John and Carol Weld moved to Paris. In a set of three letters to R. Alain Everts, John Weld gives insight to his relationship with Carol:
Transcript:
Dear Mr. Kirsch:
You might be able to locate Carol Weld through the Overseas Press Club, 54 West 40th st., New York I8, N.Y. I believe she was a founding member and I would presume she still belongs to the organization.
I never did know Carol’s mother, though I believe she lived in Brooklyn while Carol and I were living in Manhattan. There seemed to have been some estrangement between them. I’m afraid I do not have any photograph of Carol, mainly because, when we separated in Paris, in 1932 I left all of my possessions with her. I have not seen her since.
We were married in New York in October, 1927, as I recall, though the exact date I do not remember. My birthdate is February 24, 1905, and you may find some biographical material in Who’s Who in the West. Carol and I had no children. Our separation was by mutual agreement and I was granted a divorce on the grounds of incompatibility in Los Angeles in 1933. So far as I know Carol has not remarried, but then I would not have known of it if she had probably.
It interests me that you are writing the biography of Carol’s mother. Was (is) she someone of note?
Transcript:
Dear Mr. Kirsch:
It seems that we are working up quite a correspondence about Carol Greene Weld. We met in 1927 when we were working as reporters on Hearst’s New York American. I never did understand Carol’s relationship with her mother, and indeed we never discussed it; it seemed to be a closet she preferred to leave closed. Carol in no wise was a flighty or rebellious girl and certainly in my opinion she was not promiscuous, certainly not in a sexual sense.
You say that Mrs. Davis “was one of the first to support the Amateur Press movement”. What was that? I’ve never heard of it.
Good luck with your manuscript.
Transcript:
Dear Mr. Kirsch:
Do drop in when you’re down this way. Better call me though before you come.
Knowing Carol’s attitude toward her mother, I am not surprised that she refuses to cooperate with you. No, I do not have any photographs of Carol—as I told you, when I left Paris in 1932 I left all of my personal effects with her. However, my sister may have a snapshot or so. I’ll ask her.
Carol does appear to have remained in Europe until 1936, after which she went back and forth from the U.S. to Europe throughout 1936 and into 1937. (FamilySearch, 1936, 1937) Perhaps their failed marriage was a result of incompatibility, but Sonia believed it was her bad attitude that ruined the marriage. As mentioned before, it’s quite possible Carol had a temper, and when you have snippets such as the following newspaper clipping, it’s easy to see her strong will and force at play.
The Miami News, January 13, 1959, p. 21. Source: newspapers.com
Transcript:
(Photo Caption: “The trial is through, but not Miss Carol Weld. Gives arresting officer Bob Kirby a few pointers.”)
The Lady Fights Well
This is Justice?
Justice, justice, cried Carol Weld, lifting her hands and her adverbs to the heavens. Guilty, said the judge, wiping a weary brow.
But she fought the good fight in Miami Beach’s traffic court today, did Miss Weld, a writer—oh, a prolific writer indeed, and one of vast, if futile, resource.
She weighed in with a firm “Not Guilty!” and waving a sheaf of verbiage, clenching a martyred jaw. And she departed waving an indignant finger, banners tattered but flying.
The Cause?
Cause of all this commotion, which left even Judge A.H. Saperstein somewhat awed? Of what heinous misdeed was she accused? Well, this policeman, Bob Kirby, had the temerity to say she went through a stop light…
And Miss Weld felt the light was yellow—on this firm foundation she based her cause, and she spoke of violation of civil rights and she touched on deprivation of livelihood and she waxed eloquently on matters of learned law.
“But…” said the judge. “Listen…” said the judge. “I submit…” said the judge.
Judge Gives Up
The judge then leaned back with the wisdom of resignation and some 25 minutes later managed a lecture on traffic safety, fined her the usual $10 but, in obvious admiration, knocked off the $4 court costs.
Miss Weld departed with her writing, a sheaf of it, a detailed explanation of Florida traffic law which had taken her hours to prepare, enough copy—in another medium—to provide two weeks groceries on the open market.
For Officer Kirby, a sneer.
For an idealistic questioner, a stern wise-up:
“No, it wasn’t just the principle. It was the money.”
Throughout the years, Sonia never gave up searching for Carol. In the summer or fall of 1926, Sonia got a job in Chicago. While she claimed the job paid better, Sonia also believed getting the job would help her find Carol, since she thought her daughter was living there at the time. Sadly, Sonia was not aware of the whole truth regarding that bit of information: Carol was working for the Chicago Tribune, but in Paris—not in Chicago. Apparently, though, Sonia’s nephew, Martin K. Kopp mentioned something about a possible meeting in San Francisco between the two women:
I also heard that Sonia located Florence, who, as I remember it, was living in the San Francisco area. This was after World War II. They finally met. It was a disaster, and Sonia returned to the Los Angeles area, and never discussed the matter again.
Sonia never mentioned or wrote about meeting Florence in San Francisco after World War II. She did, however, elaborate on a job she got in San Francisco where she stayed there from 1935 to 1936. Perhaps Sonia mixed the years, or she actually made a second trek to San Francisco to meet Florence.
The truth of the matter is we will never know.
The Courier-Journal, March 17, 1940, p. 22. Source: newspapers.com
Transcript:
Carol Weld, Writer, Is Avisiting
By Dot Tellitall
There is a lass in our town and she’s had wondrous fun… She’s avisiting with Jane Dixon Wells, and she has had the kind of experiences that make our mouth water. Her name is Carol Weld, and she is on leave from being a foreign newspaper correspondent.
Most of Carol’s experiences were picked up somewhere in France, where she worked for the Chicago Tribune and the United Press during all those exciting months before the war. When she was quizzed about her keen nose for news, she modestly gave all the credit to her dog, “Ric,” a smooth-haired fox terrier, now deceased, who covered all her assignments with her.
“He was really a news hound,” said Carol, “and usually beat me to most of my stories.” One of the chief methods of getting news in Paris is to make the rounds of all the swank bars where the continental American hangs out and which are hodge-podges for news. “Ric” knew the bars as well as his mistress and knew the sequence in which she took them in, so he often used to precede her to each bar. When people saw the dog they would know that Carol was coming along and she turned up usually about a half-hour behind him. “Ric,” said Carol, “interviewed all the famous people in Paris.” It is a very delicate subject, that of poor little “Rickie’s” death by an automobile.
She’s Also An Author
Carol Weld is the co-author with Frank Buck of a popular book called “Animals Are Like That.” She also is one of the twenty famous newspaper people, like H.V. Kaltenborn, who each contributed a chapter to the best seller, “The Inside Story.” Carol’s chapter is called “King Bites Dog.” She expects to be in Louisville about a week. She’s young and pretty and particularly is enjoying Kentucky food.
Don’t look now, Palmer Van Arsdale, ’cause here’s a picture of the little woman, Carolyn, having lunch with a friend in Los Angeles. She certainly looks well.
Los Angeles Evening Citizen News, September 3, 1940, p. 9. Source: newspapers.com
Transcript:
Carol Weld sends me pictures of the kinds of ambulances Americans are buying to ship to England, and a long letter which says in part: “I have been so overworked trying to raise funds for ambulances to send to Great Britain—for General De Gaulle’s Free French Forces, the British Red Cross, the Mechanized Transport Corps, the Scottish Red Cross and the free Polish, Czech and Norwegian forces in England, that I have only now been able to get around to comment on your “British Notes” column—not that you asked for any comments. It is just, of course, that you are right to the point, where occasionally even someone like myself, who is working to send ambulances, wonders why the British here are not more eager to help. Do you suppose it’s because each one wants to run his own little show more than he really wants to help Great Britain?… the money raised in America to help our less fortunate friends over there could be circulated in American industry—an idea which is not easy to sell to those various people you write about.” Carol Weld is West Coast representative of the British Ambulance Corps.
We will never know what truly broke the bond between Sonia and Florence. There was undealt trauma between them, beyond them, and maybe that’s just what caused the division. Maybe Sonia wanted humble beginnings and opportunities, while Carol wanted the whole world on a platter, and that in itself is reason for clashing. At the end of the day, though, Florence wanted to distance herself from her parents, from her past, choosing a new identity, a new self, where she could be whoever she wished. As a result of that decision, we are left with such a scarcity of biographical means that makes it impossible to get to knew her fully like we know her mother, and even her stepfather.
If you wish to learn more about Carol Weld, her papers are located in the University of Wyoming. The collection contains the correspondence and writings of Carol, but half of it is in French. You may read the overview of the collection by clicking on the link below:
Box-folder 1:2-33; 2:1-11, Correspondence, 1933-1975, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz, CA.
Please do convey my love and aloha to Mother Davis—I always have and will have my warm regards for her.
Kilsoo K. Haan to Nathaniel A. Davis, October 4, 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
One would think spy espionage had little (or even nothing) to do with Sonia’s life. After all, what proper and furtive means would a milliner have to fight terrorism? (Although it does sound like a great novel idea!) Believe it or not, espionage did, indeed, cross over into Sonia’s life, if only by the degrees of a friendship. Because, you know, a true friend holds bomb strike charts without asking any questions!
In Two Hearts That Beat as One, Sonia elaborated on one very unique meeting:
During the latter part of 1939, Nathaniel and Sonia attended a public lecture given by a Korean. Nathaniel was very interested that he invited the Korean to dinner one day and told him that he had an organization that was ready to help all oppressed peoples. He told him about “Planetaryan”. The Korean became a member without any cost to him!
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, p. 178.
The Korean was Kilsoo Kenneth Haan.
In the original autobiographical manuscripts, Kilsoo Haan was simply rendered as “K.H.”. Sonia was known for changing people’s name. In this case, it was warranted why she would’ve kept his identity a mystery, given he was a literal spy and also her friend. In one passage however, she slipped and wrote his first name, making it a little easier for me to ultimately identify him.
Upon further study of Kilsoo’s papers in Santa Cruz, California (physically), and Nathaniel’s papers in Providence (virtually), I’ve learned Kilsoo was a genuine friend to Nathaniel and Sonia. While his papers do not contain any letters from Nathaniel or Sonia, in the Sonia H. Davis and Nathaniel A. Davis Papers does contain a wealth of correspondence between Kilsoo and Nathaniel, and even letters between Kilsoo and political figures.
We know who he was to Nathaniel and Sonia, but who was Kilsoo Haan really?
Kilsoo Kenneth Haan was born in Chang Dan, Korea, on May 31, 1900. He arrived in Honolulu, Hawaii, at age 5, and soon was working as a sugar cane laborer for the Oahu Sugar Company. After completing the 8th grade, he contracted to raise sugar cane for the Company, while training in the Hawaiian National Guard. After an honorable discharge, Haan moved to San Francisco. There he attended the Salvation Army Training College. Between 1922 and 1926 he served in the Salvation Army as an officer, reaching the rank of Captain, and was stationed back on the Hawaiian Islands. In 1926 he married Stella Yoon in Honolulu, with whom he had a son and a daughter. In 1932 he joined the Sino-Korean Peoples’ League, acting as its representative in Hawaii and America, and began working to assist U.S. intelligence concerning Japan. Between 1938 and 1947 he resided in Washington, D.C., as the Washington representative of the League. He is famous for having attempted to warn various American officals [sic] shortly before the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor of the impending attack. Haan became a naturalized United States citizen in 1956. He worked for the Chun King Corporation in San Jose, California, from the mid- 1950’s until 1969. Upon his retirement he moved to Capitola, a seaside village near Santa Cruz, where he died in July, 1976.
Although Sonia claimed it was the “latter part of 1939” when they attended Kilsoo’s public lecture, the earliest letter between Kilsoo and Nathaniel was March 28, 1939.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 38 1930 – 1939, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
March 28, 1939
My dear Mr./Dr. and Mrs. Davis:
Kindly accept my humble and sincere appreciation for all the nice things you have done for me. My stay was made so pleasant and useful due to your interest in my activities.
I shall always remember you and feel grateful for the love you have shown me.
My stay in New York was brief—due to Mr. Solomon’s busy hours I did not get to see him. However if you could kindly send me an introductory letter, I think I may have a better chance of meeting him.
It is very imperative that I know him for many reasons, I know he is doing a great work for humanity. His letter of sympathy will mean much to me and my people. After consideration if you do send me your letter of introduction, I shall make every effort to see him and get acquainted with him.
If you can possibly write him and pave the way for me, it would be much easier for me.
I know I am asking much of you and yet I feel I can call upon you for an understanding and cooperation.
I have been so drawn unto you and Mrs. Davis—I don’t know what is the chief attraction, yet it is so—which make me to have faith in your judgment and call on you when in need of such advise [sic] and favor.
Thus far I am laying a good foundation in Washington D.C. and soon hope to carry on my work effectively.
God is with us and so long I am on His side I know I will win.
Enclosed please find a photograph and a photostat. It is self-explanatory.
God bless you and Mrs. Davis.
Sincerely Yours
Kilsoo K. Haan
(Letter was sent at once S.H.D)
There aren’t any letters prior to this date between Kilsoo and Nathaniel, although it’s apparent we’re missing Nathaniel’s initial letter to Kilsoo. It’s very likely Nathaniel and Sonia attended the “public lecture given by a Korean” early 1939, or late 1938. Either way, the lecture forged a bond between the spy and the milliner and her husband. Sonia was by this point very involved in philanthropy, exceptionally outspoken about equality between ethnicities. This was an attribute that was sprung forth by Nathaniel, who was the founder of American Defense Society [Planetaryan] of the United States—a humanitarian organization.
Nathaniel and Sonia had mutual ground with Kilsoo: they sought to improve the welfare of others. When they heard Kilsoo’s message, they believed in the cause and without a second thought, did anything and everything within their power to bring awareness. As a result of his organization, Nathaniel had some pull in political circles, and so he wrote letters of recommendation to his contacts regarding Kilsoo, bringing additional awareness to Kilsoo’s cause:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
May
Twenty-ninth
1941.
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis
3816 1/2 South LaSalle [sic] Avenue
Los Angeles, California
My dear Dr. Davis:
It is always a pleasure to hear from you and I am glad everything seems to be going so well for you at this time.
With regard to Mr. Kilsoo K. Haan, I should be happy to meet him as he must be a most interesting person, judging from your description of him. However, I am afraid I can offer him little encouragement at the present time with reference to his desire to become affiliated with the Federal Bureau of Investigation as an investigator.
I know several other A-1 fellows out on the coast for whom I interceded with the Honorable J. Edgar Hoover, but I have been advised that at the present time they are not enploying [sic] any investigators whatsoever, and intend to continue with their present personnel, although I had previously been of the opinion that they intended appointing several new investigators out on the coast. Therefore there is little encouragement to offer at this time.
Regretting my inability to be of more assistance to you and Mr. Haan at this time, and with kindest regards, I am
Most cordially yours,
Charles Kramer, M.C.
Years 1939 – 1940
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 38 1930 – 1939, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
My dear Dr. Davis:
I thank you so much for your prompt answer and also for the letter of introduction to Dr. Solomon. It was very nice of you to favor me with these requests.
Please convey my best wishes to Mrs. Davis.
I shall do my best to do what I can to carry out the work as previously stated.
God bless you.
Yours truly,
Kilsoo K. Haan
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 38 1930 – 1939, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
Aug. 7, 1939
My dear Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis:
Perhaps you may recall seeing me while I passed Los Angeles last January.
I will be in your fair city once more from Sept. 25 to Oct. 5, 1939.
If you believe I can be of any service to your organization I shall be very have [sic] (^happy) to serve.
Kindly let me know before the 25th of August.
Many thanks for your kindness
Sincerely yours
Kilsoo K. Haan
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 38 1930 – 1939, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
August 14, 1939
Mr. Kilsoo K. Haan
101 D.St., [sic] N.E.
Washington D.C.
Dear friend Haan: —
We were more than pleased to hear again from you, and especially to note that you are likely soon to be again in Los Angeles.
Since you went East, we have, as you will see by the reply address, moved to more convenient quarters, and much nearer to the offices of the Sino-Korean league.
If in any small way, we have been of any service to you or helped you to attain your objectives in Washington, to have done that is reward enough; my only regret is that we could have not done more.
Before you leave Washington, I would very much like to have you see Mr. John Dockweiler, at the Shoreham Hotel. He was formerly one of our Los Angeles Congressmen and now has an official position in the Capital. His family ranks high in the Democratic Party. His father is one of our ranking men in the party. His brother the Hon. George Dockweiler is a Judge on the Superior Court bench. It may be well worth your while to confer with him. Make an appointment over the telephone saying that I asked to to [sic] do this.
Waiting with pleasant anticipation to see you,
Cordially yours,
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 34 1938 – 1940, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
Aug. 9, 1940
My dear Dr. Davis:
Please forgive my neglectfulness. How are you and Mrs. Davis? I trust both of you are healthy and happy in your good work.
I will be in Los Angeles from the first of Sept. to Oct. 10—
Would it be possible for you to arrange an opportunity of meeting some National Defence minded organization during my stay there?
I shall be only too happy to do what I can to make it a happy and enlightening meeting.
My topics will be—
New Order in Asia?
National Defence and You
Young People’s Problem
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 34 1938 – 1940, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
August 19, 1940
Mr. Kilsoo Haan
Senate Hotel
Washington, D.C.
My dear friend Haan,
Both Mrs [sic] Davis and I were glad to receive you [sic] note indicating that after so long a stay in Washington you are about to return to this city for awhile.
I immediately began to make enquiries as to the probability that we might be able to make use of your services in the presentation of your message backed up by your special experience during your stay here.
I am convinced that it is practicable to do this in an adequate way; but inorder [sic] to satisfy those with whom we must co-operate it has been suggested that you give us for publicity purposes and their satisfaction, a resume of your background, accomplishments, attitude to ward [sic] vital American ideals in absolute opposition to Communism, Fascism, Nazism, Atheism, and all subversive movements, and especially your experiences in Washington as you have pressed the cause of justice for suffering Korea and tortured China.
For my own part, this is not needed. I know your standing on these matters. But to do aqequately [sic] that which is in your heart, it will help mightily to go on record. So do not delay in sending to me as much material as you can, sending your reply by air mail. Then we can act. All the rest can be done I am sure.
As ever, looking forward to seeing you,
Very cordially yours
DR. NATHANIEL A. DAVIS
Kilsoo, being a representative of the Sino-Koreans’ People League, strove hard to bring rights to Koreans in America and also in Hawaii. The following letters show a brief example of what he sought to accomplish, and managed to do so:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 42 1931 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
March 16, 1939
Mr. Kilsoo K. Haan
1281 Fort Street
Honolulu, Hawaii
Dear Mr. Haan:
I am very happy to send this message to the Sino-Korean People’s League. I have learned of the excellent work you have been doing, and feel that a group such as yours can do a great deal toward the awakening of democracies to the struggle for Korean Independence and the development of an interest in the Korean people.
I congratulate you and wish you continued success.
Very sincerely yours,
Newbold Morris
Acting Mayor
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 42 1931 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
April 20, 1940
Mr. Kilsoo Haan
Senate Hotel
Washington, D.C.
My dear Mr. Haan:
I know you will be as pleased as I am to learn of the action taken with reference to the Korean students for whom you have been working so unremittingly during the past few months. The Senate Committee on Immigration, in Executive session, considered our bill at length. They were very sympathetic to its purpose and in accord with our views, but they were very reluctant to establish such a precedent as this type of legislation would establish.
A conference was held with Mr. Shaughnessy, Commissioner of Immigration, and he expressed himself as entirely in accord with our views of the situation, and gave assurance that his Bureau would not take any steps toward deportation or curtailment of the time for residence of these Korean people in the United States. This, of course, is much preferable to what we would have accomplished by the passage of the bill. Had the bill been enacted, the matter would have been left discretionary with the State Department, and with the rapidly changing aspect of international affairs, an order could be issued by the Secretary of State putting an end at any time to the stay of these people in our country. With the assurance that we have secured, through the Committee, from the Commissioner of Immigration, I am confident these Koreans can view the prospect with assurance that there will not within any reasonable time be action taken which will require their return to the Orient.
