Print Bookmark

Notes


Matches 101 to 150 of 593

      «Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 12» Next»

 #   Notes   Linked to 
101 According to the documents sent to Joseph Philip Rhein by Clayton Vogel, Elizabeth Dunkle as born 1790 and died April 24, 1856.
Family Tree Maker, #2294, shows an Elizabeth Dunkle with the same birth date who is married to John George Emerick, Jr. who was born in 1787. He is the son of John George Emerick, Sr. who was born in 1754. This will need to be investigated further, before the dates can be listed for Elizabeth Dunkle. There appears to be no relationship between these Emericks at this time. (March 28, 1997) 
Dunkle, Elizabeth (I0060)
 
102 According to the United States National Archives - Civil War Complied Military Records at Provo, Utah, Anthony Spangler was a Sergeant in Company D, 103 Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry. His Pension Application was submitted in the name of his father and mother.

"...The 103rd was at Malvern Hill on July i, 1862 and took part in that battle. The 103rd was ordered to Antietam and embarked on transports for that point, when it was ordered to Norfolk and then to Suffolk, remaining there until December 5, 1862 when it marched to the Chowan River and proceeded by transports to Newbern, North Carolina, where the troops made a raid into the interior as far as Goldsboro, North Carolina. On this raid there were three hard fights, one at Kingston, one at White Hall and one at Goldsboro." The above was taken from the History of Clarion County Pennsylvania, A.J. Davis, Closson Press, 1887. The above description refers to Company A of the 103rd Regiment. There is no mention of Company D. I have included it here as a point of information. (Note to File - JP Rhein)  
Spangler, Anthony (I1947)
 
103 Adam Emerick is listed on the records of the Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution.

This listing does not constitute proof of lineage. It is an index to find the most appropriate DAR application to order and cannot be used in place of a record copy.

EMERICK, ADAM
Ancestor #: A036365
Service:
PENNSYLVANIA Rank(s): COURT MARTIAL MAN, PATRIOTIC SERVICE
Birth:
11 Nov 1728 BERKS CO PENNSYLVANIA
Death:
25 Jan 1813 TULPEHOCKEN TWP BERKS CO PENNSYLVANIA
Service Description:
1) 6TH CO, 6TH BATT, CAPT WEAVER, BERKS CO
2) RANGER ON THE FRONTIER, BERKS CO

PA ARC 5s V.5 P.229; 5s V.4 P.617; 3s V.23 P.231
 
Emerick, Johannes Adam (I0031)
 
104 Additional information on the descendants of Amanda Alice Stewart and Chambers H. Hawk can be found on Ancestry.com at the following location.

http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/7129789/person/-1157915421

This site has good documentaion, contains numerous photos and lots of commentary on the Hawk and related families. (Note to File - JP Rhein)

 
Stewart, Amanda Alice (I0548)
 
105 Admiral John Forbes (1714-1796) was the second son of George Forbes, 3rd Earl of Granard. He entered the Royal Navy at a young age, and had risen to the rank of Rear Admiral by 1747. in 1749 he was created Commander-in-Chief of the Mediterranean. As a Lord of the Admiralty, Forbes refused to sign the death warrant of Admiral John Byng in protest at the harshness of the sentence, and as a consequence of this disagreement with his colleagues retired from the Board of Admiralty on 6 April. He was reappointed on 29 June 1757. Created a Vice Admiral in 1755, Forbes became an Admiral of the Blue, 1758, General of Marines, 1763, Admiral of the White, 1770, and Admiral of the Fleet, 1781. He also published a Memoir of the Earls of Granard (1868). He died in
1796.

Admiral John Byng (1704-1757) was court-martialed, convicted and sentenced to death in 1757, following an abortive attempt in 1756 to relieve the British garrison in Port Mahon, Menorca, from French forces. He was executed by firing squad on the deck of HMS Monarch on 14 March 1757.

Admiral John Forbes (17 July 1714-10 March 1796) was the second son of George Forbes, 3rd Earl of Granard. He entered the Royal Navy in 1726 on the Burford, commanded by his uncle. Forbes became a Rear Admiral in 1747 and, in 1749, he was created Commander-in-Chief of the Mediterranean fleet. Poor health often affected his career. He was a Lord Commissioner of the Admiralty from 1756 to 1763, during which time he gained fame for being the only member who would not ratify the sentence of death on Admiral John Byng over the loss of Minorca. Forbes refused to sign the death warrant in protest at the harshness of the sentence, and resigned from the Admiralty Board but rejoined two months later. He was a Commissioner of Longitude in 1768. Forbes was created a Vice Admiral in 1755, Admiral of the Blue in 1758, General of Marines in 1763, Admiral of the White in 1770, and eventually Admiral of the Fleet in 1781. However, ill-health prevented Forbes undertaking an active role. Forbes married Mary Capel, the daughter of William Capel, 3rd Earl of Essex in 1758 and they had two daughters. The National Maritime Museum has a portrait of Forbes by George Romney. His will was proven on 26 March 1796. Prob.11/1272. The Forbes Islands (12° 18'S, 143° 25'E) off the northern Queensland coast were named after him. DNB. Vol. 7, pp. 404-405.

 
Forbes, Admiral John (I3651)
 
106 After Euphemia died John Walker Synder remarried and had five children with Olive Ann Logan. Snyder, John Walker (I0815)
 
107 After her father was killed by Indians during the War of 1812, her mother with five children made her way across the headwaters of the Allegheny River, constructed a crude raft and floated down the river to where Catfish (Clarion County) now stands. They stayed with her mother's brother, Christopher and his wife Susanna Truby. When they were rested they floated on down the river and settled in Ohio, two sons afterward moved to Iowa. At the earnest request of Aunt and Uncle Truby, the nine year old daughter Susanna was left with them and there she grew to womanhood. (Stewart Family History, Margaret (Peggy) Ann Males Rosssey) Lauffer, Susannah (I0137)
 
108 After the death of his father in Madison County, Kentucky, John Gass was interviewed for the Draper Collection of Manuscripts which are now at the University of Wisconsin. In the interview he told of the talking of the Boone and Callaway girls by the Indians, near the fort in Boonesborough, in 1776. He mentions that his cousin John Gass swam the river during the rescue attempt. In 1798 there was a deed in Bourbon County, Kentucky where John Gass, son of Henry, sold land to John Gass son of David. (Source - Mary H. Cole, taken from and article sent by Ms. L. M. Rathbone of Austin, Texas to Mrs. Bette Rathbone, Austin, Texas, which was sent to Mary H. Cole) Gass, John (I0295)
 
109 Alexander Stewart, fourth high steward, had two sons, of whom the first son, Sir John Stewart of Bonkyl (meaning the 'the church at the foot of the hill') was the ancestor of numerous notable branches of the name, including the earls of Galloway, the Stewart earls of Atholl, and the Stewarts of Appin. Stewart, Alexander (I0200)
 
110 Alexander Stewart, who is now successfully conducting the Sligo Hotel at Sligo has throughout life been actively identified with the business interests of Clarion county and through his own efforts has secured a handsome competence. The spirit of self help is the source of all genuine worth in the individual and is the means of bringing to man success when has no advantages of wealth or influence to aid him. It illustrates in no uncertain manner what it is possible to accomplish when perserverance and determination form the keynote to man’s character.

Mr. Stewart was born May 20, 1837 in Perry Township, Clarion County of which township his parents, William and Eliza Stewart were also natives. The birth of the grandfather, William Stewart, occurred in Ireland ( This is in error as he was born August 21, 1779 at Meeting House Springs, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. It was his great-grandfather Lieutenant William Stewart, orn in County Donegal, Ireland who came to Colonial America in 1745.) but at any early age immigrated to the United States and took up residence in Perry Township, Clarion County where he owned and operated a large tract of land. He wedded Miss Mary McCribben (Sarah McKibben) and to them were born the following children: Thomas, Robert, John, William, Polly, who married William McCall and Margaret wife of Alexander McCall, a brother of her sisters husband. All are now deceased except Margaret who lives on the old homestead in Perry Township. After the death of the mother of these children, William Stewart married a Miss Parker. While they were out walking (some authorities say he wasriding on horseback) he became ill and they sat down on the roots of an old tree where he died in 1821 at a ripe old age. His remains were interred at the Concord Church in Perry Township.

William Stewart, our subject’s father, was a farmer by occupation and became quite well to do. Becoming blind, he spent the last twenty years of his life in retirement from active labor. In politics he was a lifelong Democrat and he was a consistent member of the Presbyterian Church. In October 1892 he was called to his final rest at the age of eighty years and two months, and his estimable wife died in March 1867 at the age of sixty-one, both being buried at the Concord Church in Clarion County. There children were David, a farmer of Perry Township, Alexander of this sketch, Robert an extensive farmer of Porter Township, Amos, an agriculturist of Perry Township, William who died on the old homestead where his widow and still reside, and Rosalinda wife of Israel Butler, a farmer of Madison Township.

On the home farm Alexander Stewart grew to manhood, was married in Callensburg January 28, 1838 (1858)to Miss Sarah J. Livermore, the ceremony being performed by Josesph Reynolds. The following children blessed this union; George a traveling salesman for the implement house of Johnson & Company, who married Vira Henry, and resides in Pittsburgh, William I. Who married Jennie Sloan and is a contractor living in New Kensington, Boartly B. who married Anna Craig and is engaged in the hardware business in Rimersburg, Amos who married Laura Altman and follows farming in Licking Township, Lizzie wife of W J Reichert a farmer of Piney Township, Maggie, wife of Jesse Wyman of Sligo, Maude. Elzora, Walter, and Nora, all at home. Dalla A., who died at the age of four years, and Carrie E. who died at the age of nineteen months.
(Source - Commemortive Record, the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, published in the late 1890's.)
 
Stewart, Alexander (I0419)
 
111 Also 1870 Federal Census as to date and location of birth. Source (S02819)
 
112 Also known as Jake. Stewart, Milton Van Ozza (I0458)
 
113 Amanda Craig died 1855 8 yrs.
Burial Rimersburg
Daughter of James & J. F. Craig
 
Craig, Amanda (I4122)
 
114 American Civil War Soldiers
Name: Jeremiah Brown ,
Enlistment Date: 7 Sep 1862
Enlistment Place: Curllsville, Clarion CO., Pennsylvania
Side Served: Union
State Served: Pennsylvania
Birth Date: 7 Nov 1839
Death Date: 19 Feb 1916
Death Place: Porter Township, Pennsylvania
Service Record: Enlisted as a 1st Sergeant on 7 September 1862.
Enlisted in Company K, 148th Infantry Regiment Pennsylvania on 7 Sep 1862.
Promoted to Full 1st Lieutenant on 15 Nov 1863.
Promoted to Full Captain on 31 Jul 1864.
Promoted to Brevet Major on 27 Oct 1864.
Mustered Out Company K, 148th Infantry Regiment Pennsylvania on 1 Jun 1865 at Alexandria, VA.

Sources: 18,27,80,22,250

The following information was received from C.J. Brown of Clarion County, grandson of Jeremiah Z. Brown. The only documentation is that shown. See 'Notes File' on Anthony McKinney, who also served with Company K of the 148th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry in the Civil War, for additional information on Company K and details of a number of battles fought by that regiment. (Note to File - J. .P Rhein)

THE STORY OF COMPANY K

PART I

By Capt. Brevet Maj. J. Z. Brown.

In the month of June, 1862, on my arrival at home from school, I found the war fever at high tide. I had a conversation with Capt. Thompson Core, who was engaged in the effort to enlist a company, in which I said I was ready to go at any time, and I took hold with him at once in the work of recruiting. We were assisted in the work by the influence of a number of old citizens. Among them were J. B. Guinn, Andrew Lee, John Hoover, L. C. Putner, M. Arnold, Jas. Laughlin (Jeremiah Z. Brown married his daughter Mary Jane on September 1, 1870 in Porter Township, Clarion County, Pennsylvania following the Civil War), Jacob Brown, R. N. Corbett, John Kaster and others, all living in the vicinity of Curllsville. Besides these, we were assisted by the following, living near Greenville, namely: Washington Craig, John W. Sloan, Samuel Connors, Michael Walters, J. B. Jones, David Orr, Rev. J. S. Elder. As related in subsequent parts of the story of Company K, we did not succeed in raising a full company, and the effort was continued after we had organized at Cockeysville, Maryland.
At the time Capt. Thompson Core was undertaking to recruit a company in Clarion County, enlistments were and had been for some time quite actively prosecuted, and recruits were not easily obtained, but Captain Core was very persevering, and at last succeeded in enlisting the necessary number required to complete the company, and joined us at Cockeysville with nineteen recruits from Montgomery County.
Henry H. Dotts of this squad was to be Second Lieutenant, as he had recruited a number of men and was held in very high esteem by all the men in the company, and his recruits proved to be good soldiers, and rendered noble service in the Regiment. The story of our stay at Cockeysville has been fully told, and need not be repeated.
As we approached the battlefield of Chancellorsville and heard the roar of artillery and the rattle of musketry and saw the wounded coming back, some on stretchers and some limping on foot, we began to realize what was ahead of us, as we met this first test of the mettle of our new troops, but our boys were steady and solid in line, ready for the encounter. As has been stated, Company K, with five other companies, were on the picket line, and hence not with the Regiment in the hot fight on Sunday in the rear of the Chancellor House, but the skirmish line had several quite severe engagements, and lost Corporal Neil of the color guard, killed, and three men wounded.
The 28th of June, 1863, on the Gettysburg campaign, was the hardest day's marching we ever had. The evening before, I had bought a peck of potatoes from the officers' wagon, hoping to enjoy a good breakfast, but the bugle sounded the march before the potatoes were cooked. Comrade Polliard proposed to carry them, so that we might have them for dinner. He put them in his knapsack, and we started. It was a very warm day, the march was rapid, and about noon Polliard said, "I wish they would stop. These potatoes are getting heavy." As the march continued, he said, "If we don't stop soon, I will have to throw them away," but I took his gun and carried it for him for several hours, and when we halted, about ten o'clock at night, with but four men of the company to stack arms, we dropped down on the ground, forgetting all about the potatoes, and went sound asleep. We had them for breakfast, however, the next morning.
Company K was fortunate in the Gettysburg battle, being on a part of the line in the wheat field where the enemy's bullets went over our heads.
After the Mine Run campaign, when we had gone into winter quarters at Stevensburg, I was detailed on recruiting service, and with Sergeant, afterwards Lieutenant A. C. Sloan, to Clarion County. About the 1st. of June I was ordered to close my recruiting office and report to Harrisburg, where I settled my accounts and was ordered to join the Regiment near Petersburg, Virginia.
The account of the capture of Fort Crater by one hundred men of our Regiment under my command will be fully described in the stories of other comrades.
The company served with the Regiment until discharged in June, 1865.
The following families were represented in Company K, two or more brothers: the Sloans, Fox, Quyillman, Woods, Milligan, Van Houter, Swartzfager, Carle, Dorworth, Wiant, Miller and Divins, five brothers. Thirteen men of Company K were never absent from duty from the time of enlistment until discharge. They were: Corporal G. G. Walters, Wm. Bartlett, Dennis Conner, S. H. Sloan, Daniel M. Hirsch, John Donahue, O. M. Cullens, Robert Wilson, Uriah Wilson, Reuben Quillman, Henry B. Fox and William Zeigenfuss.

PART II

For hand-to-hand fighting, for the use of sword and bayonet in personal conflict, for special cases of bravery, Company K of the 148th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry was not surpassed in the Union armies and its record ranks well up in the great battles of all history. The total enlistment of the company was one hundred and thirty-eight, of whom fourteen were killed, thirty-nine wounded, six died of wounds, five were wounded twice, ten died of disease, three in rebel prisons and twelve were taken prisoner. No more desperate charge was ever made than that led by Capt. J. Z. Brown, composed of one hundred men of the 148th on Fort Crater at Petersburg on October 27, 1864.
On that historic occasion these men did not reason why but firmly resolved "To do or die," and on the double quick charged with fixed bayonets "into the jaws of death; into the mouth of hell."
Forty years afterwards Captain Brown was induced to tell the thrilling story to the writer, although he did it with his characteristic modesty. The old hero sat at the table and dictated the details to a stenographer as they are fully verified by the account of the charge given in Harper's Weekly two weeks after the battle, though not so fully, and as it is given in substance in Bates' History and other standard histories of the War.
Major Brown, as he is now called on account of his subsequent promotion, thus tells the story: "It was in the evening of October 27, 1864, that the Adjutant of the Regiment came to me and said, `We want one hundred men to charge on a fort in front of Petersburg.' I found that it was to make a charge on earthworks within the enemy's lines and said, `I will go for one.' Three other officers of the Regiment volunteered, Lieut. P. D. Sprankle, Alexander Gibb and J. T. Benner. Capt. H. D. Price, of the brigade staff, went with us. he was killed just as he reached the top of the works. His body was recovered the next day by flag of truce. I was the first officer to volunteer, and as the senior officer I was placed in command of the forlorn hope. As the detachment was about ready to start several men of my company said, `Captain, if you are going we must go along,' but I said, `Some one of Company K must stay at home to tell the story,' but I enrolled fourteen of my company. We formed in line inside our works about twilight, and after receiving instructions from General Mulholland to reserve our fire until we got close to the fort, we fixed bayonets and started on the double quick and got within about two hundred yards of the fort before the enemy's pickets opened fire on us. Advancing rapidly our first trouble was with the chevaux-de-friese in front of the fort's trench. It was wired and roped together and after some of my men had cut an opening with axes I threw the chevaux-de-friese around, right and left, and my men charged rapidly and most gallantly through the opening. We jumped the ditch, which was full of water and scaled a rampart. I rushed up the embankment my 'boys' with me, in the face of a galling fire, and jumped right into the fort. As General Burnside had mined and exploded a fort some distance to the right about three months before this the enemy had dug a hole like a well about forty feet deep just within the parapet of the fort we charged and when I jumped over I lit within four feet of the hole, at the peril of my life. There was a bomb-proof embankment just inside the fort and the rebel artillery men were hurrying up with grape and canister to charge their guns for use on the assaulting column. A rebel officer was directing the men and I at once covered him with my sword and demanded his, which was promptly handed over and also the swords of two other rebel officers, and all were passed back to my men. We learned afterwards that the fort was garrisoned by the 46th Virginia Infantry.

"We captured a large number of men but the majority of the rebels ran out at the rear of the fort and escaped. I then ordered my
men to fire right and left along the line of the fort and directed Lieut. J. H. Benner to take the prisoners back to our lines. I staid within
the fort half an hour and looked in vain for re-enforcements and could not then understand why they did not come. "I could hear the enemy in the rear rattling their muskets, officers giving commands, and preparing for a charge when I ordered a retreat to our lines. We carried back with us some who had been wounded in scaling the redoubt. Just as I had entered our works again I met a brigade of re-enforcements under General Mulholland, and, under the circumstances, I said, `General Mulholland, why in the h--l didn't you re-enforce me' It was a terrible risk for a little Captain to thus speak to a superior officer, but he mildly replied, `I did the best I could.'

The next morning a division Aide rode down the lines and after finding me handed me an envelope ordering me to report at division headquarters immediately. It alarmed me greatly but I buckled on my sword and assumed my best military bearing and soon saluted General Miles, who seated me by his table and remarked, 'That was quite a scrap you got into last night.' I answered, 'It was interesting.' I told him I could not understand why I was not re-enforced. General Miles then astonished me by saying, `To tell you the honest truth we never expected you to cross that fort or a single man of you to return alive.' He said that it had become absolutely necessary to make a demonstration at that point, to divert Lee's attention, and I thought one hundred men enough to sacrifice.
"He then said that the best thing that he could do was to recommend me for promotion to the War Department for meritorious conduct on the field of battle, and said that he had intended to do the same thing for me after the battle of Reams Station but had over looked it. That the intention of the commanding General was carried out is shown by following papers which explain themselves:

Headquarters First Division
Second Army Corps
October 31, 1864

MAJOR SEP'S CORNCROSS,
Assistant Adjutant General,
Second Army Corps,

MAJOR: In compliance with instructions contained in circular of this date, I have the honor to submit the following recommendations:
That Capt. Jeremiah Z. Brown, 148th Pennsylvania Volunteers, receive the brevet rank of Major. Captain Brown, on the 27th of October led a party of one hundred men through the chevaiix-de-freise and abattis of the enemy's line opposite Fort Morton, capturing one of his works with several prisoners among whom were officers of rank.Very respectfully,
(Signed) NELSON A. MILES,
Brigadier General Commanding

Copy respectfully furnished Captain Brown for his information.
By order of Brigadier General Miles.
Wm. R. Driyer,
Assistant Adjutant General.

WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington, December 2, 1864.

Sir: You are hereby informed that the President of the United States has appointed you for gallant and distinguished services in leading a storming party against the enemy's works at Petersburg, Virginia, and capturing a fort on the night of the battle of Boydtown Plank Road, Virginia, a Major of Volunteers, by brevet, in the service of the United States, to rank as such from the 27th day of October, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-four. Should the Senate, at their next session, advise and consent thereto, you will be commissioned accordingly.

Immediately on receipt hereof, please to communicate to this Department, through the Adjutant General of the Army, your
acceptance or non-acceptance; and, with your letter of acceptance, return the oath herewith enclosed, properly filled up, subscribed and
attested, and report your age, birthplace and the state of which you were a permanent resident.

You will report for duty to . . . . . E. M, STANTON, Secretary of War

Brevet Major Jeremiah Brown
U. S. Volunteers, Through Commanding General Army of the Potomac.

UNITED STATES PENSION AGENCY
PHILADELPHIA, May 11, 1896.

My Dear General: I beg to acknowledge the receipt. of your letter of April 25th. I would have answered promptly but I have been confined to bed and too ill to write. You ask me if Capt. Jeremiah Z. Brown, of your Regiment, volunteered to lead the charge on the Confederate fort in front of Petersburg, October 27, 1864. In reply Captain Brown certainly did volunteer and he behaved on the occasion in the most heroic and gallant manner. I remember him well and I will never forget how perfectly cool and self-possessed he was as he stood with me in front of the enemy's work and I gave him the final instructions as to the disposal of his little force of one hundred men. The capture of the fort was a very brilliant exploit for which the Captain was brevetted Major and I was brevetted Major General. Not only did Brown volunteer but when I went over to the Regiment (148th Pennsylvania Volunteers) I had too many volunteers. Every officer in the whole camp seemed to want to go and I was almost compelled to allow one or two more than was wanted to accompany the attacking party. Brown was the senior officer of the many that volunteered and so I selected him to lead and command and I made no mistake in the man. He was a success and deserves all the honors that can be given him.

I hope you are well.

Sincerely your friend, St. Clair Mulholland

Gen. James A. Beaver, Bellefonte.

In 1896 Major Brown received a Medal of Honor according to Act of Congress by direction of the President of the United States, as shown by the following paper:

RECORD AND PENSION OFFICE,
WAR DEPARTMENT.
Washington City, June 22, 1896

MAJOR JEREMIAH Z. BROWN,
Leatherwood, Clarion County,
Pennsylvania

I have the honor to inform you that by direction of the President and in accordance with the Act of Congress approved March 3, 1863, providing for the presentation of medals of honor to such officers, noncommissioned officers and privates as have most distinguished themselves in action, the Acting Secretary of War has awarded you a medal of honor for most distinguished gallantry in action in front of Petersburg, Virginia, on the night of October 27, 1864.
The medal has been forwarded to you today by registered mail. Upon the receipt of it please advise this office thereof.
Very respectfully,
F. C. AINSWORTH,
Colonel United States Army,
Chief Record and Pension Office

(NOTE BY THE EDITOR - From papers accompanying the above)

The Confederate works on the Petersburg line, the scene of the brilliant exploit of Major Brown and his hundred men, was named by the comrades of the Regiment "Fort Crater," probably because of its proximity to the crater formed by the mine explosion, and I have allowed this name to stand in several 'stories but since there is no mention of a Fort Crater in the Rebellion Records or in any war history, I deem it proper to refer the reader to the "Brigade Commander's Story," by General Mulholland, page 56, who quotes the report of this affair by the Confederate General, B. R. Johnson, in which the work is denominated "Davidson's Battery." A description of the fort will be found on pages 52 and 53. It is also proper to say that these hundred men were not volunteers or in any sense picked men, but on the contrary they were simply representatives of the average of the Regiment. They constituted a regular detail made in the usual way from the men "next for duty" on the roster. See the story of Adjutant Ramsey, page 352.)

Major Brown tells of the death of Leander Myers as follows.:

"In the engagement on June 16, 1864, General Beaver, while in command of the Brigade, was severely wounded by the explosion of a shell, and the Brigade was repulsed in a charge. The color bearer of our Regiment was killed and the flag was left between the lines. Leander Myers of Company K said that he knew just where the flag was and after dark he, with two others of the Regiment, went out after the flag, although there was continual firing all the night. Myers never returned. The next day his body was found between the lines as the enemy had fallen back. Bates' History says that Myers' body was buried in Poplar Grove National Cemetery, Division A, Section D, Grave l5. The flag was recovered."

The story of the battle at Deep Bottom is told by Major Brown in a style which will interest his old company. He says:

"To repulse the assault we hid behind an opposite hill. We lay down in a corn field, the corn in tassel. I was on the extreme left and lay down with my elbow resting on Corporal Gibson's feet. A shell exploded and blew off the whole head of Corporal Gibson and almost the whole side was blown off Walter Corbett., but I was only touched by a little of the sand. We retreated about forty yards, carrying Walter Corbett with us. His hand had been scratched a little and he kept crying, `Oh, my hand! Oh, my hand!' and did not say a word about his side although it. was torn off so that I could actually see his lungs work. But he only lived about twenty minutes. I went back in the night, at fearful peril, and took the pictures and his watch and pocketbook from the dead body of Corporal Gibson and sent them to his sister.'

'On August 15th my company was thrown out on picket to try and find the rebels and about dark I was ordered to halt, but the rebel did not shoot as I expected. I came across a man apparently dead or dying whom I recognized as Capt. W. W. Barr, of the 105th
Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, who was shot right below the left ear. I detailed George G. Walters and Samuel Sloan to carry him off the field, which saved his life. These men never met him again until the regimental reunion on the battlefield of Gettysburg, about thirty years afterwards, when tears were shed by Captain Barr as he thanked his comrades for what they had done."

"At Reams Station, where Colonel Beaver lost his leg," says Major Brown, "my company took an active part in strenuous services. General Warren had been tearing up the railroad, advancing his line as rapidly as possible. We piled up the ties, twisted the track, and burned up the equipment About 11:00 AM, August 25, 1864, a Division Aide wanted the 148th to come out along the railroad to protect the cavalry. A body of Pennsylvania cavalry was stationed in a little bit of woods and said that they wanted the infantry to charge on a house which they said was full of rebels. We deployed as skirmishers and went forward on a double quick, a rebel cavalryman retreating on a gallop in the rear of the house, protected by it, and when we entered the house prepared for the worst we found a couple of women, but no soldiers at all. We had our own views of that cavalry. One of the women had been shot through the thigh and the wound was dressed by a surgeon, after I had assured the women that we world not harm them. The cavalry then came up and continued the chase of the retreating rebels.

"In a charge of the rebels in this battle their color bearer shook his colors over the works until they touched my head. I slashed at the flag staff with my sword but could not cut it off. I took a musket with fixed bayonet and pushed it into the flag but the old rag was too rotten and I didn't get it.

"The rebels got into our rear in the railroad cut, crawled up the embankment and we rolled them back dead into the railroad cut by
the dozen. It, was all over within twenty minntes. But we were outflanked by the enemy and saw our men away to the left running back, cavalry, infantry and artillery and rebel yell going up all the time, "Get out of this Yanks".

The following information was taken from "History of Pennsylvania Volunteers, 1861-1865", by Samuel P. Bates, Harrisburg, B. Singerly, 1870 and "The Story of Our Regiment: a History of the 148th Pennsylvania Volunteers", by Joseph W. Muffly, Kenyon, Des Moines, Iowa, 1904. (Note to File - J. P. Rhein)

"The regiment was organized at Camp Curtin, Harrisburg, Pa. on September 8, 1862 and named the 148th Pennsylvania Volunteers. Seven companies were recruited from Centre County, and one each from Jefferson, Indiana, and Clarion Counties. It was part of Brook's Brigade, Barlow's Division (First Division), Second Corps, Army of the Potomac, where it remained during the entire war.

At the request of the line officers, James A. Beaver, Lt. Colonel was appointed Colonel. He was wounded at Spotsylvania. He rejoined the regiment just as it was entering the fight at Ream's Station, where he was again wounded and suffered the amputation of a leg.

In September, 1864, the War Department ordered that one regiment in each division be armed with breech-loading rifles; the 148th was selected by General Hancock as the deserving one in its division to be thus armed."

{In the midst of the fighting at the The Salient at Spotsylvania, Confederate General George H. Steuart walked up to Colonel James Beaver of the 148th Pennsylvania and offered his surrender. "I will accept your surrender," the Federal officer replied. "Where is your sword, sir? With a tinge of sarcasm Steuart alledgelly replied, 'Well, suh, you all waked us up so early this mawning' that I didn't have time to get it on". Source - The Story of Our Regiment, J. W. Muffly, DesMoines, 1904}

On April 9, 1865, General Robert E. Lee, C.S.A., surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia to Lt. General U. S. Grant, Commanding Armies of the United States. According to the agreement of the commissioners (Lee appointed Longstreet, Gordon and Pendleton; Grant sent Griffin, Merritt and Gibbon), that last farewell would take place on April 12, 1865. The following account, taken from "Great Battles of the Civil War", By the Editors of Civil War Times Illustrated, describes that surrender, starting with the third paragraph below.

The 148th fought at Farmville, 22 miles east of Appomattox Court House and north of the Appomattox River, Virginia on April 7th as part of the Second Corps., First Division under General Miles. Crooks Cavalry also participated in that battle. It was at Farmville on April 7th that Grant wrote to Lee "..asking of you the surrender of that portion of the C. S. army known as the Army of Northern Virginia. Very respectfully, your obedient servant."

Crooks Cavalry was ordered to move on to Prospect Station. The 148th was at Appomattox on April 9th but, apparently did not participate in The Last Farewell on April 12th, which is described below. (Note to File, JP Rhein)

"Surviving his wounds at Chancellorsville, Colonel Nelson A. Miles is eventually promoted to brigade and then division command under Hancock. He receives the Medal of Honor for his brilliant stand against Lee's continuous attacks at Chancellorsville. He is promoted to Brigadier General in the spring of 1864, then after the war, to Major General."

 
Brown, Jeremiah Zachariah (I1222)
 
115 An Alan Fitz Flaad appears on a list of "Companions of Duke William at Hastings". These were the commanders. They were the elite who had provided ships, horses, men and supplies for the venture. They were granted the Lordships. (Some sources list Alan Fitz Flaald's date of birth as about 1078. The Battle of Hastings was fought in 1066. Is this the same individual? This needs to be further investigated. (Note to file by Joseph Philip Rhein)Subject:

 
de Hesdin, Sherrif of Shropshire Alan Fitz Flaald (I0204)
 
116 An early settler in New Bethlehem, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. Had a family of 11 children. Pence, Jacob (I3733)
 
117 Andersonville Prisoners of War
Surname: Jacob S. Delp
Rank: SERGEANT
Company: F
Regiment: 103
State: PA
Arm of Service: INFANTRY
Reference: p 714 [9]; p 87, 379 [101]
Location of Capture: PLYMOUTH, NC
Date of Capture: 20 Apr 1864
Page: 0
More Information: NO
Code: 40352

 
Delp, Jacob S. (I2473)
 
118 Andersonville, Georgia.

Village in Sumter county, southwest-central Georgia, U.S., that was the site of a Confederate military prison from February 1864 until May 1865 during the American Civil War. Andersonville was the South's largest prison for captured Union soldiers and was notorious for its unhealthy conditions and high death rate.

In the summer of 1863 the U.S. federal authorities ended an agreement under which Union and Confederate captives were exchanged; the resultant increased number of Union prisoners of war confined in the capital city of Richmond, Virginia, constituted a danger to the Confederacy and put serious pressure on the food supply. In November 1863, Confederate authorities selected Andersonville, through which ran a stream, as the site for a stockade encompassing 16.5 acres (6.7 hectares). Prisoners began to arrive in February 1864, before the prison was completed and before adequate supplies had been received, and by May their number amounted to about 12,000. In June the stockade was enlarged to 26 acres (10.5 hectares), but the congestion was only temporarily relieved, and by August the number of prisoners exceeded 32,000.

No shelter had been provided for the inmates: the first arrivals made rude sheds from the debris of the stockade; the others made tents of blankets and other available pieces of cloth or dug pits in the ground. By that time the resources of the Confederacy were stretched thin, and the prison was frequently short of food. Even when food was sufficient in quantity, it was of poor quality and was poorly prepared because of the lack of cooking utensils. The water supply, deemed ample when the prison was planned, became polluted under the congested conditions, and the medical staff was inadequate and poorly provisioned. During the summer of 1864 the prisoners suffered greatly from hunger, exposure, and disease, and in seven months about a third of them died. In the autumn of 1864, after William Tecumseh Sherman's Union forces had captured Atlanta, all the prisoners who could be moved were sent to Millen, Georgia, and Florence, South Carolina. Arrangements at Millen were better, and, when Sherman began his march to the sea, some 5,000 prisoners were returned to Andersonville, where the conditions also were somewhat improved. In all, nearly 13,000 Union prisoners died at Andersonville from disease, malnutrition, and other causes.

Conditions in Andersonville were utilized as propaganda material in the North, where Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton ordered retaliation on Confederates held in Union prisons. After the war, Captain Henry Wirz, commander of the prison, was tried and convicted of war crimes by a military commission. Wirz rejected an offer of parole if he would incriminate Confederate President Jefferson Davis, and he was hanged on November 10, 1865. He is the only person in the United States ever to have been executed for war crimes.

Andersonville National Historic Site (established 1970) preserves the camp area and its environs. It includes Andersonville National Cemetery, containing some 16,000 graves, including those of prisoners who died at the camp. The National Park Service has conducted archaeological excavations at the site, and a portion of the stockade wall has been reconstructed. The National Prisoner of War Memorial Museum, honouring Americans captured in all the country's wars, opened there in 1998. Pop. (1990) 277; (2000) 331.
(Source - Encyclopedia Britannic)


 
Pence, George (I3742)
 
119 Andrew Galbraith of Culcreuch appears frequently in writs between 1456 and 1476. Guthrie Smith in his book "Strathendrick" gives a good sketch of the Culcreuch family from Andrew Galbraith until Robert Galbraith sold Culcreuch in 1630, and it is not proposed to repeat all that can be found there. There are, however, one or two omissions which may he filled in.

In 1456, Andrew Galbraith had a Charter from the Crown of Over Johnstone in Renfrewshire (Exchequer Rolls of Scotland). In 1466, he is mentioned as one of the heirs of entail in Lord Lyle's Entail, on the condition of taking the name and arms of Lyle. As in this deed he comes immediately after Lord Lyle's various children, it is presumed that the relationship must have been close. It seems probable that Lord Lyle's mother and Andrew Galbraith's mother were sisters; and it may be from this connection that Over Johnstone in Renfrewshire came into the family.

Andrew, before the year 1478, confirmed as superior a Charter of the lands of Kilbride in Dumbartonshire to John Galbraith of Portnellan (Cartulary of Colquhoun). He was still alive in 1475-76. (Protocol Book of Stirling.)

The next laird of Culcreuch was Thomas Galbraith, who was almost certainly son of the above mentioned Andrew. He appears along with Andrew Galbraith, of Culcreuch, in the Retour of John, Lord Darnley, in 1473. Then, in 1484, he had sasine from the Crown of Over Johnstone. He took part in the rising headed by the Earl of Lennox and Robert, 2nd Lord Lyle, in 1489, and was taken at Talla Moss in Stirlingshire and hanged. Sir James Balfour, in his "Annals of Scotland," calls him "Chieffe of the Galbraiths." His lands of Culcreuch, Mulig, Bannachar and others were forfeited, but were soon restored to his successor, James Galbraith, who was without doubt his brother. James Galbraith had evidently taken part in the rising which had such serious consequences for Thomas Galbraith; but he escaped, and his name appears in the Remission, dated 12th February, 1489-90, to Matthew Stewart, son of John, Earl of Lennox, and many others; and in the following June, 1490, he appears as James Galbraith of Culcreuch in a sasine to Matthew Stewart of the Earldom of Lennox, the Lordship of Darnley, and the lands of Galston; and, again, in a sasine to the same Matthew in the year 1511. He is included as one of the heirs of entail in a Royal Charter to Robert, 3rd Lord Lyle, in 1495, which would seem to prove that he was son of Andrew Galbraith, who was in the entail of Robert, 1st Lord Lyle, and, therefore, brother of Thomas Galbraith, who was hanged in 1489.

James Galbraith had legal proceedings with Agnes Cunningham, widow of Thomas Galbraith, in 1493. She claimed certain rents from the lands of Over Johnstone, but the matter seems to have been amicably settled (Act. Dom. Concil). In 1501, he had a fine remitted for not entering suit for Over Johnstone. He is said to have married Agnes Colquhoun, daughter of Humrhrey Colquhoun of Luss; this Agnes marrying secondly the 4th Lord Somerville. ("The Chiefs of Colquhoun." vol. I., p. 70.)

James Galbraith's eldest son was Andrew, and, in 1509, there was an infeftment of Andrew Galbraith and Margaret Stirling, his spouse, in the lands of Johnstone in Renfrewshire, which belonged to James Galbraith, father of the said Andrew.

This must have been given to Andrew on his marriage, and when his father was living, since we know that James Galbraith was alive after 1512.

James Galbraith had other children-—
Humphrey, who was at Glasgow University in 1513. He appears to have been guilty of the slaughter of William Stirling of Glorat in 1534. He is called "Tutor of Culcreuch."
Walter (Reg. Sec. Sig. 1542).