I want especially to assure you of my appreciation of your ardent efforts in behalf of these people. Your interest in the matter and your intelligence and grasp of the situation have been very potent factors in bringing about the results which have been accomplished.
May I assure you of my high personal esteem,
Very sincerely,
Guy M. Gillette
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 34 1938 – 1940, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
SINO-KOREAN PEOPLE’S LEAGUE
101 D Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C.
Press Release
August 20 (or 26), 1940
Director of Alien Registration Earl G. Harrison today informed Kilsoo K. Haan, Representative of the Sino-Korean People’s League in Washington, D.C., that the Justice Department has granted Haan’s proposal.
The proposal and request was that the Department of Alien Registration under the U.S. Justice Department grant the Koreans in America and Hawaii the right to register as Koreans and not as Japanese subject. Haan said, “Koreans in America and Hawaii will deeply appreciate America’s sympathetic understanding of Koreans’ feeling toward Japan. This will greatly cement and enhance our loyalty to democracy and to the United States of America.”
Attention of Koreans –
Fellow Koreans: May I call your attention to the generosity of the Department of Justice in granting Koreans the right to register as Koreans and not as subjects of Japan.
When you go to the local Post Office to register, write down your nationality as Korean and not as a Japanese subject.
May I suggest that you write to Mr. Harrison, Director of Alien Registration, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., thanking him for this privilege.
Kilsoo K. Haan
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 42 1931 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
August 19, 1941
55988/630
Mr. Kilsoo K. Haan
Sino-Korean Peoples’ League
101 D Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C.
My dear Mr. Haan:
A copy of your letter of July 30, 1941, which was addressed to J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has been referred to this office for reply.
In your letter you request to be advised if there is any reason why your organization should not issue identification cards to each Korean alien in the United States so that he may be distinguished from Japanese.
In reply thereto, you are advised that this office sees no objection to your proposal. It is presumed that the proposed identification card will merely attempt to identify the holder as a Korean and not as a Japanese. Inasmuch as there will be no attempt to imitate or duplicate Federal documents there is, as stated, no reason in our opinion why you should not issue such documents.
Sincerely yours,
Lemuel B. Schofield
Special Assistant to the Attorney General
By (signed) Edw. J. Shaughnessy
Deputy Commissioner
…
August 20, 1941
Attention, Fellow Koreans:
This and other letters have been forwarded to Chairman Kim Ho of the United Korean Committee in Los Angeles, also letter enclosed for Chairman Won Soon Lee in Hawaii and other leaders in Hawaii and Los Angeles.
As soon as the leaders undertake to agree on this necessary program—either the United Korean Committee in Hawaii and Los Angeles or myself will issue a statement of facts and suggestions for your benefit.
Kilsoo K. Haan
Washington Representative
UNITED AMERICAN DEFENSE COMMITTEE
of L.A. Calif.
As remarkable as this achievement may be, Kilsoo’s main fame lies in his work against the Japanese and what he had acquired while undercover in a Japanese base in Hawaii.
While living in Honolulu, he dressed like a Japanese beggar, hair rumpled, face not too clean, and bare-footed. He walked into the Japanese consulate and in peasant Japanese asked for help. He said nobody wanted to give him any kind of job. He was hungry and had no place to live and he simply had to have work, any kind of work.
The two officials looked at each other, then at Kilsoo K. Haan. One asked him whether he could read or write, he said no. Could he do janitor work? He thought he could and would try. While cleaning the offices, he spied their literature, copied it, including the charts where Pearl Harbor was to be struck. When he had all the information he needed, he came to Los Angeles hired the large Embassy Auditorium, put an ad in the local papers, inviting all the Koreans and other citizens to come to the lecture.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, pp. 178 – 179.
At first, this passage reads a little like one great spy novel. However, this was real, and this was Kilsoo’s real mission in life. These charts were once in the possession of Nathaniel and Sonia:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 1. Sonia H. Davis, 1922 – 1971, Series 1. Subseries. Correspondence, 1938 – 1971, Box 1, Folder 1 1944 – 1970, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
(November 2, 1952)
P.S. I have Charts showing where Pearl Harbor would be struck, and about when. These, my late husband obtained from one Kilsoo Haan, who before the war went to Washington to show these charts and tell what he knew about the then impending disaster, but Washington wouldn’t listen to him. I’ll be happy to show them to you, and also some of the literature, as well as my late husband’s pleadings to F.D. Roosevelt regarding the lack of safety and security of the United States.
S.H.D.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 34 1938 – 1940, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Moreover, aside from these charts, Kilsoo had “acquired” How Japan Plans to Win by Kinoaki Matsuo. This, too, was something that Nathaniel and Sonia had received:
When World War II was over, Kilsoo Haan wrote the book “How Japan Plans to Win”. When ten thousand copies were sold, Franklin D. Roosevelt forbade the sale of the book. Nathaniel and Sonia had a copy inscribed to them, but it was later lifted or otherwise appropriated from them.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, p. 180.
Kilsoo did not write How Japan Plan to Win; he translated it and published it in 1942. There appears to be some sort of controversy surrounding how Kilsoo acquired this book. The Japanese believed he stole it from two Japanese officers’ hotel room, while Kilsoo revealed it was given to him. The following transcripts are taken from the first few pages of How Japan Plans to Win:
How Japan Plans to Win. This page is not numbered but is the first page with actual text.
Transcript:
The translator is the Washington representative of the Sino-Korean People’s [sic] League, an anti-Japanese secret society of Korean patriots, with a highly organized intelligence service. Valuable information has frequently been passed on by Mr [sic] Haan to U.S. Government Departments.
A copy of the original Japanese book was ‘acquired’ by the translator from a Los Angeles hotel room of two Japanese Army officers (of whom he had advance information), who had come to the West Coast for propaganda among the Japanese-Americans.
The book sets out in detail the Japanese strategic plan. December 1941 is laid down as a zero month. The attacks on Pearl Harbour, Guam, Wake, and Midway Islands, and the Philippines have followed according to schedule. Action between the two fleets is discussed: the Nipponese expect to defeat the U.S. Fleet utterly.
How Japan Plans to Win by Kinoaki Matsuo, trans. by Kilsoo Haan, p. 5
Transcript:
TRANSLATOR’S NOTE
How Japan Plans to Win was first published in Tokyo in October of 1940 under the title of The Three-Power Alliance and a United States-Japanese War. The author is an intelligence officer in liaison between the Japanese Foreign Office and the Admiralty; he is also, and more significantly, a high official of the Black Dragon Society, a religious-political organization of militarists which has had a behind-the-scenes influence of growing importance in the development of recent Japanese policy. The purpose of the book was twofold: to stiffen mass support for a Japanese show-down with the United States; and to bring mass pressure to bear upon those members of the Admiralty who still considered a war with the United States suicidal. The present book is an unabridged translation of that work.
The book came into my hands as Washington representative of the Sino-Korean Peoples’ League, an anti-Japanese secret society with agents all over Japan, the mandated islands, Formosa, and our own West Coast. From one of my agents in Japan I receive word some time ago that two Japanese officers, both members of the Black Dragon Society, were on their way to California to do propaganda work among the Japanese-Americans of the West Coast. I was further informed that they were bringing with them a kind of Japanese Mein Kampf, which had been used to stimulate morale at home with some effect. I went at once to the Coast, and was able to secure a copy of the book, which I thereupon undertook to translate, and which is herewith published in English for the first time.
Grateful acknowledgement is hereby made to Mr [sic] Sang Ryup Park and other friends for their help in the translation. If, in spite of the patient efforts of these friends, I have failed to do justice to the author, Kinoaki Matsuo, I hope he will forgive me.
I owe grateful thanks, also, to Senator Guy M. Gillette, who has been very sympathetic and understanding, and who has advised me on the problem of presenting this book to the American public in the interests of National Defence.
In the midst of the increasing hysteria of impending war, Nathaniel did his best to inform political figures of a possible invasion through Crescent City, California.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 34 1938 – 1940, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
April 20, 1939
To the Hon. Franklin D. Roosevelt
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C.
My dear Mr. President: —
Refering [sic] back to a recent letter from me expressing the views of this organization relative to a proposition we have for some years contended should be considered as a matter of National Policy, you undoubtedly remember that your attention was called to certain facts in connection with the defences of the Panama canal, the liberation of the naval forces of England, France, and Holland from American waters, the great value to us of the Central American, South American, West Indian, and some other islands as essential to the full protection of our coasts, commerce, and trade, and further of the resources in those teritories [sic] as producers of tropical products which we must have, and to the fact that European debts to us are constant causes of friction; and that we suggested the appointment of a special Congressional Committee to enquire as to the accuracy of our allegations and the practicability of bringing all of these places now held insecurely and quite seriously possible of occupation by enemy European or Asiatic powers definitely under our flag.
Since that time we are glad to note that a naval station has been acquired in Trinidad. This is fine; but we think it is not enough, and we sincerely hope that the complete program may be studied certain that the facts justify our views.
As part of this protection of our shores, there are other matters scarcely less important which we have more than once stressed. All of the ground covered in our correspondence with yourself we have been over. I know all of them from personal surveys of the facts on the spot.
There is another section now in our minds which is perhaps quite as important from the viewpoint of military defense. I refer to specifically to Crescent City, its harbor, Lakes Earle [sic] and Killaw [sic] immediately north of that harbor, and the hinterland in Del Norte and adjacent counties.
A vast stretch of practically unsettled arable, forest, and mineral lands of the greatest potential value, because of engineering difficulties and lack of roads and transportation facilities makes this area almost if not quite our last great West.
The harbor at Crescent City needs to be further developed as a military project as well as for commercial purposes. It is almost exactly mid way [sic] between Portland Oregon and San Francisco, California. It is the only practical point at which a harbor of refuge for ships of any size could be made available between these two ports. The coast line between Portland and San Francisco is at present the longest stretch on this earth on any shore between two major cities without such a port.
At the St. Georges Bank not far at sea from Crescent City is one of the greatest deep sea fishing areas in the world. In the farm and orchard lands of this territory there are possibilities of producing food for a mighty population.
Any alien such as Japan, seeking a landing spot not at present adequately protected, could and we think would finding all they might want, in the area referred to, seize it and settle military colonists there whom we could never expel.
The lakes before named are close to Crescent City. They are seperated [sic] from the sea by sand banks easily dredged through. An aeroplane landing fields and as naval stations, they are ideal.
There is an abundance of stone for building materials and harbor works at hand. A considerable amount of Federal work had been done already in Crescent Bay. But the naval plans should be rushed to completion and fortification make this territory safe for us and from the assaults of aggressor nations.
This Crescent City situation has been before Congress before. But at those times, the urgency of fast moving events did not enter into the argument and perhaps the tinge of racketeering real estate speculators clouded the issue. All of that has passed.
We know by all your record and your recent public statements that these problems lie close to your heart. For this we are grateful.
Trusting that our suggestions may have value and lead to action,
I have the honor to be,
most respectfully yours
National President of the AMERICAN DEFENSE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES.
This is the only available page of this letter.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 34 1938 – 1940, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
September 23, 1939
Hon. Franklin D. Roosevelt
President of the United States
The White House
WASHINGTON, D.C.
My dear Mr. President: —
It is once more my privilege to convey to you both for this organization and on my own account our sincere satisfaction and our congratulations in connection with your recent word over radion [sic] to the American people giving them the reasons for you [sic] stand on the problems of Neutrality. That was finely done. It should place the people of America as well as their representative in the Congress substantially on your side and ready to support you in every way in these trying days.
We note with natural approval the acceptance by various Departments of the suggestions we have made notably with regard to the protection of our aeroplane and munition plants from untrustworthy employees and sabotage; the attention being given to the menace of foreign submarines in the CaribeanSea [sic] and the Gulf of Mexico; the danger spots in Alaska and in Central America; the very real danger involved in the activities of notorious subversive movements; and the need for a new and more definite Americanism among our citizenry. We are in no little measure disturbed by the continued lack of adequate protection of the Del Norte County and Crescent City area in this State and the importance there of a fully developed harbor of refuge as a military measure. Nor are we less concerned with regard to the armed preparedness of certain revolutionary groups to incite domestic trouble and spread racial and credal disruption of American solidarity. The Panama conference relative to Pan American relations is we think, a masterly move which must be stimulated to constant enthusiasm throughout the Americas.
May I add to this that if there is any place I can fill, or
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 38 1930 – 1939, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
October 19, 1939
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis
3816 1/2 South La Salle Avenue
Los Angeles, California
Dear Dr. Davis:
By reference from the President, I have your letter of September 23, 1939.
I want you to know how deeply I appreciate your offer of cooperation in connection with the emergency now confronting this Nation. It is suggested that you refer any information indicating a possible violation of the neutrality laws to Mr. R.B Hood, Special Agent in Charge of this Bureau’s Los Angeles Field Division located at 810 South Spring, Room 603, Los Angeles, California.
It was thoughtful of you to forward the clipping from The Los Angeles Pan American News.
With best wishes and kind regard,
Sincerely yours,
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
December 17, 1940.
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis,
3816 1/2 S. La Salle Avenue,
Los Angeles, California.
Dear Sir:
I am directed by the Secretary of War to acknowledge receipt of your letter of November 14, 1940, addressed to the President, together with data relative to the facilities of Crescent City, Del Norte County, California, in connection with the national defense program.
It is not possible at this time to indicate the extent to which it may be practicable to utilize the facilities at the locality in question for defense expansion activities; however, the information furnished has been made of record for such reference as requirements may warrant.
In the War Department studies for the selection of locations for such additional establishments as may be authorized incident to the defense program, the merits of all suitable areas are carefully evaluated. You may be assured that the merits of the Crescent City, California area will receive full consideration.
With appreciation of your interest in matters relating to the National Defense, I am
Very truly yours,
Major General,
The Adjutant General.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 34 1938 – 1940, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
December 27,1940
REPLY TO Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis, 3816 1/2 S.La [sic] Salle Ave.Los [sic] Angeles. Calif.
Major General E.S. Adams
The Adjutant General’s Office
War Department
Washington, D.C.
Dear Sir: —
By way of calling attention to the urgency of the Crescent City conditions in connection with the present emergency, and the probable advisability of some sort of preliminary investigation being made throughout Del Norte County in California and as additional material to be placed among your records along the material already supplied by us to you, I may say that the emmisaries [sic] of Japan have over a number of years been collecting data undoubtedly for their use later.
One of our own members who is also a member of our World Affairs committee, Mr. Kilsoo Haan, a Korean by birth and for many years a resident of Hawaii who is well known to the authorities in Washington where he has appeared before various Congressional groups as the representative of the Sino-Korean League, informed me that Japan is still using that district as a sort of fairly well concealed clearing house and thinking of it in terms of military action in days to come.
I have suggested to him that he should get into touch with you on his return to Washington. Senator Gillette will bear me out in saying that you will find him decidedly useful in consideration of matters affecting the Pacific area.
Cordially yours,
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis; President American Defense Society
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
January 6, 1941.
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis,
3816 1/2 South La Salle Avenue,
Los Angeles, California.
Dear Sir:
Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of December 27, 1940, with further reference to the facilities of Crescent City, Del Norte County, California, in connection with the national defense program.
Your comments have been carefully noted and the correspondence has been placed on file with previous material on the subject, for such reference as requirements may warrant.
Thanking you for your interest in the program of national preparedness, I remain
Very truly yours,
Brigadier General,
Acting The Adjutant General.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
May 19, 1941
My dear Mr. Davis:
The Secretary of the Navy has referred to me your two letters of May 8, 1941 in which you point out various advantages that exist at the port of Crescent City, California as opposed to Eureka, California.
Careful consideration will be given to this matter.
Your thoughtfulness in bringing this matter to the attention of the Navy Department and your interest in national defense are appreciated.
Sincerely yours,
C.C. Hartigan
Captain,U.S.Navy [sic]
By Direction
I was unable to find proof that supported this theory regarding Crescent City. With that being said, due to California’s long coast, and the state’s sprawling northern region of redwood forests, it’s easy to understand the fear of a possible invasion going unnoticed. Any coastal city that was without a military presence was an Achilles heel. Then with the attack on Pearl Harbor, an attack on California was a real possibility, given how close Japanese submarines were already prowling the state’s coast. On February 23, 1942, a Japanese submarine had in fact shelled a Santa Barbara oil refinery, further perpetuating mass hysteria on the likelihood of an invasion. Santa Barbara History Japanese Attack describes the assault in great detail.
Concerts
In 1941, still dedicated to Kilsoo’s cause, Nathaniel and Sonia hosted two concerts for Korean refugees in China. The first was scheduled on April 20, 1941:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
You are cordially invited to be with us
At the home of our Hostess
THE COUNTESS de ZARUBA
3115 West Adams Blvd.,
Los Angeles
Sunday afternoon, April 20, 1941, from 3 to 7 o’clock where a Korean Refugee Relief Tea and musical program will be given by the American Committee to Aid Korean Refugees in China, under the auspices of PLANETARYAN.
Princess DER LING will be our guest of honor.
Beautifully costumed Korean girls will sing, dance and play for your pleasure.
Korean dainties, unlike any other Oriental delicacies, will be served, and will be appreciated by the American palate.
Sonia Haft Davis……………Program Chairman
Janet S. Whang……………Assist. Chairman
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis….. Master of Ceremonies
Madam Alma Wieteck….Violin Soloist…accompanied by
Mrs. Grace Bush………………..Pianiste
Korean Program assisted by Mrs. Marie Lee, Winifred Lee, Lucille Kim, Rose Lee, Gloria Kim, Lila Lee, Marian Kim, Anna Lee, Mrs. Haykyeng Chung, (^Evelyn Kim) Mr. Frank Lee and P.K. Kim.
Story of the wonderful Country, Korea, and its interesting people…………….by Dr. N.A. Davis.
“Stars and Stripes For Me”……Words by Dr. N.A. Davis
Music by Mr. Elliot Carpenter
Sung by
Phil Gatch
Admission….50 cents.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
April 11, 1941
My dear Dr. and Mrs. Davis:
I am happy to report that the party I am negotiating for your appointment telephoned me this morning that your name [sic] have been put on the recommended list for the Cultural Bureau in the Latin America.
Keep patient and F.T.
I thanks [sic] you for all the help you are giving—the tea-party—tag-day—sending out letters etc.
Letters of encouragement and cheers are coming to me from the Koreans in Los Angeles. Thanks to you and Mrs. Davis—Kindly convey my regards to all.
Andrews—and others—sending six boxes of tea—packed by Koreans in N.Y. distribute among American Committee friends—Aloha Haan
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
1941 APR 19
DR NATHANIEL A DAVIS=
3816 1/2 SOUTH LASALLE ST. LOSA=
THO THOUSANDS OF MILES SEPARATE US MY HEART IS WITH YOU ALL KIND FRIENDS OF CHINA AND KOREA WHO MADE THIS TEAPARTY [sic] POSSIBLE [.] MAY I HUMBLY WISH YOU PLEASANT AND HAPPY EVENING [.] ENJOY THE LEA [sic] AND DANCING TO HELP CHINA [.] LETS HELP KOREA TOO. GOMAPSO=
KILSOO HAAN.
The Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, CA, Wed, Apr 16, 1941, p. 10. Source: Newspapers.com
This initial benefit was no doubt significant, and a great success. The second benefit, however, was exceedingly greater, so much so that Sonia had reached out to a fellow friend from the UAPA for help.
One of the Korean women wrote a short story describing the life of the Koreans, and also a Korean wedding. Sonia was to read that story from the platform, but she decided she could not do justice to it, so she telephoned a fellow-member who was affiliated with the United Amateur Press Association of which she had been a member as well. Sonia asked Mr. Wheeler Dryden to help out in any way he could. He complied at once.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, p. 179.