Robert, married Janet Seyton, 1548, said to be the ancestor of Galbraith of Balgair.
Janet, who had a charter from Humphrey Colquhoun of Luss in 1536 of the lands of Garshake.
Andrew Galbraith succeeded his father, James. He took part in the Battle of Linlithgow in 1526, but had a "respett" in 1527 for his actions. His son was James, but Guthrie Smith (p. 167) is in error in stating that John and Andrew were also his sons. Andrew Galbraith of Culcreuch died before 1534, as in that year his brother Humphrey is called "Tutor," or legal guardian, to James Galbraith, who was a minor when his father Andrew died.
James Galbraith of Culcreuch married Katherine Barclay and had a Charter of Confirmation in 1547 of the lands of Over Johnston to himself and his spouse, having previously had sasine of the same lands in 1545.
Guthrie Smith ("Strathendrick." p. 168) is mistaken in stating that this James married secondly Margaret Crawford. He describes the early life of James as being violent but that a transformation took place in his later year-that the leopard changed his spots. Actually, this James was dead before 1573, as is shown by a deed of that date concerning the lands of Kilbride (Cartulary of Colquhoun, p. 259). It is his son, James Galbraith of Culcreuch, who married Margaret Crawford and had sasine of Over Johnston in 1575. John Galbraith in Boquhan and Andrew Galbraith in Gonachan were brothers of this younger James of Culcreuch.
James Galbraith died about 1590 and left a successor, Robert Galbraith, whose rather turbulent life is described in "Strathendrick." He was always in financial difficulties, and, finally, in 1630, had to part with his paternal estates and sold Culcreuch to Alexander Seton of Gargunnock. He is said to have gone to Ireland, where he died. He left a very large family, but it is not known who is the senior representative of this old race.
BALGAIR
When Robert Galbraith sold Culcreuch in 1630 and departed to Ireland, the Lennox, which had for so many centuries seen the Galbraiths as possessors of large tracts of land, was now bereft of any landowner of that name. This does not mean that there were no Galbraiths left in the district; there were many cadets of the old family, but they were tacksmen or long lease holders, or else small proprietors. And so it remained for nearly fifty years, until in 1687 James Galbraith, "writer in Edinburgh," bought the lands of Balgair, adjacent to Culcreuch and part of the old barony of Ballindalloch, which had belonged for so long to the Cunninghams.
It will, therefore, be interesting to inquire how this James Galbraith was connected with the old Galbraiths of the district.
In doing this it will, unfortunately, be necessary to differ in some respects from the views of the author of "Strathendrick."
Guthrie Smith, when writing of the Culcreuch family, states that the Galbraiths of Balgair probably had as ancestor Robert Galbraith, a brother of Andrew Galbraith of Culcreuch, and who, in 1548, made a contract of marriage with Janet Seyton. But in the Chapter relating to Balgair the Galbraiths in Hill of Balgair are taken as being descended from this Robert, and no clear descent is deduced for James Galbraith who bought Balgair in 1687. The view now taken is that James Galbraith of Balgair (1687) was descended from Robert Galbraith, brother of Andrew Galbraith of Culcreuch, and that the Galbraiths in Hill of Balgair were descended from John Galbraith in Balgair before 1534, who was an earlier cadet of Culcreuch (probably a son of Humphrey, a younger brother of Thomas who was hanged in 1489, and of James Galbraith of Culcreuch, 1490).
James Galbraith, writer in Edinburgh, having bought the lands of Balgair, proceeded to make an entail of these lands. The substitutes of entail were eight in number, beginning with the two sons of his cousin, George Galbraith, merchant in Edinburgh, and ending with his far-out kinsmen, John and George Galbraith, who had a joint lease for 133 years from 1693 of the Hill of Balgair, or Middle Balgair. The deed of entail was registered in the Register of Entails in 1706.
George Galbraith, merchant in Edinburgh, was a son of Mr. John Galbraith, minister in Bothkennar. Mr. John Galbraith and his wife, Katherine Norvell, had a large family, viz.:—James (also "writer in Edinburgh,'' before 1670 when he died), John, George, Michael, Humphrey (minister at Dollar), and two daughters; but, by the time of the entail, only the children of George survived. And so we see that James Galbraith, the entailer, had an uncle, Mr. John Galbraith. He had also another uncle, Andrew Galbraith, a half-brother of Mr. John, and father of Hugh Galbraith, the third substitute of entail.
Now, in 1654, Mr. John Galbraith and his spouse had a tack of Balgair from John Buchanan for all the years of their lives. The tack was registered in the Register of Deeds in 1663, after the death of John Galbraith. It is gathered from this lease that Balgair had been the home of himself and his predecessors for many years.
Since we know that Balgair was occupied by James Galbraith from before 1593 till 1628 and as we see John Galbraith in 1654 getting a new tack of his old family home for the rest of his life, there seems to be little doubt that John Galbraith was the son of James Galbraith in Balgair (1593). And it therefore follows that the father of James Galbraith, the entailer, was also a son of James Galbraith in Balgair (1593), and was, evidently, the Robert Galbraith in Hilton of Balgair, mentioned indeed on page 231 of "Strathendrick" as a son of James Galbraith in Balgair, but there given, erroneously, as an ancestor of the Galbraiths in Hill of Balgair. (It should be noted that Hilton, or Haltoun, was a part of Easter Balgair and not to be confused with Hill of Balgair. "Strathendrick," p. 30.)
James Galbraith in Balgair (1593) is said, probably, to be a son of Robert Galbraith, "brother german of the late Andrew Galbraith of Gylcruuch." This is evidently correct, and is supported by the following evidence. James Galbraith in Balgair and Andrew Galbraith in Tomdarroch are mentioned many times together. They both appear as being implicated along with others in the slaughter of Robert Lindsay (1533-94) (vide, "Strathendrick," p. 232); and again in the Register of the Privy Council there is this entry:—Caution in £2,000 by Robert Galbraith of Culcreuch as principal and Alexander Seyton of Gargunnok as surety for him (that he would not intercommune with any of the surname of Buchanan, Macgregor or Macfarlane, fugitives from the laws for criminal causes). The bond was presented for registration by Francis Galbraith, "Panniter" to his Majesty, as procurator for the parties and subscribed at Gargunnok, 18th May, 1593, before James Galbraith in Bolgair, Andro Galbraith in Tomdarroch, William Galbraith, Steward in Culcreuch, and George Auld, minister and notary public.
Andrew Galbraith married Isabell Cunningham, widow of Humphrey Galbraith in Balgair, who had died in 1578 (Testament).
Humphrey Galbraith left a brother, William, in Wester Balgair, but his own two sons, James and John, were minors, and when his widow married Andrew Galbraith in Tomdarroch, the occupancy of Balgair (or Easter Balgair) was given to James Galbraith, who for many years after was known as James Galbraith in Balgair.
All this points to the fact that James and Andrew were brothers. But Andrew was son of Robert Galbraith in Tomdarroch, the brother of Andrew Galbraith, the laird of Culcreuch, and, therefore, James Galbraith in Balgair was also son of Robert Galbraith.
To sum up the evidence, it seems clear that the beneficial occupancy of Balgair, which from before 1534 had been with John Galbraith in Balgair, and thereafter with his son Humphrey Galbraith until 1578, passed after that date to James Galbraith, the brother of Andrew Galbraith in Tomdarroch who married Humphrey's widow, and who was a son of Robert Galbraith, a brother of the laird of Culcreuch.
Andrew in Tomdarroch and James in Balgair had probably at least one other brother—William Galbraith in Frew. In 1614, there is a summons at the instance of William Galbraith in Frew against James Galbraith in Balgair for debt.
James Galbraith was alive on 11th January, 1628, as, on that date, there is a summons by James Galbraith in Balgair against Andrew Cunningham and others. But, in 1629, in the Register of Sasines for Stirlingshire, there is mentioned a William Galbraith in Frew, son and heir of William Galbraith in Balgair. So it seems that James Galbraith in Balgair must have died about this time, and that his brother William took over the occupation of Balgair.
It is not known exactly when Mr. John Galbraith had his first tack of Balgair but as noted above he had his tack renewed in 1654.
It is clear, therefore, that James Galbraith, writer in Edinburgh, was closely connected with the lands of Balgair, and was a descendant of the Galbraiths of Culcreuch, and that when he bought this portion of the old barony of Ballindalloch in 1687, he did not come to the district as a stranger.
James Galbraith the entailer of Balgair died in 1707 leaving no children, and John Galbraith, the first substitute of entail, succeeded; but he died soon afterwards in Flanders in July 1707, and James Galbraith his brother, a younger son of George Galbraith merchant in Edinburgh, took up the estate of Balgair as second substitute.
He it was who built the mansion house of Balgair in 1720; but this house was hardly ever occupied, as it soon fell into disrepair and then into ruins.
The estate of Balgair remained with the descendants of John Galbraith until his grandson, James Galbraith, a son of Rear-Admiral James Galbraith, died at sea in 1794 leaving no family; and thus the line of the second substitute of entail came to an end.
Advertisements were then inserted in the newspapers for heirs, and, finally, Richard Galbraith from County Galway, Ireland, was served as heir to Hugh Galbraith the third substitute of entail, and was duly infeft, in the lands of Balgair. His claim, though not contested at the time, was not quite clear, and led to a case being raised in the courts, which finally was taken to the House of Lords by a descendant of John Galbraith in Hill of Balgair, the seventh substitute of entail. He, however, was unsuccessful in having the service reduced and Balgair remained in the possession of the descendants of Richard Galbraith until it was sold by James Galbraith of Manitoba, Canada, on 22nd April, 1914.
(Source – Galbraiths of The Lennox, Compiled by Colonel T.L. Galloway of Auchendrana in 1944)
 
of Culcreuch, Andrew Galbraith (I4257)
 
120 Andrew Galbraith succeeded his father, James. He took part in the Battle of Linlithgow in 1526, but had a "respett" in 1527 for his actions. His son was James, but Guthrie Smith (p. 167) is in error in stating that John and Andrew were also his sons. Andrew Galbraith of Culcreuch died before 1534, as in that year his brother Humphrey is called "Tutor," or legal guardian, to James Galbraith, who was a minor when his father Andrew died. Galbraith, Andrew (I4264)
 
121 Another look at Teapot Dome as taken from the book "The Prize, The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power" by Daniel Yergin, 1992.

“The Colonel and the Liberty Bonds

The scandal had even wider repercussions when further investigations revealed that the bogus company, Continental Trading, was really a mechanism by which a group of prominent oil men had received kickbacks in the form of government Liberty Bonds on purchases of oil made by their own companies, Harry Sinclair had used part of his kickback as payoff money to Fall, passing on the bonds. He had also given some of the bonds to the Republican National Committee. The nation was shocked to learn that among those receiving Liberty Bond kickbacks was one of America's most distinguished, successful, and forceful oil men, Colonel Robert Stewart, chairman of Standard of Indiana.

A broad-faced, bulky man, Stewart had ridden with Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders. Unlike the heads of many of the other major oil companies he had never had a day of practical oil field xperience. He had first gone to work for Standard of Indiana as an attorney, and he had ridden his legal skills to the top of the company. That was not so surprising; after all, the legal challenges before and after dissolution had dominated and redefined the oil industry, and since 1907 Stewart had been at the center of every single major case involving Standard of Indiana. Autocratic, commanding, and combative, he infused the company with an aggressiveness that made it into the nation's number-one marketer of gasoline during the 1920's. "Colonel Bob," as he was called, was among the most respected and admired leaders not only of the oil industry but of all of American business. Who could believe that someone so upstanding would stoop to besmear himself in the slush of Teapot Dome? Yet, after years of evading questions about his involvement with Continental Trading and the Liberty Bonds, Stewart finally admitted receiving about $760,000 in bonds.

As Stewart became ever more deeply embroiled in the Teapot Dome controversy, the largest stockholder in Standard of Indiana, who had until then hardly interfered in the company's management, urged Stewart "to remove any just ground for criticism." Stewart would not cooperate. Finally, in 1928, the stockholder decided he had given Stewart every chance and concluded he would have to go. The stockholder was known as "Junior"; he was the only son of John D. Rockefeller.

John D. Rockefeller, Jr., was a short, shy, serious, and reclusive man. He worshiped his father and had wholeheartedly imbibed his lessons about thrift. As a student at Brown University, the younger Rockefeller had surprised his college classmates by hemming his own dish towels. But, more than anything else, he had been rigorously and repeatedly schooled by his mother in "duty" and "responsibility" and concerned himself with probity. He found his own life's vocation, independent of his father, in the systematic giving away of a significant part of the family fortune, though much would still, of course, be left over. He also involved himself in a wide variety of civic and social causes, once going so
far as to chair an official investigation into prostitution, on behalf of the city of New York.
The younger Rockefeller even established a dialogue with Ida Tarbell, his father's "lady friend" and muckraking nemesis. He had met her at a conference in 1919 and had gone out of his way to be extremely polite, even chivalrous to her. A few years later, he asked Tarbell to review a series of interviews with his father that were to be the basis of a book he was planning. To facilitate matters, he himself delivered the materials to Tarbell's apartment in Gramercy Park in Manhattan. After studying the interviews, Tarbell told him that the elder Rockefeller's comments were self-serving and sidestepped all the charges made against him. "Junior" was persuaded. "Miss Tarbell has just read the biography manuscript and her suggestions are most valuable," Rockefeller wrote to a colleague. "It seems clear that we should abandon any thought to the publication of the material in anything like its present incomplete and decidedly unbalanced form."

That was in 1924. Now, four years later, the younger Rockefeller was no less aroused by the specter of wrongdoing in Standard of Indiana than Ida Tarbell had been by the wrongdoing in the old Trust. By profession, he was a philanthropist, not an oil man, and he had made a habit of staying away from the business of the successor companies. To much of the country, the father remained a great villain; now the son broke into the public scene in quite a different guise as a reformer. And he was intent on carrying the mantle of reform to the heart of Standard Oil of Indiana. He told a Senate committee that, in the affair of Colonel Stewart, nothing less than the "basic integrity" of the company and indeed of the whole industry was at stake. But the Rockefeller interests directly controlled only 15 percent of the stock in the company. When Stewart refused to resign voluntarily, Rockefeller launched a proxy fight to oust him. The colonel counterattacked vigorously. "If the Rockefellers want to fight," he declared, "I'll show them how to fight." He had a strong business record; in the last ten years of his leadership, the company's net assets had quadrupled. And now, for good measure, he declared an extra dividend and a stock split to boot. Some saw the bitter struggle as a battle between East and West for the control of the oil industry; others said the Rockefellers wanted to reassert their control over the entire industry. But the Rockefeller forces were not clamorous for dividends; they wanted victory, and they organized and campaigned hard. And, in March of 1929, they won, with 60 percent of the stockholders' votes. Stewart was out.

John D. Rockefeller, Jr., had intervened directly, and in a highly visible way, in the affairs of one of the successor companies of his father's Standard Oil Trust. He had done so not for mere profits but in the name of decency and high standards, and to safeguard the oil industry from new attacks from government and the public-and to protect .the Rockefeller name. He was much berated for his efforts. "If you look up the record of your father in the early days of the old Standard Oil Company," one angry supporter of Stewart wrote to Rockefeller, "you will find it pretty well smeared with black spots ten times worse than the charges you lay at the door of Col. Stewart. There is not enough soap in the world to wash the hands of the elder Rockefeller from the taint of fifty years ago. Only people with clean hands should undertake to blacken the character of other and better men."

A college proferssor disagreed. "No endowment of a college nor support of a piece of research," he wrote, "could have done more it seems to me to educate the public toward honest business." American Capitalism, and the oil industry could never again be as rapacious. as it once had been; now the future of the industry and of business was at stake, not the fortunes of a few men. And the oil industry had its public image to consider. But if the younger Rockefeller's hands were clean, the entire "Teapot Dome" scandal from Fall, Doheny, and Sinclair to Stewart had picked up where the Standard Oil Trust had left of in ingraining in the public mind a nefarious image of the power and corruption of "oil money."
(Source – The Prize by Daniel Yergin)

Daniel Yergin is best known for The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power, a number-one bestseller that won the Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction in 1992. The book was adapted into a PBS mini-series seen by more than 20 million viewers. Yergin was awarded the 1997 United States Energy Award for "lifelong achievements in energy and the promotion of international understanding." According to a biographical note in the March/April 2006 issue of Foreign Affairs, Yergin is currently at work on "a new book on oil and geopolitics."
 
Stewart, Colonel Robert Wright (I1331)
 
122 Appears to be listed as John Hilyard, age 45 plus in the 1820 Census for Toby Township, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. John Hilyard appears to have originated from Northhampton County, Pennsylvania and had a least one son. Hilgert, John (I3241)
 
123 Arthur Galbraith in his will dated 1818 bequeaths "to my son Aneneas S. Galbraith my negro woman Minna (also kinown as Mina and Jemina) and her youngest child Nancy to my grand daughter Elizabeth Galbraith, daughter of my son Aeneas". Galbraith, Aeneas Sharp (I9873)
 
124 As to the date of death of Sir William Stewart, 3rd Baronet, 1st Lord Mountjoy, the Irish Time of November 10, 1940 states "He undertook, with Sir Stephen Rice, in 1688, a mission from Lord Deputy Tyrconnell to James II, then at Paris, and was, immediately on his arrival in that city, thrown into the Bastille, and there confined until the year 1692. Upon his release, he waited upon William III in Flanders, and was killed at the battle of Steinkirk in August of the same year". An article in "The Stewarts", Volume VI, by Walter A Stewart, September 1, 1933, page 378, states "Released at the end of March 1692, Mountjoy had but a very brief space of time to enjoy his freedom. He joined the English army in the Netherlands and was killed in August 1692 at the battle of Steinkirk".

"The 3rd Baronet, another Sir William Stewart, was born six weeks after his father's death, and succeeded at his birth to all the estates that had belonged to the Ist Baronet, except that of Fort-Stewart. His uncle, John Stewart had been left the Ramelton and Fanad estates in the Ist Baronet's will, but he evidently predeceased Sir Alexander. He appears to have been captured by Sir Charles Coote's forces in a sortie from Londonderry in April 1649 (J. S. Reid: History of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, 1867 edition,- Vol. 11., p. 109), and subsequently, on trying to escape from captivity, to have been put to death in October of the same year (J. T. Gilbert: Contemporary History of Affairs in Ireland, r64i-i6.52, Vol. 11., p. 294). Sir Alexander's widow married about 1655, Sir Arthur Forbes, afterwards Ist Earl of Granard, who was granted the wardship of her son, Sir William Stewart. The latter, on reaching manhood, took an active part in public affairs, besides applying himself seriously to a military career. He was Captain of the King's Company of the Regiment of Guards in Ireland 1677, and in 1684 was appointed proprietary Colonel of a regiment of Foot, as his father and grandfather had been before him. In March 1682-83 he was raised to the Peerage of Ireland as Lord Stewart of Ramelton and Viscount Mountjoy, the latter title being taken, as shown by the Ormonde MSS., for no particular reason except that the place of that name was in the county in which Sir William Stewart lived. . Later, the Stewart family held a lease from the Crown of the Castle of Mountjoy, situated on the southwest shore of Lough Neagh, Co. Tyrone, together with 300 acres of land adjoining, and this lease was renewed from time to time and still had some years to run when the senior line died out in 1769. In 1684, Lord Mountjoy was appointed Master-General of the Ordnance in Ireland for life, his being the last life-appointment to this post. In those days such offices were not obtained without payment, and when the holder was desirous of retiring, the Government selected some suitable candidate who was given permission to arrange terms for the purchase. It thus appears from the Ormonde MSS. that Lord Mountjoy paid his predecessor, Francis Aungier, Ist Earl of Longford, the sum of 3500 pounds, a great deal of money in those days, as the price of making way for him.

In 1686, Mountjoy, who had been promoted to Brigadier-General, went as one of the party of Volunteers from Britain to join the crusade against the Turks who were then being expelled from Hungary. He took part in the siege of Buda and its recapture from the Infidels. Two years later, the Revolution of 1688 broke out and Mountjoy's position became a very difficult one. As a devout Protestant, his loyalty to King James became almost impossible to reconcile with loyalty to his religion and sympathy with his co-religionaries, who looked up to him, at any rate in the North of Ireland, as their leader. For this reason, the Lord Lieutenant, Richard Talbot, Ist Earl of Tyrconnel, a Roman Catholic and zealous in that interest, desired to rid himself of Mountjoy. His flrst intention was to send Mountjoy, with his Regiment, to England, in anticipation of the invasion of William of Orange, and His Lordship was therefore ordered to march his Regiment to Dublin, with a view to its embarkation. Up till then -Mountjoy's Regiment had been quartered in and around Londonderry, and, on its withdrawal, the Regiment of the Roman Catholic Lord Antrim (Alexander MacDonnell, 3rd Earl), was sent to that city in its stead. Then took place, on 7th December 1688, the famous episode of the closing of the gates of Derry by the 'prentice boys, and Lord Antrim was unable to enter the city. In face of this unexpected turn, Tyrconnel saw no other course but to send Mountjoy with six Companies of his Regiment back to Derry. His Lordship accordingly returned, and, after a brief parley, the gates were opened and he was admitted and the keys of the city were handed over to him. John Mackenzie, in his Narrative of the Siege of Derry," a contemporary account written by an eye-witness, says:-" Our Governor freely did resigned his charge to him (Lord Mountjoy) and we all "resolved to follow his orders and directions. Accordingly, "his Lordship heartily concurred with the citizens, advised them to repair the carriages of the guns, fix the old arms "that lay in the stores, and everything else that might be found necessary for the preservation of the city." With Mountjoy were admitted to Derry two Companies of his Regiment composed wholly of Protestants, the other four Companies which had accompanied him being allowed to enter later, since, according to Mackenzie, 11 rather than " lose so many good arms, we were induced to receive " them; and having well purged them of Papists, we unanimously concur and keep our joint guards, by detachments out of these six Companies and our own six town Companies."

It would thus appear that a very important part of the garrison of Derry during the historic siege was drawn from Lord Mountioy's regiment. Of the two companies first admitted, one was commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Robert Lundy, stated to have been a native of Ayrshire, and later notorious as the " Traitor Lundy." The other was commanded by Captain William Stewart, who was in all probability William Stewart of Fort-Stewart, Lord Mountjoy's first cousin. It is of interest to note that the latter married in 1693, Mary, eldest daughter of Ezekiel Hopkins, Bishop of Derry at the ime of the siege, who endowed the cathedral with some new pieces of plate and a richly carved organ-case, which are still shown with much pride to visitors to the Maiden city.

Notwithstanding the landing of William of Orange in England, and the retirement of King James to France, the King and his lieutenant, Tyrconnel, appear to have hoped to be able to hold Ireland with the help of France and to establish it as an independent country under French protection. Mountjoy was clearly looked upon as a formidable obstacle to the realisation of such a plan, and it therefore
became amatter of cardinal importance to deprive the Protestants of his leadership. In the "Londeriad," the well known epic poem of the siege of Londonderry, by Joseph Aickin, flrst published in Dublin in 1699, King James is represented as speaking as follows to the King of France:-

' the Lord Mountjoy, I fear him more,
Than all the subjects on the Irish shore,
Him the Scots party have chosen for their guide,
And sworn to flght in no command beside.'