Since the stadium did not have a curtain, Wheeler brought his electrician with him. The stage was divided into three segments to present the three acts. The spotlight was to play on each section as needed.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, p. 179
The stadium in question was the Hollywood American Legion Post 43, which is now simply known as Hollywood Legion Theater. The theater appears to have been and still owned by the American Legion, a wartime veterans’ organization. You can read more about it here: Hollywood Legion Theater.
With Dryden’s help, and with those contributing and participating, the show was set for December 7, 1941.
Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Nathaniel had high hopes for this benefit, and it showed in the people who were invited to this event.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
Dec. 3, 1941
My dear Dr. and Mrs. Davis:
Your letter concerning Crescent City is noted with interest—will take matter up once more with War Department.
A million thanks to your hard work—I too am very anxious to have you here—I do need friends like you and Dr. Lechner.
Todate, [sic] Senator Downey and Gillette promised to wire you regarding Dec. 7—Korean night—Vice President’s secretary promised to call his attention once more—Mrs. Roosevelt’s secretary was reminded again—so far that is all—I do wish you all success—will wire you Saturday if any good news—
Aloha to Mrs. Davis and you
Gratefully yours
Kilsoo K. Haan
Senator Gillette did in fact wire Nathaniel, a day before Kilsoo’s letter:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
1941 DEC 2
REGRET UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION. BEST WISHES SUCCESS
KOREAN BENEFIT=
SENATOR GUY M GILLETTE.
…
1941 DEC 7
CONGRATULATIONS YOUR MEETING WISH YOU SUCCESS=
LEAGUE AID TO KOREA.
VOLUNITEER [sic] IN CHINA.
Another noteworthy invitation for the benefit was denied:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
DEC 6 1941
FOLLOWING MESSAGE RECEIVED FROM MRS [sic] ROOSEVELT TO BE READ SUNDAY NIGHT. WHITE HOUSE/FOR TRANSMITTAL DEAR HAAN/ I AM SENDING GREETINGS TO ALL THOSE ATTENDING THE BENEFIT AND MY GOOD WISHES TO THE SOCIETY FOR THE SUCCESS OF THEIR EFFORTS ON BEHALF OF THE KOREAN REFUGEES IN CHINA[.] I HOPE THAT THE RESULTS OF THE EVENING N [sic] KOREA WILL BE MOST GRATIFYING[.] VERY SINCERELY YOURS SIGNED ELEANOR ROOSEVELT=
KILSOV [sic] HAAN.
Even with the bomb strike charts of Pearl Harbor in their possession, Nathaniel and Sonia could never have predicted the tragedy which had transpired on December 7, 1941.
That last concert was given on December 7, 1941. The chief of police warned the population to stay home that evening, but Nathaniel telephoned and informed him that the tickets had already been sold for this benefit and that many persons would leave their homes that evening. It was very dark and difficult to get about.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, p. 179.
Southern California’s civil defense authorities had imposed severe dimout restrictions on the region, ordering residents to turn off all lights that could be seen from the sea at night. […] Residents pulled their shades, neon signs flickered off, and motorists learned to drive in the dark.
In another instance, the day after the bombing of the Santa Barbara oil refinery, Los Angeles had a battle of its own:
It began on the evening of February 24, 1942, when naval intelligence instructed units on the California coast to steel themselves for a potential Japanese attack.
All remained calm for the next few hours, but shortly after 2 a.m. on February 25, military radar picked up what appeared to be an enemy contact some 120 miles west of Los Angeles. Air raid sirens sounded and a citywide blackout was put into effect. Within minutes, troops had manned anti-aircraft guns and begun sweeping the skies with searchlights.
It was just after 3 a.m. when the shooting started. Following reports of an unidentified object in the skies, troops in Santa Monica unleashed a barrage of anti-aircraft and .50 caliber machine gun fire. Before long, many of the city’s other coastal defense weapons had joined in. “Powerful searchlights from countless stations stabbed the sky with brilliant probing fingers,” the Los Angeles Times wrote, “while anti-aircraft batteries dotted the heavens with beautiful, if sinister, orange bursts of shrapnel.
These were the times Nathaniel and Sonia sought to do good with their aid for Korean refugees. Even in the midst of this chaos, there was another form of chaos creeping into the production of the benefit. A political strain that Nathaniel took care to inform Kilsoo:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 35 1941 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
December 10,1941
Mr. Kilsoo K. Haan
Senate Hotel
Washington, D.C.
Dear friend Haan: —
In the “TIMES” this morning appears a paragraph a copy of which I am sending you verbatim, for your information.
…
“INTERPRETER SERVICES OFFERED BY KOREANS”
“Three Koreans, Rev. Key H. Chang pastor of the Korean Methodist Church, here, and Harold Sunoo and Bong Y. Choy, yesterday as interpreters and investigators for the local Federal Bureau of Investigation office.
They have been active as members of the Los Angeles Korean Committee for American Defense, according to Dr. John R. Lechner, executive director of the committee.
The group, Dr. Lechner said, will begin organizing a Red Cross Unit from among the 700 Koreans in this city. ” [sic]
…
To me, this was news. As the foot-note on this letter-head indicates,this Committee,of [sic] which I am Chairman,is [sic] a Committee to “To Aid American Defense of Freedom”. It is therefore THE Korean Committee For American Defense. Until that moment (when I read it in the newspaper) I had not heard that Dr. Lechner was its Executive Director. Since I have accepted no remuneration whatsoever for my services from my Korean brethren, and my only interest is to serve as a labor of love, if Dr. Lechner is able to make a better job of it, I would not object. But at least I was entitled to be informed. And if it was found necessary to form a new organization, of this, too, I should have been told. All such moves should be made in the open. We never do things in an underhanded way. My action is open, and with co-operation.
Like yourself, I, too, have enemies, who slander, and who would kill if they could. Stories —because [sic] I have friends—were constantly brought to me so that I have been kept much better informed than our foes suspected.
All this is a necessary preliminary to the story of disorder in the camp.
Before you went East, you and I talked about the regrettable fact that our good friend Lechner had fought openly against the re-election of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and made Republican party affiliations so paramount that his office became a Republican headquarters in which I, as a Democrat of the Roosevelt sort, had no place. Therefore I minded my own business and kept out. With the victory of FDR, Dr. Lechner became persona non grata in the Democratic camp, without influence among the leaders in the Nation and the Legion, so that he was not a delegate to any of the National Conventions, as he had been heretofore.
So far as Dr. Lechner and myself are concerned, that meant nothing. But with Miss Sanders there is a difference. She used to be Secretary of the Central Republican Committee, and is bitter against Roosevelt and hates the very name of MRS. Roosevelt. Miss Sanders learned the art of political maneuvering when she was deputed to do press-agency stuff for the Republican party. This makes her think she is a “newspaper woman”.
Miss Sanders ingratiated herself into Mrs. Whang’s favor, fussed over her, persuaded her that she could handle everything much better—etc., etc., etc. This information, too, came to me.
(Now see what happened)
(1) Without consulting or advising with me a new Committee was formed and Dr. Lechner made“Executive Director” [sic] with the purpose(I presume) of getting publicity for the “Republican” Bill of Rights Celebration Group,and [sic] building up Joe Crail for political office. It actually began to get such publicity until I protested to the press.(2)That [sic] publicity made difficulties in getting our permit, difficulties that I had to squash with strong action threatening legal suit against certain officials whom I know to be playing with our Japanese foes—your foes and mine.
(3) Without my knowledge or direction Miss Sanders undertook to get publicity which she failed to deliver. I had been told that an arrangement had been made with a local newspaper (the TIMES) for a photographer to take a picture of the wedding scene while a dress rehearsal went on but when I checked on that,I [sic] found that no such appointment had been made, but I made a definite appointment for a definite hour which was kept. This made Miss Sanders storm at me when the photographers came at the hour I set. Had I not reached this and the other newspapers, and had I not sent Mrs. Davis to them personally,there [sic] would have been no photographs in the Los Angeles papers.
(4) Then, on the evening of the entertainment when Dr. Rockeywas [sic] unable,because [sic] of illness, to represent the Mayor, and to preside, Miss Sanders jumped in with the proposal that Dr. Lechner who was the guest speaker, also should act as Chairman. This, of course, was entirely improper [sic] It is against the rules of order that a guest speaker should be his own chairman. Furthermore, this would have been an insult to our Vice Chairmen [sic] The duty fell on me and I filled it.
(5) I wanted Mrs. Whang, who wrote the script, also to be the narrator, Mrs. Davis was requested to read the script because she is a trained elocutionist and critic but she, too, thought that Mrs. Whang ought to read it and therefore did not wish to displace her, altho’ Mrs. Davis cheerfully wanted to read it and would have read it but Miss Sanders knowing all this, without consulting me, displaced both Mrs. Whang and Mrs. Davis. Miss Sander’s undue officiousness has caused a great deal of trouble.
Now, let us turn from these unpleasant things for a moment.
We rejoiced to have been able to get our personal friend, Mr. Wheeler Dryden of the Charles Chaplin Studios to work with us. Because Mrs. Davis asked him to do so, he took a crude idea of a beautiful story, cleverly thought out by Mrs. Whang,and [sic] out of that created a great story and a great show, at infinite pains on his part and without any thought of remuneration or any other reward than to be considered a great PLANETARYAN.
The beauty of the thing he did encouraged us to secure the publicity and supply also at no cost to the program, patriotic songs, singers and musicians to stamp the performance as being genuinely American. This seemed entirely providential when yesterday, when no one else could do it because all the men to whom I had to turn, were my personal friends of many years standing, I was able to get the assistance of the U.S. Attorney and others. They all asked for evidence of the Koreans’ attachment to Americanism. That program, given December 7, 1941, was the proof.
I am so thankful for friends, and that I have no enemies except among bigots, Nazi, Fascist and Red groups, and those who, like your foes, have been corrupted by Axis money, or threats.
Now what is to be done about this“storm [sic] in a tea cup”? My good wife and Rev. Chang, too, thought I should call our Committee together and“fight” [sic] it out. I do not think so. This is no time for a row, and I will not make one, besides, I am only blaming human weakness and not any real wickedness. Of course it has to be thrashed out, for if that is not done, The American Defense Society would have to repeal the resolution under which we are operating. We cannot afford to work under cross purposes.
I hope that the Rev. Chang, you, and I are the“Three [sic] Wise Men of the East”. [sic] to straighten it out pleasantly. Here is my idea. This irregular Committee which I have accidentally discovered must be dissolved for the sake of peace. That Dr. Lechner be asked in doing anything this connection, to consult with me as the Chairman of the American Committee to aid Korean Refugees in China and the Executive Director ex Officio to Aid United States National Defence of Freedom as indicated at the bottom of the Letterhead, so that people will not ask me how does it come about that Dr. Lechner is also Executive Director of the same committee. A circumstance that is not good for either of us. It should then be clearly stated, as you have urged before, that nothing be done without consulting me. Otherwise I cannot accept responsibility as I do not know what it will lead up to. When you, Rev. Chang and I have agreed as to what course to pursue it will be my job to do it in a kindly way, and I believe I can.
Here, I must tell you that I feel like John Wesley in saying “God helping me I must do this, I can do no other.” And—so—until the next letter
ALOHA.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 35 1941 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
December 11,1941
Mr. S.T. Whang
3308 East Pico Blvd.
Los Angeles
Sir: —
The letter from THE KOREAN COMMITTEE FOR AMERICAN DEFENSE which lies before me, is the worst example of duplicity and underhand treachery I have ever known.
When you were doing the things perpetrated by you and refered [sic] to in it, I was certainly entitled to the courtesy of consultation and some intimation of your intentions. Your double crossing and the crossing of wires contributed in no small degree to a defeat of your purposes and hurt our effort for last Sunday night.
I happen to know however the source from which this vile thing has sprung and was warned that it was being done but refused to believe it possible. This is not my way of life.
Your ingratitude and disloyalty are deplorable facts.
Of course there will be no clash and I will do nothing to hinder or harm a cause that I feel is mine and that as much as it is yours. But , [sic] from this moment, I and all those friends whom I have brought in with me will no longer co-operate with you ; [sic] and the resolution of the American Defense Society connecting this Committee with it will be promptly rescinded.
The slanderous statements relative to myself made by a certain public official who for the simple reason that he has resented my attitude of disapproval of him and his ways I know how to deal with and will. Exactly as and for the same reason as similar enemies of righteousness have attacked Kilsoo Haan, they have attacked me. That fact provides you with no excuse for not coming frankly to me instead of being underhanded.
At the earliest moment all your printed matter &c. will be returned. All I can add is that a very bad taste has been left in my mouth, that I want to clean out and forget.
Yours &c.
Mr. Sung Tack Whang was the chairman of Korean Committee to Aid U.S. National Defense, and it appears that he was considered an executive and treasurer of Nathaniel’s American Committee to Aid Korean Refugees in China. It would seem that during the “A Night in Korea” benefit, Whang had done some espionage, or at least a few of the members of his organization had gone undercover. If Nathaniel felt “entitled to be informed”, it was only because it would appear that his Committee, American Defense Society was associated with Whang’s Korean Committee for American Defense, therefore creating a Committee to aid both Koreans in China and in America. However, it appears that Whang was only concerned about Koreans within the U.S.
Despite the hardships that Nathaniel and Sonia and their Committee faced during the production of this benefit, it is clear that those they were seeking to uplift, and aid were deeply moved by their efforts. To Nathaniel, the appreciation of the Koreans outweighed anything the naysayers sought to do against his pursuit in doing good for others.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
December 10, 1941
Dr. Nathaniel Davis
3916 1/2 So. La Salle
Los Angeles, California
Dear Sir: —
I want to thank you for your spiritual cooperation you have given us Sunday December 7th at the Hollywood American Legion Auditorium, on behalf of the Koreans and American friends. The program was a success indeed.
With just a few words I am sending you my appreciation for your cooperation. Yes indeed! we need all the help from American friends and officially from your government now and in the future.
As you know our Korean people are one hundred percent loyal to your government.
I do hope I can be fit of service to your government and be of assistant [sic] to him anytime. Also every Korean shall be glad to serve him now and in the future to come.
Thanking you again I am,
Respectfully yours,
S.C. Ahn
Prejudices continued to surround Koreans. Specifically, the notion that Koreans were still to be considered Japan’s subjects, or to be one in the same in terms of ethnicity. Sadly, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, discrimination sprung against Asian ethnicities, regardless if they were Japanese or not. When finances and businesses were confiscated from Japanese citizens, thousands of which were interned in military-style camps, Koreans were also very likely thrown into this surge of confusion. (National Park Service) Nathaniel and Sonia continued to fight alongside Kilsoo to make distinctions clear:
Just before World War II was brewing, all the Japanese were treated as aliens and had to give up their markets and shops and were sent to concentration camps. The Koreans, too, began to be treated like an enemy. Their money and industries were impounded, but Nathaniel had written to Henry Morgenthau Jr. and assured him that the Koreans were not Japanese, and they were willing to fight on the side of the United States. Their money and property were restored to the Koreans.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, p. 180.
Nathaniel, indeed, wrote to Henry Morgenthau:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 35 1941 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
December 9, 1941
Hon. Henry F. Morgenthau
United States Treasurer
Washington, D.C.
My dear Mr. Morgenthau:
I have just come from a conference with Hon. Wm. Fleet Palmer, U.S. Attorney, in this city, with regard to a certain matter which he thinks should be referred to you.
The Koreans are by no means to be considered either as Japanese or friendly to Japan. Their status is defined in an Act of Congress recently adopted which classifies them as Koreans and not Japanese so that they carry identification cards as Koreans. They are most decidedly loyal to America beyond all question. It is, therefore, deplorable that an order of the President freezing Japanese assets has been applied in this city to Koreans whose businesses have been closed and whose bank accounts have been seized.
We hope that your good offices with the President may lead to a modification of the order so that this great hardship shall not be imposed unjustly upon our good Korean friends. I am sure that you will see at once the importance of this matter and give it your heartiest and best attention.
Yours sincerely,
Kilsoo had previously written to Henry Morgenthau on this very subject as well:
Letter Source: Kilsoo Haan Papers (MS.151), 1933 – 1973, Correspondence, 1933 – 1975, Box – Folder 2:2 1941, McHenry Library, Santa Cruz, CA.
Transcript:
MAR 10 1941
Dear Sir:
Reference is made to your letter of February 27, 1941.
I regret to advise you that this Department is not in a position to answer your inquiry since it is not felt to be appropriate to anticipate courses of action to be followed in hypothetical situations.
Very truly yours,
J.W. Pehle,
Assistant to the Secretary.
Mr. Kilsoo K. Haan,
Washington Representative,
Sino-Korean Peoples’ League,
101 D Street, N.E.,
Washington, D.C.
Hon. Henry Morgenthau Jr.
Secretary, U.S. Treasury
Washington, D.C.
Honorable Sir:
In view of the precarious situation which exists in the Pacific area, and in view of the strained relations between the Imperial Government of Japan and the United States, the Sino-Korean Peoples’ League requests that your Department help us to clarify some of the apprehensions which exist among the Korean people in the Hawaiian Islands and in America. We understand if and when America freezes all the Japanese financial holdings or confiscates the Japanese financial holdings in the event of war, all such properties and financial holdings belonging to the Koreans too may be frozen or confiscated [sic]
May we humbly request that the Department of Treasury take the attitude of sympathetic understanding and refrain from freezing or confiscating the financial holdings of the Koreans in America even though internationally speaking, we are subject race to Japan?
Last August 19th, the Justice Department Director of Registration, Hon. Earl G. Harrison, ruled Koreans can register as Koreans and not as Japanese subjects when registering under the Alien Registration Act.
We humbly plead that your Department give us the same consideration and rule that the Koreans are Koreans and not to be considered as Japanese, hence the Korean properties and holdings to be exempted from freezing or confiscation.
Years 1941 – 1942
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
May 7, 1941
My dear Dr. Davis:
Today the State Department told me to come over:
The Control Dept. in charge of all matters relating to alien-registration of raising money—propaganda and etc. After going over the papers you and Attorney sent—I was told that any money raised here in America for China or refugees in China need not need permit from the State-Department. [sic] He believe [sic] if the American Committee meet such regulation of the City of L.A. or the State law it is sufficient.
Another reason is that U.S.A—do not consider China as a “belligerent—hence this Committee need no permit nor register.
Kindly I am told that since The Defense Society has become the principle and that the American Committee is not a Foreign [sic] principle—he thinks such method of raising fund is not contrary to the law—June 1938—as amended.
He asked me to tell you to write the Social Service Dept. of L.A. that the American Committee under the situation need no permit or register in the State Department.
He further told me to have the Social Service Dept of L.A. to write to the State Dept. Control Bureau and have it verified.
Gratefully yours
Kilsoo K. Haan
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
May 12, 1941
My dear Dr. Davis:
I am enclosing clipping of Senate Joint Resolution, No. 15
Regarding Crescent City.
Your letter to Secretary Knox also have been received.
There have been close study of all appointment, I believe you have a good chance—so don’t rush them—I shall do my best—please be assured I will do so.
Kindly convey my best regards to all my friends there.
Very Sincerely Yours
Kilsoo Haan
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 35 1941 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
Dear friend Haan: —
This morning I received the cutting you sent me from the Washington News of December 11. Not only is the story interesting, but it is most gratifying to see that you are getting press recognition in D.C. for the superb work you have done. More power to you.
I have an uncanny feeling of relief today as I have shaken myself free from the political schemings that have caused us so much annoyance here. I knew it was going on all the time, but could do nothing to stop it. To Mrs. Davis and myself it meant nothing because we have ready means for personal defense and many friends who have known us both for half a century and we can afford to laugh at slanderers for that reason. But these disturbances within Korean ranks are bad. They are dynamitic in their menace to our hopes for right world adjustment. It is too bad that there are so many “purse” patriots, and self seeking [sic] parasites who care for nothing but self and would not dare do the things you have done. It was fear lest the cause of Korea might be hurt that made me stand for it and keep still until the thing came to a head. I have been very fortunate in that so little of that sort has ever plagued me. And when I think of all you have gone through and the black libels that have been hurled at you, libels that made some of your friends in L.A. come to me to ask if these stories were true, my annoyances seem as chaff.