Tyrconnel accordingly decided to resort to a ruse in order to get rid of Mountjoy, and he turned the latter's anxiety for the safety of the Protestants to account for this purpose. He pretended to agree with Mountjoy that it would be folly to attempt to defend Ireland against an Anglo-Dutch invasion and to be anxious to prevail on King James to adopt this view. To this end he proposed that Mountjoy should proceed to St Germains in order to explain the position to James. Mountjoy, though well aware of the possibility of treachery, decided that it was his duty to accept the mission and, accordingly, he returned to Dublin and took ship for France. He did not however, leave without obtaining solemn written assurances from Tyrconnel, safeguarding the Protestants against molestation. Yet, no sooner was he gone, than these assurances were repudiated, and on 23rd February 1688-89, shortly after his arrival in Paris, Mountjoy was arrested by order of Louis XIV. and committed to the Bastille, whence, in spite of repeated attempts of the English Government to negotiate his exchange, he was not released till March 1692. He had previously been offered his liberty if he would abjure his religion, but he had rejected this suggestion. (See N. Luttrell, Historical Relation, Vol. I., p. 547, Oxford, 1857). It may, however, be said for King James that he seems to have shown some reluctance to agree to Mountjoy's arrest, as in a despatch from the Comte d'Avaux, French Ambassador in Ireland, to Louis XIV., dated 23rd April 1689, the following passage occurs:-" If Your Majesty had not ordered the arrest of Lord Mountjoy and had allowed him to.leave France, as the King of England wished, the latter would never have been master of Ireland, Lord Mountjoy having great power there throughout the whole North and being moreover, a good officer and a man of wit." Nevertheless, when King James was in Ireland himself, he showed great resentment towards Mountjoy, prompted probably by the stubborn resistance to his arms which he met with from Derry and Enniskillen. Both Mountjoy and his second son, Alexander Stewart-though the latter can hardly have been a full-grown man at the time-were in the list of those attainted by King James' Parliament held in Dublin. Mountjoy's attainder is thus referred to by Lord Macaulay (History of England, Vol. III., London, 1858) " Among the attainted Lords was Mountjoy. He had been induced by the villany of Tyrconnel to trust himself at St Germains: he had been thrown into the Bastille: he was still lying there: and the Irish Parliament was not ashamed to enact that, unless he could within a few weeks make his escape from his cell, and present himself at Dublin, he should be put to death." King James lodged in the Castle of Newtown-Stewart on his way to Londonderry and again on his return from Lifford after the abandonment of the siege, but this did not prevent both the Castle and the town from being burned by his troops on their retirement. The town was not rebuilt till 1722 while the Castle has remained a ruin to this day. It is understood that there is a probability of its being scheduled shortly, under the Ancient Monuments' Act. A petition by William Stewart, 2nd Viscount Mountjoy (S.P. Dom., 8th April 1696), states that:-" The Irish army burned and destroyed the Castle of Newtown-Stewart, and all the furniture therein also the town of Newtown-Stewart, and the Castle and town of Ramelton, and wasted all the Petitioner's estate." It is an interesting circumstance that, though Mountjoy himself was lying in the Bastille, his name at least was prominent at the relief of Derry, for the vessel which broke the boom across the Foyle, and caused the siege to be raised, bore the name of " Mountjoy." Incidentally, it may also be mentioned that, when the dramatic feat of landing a large cargo of arms for the Ulster Volunteers took place at Larne on 24th April 1914, the name of "Mountjoy " was again that given to the vessel employed.

Lord Mountjoy was eventually released from the Bastille in exchange for Lieutenant-General Richard Hamilton, who commanded the besieging forces before Derry and who was captured at the battle of the Boyne. Released at the end of March 1692, Mountjoy had but a very brief space of time to enjoy his freedom. He joined the English army in the Netherlands and was killed in August 1692 at the battle of Steinkirk. His name appears, in the original despatch, first on the list of those who fell in this action. (S.P. Dom., 1691-2, pp. 392 and 429.) " The Jacobites regarded this death as the just punishment of his readiness to serve the usurper and saw in it conflrmation of the suspicions they had had regarding his fidelity to the cause of the Stuarts, whilst the Orange party declared that resentment at the ingratitude of those princes had brought him over to the "good cause." (Ravaisson, Archives de la Bastille, Vol. IX., p. 203.)

Mountjoy was a prominent member of the Dublin Philosophical Society, formed in 1684 as a counterpart of the Royal Society of England and regarded as the forerunner of the Royal Dublin Society which was founded in 1731 and still exists. He read a number of papers on scientific subjects before that Society and succeeded Sir William Petty as President in 1686. In the Correspondence of Henry Hyde, 2nd Earl of Clarendon and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Vol. I., p. 251 (London, 1828) there is a letter from Clarendon to John Evelyn, dated 14th February 1685-6, in which the following reference is made to Mountjoy in this connexion:- Royal Society of Ireland . . . Their President is the Lord Viscount Mountjoy, Master of His Majesty's Ordnance ',in this Kingdom; he is a man of great worth and honour, "of vertu and an encourager of ingenuity; he is very much my friend and is now in England. I hope you will find him i(out and get him to Gresham College, and there own to him the honour he does the Society (i.e., the Royal Society of England) in being their protector here." Lord Mountjoy was succeeded as 2nd Viscount and 4th Baronet by his eldest son, William. (Source - "The Stewarts, Volume VI, Stewarts In Ireland, Walter A. Stewart, London, September 3, 1933)


" William Stewart, born in Ireland in 1650, six weeks, after his father was killed in the battle of Dunbar in Scotland, grew up under the tutelage of his stepfather, Arthur Forbes, earl of Granard. He early entered the, Military service, in the reign of King Charles II, and by the time he was 27 years he was captain of the King's company of the regiment of Guards in Ireland. He was raised to the peerage of Ireland in March, 1682-83, as "Lord Stewart of Ramelton and Viscount Mountjoy." There had been a previous Lord Mountjoy, an Englishman named Charles Blount, whom Queen Elizabeth sent over to Ireland as lord deputy in 1601, with the queen's instructions to whale the stuffing out of the recalcitrant Irish chief, Hugh O'Neill, earl of Tyrone, which he did in a ghastly way.

It will not be to the point here to derail William Stewart's, Lord Mountjoy's, military and political career, our object being merely to picture and set him apart from his cousin William or any other William Stewart of his day, and to pinpoint his children. He married, about 1671, Mary Coote, eldest daughter of Richard Coote, Lord Coloony. He was in command of the garrison of Londonderry when the, English parliament voted to dethrone King James II and elected his daughter Mary and her husband, William, prince of Orange in the Netherlands, queen and king of England, and perhaps of Scotland and Ireland. The Stuarts, so called, had drifted so far from their moorings through marriages with French and Spanish women that most of the folks at home didn't care much about them. In fact, many were disgusted with them for imagining that the pope of Rome could take care of them. Lord Mountjoy was on a spot. He was a Protestant, trying to be loyal to a king who was not. To solve his problem for him the lord lieutenant of Ireland, acting on behalf of James, who had decided to put up a fight for his throne and to depend on the Irish people to do most of the fighting, sent Mountjoy to France on a fake mission. There the king of France, wise to the scheme, locked Mountjoy up in the Bastille on Feb. 23, 1688-9. There the good man stayed for three years, until James was thoroughly beaten. But he never went home. When released in March, 1692, he joined the army of William fighting in Flanders and was killed in the battle of Steinkirk in August, that year, at the age of 41 years. His children comprised six sons and two daughters who lived to maturity. " (Source - Stewart Clan Magazine, Tome H, Volume 37, Number 6, December 1959)
 
Stewart, Sir William First Viscount of Mountjoy (I0741)
 
125 At the time I did my initial work on the descendants of James Galbraith (1666-1744 ) my 6th great-grandfather, some thirty years ago,it was well documented that Arthur Galbraith was his grandson. I subsequently entered this on my website.

As a result of recent DNA work by Clan Galbraith this has proved to be false. Arthur's line is Group 3, and is very different from the line of James. I have removed Arthur from the list of descendants of James Galbraith but kept him and his descendants on the web site.

I have considerable information on the first several generations of Arthur's descendant's in my personal papers including details on the families extensive slave holdings in Hawkins County, Tennessee prior to the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment in December 1865. As information is so difficult to come by for African-Americans searching for their forebears, I have entered it on the web site.
(Note to file-JP Rhein)

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The following information was submitted to Ancestry.com by W. W. Watkins. It is reproduced here as it provides substantial detail on the life of Arthur Galbraith. It is not correct, however, in the first paragraph following wherein it states that Andrew Galbraith is the son of Andrew. The name of Arthur's father is not known.

Andrew Galbraith son of James Galbraith was born in the North of Ireland and came to America in 1699 (correct date is 1718) with his father James Galbraith, at about the age of seven. We have no record of his death but it occurred after 1747 as we have an account of his activities until that time, when he moved from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania to Cumberland County. In all likelihood he did not accompany his son Arthur down the Shenandoah Valley to Virginia, but died in Pennsylvania, as he was 55 at the time the move was made into Cumberland County.1

He married Mary Kyle, daughter of James Kyle (1665-1740), the exact date and place are unkown.2

Arthur Galbraith married Mary Sharp, daughter of John Sharp, of Fincastle County, Virginia, in the St. James Episcopal Church in Lancaster, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania on the 15th of January 1768.3 Arthur was 40 years old at the time of his marriage to Mary Sharp and this would suggest that this was his second marriage, however no proof of a prior marriage has come to light.

The exact date of the departure of Arthur and Mary for their trip down the King's Hiway into the Shenadoah Valley, remains a mystery. However from references in Oliver Taylor's HISTORIC SULLIVAN, it would seem likely that Arthur and Mary departed very shortly after their marriage, probably about 1770. Arthur, without moving, lived successively in Augusta, Botetourt and Washington Counties of Virginia. From the records of these counties we know that Arthur lived in Washington County until at least 1778. We also know from the records of New Providence Presbyterian Church that Arthur and Mary were members before 1781.4 We then must assume that they had moved to Tennessee between those two dates.

Even tho Arthur did not marry Mary Sharp until age 40, he and Mary were the parents of 12 children. John who married MARTHA LARKINS, Margaret, the bride of JOHN YOUNG, Elizabeth's husband was WILLIAM ARMSTRONG, Mary married BENJAMIN LOONEY. Andrew, married twice, first, ELIZABETH LAUGHLIN, and second, SARAH ANDERSON. Sarah, married ROBERT YOUNG. Arthur Sharp, never married. Julia was the bride of AQUILLA DAVIS, while Tabitha married SAMUEL HENDERSON. Joseph took as his helpmate, MARTHA SHANKS, Lucinda married ASA CARRINGTON, while Aeneas, the youngest married first POLLY COLDWELL and second, CATHERINE WYNN. Of all the male children only Andrew and Joseph remained in Hawkins County. John the oldest son moved to Lewis County, Missouri, about 1827. Joseph died when quite young, he was married in 1810 and died before the birth of his son, Joseph Bertram Galbraith, in 1811. Aeneas, the youngest child moved to Indiana, and raised a large family there. Andrew Galbraith, born 10 April 1776, in Washington County, Virginia5 came to Hawkins County, with his father Arthur when he was about 3 years old and spent the remaining 81 years of his life there. He died on 22 November 1860 and is buried in Quaryville cemetery.

Andrew was even more prolific than his father Arthur, as he and his two wives were the parents of 14 children, Louisa, John Sharp, Alexander, John M., Anna, Elizabeth, Joseph, William, Anderson, Audley, Isaac, Andrew, Amanda, and Sarah.

Andrew was prosperous, and religious as shown by his will. He was also a well liked and respected citizen of Hawkins County, and served well as the second registrar of Hawkins County from 1803 to 1808. He was also one of the commissioners appointed by the legislature to oversee the building of a turnpike from Knoxville, thru Rutledge, Rogersville, and Kingsport to the Virginia State line6. In his will, dated 17 November 1857,7 Andrew disposes of property that he states should not be sold "for a less sum than fifty thousand dollars", which attests to his prosperity. He also directed the division of his library which included Clark's Commentary on the New Testament, a History of the Methodist Church, Watson's Institutes, Bensons Commentary, a copy of Benson's sermons, a copy of Bascom Sermon's, a copy of the Life of Bascom, and his family Bible. These were in addition to other books that he did not name. The Galbraith name had faded from the annals of Hawkins County by 1900.

1 I. Daniel Rupp, HISTORY OF LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, Gilbert Hills, (Lancaster, PA 1844)
2 NSDAR National Number 479880 (Supporting papers by Prentice Price)
3 Marriage Register St. James Episcopal Church, Lancaster, PA.
4 Ruth Amis Crowe, NEW PROVIDENCE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
5 Letter of William Galbraith (son of Andrew) to his son Joseph Pharoah Galbraith, dated 23 November 1891.
6 Acts of Tennessee, Chapter CLXXIV, page 243.
7 Hawkins County, Tennessee Will Book 1, pages 231-234

(Source - This info was contributed by W.W. Watkins.)






 
Galbraith, Arthur (I0347)
 
126 Attended Pennsylvania State College. Member of Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity.

Was s Second Lieutenant World War I.

Was a Civil Engineer. 
Siehl, Clarence Henry (I2266)
 
127 Auto Accident. Sherman, Wesley Eugene (I3774)
 
128 BACKGROUND

The earliest surveys made in the area around present day Walker Township were in November 1770 at which time it was part of Cumberland County that was formed in 1750 from Lancaster County. In 1771 it became part of Bedford County when Bedford was formed from Cumberland. In 1772 it became part of Northumberland County when Northumberland was formed. On February 13, 1800 it became a part of Centre County when it was formed. Mifflin County was formed in 1789 from Northumberland County. It is adjacent to and southwest of Northumberland County and adjacent to and southeast of Centre County.

Walker Township, is situated in Nittany valley proper, and is traversed by Little Fishing creek. Its villages are Zion, Hublersburg, Snydertown and Nittany, and it has considerable ore deposits. The township was erected at January sessions, 1810, and called for the then present Judge Jonathan H. Walker. Logans Gap, was built by Judge Isaac McKinney in 1825. At January session 1810, Howard and Walker Townships were erected out of Centre Township and the latter name abolished. Centre was one of the original townships in Centre County. (g)

Villages and towns in Walker Township also include Forest, Peck's Store, Huston, Strunktown, Helca Park, also known as present day Mingoville. Hublersburg is about 10 miles Northeast of Bellefonte, the county seat of Centre County.

Walker Township lies between Eagle Mountain and Nittany Mountain, which mountain ranges run Southwest to Northeast.

THE MCKINNEYS IN NORTHUMBERLAND, MIFFLIN AND CENTRE COUNTIES

The 1790 Federal Census for Pennsylvania lists the names of 15 McKinneys. Five in Northumberland County, unknown township, Rebecca, Abram, William, Daniel, and John; one in Mifflin County; William, four in Cumberland County, David, Jean and two Patricks, all in Hopewell, Newton, Tryborn and West Pennsboro Townships, three in Washington County, and one each in Allegheny and Philadelphia Counties.

In the Northumberland listing, John is the American Revoultionary Veteran:
one free white male 16 years and upward including head of household; two free white males under 16 years of age, Samuel (1786-1871)later married Rachel McKinney, John or Anthony, born 1788, later married Mary Magadelene Emerick; two free white females, daughter Mary, born May 14, 1785, later married John Fulton and Mary Llewellyn, wife. Daughter Susah, born April 13, 1790 is not listed in the census.

When John McKinney came to Northumberland County is not known. He is the John McKinney who owned the land adjacent to John Nicholaus Emerick in that area of Northumberland County in what is now Walker Township, Centre County, as more fully discussed and documented below.

John McKinney, a volunteer in 1776 in the Continental Army, serving in Capt. Andrew Long's Company, 1st Battalion, Pennsylvania Rifle Regiment, commanded by Col. Daniel Broadhead. He was born in Ireland, before 1760, died in Centre County, Pennsylvania. He was married to Mary Llewellyn. (j) Mary was the daughter of David Llewellyn who lived in Haverford, Chester County.

Colonel Broadhead commanded the 8th Pennsylvania Regiment, Pennsylvania Line, that was formed in July 1776 of men from Westmoreland and Bedford Counties in western Pennsylvania. Colonel Broadhead's regiment was in the Penn's valley area of Northumberland County, later Centre County on July 15, 1778. Broadhead received the thanks of Congress for his expedition against the Indians who were devastating the western frontier. He was born in Ulster County, New York and died in Milford, Pennsylvania.

A 'Captain Lee' was in the area of Sunbury in 1778 ......... Included were some military warrants, one in the name of John McKinney, late a soldier in the Pennsylvania Line, for 100 acres, No. 10113. (k) This may be John McKinney above, who came to Northumberland County after 1786 and before 1790. It may be that he came to Northumberland County as a result of his military service.

A 'John McKinney' was a surety on the Estate of Felix McClaskey in Northumberland County on August 26, 1794. Whether this is the same individual referred to in the preceding paragraphs, I do not know.

The McKinneys have been in Venango County for the better part of a century. Their first ancestor in America came from the North of Ireland and settled in Haverford, Chester County where he reared his family. He served on the American side in the Revolution. His son Samuel McKinney, was born in Chester county, October 31, 1786 and when the War of 1812 broke out was living in Centre County. He was awarded a silver medal by the legislature in 1819 (while a resident of the Nittany Valley in Centre County where he farmed and operated a fulling mill). He died on September 20, 1871. He married Rachel McKinney (1799-1895) from Sunbury on May 23, 1816. She died after 1871. He brought his family to Venango County in 1832-33, securing two hundred acres near Salem City. (f) Samuel McKinney (fulling mill) is listed as an inhabitant of Walker Township in 1810 at which time, Samuel, son of John McKinney would have been 24 years of age. In 1828 this fulling mill is listed as being owned by George McCormick.

CENSUS RECORDS FOR THE YEARS 1800, 1810, 1820 AND 1830

The 1800 Federal Census for Centre County, Pennsylvania - None Available

The 1810 Federal Census for Walker Township, Centre County, lists:

Samuel McKinney appears eleven lines below the listing for John McKinney, his brother, maried to Mary Magadelene Emerick. Two free white males 16 through 25, Samuel - October 31, 1786, (one unknown); one free white female 16 thru 25 (one unknown) and one free white female over 45, probably Mary Llewellyn, widow of John McKinney and mother of Samuel. It would appear that John McKinney, the father, died prior to 1810 and that Samuel inherited the property.

The 1820 Federal Census for Walker Township, Centre County, lists:

Samuel McKinney: one free white male under 10, one free white male twenty six and under forty five, Samuel October 31, 1786; one free white female of sixteen and under twenty six, Rachel - 1799.

Mary McKinney: one free white female twenty six and under forty five, this is Susan who never married, and one free white female of forty five and upwards, Mary Llewellyn McKinney, mother of Samuel.

The 1830 Federal Census for Walker Township, Centre County, lists:

Samuel McKinney: one male of five and under ten, one male of ten and under fifteen, one male of forty and under fifty, two females under five years of age, one female of five and under ten, one female of ten and under fifteen, one female of thirty and under forty.

In a HISTORY OF VENANGO COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, published 1890, it states that John McKinney was a soldier in the American Revolution, emigrated from the North of Ireland and settled in Chester County, Pennsylvania where he reared a family.
From an application to the Daughters of the American Revolution, dated 1966, information states that John McKinney was a volunteer in the Continental Army as a private. He was on the payroll of Captain Andrew Long's Company of the first Battalion of the Rifle Regiment in the service of the Province of Pennsylvania commanded by Daniel Broadhead. He enlisted on April 1776 and was quartered in camp near King's Bridge in the militia, 5th class of 4th Battalion, Chester County Militia, Capt. John T.
Rowland.The application papers lists his children as Anthony, Samuel, Mary and Susan.

The PENNSYLVANIA ARCHIVES THIRD SERIES contains the following information on the John McKinneys of the American Revolution.

1769 Philadelphia County, Gurnedth Town

1773 Bedford County. Ary Township

1773 Bedford County, Bedford Township

1779 Cumberland County. Peter Township

1780 Cumberland County. Peter Township

1782 Cumberland County. Letterkenny Township

1782 Bucks County. Bedminster Township

1784 Bedford County. Providence Township
(Family of nine)

1786 Westmoreland County. Huntington Township

The service records of the various John McKinney's as found in the archives and other records are as follows:

1. Ensign 9th Pennsylvania, 15th November 1776; 21 April 1777, 1st Lt. 18th March 1778. Transfer Pennsylvania 17th January 1781; Transferred Pennsylvania 1st January 1783 and served to June 3, 1783; Deputy Commissary of Purchase, U.S.A. April 25, 1812. Honorably Discharged June 1, 1821. Married Sara Taliferro; died November 25, 1833 at the age of 85. Pension - s clf 196 BLWT - 1438 200 Lt. 2/4/1795

2. Pvt. 4th Pennsylvania 1/30/1776
Capt.James Taylor Co. of Col. Wayne

3. Pvt. 5th Pennsylvania Escaped or sick January Capt Beatty Co. also listed in January 3, 1777.

4. Pvt. Pennsylvania Rifle Reg. April 10, 1 Pennsylvania. Sick December 1776, Capt. Longs Company. Received pension per act of March 14, 1818. Died Hunterdon County, New Jersey in 1820 at age 73.

The Pennsylvania Lineage books has this same McKinney dying in Centre County, Pennsylvania

5. Pvt. 3rd Pennsylvania
Received Pension March 15, 1820 Died in Bucks county, Pennsylvania June 10 1833 at age of 85.

6. Pvt. 2nd Pennsylvania March 25, 1776
Sick in LancasterMay 25,1776
Capt. Marshall Co. August 1778 and September 1778.
Capt. Tolberts Co. 1781
Capt. Ashmead Co. 1779

7. Pvt. 5th Battalion Pennsylvania Capt. Samuel Patten Co. July 1778

8. Pvt. 8th Pennsylvania S. Miller Co. Enlisted March 1171

9. Pvt. Cumberland County Militia 8th. Co. 1782

10. Pvt. Chester County Militia Capt. Mordecai Morgan's Company. On furlough June 27, 1777

11. Pvt. York County Militia 1781 - 1782 Deserted November 15, 1781


SOURCE (unless otherwise noted above)

f. Commemorative Record of Pennsylvania, Venango County, Pennsylvania, pages 825 to 827.

g. Eleventh Census of the Population of the United States Published by Boroughs and Townships, in Connection with a Business Directory of the Same, Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, 1890.

k. Excerpt from miscellaneous papers furnished by the descendants of Captain Andrew Lee of the American Revolution which appeared in Egle's Notes and Queries-1885, Volume I, pages 167-176.