Incidentally, I am personally acquainted with the real men in control of all the Los Angeles papers, including the Republican press. That which you want to get through that way I can handle. But when that is your wish, always send me your instructions or a “release”, so that I have authority and also to prevent the crossing of wires. This also goes for officialdom in general. In regard to Korean matters you, to me, are CHIEF. Give your orders.
We will follow instructions.
As ever,
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 35 1941 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
Dear friend Haan: —
I do not think I have ever in my life burdened anyone with such a flood of dolorous squaks [sic] as I felt I had to forward to you in the last mail to go out. Because of my confidence in you and real interest in that which you are doing it seemed the only fair thing to be done.
And now for the next move. It was probably a mistake to have had your eggs in two baskets carried by even the best of friends who are in different political camps and therefore apt to unwittingly bring about confusion because the moves of neither was known to the other. Political factions will ruin anything. That is why PLANETARYAN refuses to recognize them, and Planetaryans while they have unrestrained rights to be of any party as individuals, do not bring their politics into Planetaryan work. Some of my best friends are ineligible among us because they will not take this stand. That keeps factional mess-ups out of our activities. Therefore from this time on we must co-operate on a different basis, and I will never again be mixed up with local groups.
As before and so forward until Korea has become FREE once more , [sic] I and our Planetaryans will persevere with our efforts. BUT in doing this our only contacts will be personal between you and myself and with our World Affairs Committee when Korean interests are involved. In other words …YOU [sic] CAN STILL ABSOLUTELY COUNT ON MY LOYAL CO-OPERATION AND CONFIDENCE. That which we do will be our affair and not pass on to others without mutual consent or instruction.
My business is done in my home for this reason. From my kitchen nothing can leak out. Thus we stir up no jealousies. When the time comes later for public functions, PLANETARYAN will give them and all others assist as we ask or instruct them. And no official nor any politician will dare to meddle with us nor busybodies cross wires nor any bad feeling be made.
And for all the days to come, Mrs. Davis will delight in having you call her “American Mother”, and I in counting you my friend and brother PLANETARYAN until all men understand all other men and are at peace.
Cordially yours,
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 39 1940 – 1941, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
DR NATHANIEL A DAVIS=
3816 1/2 SOUTH LASALLE=
RUSH AIR MAIL YOUR LATEST CORRESPONDENCE REPLIES WITH GAR DEPT AND GILLETTE REGARD CRESCENTCITY [sic] HAVE APPEALED FOR ACTION ALOHA=
KILSOO HAAN.
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 35 1941 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
December 31, 1941
Dear friend Haan: —
The L.A.Times of this morning’s date is packed with disquieting as well as interesting news. Leland Stowe and Wallace Carrol tell stories that make one’s blood run cold and give one the “creeps”. And to their tales are added others of dishonesty and shabbiness among our own in America that make one wonder if the time has not come for a revival of recognition of the validity of the ten commandments and a probe into the too frequent substitution for right doing and conscience of emotional make believe. In other words we seem to need a reurn [sic] to that teaching of Jesus which says “Not everyone who saith unto me, Lord! Lord! ; [sic] but he that DOETH THE WILL of My Father who is in Heaven”.. [sic]
I am wondering what now those who have heard your expose of the Japanese “fifth column” activities in Hawaii and here(including [sic] Crescent City) will have to say about Mr. Thacker and those who have in such a slanderous and scandalous way attacked us and particularly you. And I wonder what the purse patriots and petty politicians by whom we have been meddled with and opposed will offer as an excuse for their conduct. I am too used to it to be affected. And I think you are too sane and too courageous to let them stop you.
According to Carrol, the Honolulu Pearl Harbor incident was much worse and the native Japanese misconduct more horrible than we feared it might be. And the danger still exists.
Stowe deals with another picture that is if anything even more distressing. He says that only about twenty per cent of all the lease-lend and other shipments to China over the Burma road get to Chung King, that the so-Called Southwest Transportation alleged to be a Chinese Agency but which I know to be directed by the agents of Red Russia who for many years have backed Chinese Bandits has for instance been peddling American gasoline at $1.60 per gallon and Buick Cars at from $6000 to $7000 each, stealing arms, ammunition, blankets, food and of course money taking these by force through use of uniformed Chinese soldiers, from even Americans on the Burmah Road. Stowe suggests that an American Commission should take over all of the Burma Road traffic and protect it. He makes no charges against the Chungking Government [sic] yet he says that officials in that Government’s employ are implicated in these thieveries that leave the real Chinese soldiers often naked, hungry and without arms with which to fight.
Leland Stowe alleges that much of the Chinese Relief Funds raised in America and sent by us to China has failed to reach its destination, to say nothing of waste at this end which makes of fund raising a racket… It almost seems to me that the only funds raised here which actually can be depended upon to serve our legitimate purpose are those which are contributed for such uses as you serve. I have protested against that sort of thing whenever it has come to my attention, but that is not a popular thing to do; and that is one reason why all through my life I have refused to take commissions, or any pay that might come out of funds raised from the public. You should be paid and well paid because you are giving service that has a real value. But the “hangers on” have no such just claim.
The Stowe story is the first of a series. You should follow them through and check up on them.
You can see with a better perspective why I have resented the instruction of political meddling here even if done by any one of my friends, or by officials who have axes to grind or are capable of being handled by fifth column schemers who hate those who,as [sic] you and I do, seek to protect this world from such as they are, and I think you will understand why it has become so difficult to act officially except through our own American and Planetaryan channels and directly with you.
Changing the subject to some extent…I sent as requested, to Senator Gillette a complete copy of the Planetaryan Crescent City File and am hoping that he may be able to make effective use of it. It is a fact that the Nipponese have long had in their possession and under their eyes that spot now a most seriously potential menace or a most valuable asset depending upon what the War and Navy and State Department do about it.
Indeed it has a wider importance than has been named, for its development and use is a possible fctor [sic] in mastery of the Panama Canal and in the Pan American situation; and commercially especially as regard minerals, food stuffs, lumber, and transportation it is as important as any other potential port and colonizable area in the United States.
So it goes. On this last day of the year we again wish for you all you wish for yourself with all the blessings that a beneficent Providence may shower on you and yours.
Yours as ever
Sonia H
and Nathaniel A.
DAVIS
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 35 1941 – 1942, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
May 11…..1942
Mr. Kilsoo K. Haan
Representative of the
Sino-Korean League
Washington.. D.C. [sic]
My dear Mr. Haan: —
I have before me a copy of your official letter to the Hon. Cordell Hull, Secretary of State, bearing date May 5. 1942, and have studied that communication, its wording, implications, and plea,carefully [sic] because as you well know,PLANETARYAN [sic] has formally made the Korean cause its own. As World President of this great organization,it [sic] is my privilege to renew to you and your compatriots our pledge not to cease co-operation with you until Korea has been freed from the pagan blight of Japanese oppression.
You, as a member of our World Affairs Committee, know that we have used all the influence at our disposal on behalf of Korea. We have written many letters to the President of the United States, members of the Presidential Cabinet,members [sic] of Congress, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, and others and have given time and effort to serve your distressed and worthy people. To aid them,we, [sic] who are Americans, are bound by treaty obligations,national [sic] and political interest, in world peace and imperilled [sic] democracy. We have not lessened our participation nor will we until Korea has regained its ancient dignity as an integral member of the fraternity of free peoples.
We understand ( and [sic] because of my good fortune in having visited your fatherland and through many years studied its conditions, I think I understand) your problems and the spirit in which you are endeavoring to deal with them.
We also understand that the dangers Korea faces from subversive and selfish elements seeking to disrupt your phalanx and prevent Korea from ridding itself from feudalism on one hand and radicalism on the other, are identical with similar dangers menacing America today. These facts do not lessen but do increase the strength of your argument that our own mighty democracy must stand with and for Korean liberation, and actively help you build into the New Korea a civilization worthy of the aspirations of democracy.
Because the great majority of Koreans have in their hearts a keen sense of the brotherhood of man and the Fatherhood of God and supremacy of the Law of Righteousness over all human legislations or arbitrary dictation of any party or usurper of authority, we are certain America may safely trust Korea with arms and support without fear lest that confidence might be abused. Korea will keep the faith.
In the emergency of the Totalitarian “Blitzkreig” against freedom, the twenty five million Koreans (because of their faith, love of liberty,heredity, [sic] geographic location, and the agonies they have endured under pagan autocracy), present to America needing assistance as we proceed to obliterate Nipponese terrorisms, a military posibility [sic] we cannot afford to ignore. Planetaryan has no hesitancy in urging unsparing and unlimited use of Korean co-operation.
This is not the first time we have made such a plea. If our plea is not now listened to, we will be heard from again.
We know that the great hearts and fine souls of our AMERICAN leaders, the President, secretary [sic] of State, and every worthy man and woman, may at all times be counted upon to respond favorably to such reasons as have been presented; and expect that response to take form as we proceed to use, help, counsel, and befriend KOREA until KOREA is FREE.
Instead of writing directly to those in power, I am sending to each of them a copy of this letter, one copy being taken by the Hon. Hugh M. Macbeth, Consul for Liberia, to be personally delivered to the President of the United States.
With renewed expression of our regard for you and interest in the things you are doing as you with us endeavor to fulfill the PLANETARYAN pledge to “do what we can”,
It is my privilege to be
Cordially yours,
Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 2. Nathaniel A. Davis, 1918 – 1964, Series 2. Subseries. Correspondence, 1931 – 1948, Box 1, Folder 40 1942 – 1948, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
Oct. 4, 1942
My dear Dr. and Mrs. Davis:
How have you both fared in the complex of war situation in California. My only regret is that we have not succeeded in getting you in the State Dept. Cultural Department as I had so hoped and believe it was coming very soon.
Hence the situation has been made it doubly harder for me in carrying out my work I am only prayerfully hope you will some day be recognize and receive a just position as you richly deserve.
In spite of what has taken place I am sure my respect and high regard and our fellowship has not changed nor will alter one iota—in fact as time goes on—our friendship will mellow into closer understanding.
Circumstances are such that I cannot adequately demonstrate my true feeling, but some day, I hope we can again sit down and have our chat of fellowship and love.
Please do convey my love and aloha to Mother Davis—I always have and will have my warm regards for her.
Whatever be the fate of our war in the Pacific I am sure God in His high place shall reward all men according to its merits.
Let us have greater faith in God and in the inner goodness of humanity. Justice, equality and human understanding will rule this world eventually.
Convey my aloha to Attorney Andrews, and to all the kind friends who helped us in our attempt to bring understanding and fellowship among men.
Trusting to our friendship and understanding
Very gratefully yours
Kilsoo K. Haan
It’s unclear if the letter of October 4, 1942 was the last of their correspondence. It would have been about this time that Nathaniel would’ve began his long battle with squamous cell carcinoma on his left leg and would pass away on April 6, 1945. What is also unclear is if Sonia ever informed Kilsoo of Nathaniel’s passing. It is quite possible that a correspondence solely between Kilsoo and Sonia never sprung up, especially given, that after Nathaniel’s death, she would revisit her life as the former Mrs. Lovecraft.
Even so, Sonia never stopped sharing her testimony of her friendship with Kilsoo, and his feats:
Letter Source: Sonia H. and Nathaniel A. Davis papers (MS.2021.003), Series 1. Sonia H. Davis, 1922 – 1971, Series 1. Subseries. Correspondence, 1938 – 1971, Box 1, Folder 1 1944 – 1970, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcript:
Oct. 12, 1964
Editor, Los Angeles Reporter
Dear Mrs. Waxman:
There is a report that eight thousand (8000) Japanese have allegedly adopted Judaism; this should be accepted with a grain of salt. The fact that the group is allegedly led by two Japanese University professors, an atomic scientist and a prominent naval engineer, does not make it “kosher”. The alleged fact that they have their own Synagogue and that they bombard the Israeli Legation in Tokyo with repeated requests for emigration visas, also is likely to be the spurious device before they bomb Israel or any other Jewish community with their Scientific bombs.
You are probably not old enough to remember Kagawa who came here to Los Angeles in 1936 to assure us to assure us of his sincerity that we must not listen to propaganda regarding the alleged enmity of Japan toward the United States. At that time I tried to warn small groups to beware Kagawa’s bearing spiritual gifts to us. We were told we are “talking through our hat.” When Dr. Nathaniel A. Davis (my late husband) had in his possession written evidence by a Korean, which I still have, and which he at once communicated to the late F.D.R. at that time, that Pearl Harbor would be attacked, no heed was paid to the matter.
When a Korean spy, a Christian Salvation Army Officer, showed us copies of the blue-prints he had“lifted” [sic] from the Japanese Legation office in Honolulu—where he acted as a simple, dumb janitor—indicating the vicinity where Pearl Harbor was to be bombed, my late husband introduced the Korean to a large group of World War One Veterans, he was invited to speak to them . [sic] I was sitting in the audience when I overheard one of them say: “The old man is a war-monger.” I still feel that no Oriental can be trusted.
Do you remember the Gibeonites who came to Joshua in rags, carrying stale bread in their sacks, their sandles [sic] dusty, unkempt; when he asked their spokesman who they were and where they came from, he replied: “We are come [sic] from a far country; now therefore make ye a covenant with us. From a far country thy servants ARE come because of the name of thyLord [sic] thy God; for we have heard the fame of HIM, etc, How analogous of the Japanese desire to join the Jewish faith! Joshua, chapter 9, 3 –12.
At that time another group lent itself to a similar purpose; Stalin sent emmisaries [sic] for a similar purpose. Thousands of small groups were inveigled into starting up Peace Clubs by the American communists; all in the name of Peace, while both Japanese and Communists were arming to the teeth.
Also, you will remember—if you were old enough—that Admiral K. Nomuro, [sic] who was visiting the United States, called on the late F.D.R. a few days before the Pearl Harbor incident and pledged the sincerest friendship of his government for that of ours. No sooner had he mounted his plane than Pearl Harbor was struck. Need more be said?
S.H.
At the end of all, Kilsoo Kenneth Haan was a person who sought equality for his people and safety for those he was most loyal. It’s a real shame not much, in terms of scholarship material about Kilsoo, has been published. He had a devastating truth that no one cared to listen to, in which lives paid the price for it, and even to this day, much of his life is left to obscurity. I can only hope that through this post, a light has been shed on the incredible friendship of the milliner and the spy.
God is with us and so long I am on His side I know I will win.
Kilsoo Haan to Nathaniel and Sonia Davis, March 28, 1939, John Hay Library, R.I.
It is no secret that we, as fans and scholars of H.P. Lovecraft, want to know what he genuinely thought about “love”. Especially how he applied himself to the actual act of loving in an emotional and even physical sense. People love differently, for there’s love languages to prove it. There are different kinds of love, too, and The Psychic Phenomenon of Love begins with the descriptions of the various types. Like “Nietscheism [sic] and Realism”, Sonia provided an additional glimpse of her correspondence with Lovecraft. It’s obvious that only a wife (or a long-time lover) can provide intimate details of how a man loves when there isn’t a soul around to impress. In this case, Sonia was the only woman who could relay Lovecraft’s genuine thoughts on love, and his manner of loving her.
However, how much is her word really worth?
Recently, Bobby Derie sent me an eBay posting of the original handwritten draft of The Psychic Phenomenon of Love. The item was listed initially at $6,800. Imagine my great despair at the ten dollar shipping on top of the scandalous amount of dollars for the material! To think that thousands of dollars just couldn’t cover the shipping costs! Jokes aside, this was certainly the most amazing thing to have been discovered and shared with me, thanks to a friend, since its discovery has taught me (and is still teaching me) the value of Sonia.
The Psychic Phenomenon of Love is an essay that usually comes up when we seek to learn more about Lovecraft and Sonia. Especially how his perception of love would affect her, and later their marriage. Which is why discovering the original draft in Sonia’s own breezy penmanship is a very exciting moment in scholarship and easy to believe the material is extremely valuable! The first thing I wondered though, was how much did this original draft differ from what is freely provided in the Brown Digital Repository?
According to the eBay listing, “Brown University archives hold [sic] an incomplete facsimile of a typed version”. I’m not sure if this statement comes from a place of sheer ignorance or a blatant desire to overhype the scarcity of the item in order to sell high. What I do know is that Brown University owns two copies of the essay in their digital repository. The first copy is actually seven pages long, in which the sixth and seventh page mainly discusses an importance in understanding the sacredness of love. Just because one is married and has children does not mean there is actual love in the relationship. At the bottom of page seven, Sonia writes briefly about divorce, in which she believes divorce laws should be more flexible especially for the sake of children, whose parents are unable to reconcile. This conviction for flexible divorce laws clearly stems from her abusive marriage to Samuel Greene, in which she couldn’t easily divorce him and had to raise Florence in that toxic environment.
What makes this essay important from the rest, at least in my opinion, is what Sonia wrote on the back of the seventh page:
It was Lovecraft’s part of this letter that I believe made me fall in love with him; but he did not carry out his own dictum; time and place, and reversion of some of his thoughts and expression did not bode for happiness.
Sonia H. Davis, The Psychic Phenominon [sic] of Love, Brown Digital Repository.
Aside from the two additional pages, this essay is identical to the second copy in the digital repository. The second copy has two sheets of its own at the beginning of the essay which is a letter regarding Sonia from Lovecraft to an unknown recipient (later revealed to be his aunt Lillian D. Clark) taken from Selected Letters, Volume 2.
In comparison to the original draft that’s for sale, these essays are just as valuable. One might even argue they’re perhaps even more valuable for the tidbits of truth that Sonia provided additionally, which the original lacks. Clearly, there is no such thing as an “incomplete facsimile” from the Brown University archives. Even so, I took it upon myself to compare the handwritten draft to the copy from Brown, which had the Selected Letters excerpt, and I did this for two reasons. Firstly, I wanted to genuinely verify the seller’s statement of it being the complete draft. Secondly, by knowing the first reason, I would then understand the monetary value of the item. Moreover, I ultimately wanted to share my findings regarding this artifact because awareness is key.
It is understandable and easy to believe why someone might assume it’s worth thousands. But is it really?
The question, again, comes to how much is her word really worth? Is her word and name alone worth thousands? Or is her word and name only worth thousands because Lovecraft’s name is included? Where do we put the value in Sonia? In her actual handwriting or in her association?
Coming from a place where I have bought several original Sonia items, which have ranged from $53 to $2,500, I know full well where her value is placed. Her worth is (and always will be) more when associated with Lovecraft. You can probably imagine why one item of hers was $53 while the other was $2,500. Does that make it fair? Certainly not. Yet, that’s the way of the game. Regarding the original draft of the essay, however, is it worth what the seller is asking for when we now know it’s not a rarity of its kind?
In comparing the two essays, I discovered they’re identical, in that nothing is drastically different. Nothing more included or nothing else removed. While numerous, the differences are slight, such as a word and/or a sentence here and there changed, and commas included or removed. That is the only difference. Lovecraft’s passage in the original is exactly the same as that of the typed version. Occasionally I relied on the typed version to help me make out a word or two in the original. There were moments when the original and the typed conflicted with one another because of the corrections Sonia had made between the two.
After having transcribed both essays (not an easy feat transcribing from eBay photos), I printed the two and compared them side by side, line by line, highlighting the differences. The top slide show is the original handwritten draft while the bottom is the typed version. Please pardon my personal notes throughout the essays.
A quick note on my style of transcribing:
I copy the page exactly how I see it. If there’s a line in the middle of the passage to separate paragraphs, then I add a line. If words are typed together by accident and Sonia drew a line between the two words to signify spacing, then I add a “|” (or “/”) between the two words. For example: add|to. If I can’t make sense of a word because it’s either muddled in the text or crossed out beyond recognition, then I type “(illegible word)” in place of the word. Words that are italicized and in parenthesis are handwritten revisions by Sonia.
There are two things worth noting about the original essay. The first is her note: “The typed copy has been revised”. I’m led to believe the draft I used to compare alongside the original is the one she is referring to. It was certainly revised in some ways, appearing to be a second version of the draft, given by how some expressions were corrected while new errors emerged.
The second thing worth noting is Sonia’s additional note, revealing her uncertainty if Lovecraft’s part is the original quotation. His passage never changes throughout any of the copies available, and so what does that say? If this is not his original quotations, then how did she capture his written tone so well? Was it paraphrased elsewhere, and she merely copied it?
Sonia had burned Lovecraft’s letters at some point between 1947 and 1966. None of the copies of The Psychic Phenomenon of Love have dates, but it can only be speculated that at some point in the 1950s she wrote it. While she doesn’t mention the essay by name, Sonia revealed the work in a letter to August Derleth:
Before burning 400+ letters of H.P.L.’s I copied part of one, adding my own version. After many years, I came across it, and am sending you a copy for permission to try to sell it.
Sonia H. Davis to August Derleth, November 29, 1966, August William Derleth Papers, Wisconsin Historical Society.
The “copy” she sent him is likely the scanned copy included in the eBay listing, alongside the original, since the general item came from the “Barlow / Derleth Papers”. It’s interesting to read about her having copied the original quotations from his letter, and yet admitting in the original draft that she did not know if it was “his original”. It’s certainly a mystery, or a mere reminder on her part to ultimately verify the text. Whether she did or did not verify the text before burning the letters, we’ll never truly know. After sending the draft to Derleth, The Psychic Phenomenon of Love was printed as “Lovecraft on Love” in The Arkham Collector, No. 8 (Winter 1971). Everything Sonia wrote was removed in “Lovecraft on Love”, only publishing Lovecraft’s passage:
And so, how much is her word really worth? Obviously not much if someone can easily remove her part from the essay and only share Lovecraft’s part. Yet, how much is the essay worth if we can’t verify Lovecraft’s passage to be the absolute original? Is it still worth thousands? Hundreds? Or is it only worth thousands for mere bragging rights? If that’s the case, then what is this phenomenon doing in getting in the way of scholarship?
Addendum:
The post above was written a week before the item sold. The original draft of The Psychic Phenomenon of Love sold for $2,500 on March 29. Is that price reasonable? Or did someone fall into the trap of paying too much? At the end of the day, that is up to the reader to decide. As consumers, we put the value in an item, whether the price is worth it or not, because we’re emotionally driven creatures. Whether the final price was fair or not, we can at least appreciate the fact of having seen The Psychic Phenomenon of Love in its original form. Time will tell if we’ll get to see it again for sale in our lifetime.
A huge thank you to Bobby Derie for his help in providing materials for this post!
Two are one. Another bears the name of Lovecraft. A new household is founded!
H.P. Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, March 9, 1924, Letters to Family and Family Friends 1.106.
Anything addressed to “H.P. Lovecraft” or (miraculous and unpredictable appellation) “Mrs. H.P. Lovecraft” will henceforward reach its recipient without additional formalities.
H.P. Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, March 9, 1924, Letters to Family and Family Friends 1.106.
Before the altar and vast windows of St. Paul’s Chapel, Sonia H. Greene met the gaze of her soon-to-be husband. He, with the stamp of antiquarian appreciation, went through his stately assurance. Then, Reverend George Benson Cox, in traditional vestments and with a ceremonial expression, turned to Sonia. Would she take the weird writer in her midst, to be her husband, to have and to hold from that day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, from that day forward till death would they part? The world stilled—the empty and solemn mood of the chapel deepened as though an audience waited with bated breath for her momentous decision. In the iridescent glow of the cross, whose delicate light adorned her with additional grace, Sonia said, “I do”.
On March 3, 1924, Howard Phillips Lovecraft and Sonia Haft Greene became husband and wife. Two became one: Mr. and Mrs. Lovecraft. They had stepped out of St. Paul’s Chapel with the high hopes of a lasting matrimonial bond, and with her own quiet hopes of making him a better man.
I had hoped (perhaps it was wish-thinking) that my ‘embrace’ would make of him not only a great genius but also a lover and husband.
Sonia H. Davis, The Private Life of Howard Phillips Lovecraft, unedited manuscript.
A hundred years later…
We look at that special day through scholarly lens, and perhaps even wish we had been witnesses to such a ceremony—sitting in one of the many empty rows, observing when they exchanged vows and rings. Yet, I believe that if we had been, at most, passersby on that day, striding past the open chapel doors, the scene within would’ve appeared as any ordinary ceremony taking place, and we might have overlooked its significance. It is only through the perspective of our present that we look back longingly to the past.
Fortunately, Howard and Sonia’s friends did not overlook the magnitude of such a day. The Blue Pencil Club, an amateur journalism organization of which Sonia was a member, announced the big news in their column “Blue Pencil Club Elects New Officers”, in The Standard Union:
Brooklyn, New York, Thursday, April 3, 1924, p. 2. Source: Newspaper.com
Transcription:
Announcement was made of the recent marriage of one of the club’s members, Mrs. Sonia Greene, of 259 Parkside avenue, [sic] to Howard P. Lovecraft, of Providence, R.I.
In her memoir, Sonia revealed that the Blue Pencil Club had additionally elaborated on their wedding day:
An account of that marriage is to be found in the “BROOKLYNITE” April 1924 the official organ of the Blue Pencil Club of Brooklyn, N.Y.
Sonia H. Davis, The Private Life of Howard Phillips Lovecraft, unedited manuscript.
It is interesting to note that despite his kindness in having dedicated a poem to the newlyweds, Rheinhart Kleiner had reservations regarding their marriage. In “A Memoir of Lovecraft”, he recalled having felt “faintness at the pit of my stomach and became very pale” upon hearing the news from George Julian Houtain and his wife. Houtain, having laughed at the effect that the announcement had on Kleiner, “agreed that he felt as I did”. (Something About Cats, p. 221) While Kleiner does go on to praise Sonia for her outward beauty, he divulges further in his memoir that her “severe conduct” and naivety was something that gave a general feeling to others that Howard and Sonia were ill-fated as a pair.
Unfortunately, there isn’t enough accounts on Sonia from unbiased sources to give a clearer picture of Sonia’s true conduct. And I say “unbiased” only because the claims we have of Sonia are mainly from the close friends of Howard. They regarded him highly, and while outwardly beautiful, Sonia didn’t seem to measure up to the majority of them. Did her background as a Ukrainian Jewish woman have an impact on how they viewed her physically and intellectually? Most definitely.
While I can easily launch into the psychological reasoning behind Sonia’s overall behavior (which I did to some extent in the introduction to Two Hearts That Beat as One), what genuinely mattered most is what Howard saw in her. It speaks volumes of a man, who was devoutly xenophobic, to marry out of his preferred ethnic group. Why? Because we see that she was more than just an immigrant and a Jewess to him. He saw her the way she wanted to be seen: intellectually attractive. The truth is, what they shared most in common was intellectual thought and ideals—something that has not been entirely acknowledged.
In the provided account, The Brooklynite had claimed that “Mr. and Mrs. Lovecraft entertained members of the Blue Pencil Club at their home” on March 23, 1924. Howard had mentioned a possible meeting with fellow amateurs to his aunt, Lillian D. Clark:
We have now sent invitations to several amateurs to come over next Sunday…
H.P. Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, March 18, 1924, Letters to Family and Family Friends 1.115.
March 18th was a Tuesday, and March 23rd would have been that following Sunday, just days after Howard’s letter. In his subsequent letter to Lillian, he briefly referred to the meeting:
Yes—the assemblage of March 23 came off successfully…
H.P. Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, March 30, 1924, Letters to Family and Family Friends 1.130.
However, this “assemblage” was not in fact the Blue Pencil Club because only a few sentences down from that very same passage, he explained what happened:
On Saturday S.H. and I were to have gone to the Blue Pencil meeting; but on account of fatigue and a cold on her part we refrained. The next morning we rather regretted our absence, for it seems that the meeting had been something of a party in our honour, with a carefully prepared speech by Mortonius, and the presentation of a wedding gift—a magnificent set of glassware—by the club as a whole!
H.P. Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, March 30, 1924, Letters to Family and Family Friends 1.130.
The “magnificent set of glassware” is obviously the “cut glass punch bowl and glasses” that the Blue Pencil Club presented to them. Evidently, Mr. and Mrs. Lovecraft had not actually entertained the club, ultimately having missed a party in their honor. Nevertheless, it was obviously the thought that counted.
The fact that both Sonia and Howard were thoroughly immersed in amateur journalism, and especially because Sonia was by this point the president of the United Amateur Press Association, an identical report of their wedding was printed in the United Amateur.
On March 3, 1924, occurred the wedding of Sonia H. Greene, President of the United Amateur Press Association, and H.P. Lovecraft, Official Editor of that society.
The marriage is the culmination of nearly three years of acquaintance, beginning at the Boston convention of the National in 1921, and ripened by a marked community of tastes and parallelism of interests. It may quite justly be added to the long list of amateur journalistic romances which our social chroniclers delight to enumerate and extol.
The ceremony, performed by the Reverend George Benson Cox, took place at historic St. Paul’s Chapel, New York; a noble colonial structure built in 1766 and dignified by the worship of such elder figures as General Washington, Lord Howe, and that Prince of Wales who later became successively the Prince Regent and King George the Fourth.
Following the wedding, the bride and groom departed on a brief tour of the Philadelphia region, whose venerable and historical landmarks accorded well with the scene of the ceremony itself. On Sunday, March 23, after their return to New York, Mr. and Mrs. Lovecraft entertained members of the Blue Pencil Club at their home, 259 Parkside Avenue, Brooklyn, where, needless to say, amateurs will always be welcome.
Mr. and Mrs. Lovecraft plan a continued career of amateur activity, which will begin with a vigorous attempt to resuscitate the United. Already in harmony as to plans and policies, the union will not alter or modify their programme as previously announced; but will add the final touch of cohesiveness to their concerted efforts.
“News Notes”, United Amateur 23, No. 1, May 1924, Collected Essays, Volume 1: Amateur Journalism, 1.352-53.
Prior to Howard, Sonia had been married to Samuel Greene. After their divorce, Sonia dated Francis Bosco, a bank teller for Bank of Italy (later Bank of America). According to her autobiography, Francis and Sonia were engaged, but the engagement was called off because he was Catholic and she was Jewish. After Francis, Sonia revealed she fell hard for “Kay”, a gentleman she met at a ball. He was very much like Samuel Greene, smart and yet argumentative. All these men were book smart, but also abusive toward Sonia, except for Francis. He seemed to have treated her kindly.
By the time she met Howard, Sonia was depraved of the kind of love that went beyond “free love”. While Howard isn’t perhaps the sort of man one imagines as a “knight in shining armor”, he was just that for Sonia. She genuinely believed he was the man of her dreams:
Sonia H. Davis, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 5, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcription:
After having met many men , [sic] some proposing marriage, a few indigent ones seeing in me a good “meal ticket” sought me for that, but not one as far as I could see, wanted me because there was anything in common between us, because there might have been real love; with several it seemed to me, it would have been a marriage of convenience; others bluntly suggested “Free love”, while a few probably did love me but I still sought the “man of my dreams”. One day I thought I had met him.
At some point during their lengthy correspondence, Howard and Sonia talked about love, and what made love genuine in a relationship. Sadly, since their correspondence did not survive, we don’t know the entirety of what said between the two regarding this particular topic. However, Sonia managed to preserve the passage that ultimately made her fall in love with him. This excerpt was later included in what would be the essay, The Psychic Phenomenon of Love.
Aside from his perception of love, Sonia also likely fell in love with the comforting prospect that Howard would respect her more, physically and emotionally, than her previous lovers. She knew he would not abuse her, but encourage her, not only entice her body, but seduce her mind. Yes, Howard had his flaws, but in comparison, he was precisely who she needed at that time of her life.
While the marriage ultimately failed, I will not focus on that unfortunate fact today, for today was a day in which both Howard and Sonia believed their love was eternal and worth the risk. Today, an exact century ago, they declared with clear certainty to be together for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness, and in health. And when you really think about their relationship in the context of those marital assurances, their love had indeed persevered.
Even with the work on Sonia’s autobiography all done, I am continually learning more about Sonia. Just when I thought I knew her, something re-emerges in my searches—a piece of letter, a single statement—that I’m prompted to reanalyze my perception of her. In June 2023, I wrote a piece about Sonia’s childhood friend, Laya Machat-Smyth, and while at the time of writing that post, I believed I had divulged all there was to tell in that matter. However, as I have delved further in Sonia’s essays and letters, I began to see old materials in a new light.
To be more specific, it was the second postscript of a letter which brought an all new emphasis on her friendship with Laya:
Transcription:
P.P.S Dr. Machat (the dentist) and his sister (now Mrs. Smyth) live in Santa Barbara. Before I beame [sic] real sick, each—at different times—came to get me and have me stay at their homes sometimes weekends; but Sadie Machat as we used to call her, now Mrs. Smyth, sometimes kept me on a visit for a week.
Her husband is an Entomologist. For many years I lost track of them, but when I came to Irene’s First wedding, in ’47 I went to visit Dr + Mrs. Machat and learned that the Smyths were in Calif. that he was at the Los Angeles Museum.
Before that they were in Peru where he had a yearly contract for nine years, trying to destroy some sort of bug that ravished and destroyed many fruits and vegetables. They were given a well-furnished house and a maid. Mrs. S, having nothing do, sang for the “Lima Opera Co.” For six years after they left Peru, he worked in the Los Angeles Museum. They lived in Hermosa Beach for a few years, then built themselves a lovely home on top of a hill in Sta. Barbara, a very interesting residence. They came to see me at Magdas and took me to dinner. Dr. Machat sent me a small radio; also “Only in America” by Harry Golden, and recently he subscribed to a periodical, “Carolina Israelite” by Harry Golden, for me. On my birthday, they took me to dinner.
S.
The letter itself and the first postscript of the letter is missing. It isn’t even clear to whom Sonia was writing to, but we can only speculate given by the correspondents whose letters contained the most autobiographical writings. Leonore Goldberg is certainly the highest possibility, with her father and mother, Sidney and Florence Moseson, coming in second, and Mrs. Christine D. Hathaway coming in third. These individuals were plainly interested in Sonia’s life, and they wished to learn more about it. The majority of her autobiographical writings were presented to Leonore and to her parents. However, what had not been shared with them, Sonia revealed to the Special Collections librarian, Christine D. Hathaway. It is unclear if Brown University, or at the very least Christine, had promised to publish some sort of biography on Sonia. What’s clear is that Christine requested autobiographical information from Sonia, and collecting it for whatever reason:
My following remeniscences [sic] will shock and surprise you, but, I do not think any of this belongs in the Biography…
Sonia to Christine, October 8, 1968, p. 2, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 1, John Hay Library.
The following I do not remember whether I had unfolded to you, or not. You may use it, if you think it good enough.
Sonia to Christine, October 8, 1968, p. 4, Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 1, John Hay Library.
As per your request, I am sending you my half-brother, Sidney’s biography.
Sonia to Christine, Mar 7, 1968, p.1, Box 1, Folder 1, From S.H. Davis 1944-1970, John Hay Library.
Christine and Sonia began corresponding in 1968 after Sonia had sent several literature materials of Nathaniel’s to the John Hay Library. Much of the rare tidbits of Sonia’s life were disclosed in these letters over the year. All of the Florence Carol Greene excerpts in the autobiography were extracted from Sonia’s letter to Christine on October 8, 1968.
No letter to Leonore, Sidney and Florence Moseson mentions Florence or their troubled relationship, and one could argue that perhaps Sonia didn’t think it was necessary to rehash a family matter because they already understood the conflict firsthand. Yet, to Christine, Sonia elaborated on Florence’s moments of adolescent innocence and moments of young adult rebellion. Once the autobiography is published and released, only then can the reader really know the amount of autobiography that was drawn out from their letters together.
And thus, to any one of these individuals, Sonia felt the need to explain her reuniting with Laya through her brother Dr. Julian (Jules) Machat in 1947. It’s no secret that Sonia had her moments of great extravagances. It was in her nature to be go all out, so to speak, in any occasion that involved guests and friends.
In addition to being an extremely personable woman, she was a rare cook, and displayed magnificent hospitality to club members. On at least one picnic she had brought an entire stuffed and roasted turkey to be cut up among the members and guests. Such generosity made some of our conservative members a little uneasy, but the dinners she gave to the club in her home were the really dazzling events.
Rheinhart Kleiner, “Discourse on H. P. Lovecraft” in Lovecraft Remembered, ed. Peter Cannon, p. 161.
As she got older, Sonia enjoyed hosting concerts to celebrate or to raise funds for organizations that were dear to her. In another fragmented letter, which is undated, Sonia revealed that Jules had attended one of her concerts with his nephew.
Transcription:
I used to invite Dr. Machat; he came once with his nephew, and when he saw the singers and dancers, he asked: Where do you get such talent. [sic] I told him she is my friend, she has her musicians—who pay her when they receive jobs, etc etc
It’s unclear if this nephew was Laya’s son. No record has emerged to confirm if Laya ever had children, and Sonia neither revealed as much, nor elaborated on the identity of his nephew. While the date of this particular concert is unknown, in 1954, Sonia had hosted a concert in her home, after recovering from an illness. Laya and her husband, Eugene, attended it. Sonia introduced many of her friends, but when it came to introducing her childhood friend, the bond between these women was undeniable. Both Laya and Jules had attended Sonia’s concerts, and while we only get Jules’ surprised reaction to the talent, it’s certain that Laya was equally amazed, being the fact, she was an opera singer.
The beauty of scholarship (if you can call it beauty) is that information is always updating.
Certain facts I might’ve thought and stated as true a year ago are now likely outdated or even incorrect because of perspective and new materials which have emerged over time. Much of this is the case with this subject. In my previous post, I had stated that Laya had two older siblings. That was incorrect, and the fact is Laya was the oldest, and Jules was the youngest. The source I originally used was the 1910 census, in which “Sadie” (which we now know was Laya’s nickname) was given the estimate birth year of 1887, which in 1910 would have made her twenty-three years old.
Laya’s actual birth date was May 18, 1890, therefore making her twenty years old in 1910. Shortly after her birth, her parents emigrated to America, specifically to Brooklyn, N.Y. Fortunately, the census does have the correct year of when they settled in Brooklyn. Another questionable thing about this census is her occupation. She was a teacher at a public school, which isn’t anything out of the ordinary, but it does make me wonder if she was doing this job while she prepared on the side to become an opera singer? For in 1911 through 1915, Laya had claimed to have lived in Italy. (FamilySearch)
In some ways, this census is conflicting in regard to Laya, and even in regard to Jules. The census states he, too, was an immigrant. However, another census reveals he was born in N.Y., which would technically be correct unless Laya and Jules were twins.
While this new evidence may not seem much, it’s ultimately another puzzle piece to the friendship of Sonia and Laya. Even if it’s a tiny piece—every little bit helps to ultimately complete the picture. Sometimes even just correcting a piece that was wrongly placed is progress. Revisiting this friendship is always a wonderful thing, for I’m able to see that even when paths vastly diverge and each person follows their own dreams and goals, a true friendship will always meet again and be able to pick up the pieces as though time had never came in between.
It’s reaffirming of how much Sonia felt at home with the Machat family. Whether it was Jules or Laya, Sonia bonded well with these siblings. The Machat family was a foundation for Sonia at a time when her mother wanted to keep her, but her stepfather forced her out. It is evident in the way that Sonia spoke of the Machat family that their love and home had been a safe space in which Sonia would always count on in times of trouble.