(Note to File - JP Rhein)







 
McKinney, John (I2925)
 
129 Baptism (25 May 1788): Sponsors were Peter Klinger and Magdalena Haak, unmarried. Emerick, Maria Barbara (I1561)
 
130 Baptism (29 February 1786): 1786 was not a leap year. General: There were 3 sons born before 1820, names unknown. Emerick, Johannes (I4167)
 
131 Barbara's parents came to Leatherwood, Armstrong County (later Clarion County) in 1833. (Note to File - JP Rhein) McKinney, Barbara (I0050)
 
132 BEER, JOHN MILTON — John Milton Beer was born October 25, 1859, and died at his late home near Callensburg, Pa., March 7, 1930. He is survived by his widow, Mary Elizabeth Beer, two sons, J. W. (John Wilbur) of Perryville; and H.R., of Knox; two daughters, Mrs. Fred McKinney and Mrs. Homer Burns of Sligo; two brothers W.A. Beer , Arcata, Calif. and B. F. Beer, Moundsville, W. Va., also 19 grandchildren and 3 great grandchildren. In young manhood Mr. Beer was one of the successful school teachers of this section, many of his old pupils speaking very highly at this time of his ability as an instructor. Later he followed the carpenter trade and was for a number of years Justice of the Peace of Licking township. He was for many years a member of the I.O.O.F., of Callensburg and the impressive burial service of the Order was carried out at the grave. The services at the home Sunday at 1:30 p.m. were conducted by Rev. E. C. Hasenplug, of the M.E. church. Source: "The Clarion Democrat" - Mar. 13, 1930 - page 5 Beer, John Milton (I4053)
 
133 Benjamin Gass, farmer and wife, Mary, sell for love and affection for their son-in-law, James McWilliam, 149 acres. (Source - Franklin County, Pennsylvania, Deed Book, page 207). His wife Mary, was an early settler on the Falling Spring - see will of Patrick McClean, recorded in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Cumberland County abstract of wills, page 201.

Was one of twenty families that emigrated from Carlisle and neighboring country to Western Pennsylvania in the spring of 1784. He settled on Chartiers Creek, west of the Monongahela River, a few miles south of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He traded his horse for a track of land of about 200 acres. (Source - The Life of Patrick Gass, A Biography, author unknown) 
Jr, Benjamin Gass (I0214)
 
134 Benjamin Stewart, in 1790, was enumerated 1-1-4, near Samuel Tutor, Gabriel Holland and Robert Cummings. He lived in Cross Creek Township, said the History of Washington County, and kept a blacksmith shop until 1825. (Source - Stewart Clan Magazine, Volume XI - XV, 1933-1938, page 308) Stewart, Benjamin (I0122)
 
135 Bermie and Gertie "Lemaster" Stewart Family Biography compiled by Garry and Carol Cundiff (April 2004)

Much of the information included in this biography was provided by Euretta Martin, the daughter of Bermie and Gertie Lemaster Stewart. The correspondence is in the possession of Garry and Carol Cundiff of Lake St. Louis, Missouri.
Charles Bermie Monroe Stewart was born In Manhattan, Riley County, Kansas July 29, 1883. He was the fifth child and oldest son of Monroe and Hannah "Butler" Stewart. In April, 1889 the family left Kansas and came to Oklahoma. They missed the "Land Run" by a few days because of flooding in some of the rivers but arrived a few days later and Monroe purchased the rights to a claim in the southwestern part of Payne County. The claim was just north of the Cimarron River and is still in the family today (2004).

Bermie grew up on this farm and some of his remembrances have survived about those years. Many of the Stewarts subscribed to the Capper's Weekly, published in Topeka, Kansas and they sometimes contributed to the letter section. Below are two letters that Bermie wrote, probably in the 1950s and 1960s, that tell of some of his early experiences in Oklahoma.

Turnip Year -- My father with his family of 6 children homesteaded in Oklahoma 23 miles northeast of Guthrie which was then, in 1889, the capital. He built a large house close to the main trail from Stillwater to Guthrie. Folks traveling thru would stop to stay overnight or for a meal and Father would tell them he never turned anyone away if they could come up with the accommodations. His charges were 50 cents a night for one horsebacker, and that included 2 meals, bed, and stable and feed for the horse. Sometimes straw-tick pallets were all over the floor.

In 1890 or 1891 we had a spring crop failure and I guess it was by a message from the Lord that hundreds of acres were sown to turnips. The rains came and everyone had turnips -- also the cattle, hogs and horses. That was called "Turnip Year"

There was a wagon yard in Guthrie -- I think it covered about a block. People would go to Guthrie to trade as it was a railroad town and they would put their team and wagon in the yard with stable and hay for the team, for 15 cents. There was a bunkhouse in two corners of the yard, one for single men and one for families, with a cookstove and wood furnished and bunks with hay where you could make your bed with no extra cost.

There were restaurants where you could get a meal family style for 10 cents and if you were going to be in town awhile, sometimes three for 25 cents. Of course, there were some places as expensive as 15 or 20 cents.

From our house we could see the trail for a distance of three miles or more. After the opening of the Cherokee Strip, the range cattle were rounded up and taken to Guthrie for shipment. They came by our place. The drove was 25 or 30 yards wide and the back end of the drove wasn't yet in sight when the front end was out of sight.

In later days a man bought a drove of hogs and came by our place and stayed for the night. They fed the hogs and they just ate their feed and lay down for the night without any fence. Kent Washington - Bermie Stewart

Horse Unharmed -- I well remember the cyclone of April 25, 1893, in Oklahoma. My father was on his way home from Mulhall with a load of freight. When the storm came he unhitched his team and tied them to a blackjack tree about 12 to 14 inches in diameter. He went to a house close by just as the family was coming out. They all lay down in lister furrows, as that was the way most people planted corn in those times. The house stood and no one was hurt.

When father started to go home, there was a wagon but no team. The horses had been tied with ropes around their necks (no halter). He found them a quarter mile east and one-half mile south, still tied to the tree. Its limbs were all whipped off, but the horses were unharmed.

I attended school in a little log house built by donation labor, with a door in the south and one small window on either side. The seats and desks were made of slabs from a sawmill with the sawed side up, with holes bored and pegs for legs. The floor was covered with 4 or 5 inches of sawdust from the mill. The term was 3 months, and the teacher got $12.50 per month. Bermie Stewart - Kent, Washington

As for social entertainment, Bermie would have taken part in the various church activities and occasionally some of the local get togethers. We have a record of one such occasion when his younger sister Grace included a note in a letter to her sister Effie in 1902. "Johnsons had music last night they have an organ, fiddle and mouth organs and McCreights boys were up with their guitars and they had some very nice music so Bermie said. I wasn't there."

July 13, 1907 Bermie married Gertie Jane Lemaster in Coyle. Gertie was born March 22, 1889 in Aurora, Lawrence County, Missouri. Gertie was the daughter of William F. and Dicey Lemaster. Gertie was the fourth of five children identified. When she was 15, her mother died. According to the 1900 Census, William and Dicey had been married 17 years and they had 12 children of which 5 were surviving. Gertie's older sisters married and Gertie was the last daughter at home when she married Bermie.

After their marriage Bermie and Gertie lived in the house owned by Monroe Stewart just north of present day Oak Grove Cemetery. They soon had a sale and went to New Mexico where they began farming. Their daughter Eva was born in Stanley, Santa Fe County, New Mexico June 26, 1909. They remained here until Eva was 15 months old when they returned to Payne County and rented the four room house (Gertie recalled that it was light green) on the original Monroe Stewart homestead. (This is the present home of Waco Bridenstine a descendant of Monroe). It was here that their second daughter Euretta was born October 1, 1911.

The family moved to eastern Oklahoma and Euretta recalled: "I remember faintly a few things when we lived near Pryor in eastern Oklahoma, I think. I remember it was open range and we had a milk cow with a cow bell on her. In the evening the folks would call our dog and have him listen for the cow bell. Then they'd say "Go get her." The dog would bring the cow home. I think Locust Grove (Mayes County) was our post office at one time. I think it is near Pryor. It must have been fall or early winter we moved back to Coyle via covered wagon. We had a lot of nice parsnips in the garden. The folks pulled them - mother bailed them and we took them in the covered wagon to eat on our trip. She'd roll them in flower and fry them. (I'm very fond of parsnips.) We went to Grandpapa's place - there in the big house. I wasn't old enough to go to school - maybe 5. Amber was still going to Progress and she took Eva. I remember I found a little pencil maybe 1 1/2" long. I thought Eve should have it for school. After she and Amber left for school I remembered the pencil so I took out after them running as fast as I could. There was snow on the ground; Amber was pushing Eva along in front of her - having so much fun they couldn't hear me call. finally I turned and went back. I don't think anyone ever missed me! That must have been when we moved to the little house just north of the cemetery. It is gone now. It was on the west side of the road about halfway between the cemetery and the corner (Intersection). Grandpa owned the place. There were two rooms down stairs and the upstairs was just one open area."

I went to Progress School. We left when I was in the 3rd grade. Here is an interesting twist - Roy Kenny was one of my teachers at Progress. He had returned from the war (World War 1) and about all he knew to teach us was how to "salute"! We called him "Cap" - but not to his face. The "Johnsons" - (that is all I know) lived on that road that went north from the school corner. I think the first house on the west side that sat back from the road a little way. Mrs. Johnson died: The day of the funeral as the procession came down the road and turned west, "Cap" had all of us lined up out front of the school and we stood at attention and saluted as the funeral procession went by! The funeral coach was horse drawn - there were a few cars. The horses drawing the wagons, carriages couldn't keep up with the cars. The cars tried to drive slow and their motors were getting hot and steaming. For a little kid I guess I observed a lot.

One Friday nite we started home after school and noticed that "Cap" went to the "out house". Some of the boys slipped down and locked the door from the outside. We were going to leave him there all week end! "Cap' began to beat on the door and yell for someone to let him out. Finally one of the boys ran down and unlocked the door.

In about 1974 (I've forgotten the date) my son got married. It was later when they were opening their wedding gifts - I was there and I noticed gifts from people with names that I recognized and I began to question and it came out that my son Ronnie had married "Caps" grand daughter - in So. Calif! I had met him at the wedding but of course he was just Mr. Kenny! I never thought about having known him so many years ago!"

The family continued to live there until about 1919 when again Euretta recalls: " From there we moved out west 100 miles where Canton (Blaine County) was our Post Office. It was 19 miles north and a little east of our farm. It took us four days by covered wagon. We all four slept in one bed in the wagon. I don't remember feeling crowded! The wagon was so cozy at nite. Mother would light a burner on the kerosene stove in the front of the wagon and put the oven on it. We'd hang a blanket over the front of the wagon."

Euretta: "I was 8 yrs old when we moved to western Oklahoma. You could never guess how I remember. The people who had lived in the house must have been filthy housekeepers. The house had wood lath and plaster (on inside) and probably had never been sealed and painted - from what I know now. In the kitchen it was black with fly spots. I took a pin or a little nail and scratched Euretta Stewart - Age 8 in the plaster. It showed up real white and I thought it looked pretty nice until mother saw it!"

Euretta: " I remember being there one 4th of July. We met friends from "far away" there for the celebration. We each took a gallon of ice cream ready to freeze. We bought ice and froze it there, in the shade, by our team and carriage. How exciting can you get! I got to ride the Merry-go-Round. It cost 5 or 10 cents, I've forgotten. Our farm had 360 acres. At that time there were families living all over the area but the last time I was there it is such a forsaken place - hardly any one within miles.

One Christmas we went back to Coyle via train. We had to leave home in the wee hours of the morning - drove with a team 19 miles to catch the train at noon. With all the waiting along the way we got into Okla. City at midnight. I was so surprised - people hadn't even gone to bed! (It had been dark for a long time!) We caught an inter urban to Guthrie - waited again for the train that would get us into Coyle at noon the next day. (One long day, all nite, until noon the next day for 100 miles) Grandpa had a Ford touring car - I guess what they called a Model T. He didn't know how to drive a car so the only time it could be used was when Uncle Harley drove it. He seemed to be the only one that had mastered the art.

When we went home Uncle Harley, Aunt Bessie, baby Doris, papa, mother, Eva, Franklin and I were packed into Grandpapa's car. What luxury! We drove across country - got to the depot before the train that we were supposed to be on. Our neighbor was waiting for us with our team and carriage. We nearly froze to death before we got home to a house that hadn't had any heat in it for a week."

I've tried to think of the name of our school and the only name that has popped up is Pleasant Valley and yet I'm not sure that is right. We had been there maybe a year or two when one night the school house burned to the ground. It was old and just one room. Now when I think of it, the fire must have been set by someone. There wasn't any electricity and seems like the weather was warm. (It was heated by a big wood stove) It served as a Community Center. That is where we had Sunday School and church if some preacher happened to be in the area. There weren't any churches within miles - probably in the little towns - 10 -12 -19 miles - away and with a team and wagon or a carriage you didn't go that far. Taloga was the closest town but we had to ford the S. Canadian River and it could be quite treacherous at that time. I think now it is dammed up and it is a dry bed there. When our school house burned the folks got us enrolled in another country school out east of us and farther away than our own school 2 and a quarter miles. I remember the name of that school Pig Hill. Eva and I rode our pony. I was in the 4th grade. I had my first Geography Book. That was real important!

For Sunday School they organized a S.S. at another Country School south and east of us; that name was Little Robe. Our new school was built a quarter of a mile farther north of us. It was real modern. It had one large room with a "circulating" wood stove with a "jacket " around it and outside vent. There were two cloak rooms. A gas lamp hung from the ceiling so there could be meetings at night. There were Sunday services- morning and evening. Water had to be carried from the neighbors well. Everybody drank from the same "dipper"

While living in Blaine County, their third child Franklin Monroe was born October 15, 1920. In 1922 a fourth child was born, Bermie Jr. He lived only a short time and is buried in a small cemetery there.

Euretta: "I think we were there on the farm four years. From the farm we moved back to Coyle in the dead of winter. I was now in the 7th grade. We had our first car- a ton truck. Our neighbor showed papa which was the brake and which was the forward pedal - also how not to pull the "spark" (on the steering wheel) down too far when you cranked the car because it might kick and break an arm. They went for a drive and that was it - nothing more to learn! We moved in the truck back to Coyle. I remember we hit icy roads moving to Coyle and papa stalled on a hill and began to slide backward - like a sled. A car came along and that more experienced driver got in and drove us to the top of the hill. Eva and I about froze to death riding in the back on top of the load. We lived in Coyle and papa worked for the railroad. (Coyle had a train then.) It must have been when school was out we moved to Protection - because that Fall (in Kan.) I started 8th grade."

Monroe's brother Walter Lowery Stewart lived in Protection and two of his daughters, Ida and Jessie had married local farmers, Abraham and Arthur Van Wey.

Euretta: "I don't know why the folks wanted to move to Kansas (Protection). That summer papa worked in the wheat harvest. We lived in a tent at Jessie and Art Van Wey's home. With so many people in for the harvest, housing in Protection I guess was not to be had. (they hadn't heard of apartments and condos!) Our tent was in a grove of trees not far from Jessie's house and we got water from their well. That fall we got a house in town. Later we bought a home then bought the Produce. Protection used to buzz - especially on Saturday night during the summer. All the farmers would come to town. The harvest hands from far and near - having no place to go would also be there. It was an opportunity for the town people to see and visit with friends. I would be working in the store. Upon arrival the people would come in and place their order. We each had a "pad" to write down everything -"Peck of Potatoes", 50 cents lima beans, 10 lb. sugar, etc. Then they'd go out on the street where they'd visit with friends while we filled their orders. Just before midnight they were all ready to get their groceries and go home. My boss would always send me home at midnight. He'd stay to take care of the stragglers! I started working there for 50 cents a day - Mon-Fri and $1.00 on Saturday. We sold groceries, work clothes, shoes, yardage - just name it. I remember one big fat woman would come in to look at shoes. She couldn't reach her feet and she always wanted to see about every shoe in the store. I can't remember if she ever bought a pair! The store owner was an Assyrian - married to a "white" woman. He was kind of known as the Jew.

He taught me a lot of things. I felt real privileged to work there. They had a daughter a year behind me in school. She was sick for a while and got behind in her work. She couldn't seem to catch up in arithmetic so they asked if I would tutor her 1 hour after school. Arithmetic was my subject - I loved it. They'd pay me 25 cents! That went on until the daughter was sailing through her work. Then they asked if I'd work in the store. That is how I got the job. Imagine my excitement! A lot of the kids in town - older than I was, didn't have a job. Kids now expect more for one hour's work than I got for the whole week working 8-6 Mon-Fri and 8-12 (Midnight) Saturday. Times have really changed!

We lived there and I went to school in the 8th, 9th and 10th grades - then we moved to Missouri. At that time it was a thriving little town of about 1,200 people."

Uncle Lowery had a little shoe repair shop. Jessie Van Wey's home was maybe 3-4 miles south of town - husband, Art, was a wheat farmer."

Carol and I visited Protection, Kansas a few years ago and Euretta provided us a map of what the town looked like when her family lived there. It was recognizable although some of the buildings were gone. Below is Euretta's sketch of Protection in about 1925-1928.


Euretta: "In the fall of '28 we moved to Mountain Grove, Missouri. Eva graduated from H.S. in the spring of "29". (I was a Junior) While living in Mountain Grove for the school year papa got out and scouted around and bought the farm at Ava (Douglas County). In the spring of 1929 when school was out we moved there. We were there (Ava) all summer and I was fortunate to meet the "right" kids in church at Ava in town. When school started I seemed to have a "place" and it was the most wonderful year of my High School. Even as a newcomer I was elected as an officer in a literary society. I made the H.S. girls quartette, the H.S. mixed quartette and I loved it. I had one of the leads in our Spring Operetta and graduated there in 1930."

Bermie and Gertie continued to farm and live near Ava until 1942. Their oldest daughter, Eva, had married and her family had moved to Oregon. Euretta: "By 1942 Eva, Franklin, and I were all married - Franklin was in the army. The folks moved to Wilmington, Calif. (Uncle Harley and Aunt Bessie were there) That was just before gas rationing. My husband and I drove through to Calif. with them. Papa worked in the Ship Yards during the war. After that he seemed to sort of retire.

They moved farther north to Exeter, Calif. and from there (I think) they moved to Dorena, Oregon. (I don't know the years) From there they moved into Creswell Oregon where they lived a short time and then moved to Kent, Wash. (Franklin was at Kent). Papa was in his 80's when he built their home there. (He'd bought a couple of other houses.) It was in this new house where they were living when he died. He was taken to Eugene, Oregon for burial. Mother later moved back to Creswell, Oregon (Eva lived there) where she died and was buried in Eugene."

Bermie along with both of his brothers were accomplished carpenters. The families relate numerous stories about their construction projects.

Charles Bermie Monroe Stewart died August 02, 1971 and Gertie Jane Lemaster Stewart died May 6, 1982. They are buried in Lane Memorial Gardens, Eugene, Oregon.

In 1932 the oldest daughter Eva married Ralph Conklin in Sparta in Christian County, Missouri. They had two children, Charles, born 1934 and Wanda, born 1936. Ralph was a truck driver and they moved to Creswell, Oregon where the children were raised. Charles married Frances Green and was a barber in Cottage Grove. Wanda married Dan Peters and Dan was a heavy equipment mechanic in Cottage Grove. Ralph died August 31, 1981 and Eva died November 25, 1995. They are buried in Lane Memorial Gardens, Eugene, Oregon.

Euretta married Paul Martin, January 28, 1933 in Ava, Douglas County, Missouri. Paul was a high school principal in Missouri. They had two children in Missouri, Naomi, born Oct 30, 1935 and Leon born March 22, 1938. Leon had sterp throat and died in April 1940.

Paul and Euretta moved to California In 1942. They were in the L.A. area but during the war. Euretta would later relate. "We didn't have gas to go anywhere." They bought their home in 1948 and lived in Southern California most of their married life. Paul was a high school math teacher in California and he obtained a Master's Degree from the University of California in Los Angles. Their third child Ronald was born there in 1952. Paul and Euretta retired to Santa Rosa, California (North of San Francisco) and Euretta still lives there (2004). Paul died March 09, 1982 and is buried in Santa Rosa Memorial Park, Santa Rosa, California.

Franklin married Lucille Harnden June 7, 1942 in Ava, Douglas County, Missouri and shortly afterward joined the Army. He served in World War II and was awarded the Bronze Star. Franklin and Lucille had five children, Margaret born in Springfield, Missouri, Doris, Jeanne, Calvin, all born in Cottage Grove, Oregon and Janet, born in Renton, Washington.

After he returning from the service, the family lived in Cottage Grove, Lane County, Oregon. Euretta: "In Cottage Grove, Franklin was a chicken farmer. He had a large three story chicken house. He built an elevator that they used to take feed up, when they went up to gather eggs, etc. If he needed something that he couldn't afford to buy he'd make it! I remember he built a Marry-Go-round for the children."