One day, Mrs. Balch asked Sonia what she thought she would like to be.
“I think I would like to make ladies’ hats if I could find someone to teach me.”
“I’ll ask my milliner whether she would care to take an apprentice.” In those years telephones were not the common commodity they are today, but Mrs. Balch was one of the few householders who permitted herself that expensive utility. She called up Madam Hagadorn, the finest milliner in town, and told her that she had in her home a very bright little girl who, she thought, would make a very good apprentice. Could she find room for her?
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, Chapter Eight.
Mary Bathsheba Baldwin was born on January 11, 1840, in the town of Durham, Greene, New York. Her parents were Anson Curtis Baldwin and Bathsheba Gilbert, both natives to the town of Durham. She was the second daughter of the couple. The first daughter, Elisa Baldwin, was born on June 16, 1836, but sadly passed away September 18, 1840, when Mary was only eight months old. She had a half sibling, Cadwell A. Baldwin, born on May 31, 1835.
Mary’s father, Anson Curtis Baldwin, had been previously married to Elizabeth Cadwell, and not long after giving birth to her son, Cadwell, she passed away on June 11, 1835. Anson, somehow in the midst of this tragedy, met Bathsheba Gilbert shortly thereafter and they married. In the collaborative notes section in Anson’s “person” page in FamilySearch shows the date October 7, 1835, alongside Bathsheba’s name, and it could very well mean the date of their marriage. Although without a marital record, it’s hard to verify this possibility.
Anson and Bathsheba had their first child, Elisa, and then Mary.
Tragedy had not only struck Elisa, but it had first struck Bathsheba. She passed away on January 11, 1840, on the very same day that Mary was born. (Find a Grave) And thus explains why on Mary’s christening record, it only mentioned her father. (FamilySearch) It’s hard to imagine the level of pain Anson suffered through all these losses: the death of his first wife and his second wife. Yet, the sorrow did not follow him into old age, for Anson passed away on September 11, 1840, only seven days prior to Elisa’s death. (Find a Grave)
The cause of death is a mystery, but it might’ve had something to do with Anson’s time in the military. In the memorial section for Cadwell A. Baldwin in Find a Grave, it gives this brief mention of Anson’s occupation and lineage:
They [Anson and Elizabeth] died in 1840 and 1835, respectively, Mr. Baldwin having been a captain in the New York State militia. But little is known of his family, except that his father was Curtis Baldwin, who was married on April 15, 1779, to Polly Chitenden, whose ancestry can be traced back to William Chitenden, originally from the parish of Marden, County of Kent, England, where he was born in 1594.
Only eight months old, and so much death had already surrounded Mary. There is little record to inform us about what happened next for both Cadwell, who was only five, and Mary, only an infant. We don’t know if they were separated or they remained together, or if they were taken in by relatives or sent elsewhere entirely. It really is a dismal case, but while there is very little to map out Mary’s own childhood years, she would later play a pivotal role in Sonia’s childhood and livelihood.
Years passed and nothing more is revealed, in terms of records, until 1860, in which Mary was mentioned in that year’s census. She was nineteen and living in the same house with two other families (the Boings and Bascoms), and their servant, Sarah Crandle. Mary was already working as a milliner at the time of the census.
Mary B. Baldwin, United States Census, 1860. FamilySearch.
Then, in the midst of the Civil War, Mary met Charles Hagadorn and they married on December 29, 1863. While the Civil War continued to rage on, the couple had their first child, Cora Hagadorn, occasionally referred to as “Flora”. Cora was born on October 16, 1864, and her brother Charles Hagadorn was born on March 12, 1866.
In the 1880 census, Mary’s profession was listed simply as “Millinery store”. It is unclear if Mary owned her own shop in Elmira, or if she was hired as a milliner by an established shop.
While a milliner apprentice was living with Mary at the time of this census, it’s doubtful that Sonia lived with Mary. FamilySearch.
The tragedy of the 1880 census, however, is that we learn Mary was a widow. Her husband, Charles Hagadorn, passed away on January 19, 1877, and the cause of death is unknown. The only available source for Charles Hagadorn is the 1870 census.
Charles Hagedorn [sic], United States Census, 1870. FamilySearch.
This census provides a wealth of information into their family, the first being that Charles was a clerk, working at a hardware store. Secondly, Mary was wrongly named Emma, but we learn that she was “keeping house” as her occupation, which certainly is a job in itself. Followed by Charles and Mary, their children Flora (aka Cora) and Charles. Their domestic servant, Kate McCarty, was listed as well. The last two members registered under their household is worthy of attention, for both women, Hattie Gilbert and Sarah Sanders, were milliners. Hattie Gilbert was likely a relative of Mary’s mother, given her maiden name, or she was purely a coincidental possessor of the Gilbert surname, while Sarah is virtually unknown, and little is revealed elsewhere.
It is remarkable bearing in mind that two milliners were living with Mary. Even though Mary’s occupation in 1870 was “keeping house”, these women could very well have been her employees, if she indeed had her own shop. Another significant probability is that Mary worked alongside them in her free time to bring extra income, especially since in the millinery trade, women didn’t have to work in hat shops to still make money in the field. In her autobiographical writings, Sonia confessed in doing this quite a bit while she was pregnant with her firstborn, an unnamed son, and with Florence:
Besides working at the shop, she [Sonia] took in private work at home whenever she could get it.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, Chapter Ten
In May 1901, Sonia became pregnant again. She worked in the neighborhood, and they were glad to keep her job open for her. Materials were brought to her house, and they would collect the finished hats in the evening. A substitute milliner was hired until Sonia was able to come back.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, Chapter Eleven.
And she even did it while she worked at Ferle Heller:
Later Klei [Rheinhart Kleiner] & I went for a walk around Flatbush, whilst Mrs. Greene prepared some hats for a customer of the evening—she sometimes makes exceptionally artistic hats herself, aside from the work of the establishment. Good profit—just now she’s getting $60.00 for a couple whose raw material cost only $20.00. Forty simoleons for labour which isn’t in the least repulsive…
H.P. Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, September 29, 1922, Letters to Family and Family Friends, p. 81.
By 1880, Mary reclaimed her occupational role as milliner and would do so officially in the censuses thereafter. Three years later, on March 16, 1883, Sonia was born in Ichnya, Ukraine, and on June 4, 1892, she emigrated to the United States and lived in Elmira with her mother and stepfamily. Due to the harassment from her stepfather, Solomon Moseson, Sonia moved out of his house roughly around the age of thirteen or fourteen between the years 1896 and 1897.
She went to live with the “Balch” family. In my post, “Laya Machat-Smyth: A Girlhood Friend”, I reveal that the “Balch” family was actually the Machat family. Mrs. Machat was a friend of Racille Moseson, Sonia’s mother. Sonia became extremely close with Laya, whose name in the autobiography was changed to Eva. Sonia was prone to changing the names of those she included in her autobiography for fear of legal complications, which, in my personal opinion, was a fear instilled in her by August Derleth. Yet, for the sake of consistency, Mrs. Machat will remain as “Mrs. Balch” in this post so as not to confuse the reader.
When Sonia moved out from her stepfather’s house, Mary was considered the finest milliner in Elmira, and it’s at this time we get the quoted passage above in which Mrs. Balch called Madam Hagadorn. There’s no need to avoid spoilers when we know Sonia’s fate as a talented milliner, and during that phone call between Mrs. Balch and Madam Hagadorn, we get Mary’s response to Mrs. Balch’s question: Could she find room for her?
“But Mrs. Balch,” said Madam Hagadorn, “we do not pay our apprentices the first six months. Also, we usually have them deliver our orders. If the young lady is willing to work six months while learning, we will pay her a small salary after that, according to her ability.
Sonia H. Davis, Two Hearts That Beat as One, Chapter Eight.
For six months, Sonia apprenticed under Mary Bathsheba Hagadorn.
The finest milliner in town took Sonia under her wing and taught her all that she could in that short span of time. It’s unclear how immersed Sonia became in Mary’s life during her apprenticeship. By this point Mary had two very adult children. Cora was thirty-two years old in 1896, and Charles was thirty, both of which were living their own lives. But I can’t help but wonder if they met Sonia at any given moment while visiting their mother at the shop, or if Mary had ever spoken about them to Sonia.
While a marriage certificate has yet to be found, Cora met and married Charles A. Bowman. According to the 1900 census, Charles and Cora had been married for twelve years, indicating they got married in 1888. Charles was a bookkeeper for a bank, as stated in the 1900 census, and living with the couple was Mary, and their servant Mary E. Curtis. It appears that Charles and Cora never had any children.
Cora H. Bowman, United States Census, 1900. FamilySearch.
As for Cora’s brother, Charles Hagadorn, he had enlisted in the military. In the 1900 military and naval population census, he was listed at the top as the Captain of the Field and Staff 23rd Infantry.
Charles Hagadorn, United States Census, 1900. FamilySearch.
He was stationed in Camp Gregg, which is in the province of Pangasinan, Philippines. Little else is given about Charles in that census, and we’re left to wonder about his personal life. It would seem that Charles never married and instead made a career out of the military. After the 1900 military census, the only other mention of Charles is from the Veterans Administration Master Index regarding his death on October 18, 1918. Oddly enough, his residence at the time of death was Elmira, Pennsylvania; however, his death was listed in the Illinois vital record of Deaths and Stillbirths, 1916-1947. I haven’t the slightest idea as to why that’s the case. The cause of death is unknown, but I can only speculate it was somehow related to his service in the military.
FamilySearch.Charles B. Hagadorn, United States, Veterans Administration Master Index, 1917-1940. FamilySearch.
After Sonia’s apprenticeship with Mary, Sonia moved to live on her own in Passaic, New Jersey, and later in New York City. While living in Passaic, she met Samuel Greene in December 1898, marrying him a year later in December 1899. In October 1900, Sonia gave birth to her first child, a son—“a gorgious [sic] baby”. (Sonia to Sidney, Florence, and niece Leonore, August 25, 1964) For the next eight years, Sonia would endure the hardest relationship in her life. She would lose that gorgeous baby boy on January 1901, give birth again to Florence Carol Greene on March 19, 1902, all while she was physically (and psychologically) abused by Samuel. Both Sonia and Florence left Samuel in 1906 and lived in Baltimore for two years. After which, in 1908, Sonia returned to New York City to finally divorce Samuel. With that terrible chapter of abuse behind her, Sonia’s life would change for the better, both personally and professionally.
Sonia would climb the ranks of millinery, ultimately landing the high-paying job at Ferle Heller. As for Mary Baldwin Hagadorn, she, too, continued her own millinery work, even into old age. Sadly, on January 14, 1909, Mary passed away. The cause of death is unknown, and it’s also unknown if Sonia was informed of her death. She passed away only a year after Sonia divorced Samuel, and since Sonia was close with Mrs. Balch and her family, it is quite possible Sonia heard the news from her. We will never truly know if Mary and Sonia ever stayed in touched after the latter’s apprenticeship. What we do know is Mary made an impact in Sonia’s life. Mary’s expertise in millinery helped shape Sonia’s dream into reality, and her willingness to bring an immigrant teenage girl under her wing speaks volumes of Mary’s kindness and patience.
Because music plays such a pivotal role in my writing, I have made this playlist which has inspired the posts for this blog. These are the songs I listen to while drafting my research every month. You may follow it in Spotify, or simply take a listen while learning more about Sonia.
Tonight as I sit at my little desk trying to compose an eloquent address to you, I find that the head gives way to the heart; so that instead of making ambitious flights into the aether of rhetoric, I may only express my profound gratitude to all you spirited and delightful Fellow-amateurs for the joys of this splendid game. In a reminiscent mood, I am looking over some old amateur papers, and scarcely can I find adequate words of praise for each; they are so full of the joy of living and so vibrant with every emotion–love, laughter, joy, and sorrow, and good-natured humor–therefore so alluring and delightful.
Sonia H. Greene, “Amateurdom of the Editor”, in The Rainbow Vol 2, May 1922, p. 19.
Picking up where I left off in last month’s post, I will continue the thread on Sonia’s contribution to amateur journalism. If you have not yet read part one, I’m linking it here, so you may do so. While “Amateurdom and the Editor” focused primarily on Sonia’s entrance into the amateur journalism world, in this continuation we will learn more of Sonia’s journal The Rainbow, her time as president, and her overall literary input in amateur journals.
Sonia joined the United Amateur Press Association (U.A.P.A.) at some point between July 30 and August 11, 1921. Although it would seem the United suited her much better, she did not fail to pass her appreciation to the National Amateur Press Association (N.A.P.A.):
I feel impelled to acknowledge a debt of gratitude to the National Association for introducing me to the United, with its artistic and philosophical atmosphere and highly developed critical facilities.
Sonia H. Greene, “Amateurdom and the Editor”, The Rainbow Vol. 1, October 1921.
In a letter to Rheinhart Kleiner on August 30, 1921, Lovecraft had by this time already returned to Sonia the proofs for the first volume of The Rainbow. The level of swiftness the first volume was produced is rather impressive when considering Sonia’s life at the time. Sonia was working for Ferle Heller, a high-end millinery shop in New York City, and her job was quite extensive. She not only sold hats in the storefront, but she also sold hats at wholesale, traveling city to city to other millinery shops. She also had “charge of 60 girls in the workroom + 12 saleswomen in the showroom”. (Autobiographical Writings Box 9, Folder 7) Due to the demand in her trade, any schoolwork, when she received it as an adolescent and as an adult, was usually set in the back burner. The first excerpt which follows is when Sonia had moved out at the age of thirteen and had begun her millinery apprenticeship under Mary Bathsheba Hagadorn. The second after it, is when Sonia had enrolled at Columbia University, and took the Cultural Course.
The following Monday morning Sonia was situated as an apprentice in the very best shop in town. In the daytime she learned her trade; while in the evening she made arrangements with her teacher to give her the lessons she was missing. Once more she studied at night; but could not possibly keep this up. She was obliged to give up her studies.
Sonia H. Davis, Autobiographical Writings Box 9, Folder 6.
I paid for the books and the course, and was to come back one evening a week for examinations. You may be sure I did not come back very many evenings; but I kept reading on my own account; and, believe it or not…. I actually learned.
Sonia H. Davis, Autobiographical Writings Box 9, Folder 2.
(Side Note: Sonia wrote half of her autobiographical writings in third person, and the other in first person.)
While taking these accounts into consideration, and then knowing that she had only met Lovecraft in July yet having proofs of her amateur journal for him to review by the end of August, is nothing short of phenomenal. How interesting to think that while schoolwork, a necessity to pass a class, would be set aside to be completed at her own timeframe because of her busy schedule as a milliner, but the work involved to produce her amateur journal, such as writing and editing it, would remain constant and in the forefront. For the first issue of The Rainbow, Sonia wrote three essays, two of which are short in length, two poems, one book review, and one short letter. Which is not an unreasonable amount of work, but still very impressive. It’s probably for this very reason why it was believed she created the journals in order to impress Lovecraft:
Just previous to his coming to Brooklyn, and no doubt as part of her campaign to impress herself upon Lovecraft, his wife-to-be had issued an elaborate number of an amateur magazine, The Rainbow.
Rheinhart Kleiner, “A Memoir of Lovecraft”, in Something About Cats and Other Pieces, Sauk City: Arkham House, 1949, p. 224.
Whatever the reason, The Rainbow is certainly a beautiful amateur journal. The two volumes are tastefully done with soft textured covers and photographs of each person who contributed to it. Much of its beauty lends proof to the state of her finances. Because of her position in Ferle Heller, Sonia was earning nearly $10,000 a year, which in a field such as amateur journalism which depended heavily on donations to help publish the journals, certainly gave Sonia creative and financial liberties to spend generously on the production of The Rainbow. The first volume contains contributions from Alfred Galpin, James F. Morton Jr., H.P. Lovecraft, Rheinhart Kleiner, and Samuel Loveman. The theme of the volume is primarily philosophical and focuses on Friedrich Nietzsche and his writings.
The second volume is geared more toward art and its misconceptions culturally and occupationally. This issue is slightly larger in comparison to the first, 8 x 11 rather than 7 x 10, yet still possessing the same high-grade quality as its predecessor. It contains additional articles from Alfred Galpin, James F. Morton Jr., Samuel Loveman, and the short story, Celephaïs, by H.P. Lovecraft. Other literary pieces included are by B.C. and W.C. Brightrall, Betty Jane Kendall, Edith Miniter, Lilian Middleton, and Maurice W. Moe.
The Rainbow was quite a praiseworthy venture. In Rheinhart Kleiner’s amateur paper, The Piper, he wrote:
In Mrs. Sonia H. Greene, of Brooklyn, amateur journalism has gained an ardent recruit. She has already contributed generously to the official organ fund of both associations, and the first issue of her own paper, THE RAINBOW, has just appeared. So practical a demonstration of zeal for the welfare of our hobby is seldom obtained from a new member, and if Mrs. Greene continues as she has begun the republic of amateur letters may well call that day blessed which first saw her induction into the ranks.
“At Random”, The Piper, No. 5, January 1922, p. 2.
In the National Amateur 44, No. 4, Lovecraft wrote:
Easily the foremost of all the current amateur output, and unquestionably the most brilliant first issue of any paper within the present critic’s recollection, is the October Rainbow; edited and published by Mrs. Sonia H. Greene. Mrs. Greene, though a very recent recruit, has absorbed the amateur spirit with amazing speed; and possesses a very high conception of the duty of the individual to the institution. As a result she has become almost at once a leader, and has put forth a publication not only distinguishing her but assisting substantially in the advancement of amateur letters.
Unlike the average amateur paper, The Rainbow is not a haphazard collection of all the available manuscripts of the period, or yet a weary chronicle of trivial gossip and social insipidities. Mechanically dazzling and impeccable with its iridescent cover, numerous illustrations, and pleasing paper and typography, it nevertheless derives its chief claim to notice from its intellectual policy and carefully chosen contents. The Rainbow, in a word, represents a genuinely artistic and intelligent attempt to crystallise homogeneously a definite mood as handled by many writers. The mood is that of enlightened liberalism and civilised honesty and independence of thought; nor is its atmosphere lost even for a moment, despite several agreeable interludes of lighter nature. From the briefest item to the longest article and most ambitious poem there is uniformly sustained a tone of freedom and revolt against the stultifying lies, stupidities, hypocrisies, and mental narcotics of the conventional age which we are only now beginning to shake off.
[…]
Mrs. Greene’s own contributions to The Rainbow are of varied and representative nature. “Mors Omnibus Communis” is a poem vital with the tragedy and mockery of existence. “Amateurdom and the Editor” is a graceful editorial column in which the objects of amateurdom are re-stated with much power and piquancy. “Idle Idyls” and kindred personalities exhibit the editor as a brilliant and fraternal commentator, while the column headed “Philosophia” displays a vision and sense of proportion gratifying in an age as unsettled as this. Mrs. Greene is a thinker with much to say, and with a fast-growing power to say it effectively.”
H.P. Lovecraft, The Collected Essays: Amateur Journalism, ed. S.T. Joshi, New York: Hippocampus Press, 2004, pp. 310-312.
While the praise came in, so did the criticism. Sonia’s piece, “Opinion”, in the second volume of The Rainbow was criticized by Paul Livingston Keil. Keil wrote under the pseusonym “Pauke” and was the editor of Pauke’s Quill. It was in Pauke’s Quill, where Keil published his thoughts on Sonia’s article. Unfortunately, I was unable to find “Opinion Versus Fact”, but I am including Sonia’s original piece, “Opinion”, followed by her rebuttal, “Fact Versus Opinion”.
The Rainbow, Vol. 2, No. 2, May 1922, p. 3
Transcription:
OPINION
Several of THE RAINBOW’S correspondents have seen fit to take exception to the philosophical views of some of the contributors to the first number, as if there were one stereotyped set of opinions in the world, which everyone should endorse without thinking for himself.