Franklin's family moved to Kent, Washington in the Seattle area about 1955 where Franklin worked 23 years as an Electronic Quality Control Inspector for Boeing Aircraft. Franklin died January 13, 1999 and Lucille died October 26, 2001. They are buried in Greenwood Memorial Park, Renton, Washington.

 
Stewart, Charles Bermie Monroe (I3951)
 
136 Birth: Sep. 11, 1896
Clarion County
Pennsylvania, USA
Death: Feb. 22, 1933
Clarion County
Pennsylvania, USA

Homer Alonzo Burns, son of Edward and Anna (Finnefrock) Burns, was born September 11, 1896 at Sligo, Pa., and died February 22, 1933, after an illness of a few days of pneumonia. He was united in marriage Sept. 11, 1918, to Miss Dimple Beers, and to their union were born eight children, Mildred, Dorothy, Evelyn, Agnes, Lois, John, Karl, and Ruby, all at home. He also leaves his mother and the following named brothers and sisters: Mrs. Orville Myers, Mrs. Clyde Larimer, of Sligo, Pa.; Thomas of Callensburg, and Donald of Rimersburg. Funeral services were held at his home February 24, 1933, conducted by Rev. Renwick of Sligo, and the remains were given interment in the Sligo cemetery under the direction of R. R. Hawk.
New Bethlehem Vindicator, 1933




Burial::
Sligo Cemetery
Sligo
Clarion County
Pennsylvania, USA

Created by: Thelma Kifer
Record added: Sep 23 2008
Find A Grave Memorial# 30013814



 
Burns, Homer Alonzo (I4099)
 
137 Birth: Jul. 20, 1896
Clarion County
Pennsylvania, USA
Death: Jan. 21, 1958
Clarion County
Pennsylvania, USA

Thomas H. Craig, 61, of North East, Pa., died January 21, 1958 in the Passavant Hospital, Pittsburgh. He was born July 20, 1896 in Sligo, the son of Charles F. and Minnie Mae Anderson Craig. He was married to Mary Agnes Hartman in1917, who survives. Those surviving beside his wife are six daughters: Agnes Males, North East, Annabelle Prichard, North East, Elsie Grazier, Erie, Mary Wright, Bruin, Luella and Barbara, at home; five sons Charles Edwin, Lowellville, O. Thomas C., Curllsville, Herbert, East Brady, Wade and Robert, at home three brothers: William of Knox, Ira, of Cleveland, O., and Herman , of Rimersburg; seven sisters; Mrs. Grant Hoover, Sligo, Mrs. Nina McMaster, Pittsburgh, Mrs. Mable White, Warren, Mrs. Ira Stewart, Meadville, Mrs. Evabelle McClain, East Brady, Mrs. May McCall, Clarion, RD, and Mrs. Carl Heeter, Sligo, and 16 grandchildren. A daughter, Connie, preceded him in death in 1942. He had been a resident of Sligo before moving to North East several years ago. He was a member of the Presbyterian Church, Sligo, and the Moose, Clarion. Funeral services were held Friday, January 24, 1958, at 2 p.m. at the Hawk Funeral Home, Sligo, with Rev. Harold Orr officiating Burial was in Rimersburg.



 
Craig, Thomas Hobart (I2914)
 
138 Born December 8, 1542, Linlithgow Palace, West Lothian, Scotland died February 8, 1587, Fotheringhay Castle, Northamptonshire, England
byname Mary Queen of Scots, original name Mary Stuart or Mary Stewart queen of Scotland (1542–67) and queen consort of France (1559–60). Her unwise marital and political actions provoked rebellion among the Scottish nobles, forcing her to flee to England, where she was eventually beheaded as a Roman Catholic threat to the English throne.

Early life

Mary Stuart was the only child of King James V of Scotland and his French wife, Mary of Guise. The death of her father six days after her birth left Mary as queen of Scotland in her own right. Although Mary's great-uncle King Henry VIII of England made an unsuccessful effort to secure control of her (Mary inherited Tudor blood through her grandmother, a sister of Henry VIII), the regency of the kingdom was settled in favour of her mother.

Her mother saw to it that Mary was sent to France at age five. There she was brought up at the court of King Henry II and his queen Catherine de Médicis with their own large family, assisted by relations on her mother's side, the powerful Guises. Despite a charmed childhood of much luxury, including frequent hunting and dancing (at both of which she excelled), Mary's education was not neglected, and she was taught Latin, Italian, Spanish, and some Greek. French now became her first language, and indeed in every other way Mary grew into a Frenchwoman rather than a Scot.

By her remarkable beauty, with her tall, slender figure (she was about 5 feet 11 inches), her red-gold hair and amber-coloured eyes, and her taste for music and poetry, Mary summed up the contemporary ideal of the Renaissance princess at the time of her marriage to Francis, eldest son of Henry and Catherine, in April 1558. Although it was a political match aimed at the union of France and Scotland, Mary was sincerely fond of her boy husband, though the marriage was probably never consummated.

The accession of Elizabeth Tudor to the throne of England in November 1558 meant that Mary was, by virtue of her Tudor blood, next in line to the English throne. Those Roman Catholics who considered Elizabeth illegitimate because they regarded Henry VIII's divorce from Catherine of Aragon and his marriage to Anne Boleyn invalid even looked upon Mary as the lawful queen. Mary's father-in-law, Henry II of France, thus claimed the English throne on her behalf. The death of Henry in 1559 brought Francis to the French throne and made Mary a glittering queen consort of France, until Francis's premature death in December 1560 made her a widow at the age of 18.
Queen of Scotland

Returning to Scotland in August 1561, Mary discovered that her sheltered French upbringing had made her ill-equipped to cope with the series of problems now facing her. Mary's former pretensions to the English throne had incurred Elizabeth's hostility. She refused to acknowledge Mary as her heiress, however much Mary, nothing if not royal by temperament, prized her English rights. While Mary herself was a Roman Catholic, the official religion of Scotland had been reformed to Protestantism in her absence, and she thus represented to many, including the leading Calvinist preacher John Knox, a foreign queen of an alien religion. Most difficult of all were the Scottish nobles; factious and turbulent after a series of royal minorities, they cared more for private feuds and self-aggrandizement than support of the crown. Nevertheless, for the first years of her rule, Mary managed well, with the aid of her bastard half-brother James, earl of Moray, and helped in particular by her policy of religious tolerance. Nor were all the Scots averse to the spectacle of a pretty young queen creating a graceful court life and enjoying her progresses round the country.

It was Mary's second marriage in July 1565 to her cousin Henry Stewart (Stuart), earl of Darnley, son of Matthew Stewart, 4th earl of Lennox, that started the fatal train of events culminating in her destruction. Mary married the handsome Darnley recklessly for love. It was a disastrous choice because by her marriage she antagonized all the elements interested in the power structure of Scotland, including Elizabeth, who disapproved of Mary marrying another Tudor descendant, and her half brother James, who, jealous of the Lennox family's rise to power, promptly rebelled. Nor did Darnley's character measure up to the promise of his appearance—he was weak, vicious, and yet ambitious. The callous butchery of her secretary and confidant, David Riccio (Rizzio), in front of her own eyes, in March 1566, by Darnley and a group of nobles, convinced Mary that her husband had aimed at her own life. The birth of their son James in June did nothing to reconcile the couple, and Mary, armed now with the heir she had craved, looked for some means to relieve an intolerable situation.

The next eight months constitute the most tangled and controversial period of Mary's career. According to Mary's detractors, it was during this period that she developed an adulterous liaison with James Hepburn, 4th earl of Bothwell, and planned with him the death of Darnley and their own following marriage. There is, however, no contemporary evidence of this love affair, before Darnley's death, except the highly dubious so-called Casket Letters, poems and letters supposedly written by Mary to Bothwell but now generally considered to be inadmissible evidence by historians. But Mary did undoubtedly consider the question of a divorce from Darnley, after a serious illness in October 1566, which left her health wrecked and her spirits low. On the night of February 9, 1567, the house at Kirk o' Field on the outskirts of Edinburgh where Darnley lay recovering from illness was blown up, and Darnley himself was strangled while trying to escape. Many theories have been put forward to explain conflicting accounts of the crime, including the possibility that Darnley, plotting to blow up Mary, was caught in his own trap. Nevertheless, the most obvious explanation—that those responsible were the nobles who hated Darnley—is the most likely one.

Whatever Mary's foreknowledge of the crime, her conduct thereafter was fatally unwise and showed how much she lacked wise counselors in Scotland. After three months, she allowed herself to be married off to Bothwell, the chief suspect, after he abducted and ravished her. If passion is rejected as the motive, Mary's behaviour can be ascribed to her increasing despair, exacerbated by ill health, at her inability to manage the affairs of tempestuous Scotland without a strong arm to support her. But in fact Bothwell as a consort proved no more acceptable to the jealous Scottish nobility than Darnley had been. Mary and Bothwell were parted forever at Carberry Hill on June 15, 1567, Bothwell to exile and imprisonment where he died in 1578, and Mary to incarceration on the tiny island of Loch Leven, where she was formally deposed in favour of her one-year-old son James. After a brief fling of liberty the following year, defeat of her supporters at a battle at Langside put her once more to flight. Impulsively, Mary sought refuge in England with her cousin Elizabeth. But Elizabeth, with all the political cunning Mary lacked, employed a series of excuses connected with the murder of Darnley to hold Mary in English captivity in a series of prisons for the next 18 years of her life. In the meantime, Mary's brother Moray flourished as regent of Scotland.

Captivity in England

Mary's captivity was long and wearisome, only partly allayed by the consolations of religion and, on a more mundane level, her skill at embroidery and her love of such little pets as lap dogs and singing birds. Her health suffered from the lack of physical exercise, her figure thickened, and her beauty diminished, as can be seen in the best-known pictures of her in black velvet and white veil, dating from 1578. Naturally, she concentrated her energies on procuring release from an imprisonment she considered unjustified, at first by pleas, and later by conspiracy. Unfortunately for her survival, Mary as a Catholic was the natural focus for the hopes of those English Catholics who wished to replace the Protestant queen Elizabeth on the throne. It was the discovery in 1586 of a plot to assassinate Elizabeth and bring about a Roman Catholic uprising that convinced Queen Elizabeth that, while she lived, Mary would always constitute too dangerous a threat to her own position.

Despite the fact that she was the sovereign queen of another country, Mary was tried by an English court and condemned; her son, James, who had not seen his mother since infancy and now had his sights fixed on succeeding to the English throne, raised no objections. Mary was executed in 1587 in the great hall at Fotheringhay Castle, near Peterborough; she was 44 years old. It was a chilling scene, redeemed by the great personal dignity with which Mary met her fate. Her body ultimately came to rest in Westminster Abbey in a magnificent monument James I raised to his mother, after he finally ascended the throne of England.

A romantic and tragic figure to her supporters, a scheming adulteress if not murderess to her political enemies, Mary aroused furious controversy in her own lifetime, during which her cousin Queen Elizabeth aptly termed her “the daughter of debate.” Her dramatic story has continued to provoke argument among historians ever since, while the public interest in this 16th-century femme fatale remains unabated.
(Source – Encyclopedia Britannica)
 
Stuart, Mary Queen of Scotland (I0737)
 
139 Born in a log cabin. Stewart, Seth Charles (I1172)
 
140 Born June 19, 1566, Edinburgh Castle, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Died March 27, 1625, Theobalds, Hertfordshire, England.

King of Scotland (as James VI) from 1567 to 1625 and first Stuart king of England from 1603 to 1625, who styled himself “king of Great Britain.” James was a strong advocate of royal absolutism, and his conflicts with an increasingly self-assertive Parliament set the stage for the rebellion against his successor, Charles I.

James was the only son of Mary, Queen of Scots, and her second husband, Henry Stewart, Lord Darnley. Eight months after James's birth his father died when his house was destroyed by an explosion. After her third marriage, to James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell, Mary was defeated by rebel Scottish lords and abdicated the throne. James, one year old, became king of Scotland on July 24, 1567; Mary left the kingdom on May 16, 1568, and never saw her son again. During his minority James was surrounded by a small band of the great Scottish lords, from whom emerged the four successive regents, the earls of Moray, Lennox, Mar, and Morton. There did not exist in Scotland the great gulf between rulers and ruled that separated the Tudors and their subjects in England. For nine generations the Stuarts had in fact been merely the ruling family among many equals, and James all his life retained a feeling for those of the great Scottish lords who gained his confidence.

The young king was kept fairly isolated but was given a good education until the age of 14. He studied Greek, French, and Latin and made good use of a library of classical and religious writings that his tutors, George Buchanan and Peter Young, assembled for him. James's education aroused in him literary ambitions rarely found in princes but which also tended to make him a pedant.

Before James was 12 he had taken the government nominally into his own hands when the Earl of Morton was driven from the regency in 1578. For several years more, however, James remained the puppet of contending intriguers and faction leaders. After falling under the influence of the Duke of Lennox, a Roman Catholic who schemed to win back Scotland for the imprisoned Queen Mary, James was kidnapped by William Ruthven, 1st Earl of Gowrie, in 1582 and was forced to denounce Lennox. The following year James escaped from his Protestant captors and began to pursue his own policies as king. His chief purposes were to escape from subservience to Scottish factions and to establish his claim to succeed the childless Elizabeth I upon the throne of England. Realizing that more was to be gained by cultivating Elizabeth's goodwill than by allying himself with her enemies, James in 1585–86 concluded an alliance with England. Thenceforward, in his own unsteady fashion, he remained true to this policy, and even Elizabeth's execution of his mother in 1587 drew from him only formal protests.

In 1589 James was married to Anne, the daughter of Frederick II of Denmark, who, in 1594, gave birth to their first son, Prince Henry. James's rule of Scotland was basically successful. He was able to play off Protestant and Roman Catholic factions of Scottish nobles against each other, and through a group of commissioners known as the Octavians (1596–97), he was able to rule Scotland almost as absolutely as Elizabeth ruled England. The king was a convinced Presbyterian, but in 1584 he secured a series of acts that made him the head of the Presbyterian church in Scotland, with the power to appoint the church's bishops.

When James at length succeeded to the English throne on the death of Elizabeth I (March 24, 1603), he was already, as he told the English Parliament, “an old and experienced king” and one with a clearly defined theory of royal government. Unfortunately, neither his experience nor his theory equipped him to solve the new problems facing him; and he lacked the qualities of mind and character to supply the deficiency. James hardly understood the rights or the temper of the English Parliament, and he thus came into conflict with it. He had little contact with the English middle classes, and he suffered from the narrowness of his horizons. His 22-year-long reign over England was to prove almost as unfortunate for the Stuart dynasty as his years before 1603 had been fortunate.

There was admittedly much that was sensible in his policies, and the opening years of his reign as king of Great Britain were a time of material prosperity for both England and Scotland. For one thing, he established peace by speedily ending England's war with Spain in 1604. But the true test of his statesmanship lay in his handling of Parliament, which was claiming ever-wider rights to criticize and shape public policy. Moreover, Parliament's established monopoly of granting taxes made its assent necessary for the improvement of the crown's finances, which had been seriously undermined by the expense of the long war with Spain. James, who had so successfully divided and corrupted Scottish assemblies, never mastered the subtler art of managing an English Parliament. He kept few privy councillors in the House of Commons and thus allowed independent members there to seize the initiative. Moreover, his lavish creations of new peers and, later in his reign, his subservience to various recently ennobled favourites loosened his hold upon the House of Lords. His fondness for lecturing both houses of Parliament about his royal prerogatives offended them and drew forth such counterclaims as the Apology of the Commons (1604). To parliamentary statesmen used to Tudor dignity, James's shambling gait, restless garrulity, and dribbling mouth ill-befitted his exalted claims to power and privilege.

When Parliament refused to grant him a special fund to pay for his extravagances, James placed new customs duties on merchants without Parliament's consent, thereby threatening its control of governmental finance. Moreover, by getting the law courts to proclaim these actions as law (1608) after Parliament had refused to enact them, James struck at the houses' legislative supremacy. In four years of peace, James practically doubled the debt left by Elizabeth, and it was hardly surprising that when his chief minister, Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, tried in 1610–11 to exchange the king's feudal revenues for a fixed annual sum from Parliament, the negotiations over this so-called Great Contract came to nothing. James dissolved Parliament in 1611.

The abortive Great Contract, and the death of Cecil in 1612, marked the turning point of James's reign; he was never to have another chief minister who was so experienced and so powerful. During the ensuing 10 years the king summoned only the brief Addled Parliament of 1614. Deprived of parliamentary grants, the crown was forced to adopt unpopular expedients, such as the sale of monopolies, to raise funds. Moreover, during these years the king succumbed to the influence of the incompetent Robert Carr, Earl of Somerset. Carr was succeeded as the king's favourite by George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, who showed more ability as chief minister but who was even more hated for his arrogance and his monopoly of royal favour.

In his later years the king's judgment faltered. He embarked on a foreign policy that fused discontent into a formidable opposition. The king felt a sympathy, which his countrymen found inexplicable, for the Spanish ambassador, Diego Sarmiento de Acuña, Count of Gondomar. When Sir Walter Raleigh, who had gone to Guiana in search of gold, came into conflict with the Spaniards, who were then at peace with England, Gondomar persuaded James to have Raleigh beheaded. With Gondomar's encouragement, James developed a plan to marry his second son and heir Charles to a Spanish princess, along with a concurrent plan to join with Spain in mediating the Thirty Years' War in Germany. The plan, though plausible in the abstract, showed an astonishing disregard for English public opinion, which solidly supported James's son-in-law, Frederick, the Protestant elector of the Palatinate, whose lands were then occupied by Spain. When James called a third Parliament in 1621 to raise funds for his designs, that body was bitterly critical of his attempts to ally England with Spain. James in a fury tore the record of the offending Protestations from the House of Commons' journal and dissolved the Parliament.

The Duke of Buckingham had begun in enmity with Prince Charles, who became the heir when his brother Prince Henry died in 1612, but in the course of time the two formed an alliance from which the king was quite excluded. James was now aging rapidly, and in the last 18 months of his reign he, in effect, exercised no power; Charles and Buckingham decided most issues. James died at his favourite country residence, Theobalds, in Hertfordshire.

Besides the political problems that he bequeathed to his son Charles, James left a body of writings which, though of mediocre quality as literature, entitle him to a unique place among English kings since the time of Alfred. Chief among these writings are two political treatises, The True Lawe of Free Monarchies (1598) and Basilikon Doron (1599), in which he expounded his own views on the divine right of kings. The Poems of James VI of Scotland, 2 vol., were edited by James Craigie (1955–58). The 1616 edition of The Political Works of James I was edited by Charles Howard McIlwain (1918). (Source - Encyclopedia Britannic)



 
James, VI King of Scotland (I1935)
 
141 Born November 19, 1600, Dunfermline Palace, Fife, Scotland
Died January 30, 1649, London

Charles I, king of Great Britain and Ireland
(1625–49), whose authoritarian rule and quarrels with Parliament provoked a civil war that led to his execution.

Charles was the second surviving son of James VI of Scotland and Anne of Denmark. He was a sickly child, and, when his father became king of England in March 1603, he was temporarily left behind in Scotland because of the risks of the journey. Devoted to his elder brother, Henry, and to his sister, Elizabeth, he became lonely when Henry died (1612) and his sister left England in 1613 to marry Frederick V, elector of the Rhine Palatinate (see James I).

All his life Charles had a Scots accent and a slight stammer. Small in stature, he was less dignified than his portraits by the Flemish painter Sir Anthony Van Dyck suggest. He was always shy and struck observers as being silent and reserved. His excellent temper, courteous manners, and lack of vices impressed all those who met him, but he lacked the common touch, travelled about little, and never mixed with ordinary people. A patron of the arts (notably of painting and tapestry; he brought both Van Dyck and another famous Flemish painter, Peter Paul Rubens, to England), he was, like all the Stuarts, also a lover of horses and hunting. He was sincerely religious, and the character of the court became less coarse as soon as he became king. From his father he acquired a stubborn belief that kings are intended by God to rule, and his earliest surviving letters reveal a distrust of the unruly House of Commons with which he proved incapable of coming to terms. Lacking flexibility or imagination, he was unable to understand that those political deceits that he always practiced in increasingly vain attempts to uphold his authority eventually impugned his honour and damaged his credit.

In 1623, before succeeding to the throne, Charles, accompanied by the Duke of Buckingham, King James I's favourite, made an incognito visit to Spain in order to conclude a marriage treaty with the daughter of King Philip III. When the mission failed, largely because of Buckingham's arrogance and the Spanish court's insistence that Charles become a Roman Catholic, he joined Buckingham in pressing his father for war against Spain. In the meantime a marriage treaty was arranged on his behalf with Henrietta Maria, sister of the French king, Louis XIII.

Conflict with Parliament

In March 1625, Charles I became king and married Henrietta Maria soon afterward. When his first Parliament met in June, trouble immediately arose because of the general distrust of Buckingham, who had retained his ascendancy over the new king. The Spanish war was proving a failure and Charles offered Parliament no explanations of his foreign policy or its costs. Moreover, the Puritans, who advocated extemporaneous prayer and preaching in the Church of England, predominated in the House of Commons, whereas the sympathies of the King were with what came to be known as the High Church Party, which stressed the value of the prayer book and the maintenance of ritual. Thus antagonism soon arose between the new king and the Commons, and Parliament refused to vote him the right to levy tonnage and poundage (customs duties) except on conditions that increased its powers, though this right had been granted to previous monarchs for life.

The second Parliament of the reign, meeting in February 1626, proved even more critical of the King's government, though some of the former leaders of the Commons were kept away because Charles had ingeniously appointed them sheriffs in their counties. The failure of a naval expedition against the Spanish port of Cádiz in the previous autumn was blamed on Buckingham and the Commons tried to impeach him for treason. To prevent this, Charles dissolved Parliament in June. Largely through the incompetence of Buckingham, the country now became involved in a war with France as well as with Spain and, in desperate need of funds, the King imposed a forced loan, which his judges declared illegal. He dismissed the chief justice and ordered the arrest of more than 70 knights and gentlemen who refused to contribute. His high-handed actions added to the sense of grievance that was widely discussed in the next Parliament.

By the time Charles's third Parliament met (March 1628), Buckingham's expedition to aid the French Protestants at La Rochelle had been decisively repelled and the King's government was throughly discredited. The House of Commons at once passed resolutions condemning arbitrary taxation and arbitrary imprisonment and then set out its complaints in the Petition of Right, which sought recognition of four principles—no taxes without consent of Parliament; no imprisonment without cause; no quartering of soldiers on subjects; no martial law in peacetime. The King, despite his efforts to avoid approving this petition, was compelled to give his formal consent. By the time the fourth Parliament met in January 1629, Buckingham had been assassinated. The House of Commons now objected both to what it called the revival of “popish practices” in the churches and to the levying of tonnage and poundage by the King's officers without its consent. The King ordered the adjournment of Parliament on March 2, 1629, but before that the speaker was held down in his chair and three resolutions were passed condemning the King's conduct. Charles realized that such behaviour was revolutionary. For the next 11 years he ruled his kingdom without calling a Parliament.

In order that he might no longer be dependent upon parliamentary grants, he now made peace with both France and Spain, for, although the royal debt amounted to more than £1,000,000, the proceeds of the customs duties at a time of expanding trade and the exaction of traditional crown dues combined to produce a revenue that was just adequate in time of peace. The King also tried to economize in the expenditure of his household. To pay for the Royal Navy, so-called ship money was levied, first in 1634 on ports and later on inland towns as well. The demands for ship money aroused obstinate and widespread resistance by 1638, even though a majority of the judges of the court of Exchequer found in a test case that the levy was legal.

These in fact were the happiest years of Charles's life. At first he and Henrietta Maria had not been happy, and in July 1626 he peremptorily ordered all of her French entourage to quit Whitehall. After the death of Buckingham, however, he fell in love with his wife and came to value her counsel. Though the King regarded himself as responsible for his actions—not to his people or Parliament but to God alone according to the doctrine of the divine right of kings—he recognized his duty to his subjects as “an indulgent nursing father.” If he was often indolent, he exhibited spasmodic bursts of energy, principally in ordering administrative reforms, although little impression was made upon the elaborate network of private interests in the armed services and at court. On the whole, the kingdom seems to have enjoyed some degree of prosperity until 1639, when Charles became involved in a war against the Scots.

The early Stuarts neglected Scotland. At the beginning of his reign Charles alienated the Scottish nobility by an act of revocation whereby lands claimed by the crown or the church were subject to forfeiture. His decision in 1637 to impose upon his northern kingdom a new liturgy, based on the English Book of Common Prayer, although approved by the Scottish bishops, met with concerted resistance. When many Scots signed a national covenant to defend their Presbyterian religion, the King decided to enforce his ecclesiastical policy with the sword. He was outmanoeuvred by a well-organized Scottish covenanting army, and by the time he reached York in March 1639 the first of the so-called Bishops' Wars was already lost. A truce was signed at Berwick-upon-Tweed on June 18.

On the advice of the two men who had replaced Buckingham as the closest advisers of the King—William Laud, archbishop of Canterbury, and the Earl of Strafford, his able lord deputy in Ireland—Charles summoned a Parliament that met in April 1640—later known as the Short Parliament—in order to raise money for the war against Scotland. The House insisted first on discussing grievances against the government and showed itself opposed to a renewal of the war; so, on May 5, the King dissolved Parliament again. The collection of ship money was continued and so was the war. A Scottish army crossed the border in August and the King's troops panicked before a cannonade at Newburn. Charles, deeply perturbed at his second defeat, convened a council of peers on whose advice he summoned another Parliament, the Long Parliament, which met at Westminster in November 1640.

The new House of Commons, proving to be just as uncooperative as the last, condemned Charles's recent actions and made preparations to impeach Strafford and other ministers for treason. The King adopted a conciliatory attitude—he agreed to the Triennial Act that ensured the meeting of Parliament once every three years—but expressed his resolve to save Strafford, to whom he promised protection. He was unsuccessful even in this, however. Strafford was beheaded on May 12, 1641.

Charles was forced to agree to a measure whereby the existing Parliament could not be dissolved without its own consent. He also accepted bills declaring ship money and other arbitrary fiscal measures illegal, and in general condemning his methods of government during the previous 11 years. But while making these concessions, he visited Scotland in August to try to enlist anti-parliamentary support there. He agreed to the full establishment of Presbyterianism in his northern kingdom and allowed the Scottish estates to nominate royal officials.

Meanwhile, Parliament reassembled in London after a recess, and, on Nov. 22, 1641, the Commons passed by 159 to 148 votes the Grand Remonstrance to the King, setting out all that had gone wrong since his accession. At the same time news of a rebellion in Ireland had reached Westminster. Leaders of the Commons, fearing that if any army were raised to repress the Irish rebellion it might be used against them, planned to gain control of the army by forcing the King to agree to a militia bill. When asked to surrender his command of the army, Charles exclaimed “By God, not for an hour.” Now fearing an impeachment of his Catholic queen, he prepared to take desperate action. He ordered the arrest of one member of the House of Lords and five of the Commons for treason and went with about 400 men to enforce the order himself. The accused members escaped, however, and hid in the City. After this rebuff the King left London on January 10, this time for the north of England. The Queen went to Holland in February to raise funds for her husband by pawning the crown jewels.

A lull followed, during which both Royalists and Parliamentarians enlisted troops and collected arms, although Charles had not completely given up hopes of peace. After a vain attempt to secure the arsenal at Hull, in April the King settled in York, where he ordered the courts of justice to assemble and where royalist members of both houses gradually joined him. In June the majority of the members remaining in London sent the King the Nineteen Propositions, which included demands that no ministers should be appointed without parliamentary approval, that the army should be put under parliamentary control, and that Parliament should decide about the future of the church. Charles realized that these proposals were an ultimatum; yet he returned a careful answer in which he gave recognition to the idea that his was a “mixed government” and not an autocracy. But in July both sides were urgently making ready for war. The King formally raised the royal standard at Nottingham on August 22 and sporadic fighting soon broke out all over the kingdom.
(Source - Encyclopedia Britannica)


THE CIVIL WARS 1642-51

The tension between Charles and Parliament was still great, since none of the issues raised by the Short Parliament had been resolved. This tension was brought to a head on January 4th, 1642 when Charles attempted to arrest five members of parliament. This attempt failed, since they were spirited away before the king's troops arrived. Charles left London and both he and parliament began to stockpile military resources and recruit troops.

Charles officially began the war by raising his standard at Nottingham in August, 1642. Robert Devereux (3rd Earl of Essex) was made parliamentary commander.

At this stage of the wars, parliament had no wish to kill the king. It was hoped that Charles could be reinstated as ruler, but with a more constructive attitude to parliament.

The majority of the country was neutral in the civil wars, and both sides only had about 13,000 men in 1642.

The areas of Royalist support tended to be the North, West and Wales. Parliament were supported by the richer South and East, including London. Parliament also held most of the ports, since the merchants that ran them saw more profit in a parliament-lead country.

Parliament definitely had access to more resources than the king, and could collect taxes. Charles had to depend on donations from his supporters to fund his armies.

The first war stretched from 1642 to 1646, beginning with the king's raising of the standard.

Charles marched on London, hoping for a quick victory that would negate the benefits of parliament's resources. He was met at Edgehill (Oct 23 1642) by Essex and a battle was fought. This battle proved inconclusive, but failed to stop Charles' advance. He was met by another force at Turnham Green, however, and was forced to turn away from London.

Charles withdrew to Oxford, where his headquarters was based for the rest of the war.

In 1643, many battles were fought all over the country.

The royalist forces won at Adwalton Moor (Jun 30), taking control of Yorkshire. They also won at Lansdown and Roundway Down (Jul) in the South-West, allowing Prince Rupert to take Bristol.

The forces of parliament won at Winceby (Oct 11), taking Lincoln, but on the whole had the worst part of military actions for the year.

At Newbury (Sep), a large battle took place that was inconclusive. After this testing of the major armies, both sides sought allies elsewhere.

Parliament drew up the "Solemn League & Covenant", which promised the Scots religious reforms in return for their help.

Charles negotiated a cease-fire in Ireland that freed English troops for action on the mainland.

In 1644, military actions were more balanced. Parliament won at Marston Moor (Jul 2), allowing them to take York with the Scots' help. They lost at Lostwithiel in the South-West, and withdrew from Newbury after a second inconclusive battle.

In 1645, the New Model Army was formed by Fairfax. This army won two important victories, at Naseby (Jun 14) and at Langport (Jul 10), effectively destroying all of Charles' armies.

In 1646, Charles had little choice but to disband his remaining forces. Oxford surrendered, and Charles fled North seeking refuge with the Scots, bringing the first war to a close.

Charles was ransomed by parliament, and held at Holmby House whilst parliament drew up proposals. In the mean time, parliament began to disband its army.

However, the army was unhappy about issues such as arrears of pay and living conditions, and resisted the disbandment. Eventually the army kidnapped Charles in an attempt to win a bargaining piece. However, Charles escaped to the Isle of Wight.

Increasingly concerned, the army marched to London (Aug 1647) and debated proposals of their own at Putney.

Charles took advantage of this shift of emphasis away from him to negotiate a new agreement with the Scots, again promising church reform (Dec 28 1647). This agreement lead to the second war.

A series of royalist rebellions and a Scottish invasion (Jul 1648) took place. However, all were defeated by the now powerful standing army. This new betrayal by Charles caused parliament to debate whether Charles should be returned to power at all. Those who still supported Charles' place on the throne tried once more to negotiate with him.

The army, angry that parliament were still considering Charles as a ruler, marched on parliament and conducted "Pride's Purge" (named such since the commanding officer of the operation was Sir Thomas Pride). 45 MP's were arrested, 146 were kept out of parliament, and only 75 were allowed in, and then only to do the army's bidding.

This rump parliament was ordered to set up a high court of justice in order to try Charles I for treason in the name of the people of England.

The trial of the king (Jan 1649) found Charles guilty as charged, and he was beheaded on January 30th.

Oliver Cromwell then lead the army in quelling revolts in Ireland and Scotland (1649-50) to finally restore an uneasy peace.

Charles II was then crowned in Scotland, claiming that the throne was rightfully his. He marched with the Scots on England. Cromwell beat the Scottish forces at Dunbar (Sep 3 1650), but could not prevent Charles II marching deep into England.

Cromwell finally engaged the new king at Worcester (Sep 3 1651) and beat him. Charles II fled abroad, ending the civil wars.

The Commonwealth was then established, with Oliver Cromwell as Lord Protector of England.
(Source - Aberysturyte - Educational Internet Series)

America’s Revolution: The PrequelBy ADRIAN TINNISWOOD
Published: July 2, 2010


PICTURE the scene: Out of the dawn mist, a fleet of longboats glides across the water, packed full of musket-wielding patriots and weather-beaten Massachusetts militiamen. Standing in the prow of the lead boat, like Washington crossing the Delaware, is a man with long flowing hair and a blood-red banner emblazoned with two words: Vincat veritas. Truth Conquers.

But it’s not Washington, and it’s not the American Revolution. In fact, it’s not even America. This daring amphibious assault by Col. Thomas Rainborowe and his regiment of New Englanders took place 3,000 miles away, in old England, and in 1644, more than 130 years before those famous shots were fired at Lexington to herald what we Brits insist on calling the War of American Independence.

It is a fact rarely discussed on either side of the Atlantic that American colonists played a crucial role in the English Civil War, the bitter struggle between King Charles I and Parliament that tore England apart in the 1640s. The English Revolution — and that is just what it was — can be interpreted in all kinds of ways: as a religious fight between pathologically earnest Puritans and the Catholic-leaning bishops of the Church of England; as an uprising by a nascent merchant class determined to throw off the shackles of medieval feudalism; as right-but-repulsive Roundheads bashing the wrong-but-romantic Cavaliers.

It was all those things. But it was also a battle against the arbitrary tyranny of the crown that prefigured America’s own struggle for independence. And hundreds of American colonists cared enough about that struggle to sail back across the vast Atlantic, to build a city upon a hill — not in the frightening, alien landscape of Massachusetts but in the familiar fields and townships of England.

Most of these men were linked by friendship, business or marriage to the Rainborowes, a charismatic clan of English merchant-mariners, pioneers and visionaries who moved back and forth between the Old World and the New in the 1630s and 1640s.

Stephen Winthrop — the son of Gov. John Winthrop of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and a revolutionary who was once described as “a great man for soul liberty” — married Judith Rainborowe, the daughter of Thomas’s brother William. (Winthrop’s father later married Judith’s sister — which, by my reckoning, made the governor both grandfather and uncle to Stephen’s children.) The younger Winthrop decided he couldn’t stand on the sidelines in the colonies when there was a righteous fight in England; he enlisted as a captain in the Parliamentary Army and never returned to America.

Nehemiah Bourne, a Boston shipbuilder, had once been the Rainborowes’ neighbor in London; he too sailed back to fight the crown. Israel Stoughton, who captained the Dorchester militia in the Pequot wars of the 1630s, was a friend of William’s. William himself sold his farmstead in Charlestown to return to England, and Bourne and Stoughton served as officers in the Parliamentary Army under Thomas, whose regiment was packed with colonists. They were with him when he launched the daring amphibious assault on a Royalist garrison in the east of England in 1644 that made these “New-England men” famous all over the country.

The interesting thing about these colonists was their radicalism, their revolutionary fervor. They were Puritans — but they were more than that. They were merchant-venturers, looking for new markets and business opportunities. They were more than that, too. They were idealists, who went to extraordinary lengths and traveled extraordinary distances to fight for the chance to build a fairer society.

These were the men who, when the Parliamentarians had all but won the war and Charles I was imprisoned, pressed Oliver Cromwell and the other Roundhead grandees to sweep away the old order. To change the world. William Rainborowe asserted that there could be no compromise when it came to “the rights and freedoms of the people.” Thomas, who was greatly influenced by the radical colonists in his regiment, hoped the new regime would at least extend the limited male suffrage that was being adopted throughout the New England colonies. But he also pushed hard for the grandees to take it further and grant the vote to all men — something that wouldn’t be achieved in Britain for another 270 years.

Thomas declared, “I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live as the greatest he; and therefore truly, sir, I think it’s clear that every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that government.”

His words still have power, even after all this time; they could have been spoken by Jefferson. And as the skies light up this Fourth of July, consider this great paradox of history: while the English Revolution owed so much to America, the first shots in the American War of Independence were fired in England.


Adrian Tinniswood, the author of “The Verneys: A True Story of Love, War and Madness in 17th-Century England,” is working on a book about the Rainborowe family.




 
Charles, I King of England (I1936)
 
142 Buried at Curllsville, Pennsylvania. About 1910 body was removed and placed in the lot of Dr. Robert Boyles in Rimersburg Cemetery. Shadle, Hannah Cinderelle (I2112)
 
143 By BARRYMORE LAURENCE SCHERE
The Wall Street Journal, August 3, 2011

To pedestrians en route between Columbus Circle and Lincoln Center, the striking American Bible Society building at West 61st Street and Broadway is an architectural landmark. What people may not know, however, is that aside from the ABS, the building also houses the Museum of Biblical Art.

An outgrowth of the former Gallery of the ABS, the Museum of Biblical Art (MoBiA) opened to the public in 2005. Previous MoBiA exhibitions have focused on the biblical illustrations of Albrecht Dürer and his circle, Marc Chagall, and Altarpieces Medieval Spain, which investigated the cooperative relationship between Christian and Jewish artists in the medieval Iberian kingdoms of Aragon, Valencia and the Catalonian region.



On Eagles' Wings: The King James Bible Turns 400

Museum of Biblical Art
Through Oct. 16
.
MoBiA's current exhibition, "On Eagles' Wings"its title is taken from the line "Ye have seen . . . how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself." (Exodus 19:4)celebrates the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible, first published in 1611. For all his scholarly proclivities, King James I didn't actually translate the Bible himself. However, as England's first Scottish-born king (who continued to rule Scotland as James VI), he championed the new edition. As the exhibition's curator, Liana Lupas, explains in the fine exhibition catalog (which she wrote along with the excellent audio tour), the King James Bible "originated in the King's desire to bring religious unity to his realm and was conceived as a revision of the English Bible published during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. The King's team used the Hebrew and Greek text, the previous English versions and a variety of other translations and commentaries . . . aiming to produce a faithful rendition of the Hebrew and Greek originals and provide a translation appropriate for liturgical reading in churches while also avoiding theological disputes."

Four centuries later, the project's success is indisputable. Not only has the King James Bible been the standard Protestant English text and basis of most subsequent revisions, but it has inspired a large body of music in English-speaking countries, providing the text for Handel's oratorios ("Israel in Egypt," "Judas Maccabeus" and "Messiah") and a wealth of sacred music by British and American composers from Henry Purcell to Edward Elgar to Charles Ives; it has also been the source for easel paintings, murals and stained glass by legions of artists from Joshua Reynolds and William Blake to Edward Burne-Jones and John La Farge. Purely as literature, the majestic beauty of its poetry and prose is unsurpassed. Even in our skeptical age of Stephen Hawking and Christopher Hitchins, the King James Bible remains a supremely good read.

Hence, the MoBiA exhibition appeals to interests ranging from theology and the complexities of interpretation to the aesthetic delights of bibliophilia. Featuring more than 50 rare Bibles from the 15th through 21st centuries, the exhibition places the King James translation in the context of its predecessors, documenting the centuries-old controversy that led to its publication, and showing how it made its way though the English-speaking world thereafter. Beyond the books themselves?many of them profoundly beautiful?this is a show about the persuasive power of language, and how scholars were willing to face supreme punishment for the freedom to use the subtleties of language to translate, interpret and communicate the intangible issues of faith in their own tongue. As Ms. Lupas notes, while King James sponsored and protected his team of translators, many translators of previous generations were either executed for their troubles or exiled. Indeed, during the brief, tempestuous reign of the Catholic Queen Mary I (daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon), reading or owning an English Bible had been a capital offense.

Museum of Biblical Art
A 1620 display Bible for public access that would have been chained to a desk in accordance with the eighth commandment.
.
The show opens with a c.1440 manuscript copy of John Wyclif's Bible, its exquisite calligraphy and illuminated initials representing untold hours of a scribe's life. Plainly visible are the faint preliminary lines drawn across the vellum pages to ensure correct spacing and size of each handwritten line and column of text. Wyclif (c.1330-84), a brilliant Oxford theologian, was the guiding light for a group of followers who made the actual translation. Though he was accused of heresy and banished from Oxford, the cultural centrality of the Wyclif translation in Medieval England is revealed by the 250 manuscript sources preserving the work in whole or in part, a large number compared to the mere 64 manuscript sources of Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales."

Although the printing press was introduced in England in 1476, no scriptures were printed there until the 1530s. The earliest translations were printed on the Continent, exemplified by the 1526 edition of William Tyndale's translation of the New Testament and his 1530 Pentateuch translation, published in Antwerp. Obliged to work in Germany, Tyndale had based his New Testament translation on the original Greek sources as well as Erasmus's Latin translation. But when copies arrived in England they were denounced by his enemy, the Bishop of London, and within four days a pile of them was ceremoniously burned before Old St. Paul's Cathedral, the medieval Gothic church later replaced by Sir Christopher Wren's domed masterpiece. Still in exile, Tyndale was imprisoned and burned at the stake in 1536.