Upon such persons the editor would urge a broader point of view, involving a recognition of the fact that sincerity is the only criterion we may universally apply in such a case. Any attempt to conform opinion to popular prejudice would rob it of this one paramount virtue. It should further be remembered that philosophical opinion has nothing to do with aesthetic quality. To condemn an author because he holds certain views is the height of absurdity. As an author he is not governed by these views at all, but by his artistic imagination. At most, the opinions merely suggest a background; and in the case of the purely aesthetic writer this background is seldom a literal application of any set of beliefs. Often the same author will base different works of art on different theories.
So we judge an artist’s work of imagination only by purely aesthetic criteria. If the work is intense, vivid, simple, and poignant, it is good.
When the writer expresses an opinion he leaves the realm of art and becomes another character. He then deals in intellectual instead of aesthetic matters, and must be judged by an entirely new set of standards. Do not try to find in his plain statements and hypotheses any of the airy stuff from which his dreams are made. If the writing is sincere, analytical, logical, and forcible, it is good.
Readers as well as authors need mental discipline. We must all strive for breadth, discernment, objectivity, and impartiality; so that when we praise or blame we may know why we do so, and may confine our sentiments to regions where they are legitimately applicable.
Transcription:
FACT VERSUS OPINION
It is regrettable to find the possessor of a strong right arm, who could be so potent in advancing art and truth, employing his strength in the obstruction of ideas and the defence of narrow and obsolete notions. Such, however, seems to be the case with the youthful editor of Pauke’s Quill, who in his article “Opinion Versus Fact” takes it upon himself to misunderstand and misinterpret with curious completeness my remarks on “Opinion” in The Rainbow for May, 1922.
Mr. Keil jauntily refutes so much which was entirely absent from the editorial he purports to criticise, that one is somewhat in doubt how to begin a reply! I think, though, that attention ought first to be called to the fact that if our young critic had read the editorial with any amount of care and intelligence, he could not possibly have perpetrated the cumbrous sentence in which he charges me with stating that “there is no or very little connection between the style of an author and what he has to say.” To attribute this view to one with my aesthetic opinions is proof of Mr. Keil’s meagre comprehension of the whole subject.
What I did say, and what I repeat as a basic principle of art, is that an author’s philosophy has nothing to do with the aesthetic quality of his work. Surely this conveys a very different idea from the one which Mr. Keil so ingeniously manufactured. It is a principle which should be obvious to anyone with the least understanding of the nature of art; and few things are more easy to understand than that art is simply depiction and expression, whose merit depends solely and exclusively on the success of the artist in making his medium convey what he wishes to convey. What the artist wishes to convey is absolutely immaterial. He is free to choose, and equally great works of art have arisen from diametrically opposite conceptions of life. The one criterion of art is its perfection—the perfection with which the creator carries out whatever design he has selected.
Mr. Keil’s whole critique, it is to be feared, forms something of a replica of his impoverished and beautifully irrelevant metaphor anent a surface of black paint as a night scene. Like such a night scene, it doesn’t show anything; or at least not anything but darkness, as manifested in the blandly dogmatic pronouncements on the “real purpose of authorship” and the cocksure corollary that “it is logical and obvious that the philosophical opinions of the writer must (the italics are Mr. Keil’s) be considered in judging an author, always.”
The fallacy of Mr. Keil lies in his utter and inextricable confusion of art and intellect. He believes that the artist, like the philosopher, deals in ideas; whereas in truth impressions are the only legitimate materials of art. “Literature,” says Arthur Machen through one of his characters, “is the sensuous art of causing exquisite impressions by means of words.” Facts are excellent things in their place; but they have not the remotest connection with aesthetic expression.
In his violent challenging of this truth—which has certainly been placed by all literary history, emotional experience and psychological investigation upon as firm a basis as any other admitted “fact”—Mr. Keil reveals a bias and bigotry which warn us not to take him too seriously in all his assertions.
Need one cast about for concrete examples? Wilde is always with us—and who seeks to correlate his philosophy with the widely contradictory manifestations of his art? An artist may be defiantly pagan, yet paint in his love of beauty a madonna [sic] and child which all the aesthetic world will acclaimed as perfect; while a pious, conventional and passionate believer may fail in depicting the simplest violet or daisy of whose celestial workmanship and mystical symbolism he is so fervently convinced. A sculptor may reject all philosophy, and refuse to question the universe, yet be able to mould figures of divinely breathing beauty. Nor can literature be classed apart from its sister arts—for the purer it is, the closer it approaches their harmonies and plasticity. Who would seek for Poe’s opinions and beliefs amidst the multicolored ecstacies [sic] of his strange and tortured genius?
Sometimes a writer, like the Russians of a few decades ago, may be by nature a propagandist, and tend to make his dramatis personae mere mouthpieces of opinion. Familiar indeed is the novel of intellectual debate, with the author’s voice but thinly concealed in the tones of his hero or heroine, or of some subtler character. But these things are not primarily works of art at all. They are philosophical tracts, and when they possess art it is not in the central plan, but in occasional touches of coloring and characterization where the author happily forgot his homiletic role. The actual artist does not concern himself with petty human problems and their unravelling, but strives simply to bring to the reader’s imagination beautiful things beautifully created.
Mr. Keil would gain a clearer general perspective by considering the striking contrasts between philosophy and performance, with which life abounds. He should realize how many authors, while viewing the world and its futile struggles with the utmost coldness, sanity and objectivity, paint spirited idyllic pastorals or hectic and glamorous metropolitan scenes with perfect naturalness and success; how many sincere prohibitionists maintain well-stocked cellars; or how many tireless workers for rational motherhood and child welfare are solitary spinsters. I reiterate, and I believe the facts of thought and existence sustain me, that to condemn an author because he holds certain views is the height of absurdity.
The concluding ex cathedra paragraph where Mr. Keil so grandiosely divides ideas into facts and opinions is something which takes us altogether outside the domain of art. It is, nevertheless, worth refuting as philosophy; since it represents so pathetically narrow and obsolete a system of metaphysics. The bald truth is that Mr. Keil has been absolutely untouched by the thought of the last half-century, and that he still accepts the conventional beliefs of former times as unquestioned certainties. He should learn that there are no such things as absolute values or universal facts outside the elemental sphere of chemical and physical action; and that virtually all the standards governing human life and effort are just what he insists they are not—“merely the collective beliefs of the majority” acquired through the interpretation, sometimes sensible and sometimes fallacious, of the race’s experience during its remote formative period. All human beliefs are opinions, and nothing more; valuable only so far as they continue to satisfy us regarding the phenomena forming our visible world.
“Opinion pitched against fact,” far from being worthless, is really the greatest of all forces in the advance of civilization. There is not a barbarous, degrading or fallacious idea of the past whose abolition has not begun with the untiring and concerted efforts of a small minority with strange “opinions” that contradicted the accepted “facts” of the bovine majority. But for “opinion pitched against fact,” witches would still be burned in the market-place, slaves sold on the wharves, and minds fettered with the notions of a flat earth and Ptolemaic universe.
I firmly believe that the opinion of the thoughtful, fearless and cultivated minority is in most cases more likely to be correct than the blindly inherited and clumsily unanalyzed view of the superficial throng. The past too often shows it—and shows how the throng itself will some day accept and enjoy with belated gratitude the “errors” for which its members now chide the struggling minority. But this is very trite.
What must be emphasized as a final word is that Mr. Keil represents both aesthetically and philosophically a degree of unreflective naivete, confusion and dogmatism which argues either extreme youth or deep-seated backwardness. Fortunately the cause in this particular instance seems to be extreme youth; so that we may reasonably expect from our energetic disputer a steady progress in breadth and logic. His zeal for an artistic and intellectual Amateurdom deserves the highest praise; and if we challenge his present utterances, it is only that he may be aroused to new vistas mutually profitable to himself and to amateur letters.
—Sonia H. Greene
It is hard to objectively deconstruct the misunderstanding on Keil’s part when half of the argument is gone. Sonia’s intention in “Opinion” was quite simple, separating the artist from his or her beliefs when creating art. An artist creates solely because they wish to produce beautiful things that go beyond the confinement of one’s philosophy. Art does not exclude, because when an artist creates, he or she is moved by the imagination, by the desire to manifest what is intangible into what is tangible. It is not about going into art with a secret agenda to broadcast one’s beliefs or political stance, although there is a time and place for this kind of theme within art’s creation. Sonia does so well in conveying this point throughout “Fact Versus Opinion”. It’s quite possible due to the length of “Opinion” that Sonia’s point was entirely missed by Keil, and perhaps, if she had elaborated in greater detail like she did in “Fact Versus Opinion”, there might not have been any criticism or rebuttal.
While Wikipedia is obviously not a reliable source, “Fact Versus Opinion” is not an editorial against censoring pornography, as it is stated in Wikipedia. This mistake likely arises from the fact that in the same volume of The Oracle, where Sonia’s “Fact Versus Opinion” appears, Lovecraft wrote “The Omnipresent Philistine”, which was an editorial against censorship. Keil and Lovecraft had a disagreement over this issue, and thus “The Omnipresent Philistine” was written to prove the particular dangers of censorship on art, literature, and the like.
The Oracle is merely one journal in which Sonia contributed, aside from her two issues of The Rainbow, and certainly not the last.
In July 1923, Sonia was unknowingly elected president of the U.A.P.A. Yet, she did not find out until September of that year of her having been elected. No doubt overwhelmed by the sudden responsibility, Sonia sent a note to Lovecraft, “asking to be relieved of the unexpected & cataclysmic presidential burden,” but he wrote back, “urging her to hang on for dear life”. (Lovecraft to James F. Morton, Letters to James F. Morton, p. 55)
She did just that, and addressed the members of the U.A.P.A. as their president:
Three months ago, out of the chaos of disorganization into which the society had fallen, I received belated notification of my election to the Presidency of the United Amateur Press Association. Prompt visible action was impossible, because of the utter administrative inefficiency and absence of records; but despite all obstacles I have decided to bend every energy towards an intensive restoration during the latter half of the executive year—January 1, 1924 to July, 1924. That period has now arrived, and as the need for universal co-operation becomes more definite, I wish to call attention to what we have been able to do, and to what we still require so urgently.
Our present official board, as elected and appointed, is as follows:
President, Sonia H. Greene; 1st V.P., Harry N. Lehmkuhl; 2nd V.P., Stella V. Kellerman; SECRETARY-TREASURER, EDGAR J. DAVIS, 100 HUNTINGTON AVE., Suite 3, BOSTON, MASS. Official Editor, H.P. Lovecraft; Official Publisher, W. Paul Cook; Historian, Wilfred B. Talman, Laureate Recorder, Arthur F. Ziegfeld; Manuscript Manager, Paul G. Trueblood; Supervisor of Amendments, John Y. Piersol; Directors, Messrs. Conover and Mazurewicz, and Mrs. Moitoret.
Several issues of the UNITED AMATEUR are planned, but their preparation has so far been hindered by delay in obtaining any report of the 1923 Convention, or of the present state of the membership list. There is now in the Official Organ Fund $49.66 in cash, remaining from the year 1921-22. This will ably launch the current UNITED AMATEUR, but for its maintenance till July further contributions will be required. Substantial funds are guaranteed by both President and Official Editor, but such will prove of small permanent value unless backed by generous donations from all members able to make them. As before, the Custodian of the Fund, to whom all remittances should be sent, is H.P. Lovecraft, 598 Angell St., Providence, R.I.
Recruiting machinery is slowly forming, and will be more definitely described in my first regular report. Meanwhile let me urge all members to be particularly prompt and conscientious about their renewals; carefully remitting to Secretary Davis upon expiration of membership, whether or not officially notified. Notifications must necessarily be lax until Mr. Davis can secure the records. Former members who receive this circular are urged to reinstate at once, and any persons willing to serve on the recruiting committees will confer a great favor by writing me to that effect.
Our objects in this work of restoration are very simple. We want, if it is humanly possible, to re-create the United as a purely aesthetic force; a stimulus to literary beginners of real ability, which will give them practical and immediate help in their chosen field without waste of energy in such directions as commercialism, stagnant dabbling, or social frivolity. We want to serve aspirants, crude or advanced, who sincerely desire “to write perfectly of beautiful happenings”; [sic]
My task is to keep things moving until July, when a new fiscal year will bring new leaders. Co-operate by writing, reviewing, publishing, recruiting, and shouldering responsibility. Shall we prove equal to our respective assignments? Let us hope so, for upon us in these months rests the main hope of literary amateur journalism.
Hopefully and Fraternally yours,
SONIA H. GREENE
A month after having been notified about her presidency, Sonia attended the fifteenth anniversary celebration of the Blue Pencil Club.
The Chat, October 6, 1923, p. 13. Source: Newspapers.com
While “Opinion” in The Rainbow (Vol. 2) was released in May 1922, her article “Fact Versus Opinion” in The Oracle (Vol. 4, No. 3) was released in May 1924. By this time, Sonia was married to Lovecraft, and they were living together. In Lovecraft’s letters, little is mentioned about amateur journalism and/or the work involved in Sonia’s presidency during this period of their marriage. What we do learn through his letters to his aunts, however, is about the hardships that Lovecraft and Sonia went through in 1924.
Whatever the reason for her departure from Ferle Heller, Sonia decided to open her own hat shop at some point between the spring and early summer of 1924. The business venture failed miserably, and since Sonia was the sole financial provider, their household took quite a hit because of it. Then, on October 21, 1924, Sonia was hospitalized for gallbladder pains.
After being released from the hospital on Halloween, Sonia began searching for work, and ultimately finding an opening in Mabley & Carew in Cincinnati, Ohio, Sonia left for the job on December 31, 1924. Sonia returned to New York on February 26, 1925, on the grounds that she “has at last found the hostile & exacting atmosphere of Mabley & Carew’s intolerable”. (Letters to Family and Friends 1.254.) In the midst of all this health and occupational chaos, her presidency in amateurdom was the last thing on her mind, and she reveals as much in the following excerpt.
In July 1925, Sonia addressed the members of the U.A.P.A in the “President’s Message” column of the United Amateur 24, No. 1. Only this time it was to give her resignation.
Transcription:
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
169 Clinton St., Brooklyn, N.Y.
June 16, 1925
Dear Fellow-Amateurs:—
It is once again my fate to address a membership who must be almost sceptical of the continued existence of the United, and to express the profound regret which I feel at this lapse of activity. Last year’s appeal for reconstruction, lacking both the spontaneous co-operation of our personnel as a whole and the endorsement of any leader with requisite health and time for its practical promotion, proved a futile one; though I must here thank most sincerely those few who did respond to my messages and apologise most profoundly to those whose responses seem to have been inadequately acknowledged. Outside responsibilities of unexpected magnitude, together with a failing health which culminated in my autumn sojourn at the Brooklyn Hospital, cut me off hopelessly from amateur work during the summer of 1924; a disastrous interregnum whose effects proved too profound to be shaken off during the balance of the year, especially since my energy and leisure have even since then been but fractional. The main result of this condition has been to make impossible a 1924 election, and thus to effect the holding-over of the present official board another year. Though arising primarily from the inability of the officers, this circumstance throws a sadly illuminating ray on the apathetic state of the general membership.
Possibilities of Revival
We must acknowledge, then, that the one paramount business of the United at present is simply to fight doggedly for its existence if it deems that existence worth preserving. Our society is not alone in its enfeebled state. Others, complaining of the same symptoms in varying degree, have proposed a final consolidation of all surviving amateur bodies; in order that the few remaining active souls in each society may be linked in one combined burst of desperate team-work for the perpetuation of amateurdom as an institution. This may or may not be necessary in the end; but even with such a plan as a goal it is essential that we restore our balance and functioning for the time being, if only for the purposes of intelligent negotiation. I, myself, am not inclined to endorse the idea of union except as a very last resort; since I believe that the aesthetically helpful qualities peculiar to the United would be vitally impaired if mingled with the attributes of more social and frivolous organizations. The United is too unique in its province to sacrifice its identity lightly; rather ought we to investigate closely our causes of decline, and seek to repair them in our own way. My own strangely doubled term, of course, is now at an end; and whatever revival is effected will be the work of the incoming board. I believe that the great necessity is the succession to active leadership of an entirely new generation; youthful, ambitious, unjaded, and possessed of sufficient interest and spare time to work with an intensity which to our present middle-aged leaders must naturally seem almost fabulous and inconceivable. Given one or two young and active spirits, we may reasonably hope for an influx of kindred recruits through their propaganda; and expect in the end a United restored to something like its former freshness and vitality. Our mistake has been in not demanding and enforcing the transfer of power from those whom outside affairs make less and less free to wield it properly, to younger hands eager and well-fitted for its exercise. This mistake we trust to see rectified in a mail election planned with the greatest conscientiousness and saved by energetic action from the fate of last year’s proposed election.
The Election
In the absence of a Convention, I have declared July 15th as the date for a general election by mail; ballots for which are soon to be received by the members. On account of Secretarial difficulties, we are still uncertain as to the status of many whose names appear on our rolls; hence will distribute the ballots as widely as possible, asking that the recipients enclose a dollar to the Secretary for extension of membership when any doubt exists. Duplicate ballots are to be mailed to the Secretary, Edgar J. Davis, 100 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Mass., and originals to the Custodian of Ballots, George W. Kirk, care Martin’s Book Store, 97 Fourth Avenue, New York, N.Y. Both must be mailed in sealed and labelled envelopes in time to reach their recipients by the appointed date, July 15, 1925. Upon the counting and checking up of the votes, the result will be announced in due season; either by special bulletin or in THE UNITED AMATEUR. Every effort will be made by judicious and impartial workers to provide one or more sets of willing and competent candidates; while of course the voters are free to choose any qualified persons whom they may deem suitable for the elective offices. These offices now are President, First and Second Vice-Presidents, Laureate Recorder, Historian, Manuscript, Manager, and three Directors. A 1926 Convention Seat will likewise be chosen.
Past Details
Efforts to obtain records of the 1923 Milwaukee convention having come to nothing, I have decided to let the matter rest; or at least, to leave it for future archaeologists and palaeographers to adjust and embody in whatever chronicles they may wish to keep. Laureate awards for 1924 and 1925, likewise, are out of the question; it being understood that the 1923 winners retain their titles till fresh ones are awarded in 1926.
Secretarial
Members are urged to let nothing interfere with their renewals and reinstatements, or with the recruiting of truly suitable novices; continuing to address applications to Secretary Davis until the appointment of a successor on the new board. Patience is recommended in cases of delayed acknowledgment, for our convalescing Secretary is sorely overburdened with matter accumulating during his long typhoid siege at the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital, from which he has only recently emerged.
Official Organ
Lack of cash has circumvented the regular issuance of THE UNITED AMATEUR, so that in view of all conditions it was thought best to delay the present single unmber [sic] until the last, as a herald and auxliiary [sic] in the reconstructive campaign of next year’s board. Vastly more liberal support will be necessary if the coming volume is to be of any size and frequency; and I urge upon everyone a share in the maintenance of a sinking fund for its financing—unofficial if no official arrangement of the sort is formulated by the incoming editor. The official organ is the life of the United, and its preservation is the first requisite to general survival. The fund, which was used wholly up in the printing and mailing of the May, 1924, issue, ($52.00) now stands at $39.50. The following voluntary contributions are to be noted:
J.E. Hoag…………… $5.00
Eugene B. Kuntz……. $1.00
Activity
Of activity during the year there is, of course, little to report; and one must give double commendation to the few who have remained faithful. Mr. Paul Livingston Keil is about to isue [sic] a new number of his attractive journal; and a Liberal from Mr. Paul J. Campbell is expected soon. More publications form the crying need of the time; and it is fervently to be hoped that the new board will be able to devise some means for their endowment or stimulation, in printed, multigraphed, or any other imaginable form. Even the “pass-around” manuscript magazine is by no means to be despised in these lean days, if a sufficient number of carbon copies are set in circulation.
Conclusion
So, regretfully conscious of the amateur hiatus which my extended term was unable to redeem, I take my leave of an office whose duties deserved a more active occupant. My basic views on amateurdom and its province remain unchanged, and I still hope to see the United, under younger and brisker leadership, strengthening its position as a force for the inspiration of the sincere, non-academic literary novice. Enough time has elapsed since the last busy period to sink all factional feelings into one conjoined solicitude for the Association as a whole; and it is my keenest wish that I may witness during the coming year the birth of a new epoch of organisation, development, artistic endeavour, and critical thoroughness.
Sincerely yours,
SONIA H. GREENE LOVECRAFT,
President.
There are a few things worth noting in Sonia’s message.
Sonia’s introductory sentence brings our attention to the fact that this is in all likelihood the second time Sonia addressing the members as a whole. The only other time we have factual evidence of her addressing the members is her letter in late 1923, when she had been recently notified of her election. In comparing her 1923 president letter to her 1925 president’s message, we’re able to see that not much had changed with the U.A.P.A during the span of those two years. While one piece of writing possesses the motivation to accomplish, the other possesses a sense of defeat. In her 1923 letter, Sonia had hoped to achieve a restoration of the U.A.P.A. from January 1, 1924, to July 1924, which was her actual term as president.
However, in her 1925 message, she reveals a sense of failure for not having achieved the restoration, and the reason was because of her health and ultimately her hat shop which failed. It was also these reasons why her term as president was extended into 1925. The failure, however, didn’t just fall entirely on Sonia and her personal hardships. Clearly, due to the disorganization of the U.A.P.A, Sonia was ill-prepared for her position. The U.A.P.A. was heading toward disintegration, and it clearly shows in how Sonia was elected for a responsibility she had not willingly sought to obtain, then let alone to not be notified about it in a timely manner. Yet, Sonia still put on a brave face and sincerely tried to make the best of the hand she was dealt with.
Throughout her term as president, however, the affairs of the U.A.P.A would only keep making matters worse. Stated both in her 1923 letter and then in her 1925 “President’s Message”, she was unable to obtain the necessary report to help with publication, which after nearly two years of trying to acquire and never receiving it is ample proof of the terrible state in which the U.A.P.A really was at that time. Then, there was the fault of the “machinery”. This, too, was another underlying reason for the failed attempt of restoration, which is mentioned both in Sonia’s 1923 letter and then in Lovecraft’s “Editorial” in 1925, which was printed alongside Sonia’s “President’s Message”. Sonia called it “recruiting machinery” while Lovecraft declared “sheer indifference has stalled the replacement machinery”. (“Editorial”, United Amateur 24, No. 1, July 1925, p. 8.)
While it’s not a literal machine, “machinery” in this context is meant to imply the membership of the organization, who were to help bring new members into the group. Since the membership were slow to recruit, there was little funds to secure a printer, and without a printer, volumes wouldn’t be published, and without publications, there wouldn’t be a readership and without a readership, no renewals. It’s easy to see why this system is termed “machinery”, and why its very necessity to thrive is of the utmost importance.
Yet, even with the sad state of her concluding presidency, Sonia still believed a revival for the U.A.P.A. was possible. She had hoped the new board would bring about this change, especially if young members were voted in. Hope is never vain, but in this case, her hope for a revival was indeed futile. Edgar J. Davis would take her place as president for the year 1926-1927. He was the Secretary-Treasurer from 1923 to 1925, and according to Sonia’s message above, he appeared to have been hospitalized for typhoid, which seemed to have caused some delay in things once more.
Nonetheless, Sonia’s resignation as president couldn’t come at a better time.
When she wrote her “President’s Message” on June 16, 1925, Sonia had just returned from Saratoga Springs, N.Y., where she had stayed for a couple of weeks to recover from the lingering gallbladder pains from October 1924. Moreover, by the time the journal was published in July, Sonia was heading back to Ohio to begin her new job in the millinery department at Halle Brothers Co. in Cleveland.
The United Amateur, Vol. XXIV, No. 1, July 1925, p. 12.
One thing of interest that has been recently brought to my attention by Dave Goudsward and Bobby Derie is that while Sonia had resigned as president from the U.A.P.A. in 1925, it appears that Sonia was part of the new board of 1926-1927. Sonia was a Director alongside Frank Belknap Long and Maurice W. Moe. The general consensus though seems to be that Lovecraft simply put down Sonia as a Director on paper, while not entirely holding her to the position. Although it’s quite a mystery.
The United Amateur Vol. XXV, No. 2, May 1926, p. 4.
The truth is, Sonia would walk away from amateur journalism in 1926. In May 1926, both Lovecraft and Sonia resigned from the Blue Pencil Club, closing yet another chapter in Sonia’s part in amateurdom. In 1927, she did, however, write a heartfelt reminiscence of Hazel Pratt Adams, who passed away on August 6, 1927.
In Memoriam Hazel Pratt Adams, 1927, p. 14.
After this, Sonia’s contribution to amateur journalism stopped entirely. It did not mean the end of her allegiance to its mission. While living in Los Angeles, Sonia resumed her friendship with Wheeler Dryden, who was also a fellow amateur, and also who, according to Sonia, was visiting when her husband, Nathaniel A. Davis was rushed to the hospital on the night Nathaniel died. Sonia would return to amateurdom after Nathaniel’s death and remain faithful to it for the rest of her life. She attended the 73rd annual convention of N.A.P.A. in July 1948 at the Hotel Mayfair, Los Angeles. In July 1953, Sonia then attended the Milwaukee convention.
The Fossils, Vol. XLVI, No. 2, October 1948.
Because of her return to amateurdom and the rising star of Lovecraft, Sonia would have fans, followers, and friends, who would always remember her contribution to amateur journalism. We see this acknowledged in her letter addressed to the old and new members of amateurdom who remembered her on her 81st birthday and even during her hardships with her health.
Series 1, Subseries, Correspondence, 1938-1971, Box 1, Folder 2, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.
Transcription:
A GRATEFUL LETTER FROM SONIA
Dear Members of the United Amateur Press Association:
Although it has been a very long time since I have made a contribution to the “BUNDLE”, I would certainly be delinquent—regardless of my illness—if I did not make one at this time. Very few pages are now to be found in the “Bundle” but every time I receive one it is so welcome!
After almost fifteen months in the Hospital and still under Doctor’s care is hardly an excuse for my silence; especially since I’ve been remembered on my eighty first (81) birthday by so many kind UAPers and many dear friends. GOD BLESS THEM.
If at this time I name but a few I trust that the entire membership will feel included; and a very hearty welcome to all new members. Dr. W.J. Thompson and dear Mrs. Thompson have been particularly generous with their personal visits and his many letters of encouragement and prayers from my recovery; and his wonderful literary contributions to the Bundle each month is something I am sure every reader enjoys.
Grace Moss Weitman is another great and wonderful friend who never forgets my birthdays and all holidays, for which I am very grateful, as I am, also, to the many friends whom I met at several Conventions; the last one having been in Milwaukee in 1953, which I shall always remember.
There are so many more to whom I owe my gratitude; Nona Spath who arranged a wonderful evening for me at her home in 1958 when I visited my late sister; also my very charming friend and UAPer, Dr. Belle S. Mooney, who also arranged a wonderful day for me and our friend, Minnie Mills Neal; Dr. Mooney was so young and chipper that I hardly recognized her as she came stepping down the hall of the hotel where I was waiting for her at the appointed hour. This, too, was in 1958; a cold, nippy morning, when Dr. Mooney invited us both to breakfast and later to a wonderful dinner; and, of course, plenty of reminiscences! This was in Kansas City where I had a day’s stop-over privilege.
Now I pick up at random the rest of my birthday cards; to whom I owe many thanks for remembering my eighty-first birthday. Jolly Bea Dragin, whom I met at Nona’s home. Dear Olive Gilbert, whom I met at the Milwaukee Convention and with whom I have had some pleasant correspondence. Charles and Ione Beers, who came to see me several times while I was very ill, both at home and in the hospital; Marshal Hood, whom I have never had the pleasure of meeting but is a welcome member of UAPA; Mr. and Mrs. William Wallace Ellis who became very good friends of mine and whom I met at the Milwaukee Convention; since then we have had some pleasant correspondence, and whose poems are gems of art. Ella Laufenberg, whom I met at the Milwaukee Convention, visited me in Des Plaines, in 1953. The rains came down in torrents but she would not stay over until the following day although my late sister and I urged profusely; she said she had some special commitments whose presence required that she go back to Milwaukee that night.
Earnest Evans is another gentleman whom I had never met but he was very kind to send me some encouraging poems to get well. If I had left out any UPAers, please forgive me, but I trust you will feel included in my sincere appreciation.
May the good Lord bless all of you with much good.
Sonia H. Davis
This grateful letter from Sonia raises some questions. Why does she address the letter to the members of the U.A.P.A? Especially when we know the U.A.P.A. collapsed not long after her presidency. Is Bundle an amateur journal? And if so, just how much did Sonia contribute to it? Was this letter published in the Bundle? These are questions that don’t have answers to them yet, but worth considering the possibilities.
Because amateur journalism is so vast, especially with it being associated with Lovecraft, Sonia could very well be mentioned in more journals than what I’ve covered. This post, despite its length, is likely only covering the figurative tip of the iceberg, or perhaps I’ve covered all the bases. I doubt it’s the latter. The good thing is the search continues, and with it, we’ll get to learn just a little more about Sonia, and her contribution to amateur journalism.
You have my version, as my dear late mother told it to me…
Sonia to Christine D. Hathaway, March 6, 1968.
I’ve made it no secret that I’ve been working on a timeline for Two Hearts That Beat as One, and with such a task at hand, I was able to delve more deeply in the finer details of Sonia’s life. While constructing the timeline, I focused on materials that I would not have otherwise incorporated in the autobiography. I wanted to build a timeline that was both exhaustive and concrete. It certainly wasn’t easy, but what came out of it was meaningful and provided a newfound appreciation for the life and legacy of Sonia H. Davis.
My original reason for creating the timeline was because of my over compulsiveness as a storyteller. The events described in her autobiographical writings lacked dates and were far from being organized, making each placement of accounts difficult or sometimes impossible to arrange them where they inherently belong. The perfect example would be The Private Life of H.P. Lovecraft, in which the memories are jumbled up and it’s hard at times to differentiate when the moments precisely occurred.
Hence why the last month and a half was devoted specifically to what I called the “HPL Years”, because it was just that, I was working solely on the years between Lovecraft and Sonia. Much of my work involved annotating, which, because of my sourcing other materials to verify the narrative, I was then obliged to rearrange certain recollections to fit in their rightful order. Yet, there still remained scenes where they were irrevocably out of place, and could no longer be moved elsewhere. Thus, the timeline was created. It was also because of this adamant attention to the finer details that brought another marriage to the forefront.
The “HPL Years” is , in reality, a smaller detail taken out of a larger picture.
This is a part of Sonia’s life that has been under the microscope for far too long, and there are other “years” to this life that have been denied that same microscopic attention. Granted, it all comes down to interest and target audience. However, it was in this “timeline” state of mind that I learned more intimately about Sonia’s mother, Racille, aka Rachel Moseson—specifically about her marriage to Solomon Moseson. Although Sonia divulged generous accounts of the marriage, I discovered additional tidbits about the rocky relationship and it was through the lens of newspaper clippings. Before the great advancement of the internet, the newspaper was the printed form of social media, in which its subscribers were given the liberty to publicize their lives to the critical masses. In the case of Solomon and Racille, it’s no different. The clippings provided in this post not only verify the statements made by Sonia, but they also reveal Racille’s loss in which Sonia did not disclose in her autobiographical writings.
Before marrying Solomon Moseson in New York, however, Racille Haft was married to Simyon Shafirkin in Ichnya, Ukraine. It was through Joseph Haft, Racille’s middle brother, that Simyon and Racille met. Despite the disapproval of Moisieh Haft, Racille’s father, Simyon and Racille married around 1881/1882, and on March 16, 1883, Sonia was born. Days after her birth, the young Shafirkin family fled Ichnya at the news of a possible pogrom threatening to sweep through their village, settling permanently at the home of Racille’s parents in Konotop, Ukraine. In 1884, due to the compulsory enlistment throughout the nation, Simyon was obligated to serve in the military upon turning twenty-one. His departure was a sad one for his family—especially for Racille.
Right from the very beginning we are informed of the odds set against Simyon and Racille, but rarely of the treasured memories they shared which made their marriage a beautiful one. Their marriage was from one danger to another and one heartbreak from another. When Racille later relayed everything to Sonia it is quite possible certain particulars were likely forgotten, bunched together, or seemed insignificant to share. Also, because of the length of time which had elapsed from when Racille shared these recollections with Sonia and when Sonia finally wrote it all down, who knows how much more Sonia had forgotten as well.
In 1888, Simyon returned from his service and would sadly leave Racille and Sonia once more. This time, he thought he would seek his livelihood outside of Ukraine and call for Racille and Sonia to wherever he was to find it. Sonia had these words to say about her father, and how accurately they describe him:
Being young and idealistic, he believed that he could find his destiny instead of it,findng [sic] him.
Autobiographical Writings, Box 9, Folder 3.
What neither Simyon nor Racille had expected was for her father to force a divorce upon them, breaking their family apart for good. It is easy to fall into the rabbit-hole of “what ifs” at this crossroad of their story. What if Simyon had chosen his family over seeking work outside of Ukraine? What if Simyon and Racille had stayed together? What if Sonia had her father’s love as she grew up? Their lives would have been drastically different from what we now know it, and I would not be here talking about Sonia and her loved ones.
After the divorce, Racille and Sonia migrated to Liverpool, England, around 1889, and while living there, Racille went with friends to the United States around 1890. Sonia remained behind with her uncles, Harris and Joseph Haft, in Liverpool and attended school. Being wholly different from Ukraine and even from Liverpool, America had a completely liberating way of living. Racille was free here to live without persecution, free to be who she wanted to be, and free to seek the highest education. She decided America was the perfect place to raise Sonia, and with high hopes she set her mind to raise the funds to bring her to the States. It was during this time that Solomon Moseson met Racille, now Rachel.
To this day N.Y.C. is full of marriage bureaus and marriage consultants; and they make it their business to find marriagable [sic] girls and young widows. That’s how Mr. Sol Moseson found my mother.
Sonia to Sidney Moseson and his wife, Florence, August 19, 1964.
This slightly conflicts with what is said in the autobiographical writings, in which Sonia revealed Rachel was not interested in seeking a relationship when she arrived in America. It is unclear if Rachel had joined this supposed marriage bureau, or her name was in a roster of single women. Regardless, Solomon was interested in Rachel. Being fully aware of the persuasion of money, he managed to prey on Rachel’s wish to bring Sonia to America. He courted Rachel with material things rather with genuine affection, promising her a good life.
Around 1891, Rachel married Solomon Moseson and moved to Elmira with him. It is this time when Solomon begins to reveal his true character. Who was formally a generous man, was now suddenly frugal in providing for his loved ones. He was slow to fulfill his promise to Rachel, not only in providing her a good life but in bringing Sonia to America. Yet, after enough persistence, Solomon gave in, and Sonia arrived on June 4, 1892. On September 9, 1892, Rachel gave birth to Anna Moseson, the first child from her new marriage.
On November 1896, however, their marital troubles begin to make headlines.
Star-Gazette, November 10, 1896, p. 8. Source: Newspaper.com
Sadly, it does not come as a surprise when a stepchild may deal with small injustices from a stepparent. It is easy to assume this was the case with Solomon and Sonia, although it just wasn’t so. Sonia not only described the abuse she went through while living under his roof, but she also recounted the abuse he brought upon his own children from his first wife and from Rachel. In 1896/1897, Sonia was forced to move out and live with a family friend because Solomon’s harassment became too much for her to bear.
Thanks to the love and support of this friend, Sonia was given the opportunity to follow her dream in becoming a milliner. She was able to apprentice under Mary Bathsheba Hagadorn, a woman who either ran her own millinery shop or oversaw a shop in Elmira. Inevitably, Sonia finished her apprenticeship and with the assistance of the family friend, Sonia was able to travel to the city to seek work within her trade. In the midst of this, on January 18, 1897, Rachel gave birth to another baby, Sidney Moseson. Sonia loved her half-siblings, and had helped her mother to care for them while she had lived in Elmira.
Sonia, now living on her own, met Samuel Greene on December 24, 1898, marrying him on December 24, 1899. Samuel was a man whose cruel behavior resembled Solomon’s own. In September 1900, one month before Sonia would give birth to her first child, Rachel with her two children, Anna and Sidney Moseson, left Solomon.
Star-Gazette, September 5, 1900, p. 3. Source: Newspaper.com
What is most interesting about these two clippings is that in the first, Solomon was advised to seek a separation from Rachel and failed to do so. And yet, in the second clipping, he openly admitted his lack of care whether she returned to him or not. It’s unclear what his true intention for continuing the marriage was, for evidently, he cared very little about Rachel. Perhaps it was simply his want of control over her, seeing her a possession rather than his wife. Regardless of his reasoning, their troubles would stretch for another 11 years, and it would not be until 1911 when enough would be enough for Rachel.
In the span of those 11 years, though, Sonia had gone through a great deal herself. After losing her first child in January 1901, she gave birth to another baby, Florence Carol Greene, on March 19, 1902. Sonia’s marriage was turbulent—being emotionally and physically abused. In 1906, Sonia and Florence left Samuel, moving first to her mother in law’s home, then to Baltimore. There, they remained for two years, and in 1908, upon Sonia’s request, Rachel came for Florence, and she took her to Elmira. Sonia returned to New York thereafter and divorced Samuel.
In the autobiographical writings, Sonia described going back to Elmira to get Florence and it’s at this time that Rachel also leaves with Sonia to come to New York. She had the intention of leaving him for good. The following newspaper clipping aligns with this truth. However, in the autobiographical writings, Rachel returns to Solomon while the clipping gives the vague impression of her never returning to him.
Rachel was not a native of New York. Star-Gazette, August 21, 1911, p. 11. Source: Newspaper.com
From August 1911 through March 1912, Rachel would go up against Solomon in court for separation and alimony.
Star-Gazette, September 6, 1911, p. 7. Source: Newspaper.comStar-Gazette, March 8, 1912, p. 5. Source: Newspaper.com
Justice is a funny thing, especially in this case. Naturally, the judge would have ruled in favor of Rachel—she had six witnesses while Solomon had only himself, and yet, Rachel lost because of a single mistake on her part. New York had maintained a strict rule over divorce, in which adultery was the only grounds for a divorce, that is until 1966 and later in 2010 when the no-fault law was passed. Abandonment, or desertion, was also taken into consideration. When Rachel began the case against Solomon, she was no longer living with him, giving the judge cause to rule against her. This one mistake costed her greatly, and it’s easy to imagine her sense of defeat, especially when the evidence was on her side. Surprisingly, given the nature of the case, Sonia did not disclose any of the court matter in her autobiographical writings, and it’s unclear if it was because she chose not to, or it slipped her mind.
Martin H. Kopp, the son of Anna (Moseson) Kopp, would later described his recollections of Rachel and even of Solomon, putting it simply:
Apparently, Grandpa was an overpowering, dominating Orthodox man, and here was Grandma, the product of a very cultured, urbane family environment.
“Memories of Sonia H. Greene Davis”, Lovecraft Annual, p. 28.
Surely, there’s still more to be learned about the marriage of Solomon and Rachel Moseson. Yet, with these newspaper clippings, we get a little more insight and a little more verification on what Sonia wrote in her autobiographical writings. There is something to be said about Rachel staying in a marriage for nearly twenty years. It either speaks volumes of her perseverance or it is quite possible there were moments of hope for the relationship to continue. But like most things, unless we were there, we’ll never truly know.
The Papers of Sonia H. Davis 