In addition to documenting what it took to arrive at a widely accepted English Bible, the beautifully preserved copies of Tyndale, the 1535 Bible translated by Miles Coverdale, the splendid 1568 folio Bible translated and published under Queen Elizabeth's aegis and Robert Barker's first edition of the King James Bible (1611) attest to the sheer technical challenge of printing such a text. Johannes Guttenberg's invention of movable type had paved the way to commercial book publication, but when you examine these volumes, with their elaborate woodcut illustrations, elegant initial letters and handsome typefaces, consider the vast time and labor that went into early printing on a hand-operated flat-bed press. Hand-carved woodcut illustrations and initials worked splendidly because the relief-carved blocks could be printed along with the type on the same press. But later volumes, such as the first illustrated edition of the King James Bible, printed in Oxford by John Baskett in 1717, reveal new complexities. The handsome illustrations, with their fine lines and telltale embossed plate marks, are copper engravings. Though the text was still printed on a flat-bed press, copper engravings required an intaglio press, meaning a separate procedure. By 1846, when Harper & Brothers published their "Illuminated Bible" in New York, mechanized steam-run printing presses had replaced the old hand press. Here, the illustrations, by the immensely popular artist Gustave Doré, are wood-engravings, a 19th-century refinement of earlier woodcuts.

That the illuminating beauty isn't confined to the past is shown by the resplendent Pennyroyal Caxton Press Bible published in 1999. Handsomely printed on handmade paper, it is dramatically illustrated by Barry Moser (b.1940), a worthy successor to Doré. Faced with the impossibility of obtaining traditional end-grain boxwood blocks to engrave, Mr. Moser found a modern substitute?his striking designs were engraved on polymer resin.

Complementing the books is "the Four Holy Gospels," a series of five large nonrepresentational paintings and 89 illuminated initials (one for each chapter of the Gospels) by the Japanese-American artist Makoto Fujimura. Mr. Fujimura's layering technique makes use of Japanese materials and traditional mineral pigments ground from precious minerals, as well as touches of gold and platinum. Thus the depth of color he achieves evokes that of early Renaissance painting, and a shade such as ultramarine is alive with the adamantine sparkle of powdered lapis lazuli.

Nearby is a superb display showing the step-by-step process of conserving a worn 1638 Bible. Related vitrines show the wooden sewing frame, linen cords and threads of traditional hand bookbinding still used by rare book conservators today.

Finally, there are two splendid videos. The first records the actual conservation treatment of that 1638 Bible. The second is a 1969 documentary, "The Making of a Renaissance Book," filmed at the venerable Plantin-Moretus museum in Antwerp. Once you have seen the care and precision with which the typemaker carves and files a single letter as a model for casting lead slugs, you will never take an old printed book for granted again.

Mr. Scherer writes about classical music and the fine arts for the Journal.
 
James, VI King of Scotland (I1935)
 
144 By Joel Achenbach
Sunday, June 6, 2004; Page W10

(The following article set to Joe Rhein by Alec Stewart)

On the thirteenth of September, 1784, coming down from the mountains into the valley of the Youghiogheny, George Washington arrived at the gristmill. His gristmill. He had never seen it. Years earlier, before the Revolution, he'd been told that his mill was the finest west of the Alleghenies. But now that he was finally free from his duties as commander in chief, and could make the long journey to inspect the mill personally, he saw to his dismay that it harnessed the might of a feeble stream, a virtual rivulet -- a seep! The millrace was essentially dry. Perhaps the masters of the place were expecting some other source of power to come along, something more sophisticated than water.

The surrounding land boasted some patches of rich soil, but the level tracts were interrupted by gullies, depressions, rocky outcroppings -- "broken" terrain. He owned 1,644 acres of rolling backwoods turf inhabited by people living in extremely modest dwellings. It would someday be named Perrypolis, but for now the residents called this place "Washington's Bottom." What an honor.

Free E-mail Newsletters
Today's Headlines & Columnists
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
Breaking News Alerts
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

"I do not find the Land in general equal to my expectation of it," Washington wrote in his diary. "The Mill was quite destitute of Water . . . In a word, little rent, or good is to be expected . . .

Washington knew who was to blame for the mill disaster: Gilbert Simpson, the mill operator, whom Washington had once described as a man of "extreame stupidity."

When the general finished dealing with Simpson, he knew he'd have to cope with a second, even more irritating problem. A group of people had journeyed to Washington's Bottom to discuss his allegation that they were squatting on his land. They were Scotch-Irish Presbyterians who belonged to a sect called Seceders. They lived on Washington's land -- or what Washington claimed was his land -- about half a day's ride to the north, on Millers Run, southwest of Pittsburgh.

Pennsylvania had been founded by Quakers, but these Scotch-Irish were a different breed -- rougher, more belligerent and ready to tromp into every remote mountain hollow of the Appalachians to hack out a new life. They did not come to the mill to give the general a parade. The great man threatened to take away their farms. When they had arrived in this part of western Pennsylvania in the early 1770s -- it was then considered part of the sprawling colony of Virginia -- they had found a trackless forest. They had hacked down trees, burned and grubbed the stumps, built fences, log cabins and barns, and found a way to survive in a world that still knew the howl of the wolf. They had endured the constant risk of Indian attacks, and, indeed, one of their members, Thomas Bigger, had narrowly escaped a massacre that claimed the lives of three families a dozen miles to the west, near Raccoon Creek. And now, years later, they'd gotten word of a visitor, at best an absentee landlord, but perhaps more properly a man with no right to their farms whatsoever.

What bad luck for the Seceders: They had squatted on the wrong man's land. Worse, he was a details freak. George Washington kept track of every shilling he was due, every acre he owned. He had an extraordinary gift for seeing the big picture of America, of perceiving the possibility that on this continent a new and powerful nation might spring into being, something to rival the great powers of Europe -- but he also paid attention to the vexing minutiae of his considerable landholdings. The 52-year-old war hero doubled as an accountant.

The Seceders had several things going for them. In Pennsylvania there was a general presumption that settlers who improved land had priority over an absentee landlord with only a paper title. The Seceders had heard that Washington had a bogus title and that the original surveyor of the land, William Crawford, lacked proper credentials. When they began clearing land and burning stumps, the Seceders had assumed they'd found their place in the world, beyond the machinations of moneymen far to the east. They would grow their corn and wheat, raise their cows and pigs, hunt wild game and worry only about the weather and the threat of Indians, wolves and panthers. That was the plan.

And then the grave, frowning, humorless George Washington himself came riding in. Who could have imagined?

Washington saw himself as the victim, not as a feudal lord showing up to slap around some lowlifes. He felt abused. These people had taken advantage of him. He hadn't been around for the last decade because he'd been busy winning freedom for the nation. He insisted that, although he owned tens of thousands of acres in the West, he was not a land speculator or "monopolizer":

"Indeed, comparatively speaking I possess very little land on the Western Waters," he wrote to his attorney. "To attempt therefore to deprive me of the little I have, is, considering the circumstances under which I have been" -- fighting for liberty! -- "and the inability of attending to my own affairs, not only unjust, but pitifully mean."

The historian Archer Hulbert, in Washington and the West (1905), noted that the general had more than just the Millers Run tract on his mind. He feared that a loss of this one parcel would have a cascading effect, and that he might lose all of his tens of thousands of land in the remote backcountry. Being lenient "would certainly result in the establishment of a precedent that would be ruinous to him; and if Washington could not keep his land, how would the less influential and less powerful fare?" He would fight this battle on behalf of all absentee landlords.

This dispute was, in miniature, the conflict of the continent: Who owned the land? How was that ownership established? Would the laws of the East hold sway in the distant forests of the West? Was the game stacked against the common man, the pioneer, the tribesman? Would ordinary Americans own their own farms or pay rent to far-off aristocrats? Would order triumph, or chaos?

What kind of country was this going to be?

THIS WAS BOTH a business trip for Washington and a chance to scout the terrain of his young nation. In the closing days of the war, he had declared his intention to make a grand tour of the new United States, to take its measure from the Great Lakes to the Mississippi to the Deep South. It was, after all, the fourth-largest country in the world by size, yet much of it was scarcely mapped.

Pressed for time, constrained by his duties at Mount Vernon, Washington had dramatically scaled back his ambitions. The new plan: Ride up the valley of the Potomac, across the mountains, through forests so dark they had names like "the Shades of Death," to the frontier of the nation, and then keep going by canoe down the Ohio River for hundreds of miles, far beyond the outer reaches of what people of his society called civilization.

Washington loved the back country and had seen more of it than almost anyone of his generation. He'd slept many times under the stars. He'd spent years as a surveyor, tromping through remote valleys and across swollen rivers, learning the way of the woods, sharing the pipe with Indian chiefs, and imposing imaginary lines on the wilderness. He and Thomas Jefferson had corresponded at great length in recent months about the western country, but while Jefferson was content to remain at Monticello -- in his entire life he never traveled farther west than the Shenandoah Valley -- Washington always had the urge to see things directly, to rub that western soil between his thumb and fingers.

Washington also knew better than anyone how hard it was to get anywhere. The few roads that existed were muddy trenches choked with stumps. In the entire country there was not a single bridge over a major river. The Appalachian Mountains stood like walls between the East and the West. The country was spread out and disconnected to a potentially disastrous degree. Washington feared that the West -- the rapidly settling Ohio country -- would become a breakaway republic.

But he thought there was a solution: He could help create the Potomac Route to the West. The river could become the premier commercial artery for the young republic. It would bind the settlers in the Ohio country to the markets of the Atlantic Seaboard. But without improvements in the river and the creation of a good portage road over the mountains, the centrifugal forces of the Revolution might rip the country apart. There might even be a civil war -- West against East.

Most biographers have focused on Washington's full-time jobs (plantation owner, warrior, president). Yet sometimes we understand a person best when we see what he does in his spare time, when he is not forced by necessity to dash off into battle or settle a political dispute. Washington, given the chance, high-tailed it to the hinterlands. Less than a year after returning from the war, and declaring that he was forever retired to "my own vine and my own fig tree," Washington saddled up and headed west. Washington's detailed diary of his epic 1784 journey to the frontier -- and the annotations and insights provided over the years by historians and archivists of The Papers of George Washington -- is the primary basis of this account. Washington hadn't kept a diary for nearly three years, but when he set out on September 1, 1784, he began scribbling with gusto in his small leather-bound notebooks. He was accompanied on the trip by his nephew, old friend James Craik, Craik's son and several slaves who were unidentified in the diary.

The 1784 trek and the encounter with squatters have been largely a footnote in the biographies of George Washington. Douglas Southall Freeman allots the expedition 14 fine and evocative paragraphs in his seven-volume biography. John Marshall, one of the first Washington biographers, gives the '84 trip precisely 15 words. Marshall's contemporary David Ramsay is even more efficient, summarizing the entire 680-mile frontier adventure in nine words (". . . he made a tour as far west as Pittsburgh . . .").

The trek never became part of Washington lore. There are countless 19th-century engravings illustrating highlights of Washington's life, but the artists somehow missed this particular chapter. It may be that what happened failed to fit into the narrative that biographers were fashioning for the great man. The western trek reveals Washington at his most appealing but also at his most imperious. He's wonderfully intrepid, unafraid to sleep out in the open in a thunderstorm -- but he's also an aggressive entrepreneur, disdainful of the westerners.

The 1784 journey gives us a glimpse of an infant nation, destiny uncertain, sprawled upon a wild and tantalizing landscape. It shows some of the first steps in the creation of what would become a continental nation, and eventually the most powerful country on the planet. Most of all, it provides an unusually vivid look at a man whose personal issues had a way of becoming national ones.

IN THOSE DAYS, a forest covered most of the American backcountry. This was a gloomy world, and a person could walk for miles without encountering a sunbeam. From a bluff, a traveler looking down on the forest would see a surprisingly uniform canopy, with a slash or dip here and there to signify a stream. But rising above the tree line would be a few giants -- the white pines, soaring 50 feet higher than everything else, surveying their domain. White pines were prized timber, so beautifully straight, perfect for masts, easily sawed, lightweight, buoyant, a wood so congenial that this tree alone could entice a person halfway across the continent. Sycamores leaned over the creeks and rivers, hollow inside, roomy enough that a family could live in the trunk while building a cabin. (Washington once found a sycamore that, three feet above the ground, measured 44 feet 10 inches in circumference.)

The agents of change act on different scales. Mountains form over tens of millions of years; animals evolve and become extinct over millions of years; ice ages come and go on the order of tens or hundreds of thousands of years; and the works of human beings take place in decades, years, months, days. As Washington rode across the mountains, he knew the West had changed dramatically since his last visit, 14 years earlier.

Naturally he didn't know about plate tectonics, could not imagine that entire continents could move. Washington had no inkling that life evolved, that from a single primordial germ a diverse array of organisms could appear, that giant reptiles once roamed the planet, that the flora and fauna that framed his life had not sprung fully into existence at the moment of the Creation. And yet the general knew facts that later generations would forget. He knew the names of the trees, the habits of the animals. He knew the soils and the rocks, the resources beneath his feet. He knew where to find useful mud and fuel for the fire. He knew how to read the sky and measure the wind and smell the coming of a storm. Washington had abundant knowledge of the western terrain, from a lifetime of exploration and adventure. He knew where he was on the planet.

THE SECEDERS were part of a great migration of people into the West. For decades, European Americans and African Americans had been pooling on the eastern side of the Appalachians, constrained first by the Indians and the French, then by the British proclamation that the western waters would be reserved to the Indians. But the Revolution opened the floodgates. The powers of attraction of the West, which so many times had yanked Washington from the comforts of his Mount Vernon estate, had an even more powerful effect on landless people.

There was a presumption underlying this westward movement, a belief that the continental interior was in some fundamental way unoccupied, that although the Indians had lived there for millennia and knew every trail and stream, every spring and salt lick, and had built villages and raised crops and interred their dead in ceremonial mounds, they still did not own these ancestral lands. The native Americans didn't have any use for the concept of private property and found bizarre the European belief in imaginary lines that enclosed the natural world. So it was all up for grabs.

The Scotch-Irish, Germans and French were in the vanguard of the western assault, along with Finns and Swedes. In addition to families, there were many lone wolves, usually young men fleeing the backbreaking labor of the indigo and rice fields of the Deep South or recently released from debtors' prison. For many Americans, the dangers and deprivations of the West, the terror of Indian raids, the shortage of staples and ordinary comforts, were still a step up in life.

Voyagers to the West had to supply all their own needs as they migrated. For food they would hunt deer, bear, wild turkey and perhaps the occasional squirrel, raccoon or groundhog. At the end of their journey through the forest would be nothing as coherent as a village or town, just a patch of woods along a river or stream. Many a family made a clearing in the forest and, using nothing but an axe, built a cabin, complete with wooden hinges, wooden pins, wooden chinking (held in place by clay or mud), even a wooden chimney. Packed clay served well enough for a floor.

Peace, as a rule, did not follow the settlers as they infiltrated the domain of the Indian. When the frontiersmen weren't killing Indians, they were inventing ways of maiming one another. Eye-gouging became something of a sport, and the countryside had an unusually large number of one-eyed men. The historian Leland Baldwin reported that a "fair fight" meant the use of fists and nothing more, but the "rough and tumble" was the more common form of frontier combat, one in which "the endeavor of each man was to maim and disfigure the other by gouging out his eyes, biting off his lips, nose, or ears, or kicking him in the groin." These people did not follow Washington's maxims for gentlemanly behavior.

Whiskey cost three cents a glass. Wagoneers would dance to a fiddler, drink all night and never repair to their room, since they had no room, only a claim to a few square feet on the barroom floor. They smoked a crude cigar that emitted a mephitic stench and cost four for a penny. That such twists of tobacco were smoked by drivers of Conestoga wagons gave the cigars their enduring name: stogies.

When George Washington moved among frontier folk, he didn't mix. He passed over these people like a dark nimbus cloud. To be George Washington required an adherence to certain principles, behaviors and beliefs that could properly be described as elitist, and that elitism wasn't superficial, it came from the marrow. Whatever he found common in himself he tried to purge. He once referred to ordinary farmers as "the grazing multitude." Apparently, he did not subscribe to the Jeffersonian dictum that yeoman farmers were God's chosen people.

And now the general had to meet face to face with these squatters. In his diary, one can sense a steady reddening of Washington's visage. They "came here to set forth their pretensions to it; & enquire into my right," he wrote. They attempted to "discover all the flaws they could in my Deed."

The energetic editors at The Papers of George Washington, and the 19th-century historian Boyd Crumrine of Washington County, Pa., have done heroic work in trying to untangle the legal knots around the property, though this may require several more centuries of labor. It appears that in 1763, a war veteran named John Posey, one of Washington's neighbors, obtained a military warrant (as payment for service in the French and Indian War) for 3,000 acres between Millers Run and Raccoon Creek, in the primeval forest southwest of Forks of the Ohio. A few years later, William Crawford told Washington about Posey's land. Washington obtained Posey's warrant in exchange for forgiving a debt. (In none of these transactions did any actual money change hands.) Late that year, or perhaps early in 1771, Washington recalled, Crawford surveyed 2,813 acres near Millers Run in Washington's name. But the backcountry trader George Croghan, an ambitious man with his own aspirations of a western empire, claimed the land and encouraged a number of settlers to move in.

The situation at that point turned downright devilish. To secure rights to a piece of property, the owner had to improve it by clearing land, putting up fences or building a cabin. Crawford, representing Washington's interests, arranged for a man to build a cabin on the Millers Run site. That single, humble dwelling -- as lost amid the 2,813 acres as a mollusk at the bottom of a lake -- supposedly satisfied the improvement requirement. But then Croghan's people built their own cabin inches from the first. They simply blocked the door to the first cabin. If there had been someone inside he would have died of thirst.

Now, more than a decade later, September 14, 1784, Washington and the Seceders faced off at the mill and explained their respective positions. They resolved nothing -- except that they'd meet again in a few days, when Washington would visit Millers Run and see the land himself.

The next day, the general tried to sell his gristmill to the highest bidder. A crowd formed, but Washington quickly realized that the people had not come to bid on the mill. They were there to gawk, to see the famous George Washington. He had serious business to conduct, and they seemed to view the whole thing as entertainment.

He called for bids.

No one answered.

The great man waited. Still no bids. A total disaster, this auction. At some point, it became obvious that no one was going to buy his mill. The general had all this wealth on paper, but what was it worth if you couldn't make it liquid? He decided he would simply abandon the mill and let it rot.

Doing his best to salvage the situation, the general announced that he would rent the farm on which Gilbert Simpson had been living. He would not even ask for cash, merely a payment in wheat. Five hundred bushels a year would cover it, he said.

Again, no one in the crowd showed any interest and only one man wanted to rent the farm: Gilbert Simpson. The vile Simpson! Washington wanted to end all connection with the man, but the general had no choice. He agreed to keep Simpson as a tenant.

The general always had a good instinct for when to retreat.

THE NEXT DAY the sky opened. In a pouring rain, Washington formally ended his business arrangement with Simpson to run the gristmill. The general wrote almost nothing in his diary, just a few terse sentences. Then he hit the road again, north and west, to Millers Run, home of the squatters. This wasn't going to be pretty.

The general wasn't in a rush to confront these people. He arrived on a Saturday afternoon, and on Sunday morning decided to postpone the reckoning. "Being Sunday, and the People living on my Land, apparently very religious, it was thought best to postpone going among them till tomorrow . . ." There's a rare whiff of sarcasm there. Apparently very religious -- his italics.

The next day, Washington made a tour of the 13 farms that had been carved out of his land. The general knew as well as anyone alive how to eyeball a farm by horseback. He examined the soils, the trees, the houses, the barns, the fences. He took notes, recording the names of the squatters and the number of acres cleared and under cultivation.

"James McBride. 3 or 4 Acres of Meadow . . . Pretty good fencing -- Land rather broken, but good -- white & black oak mixed -- A dwelling House and barn (of midling size) with Puncheon roofs . . . Brice McGeechen. 3 Acres of Meadow . . . Arable -- under good fencing. A small new Barn good . . . John Reed Esquire. 4 Acres of Meadow . . . A Small dwelling House -- but Logs for a large one, a still House -- good Land and fencing . . ."

And so on.

That night the settlers showed their visitor a modicum of respect, hosting him for dinner at the home of one of their leaders, David Reed. They announced that they would be willing to buy the land from the general outright -- a sign that, as much as they doubted his legal right to the properties, they feared that they might lose their farms should Washington prosecute his claim. They made clear to the general that they weren't conceding that he owned the land, but rather they merely wanted to avoid a nasty fight. Washington said he had no inclination to sell. They talked of their hardships, their history, how they'd come together, their religious beliefs and so on. The steel in Washington's resolve softened ever so slightly. He would consider selling, he said.

Now they talked price. Washington said he would accept no less than 25 shillings an acre, paid in three annual installments, with interest. Otherwise, they could sign a 999-year lease. No one was interested in the lease, but the squatters asked if the general would sell the land for his asking price but over a much longer period of time and without any interest. He said he wouldn't. That ended the negotiations. The squatters formally declared that they did not recognize Washington's ownership.

He would have to sue them, they said.

There is a bit of local lore about what happened next. Supposedly, Washington declared that he would have the land, and accompanied this vow with a curse. Squatter John Reed, who served as a justice of the peace, promptly fined Washington five shillings. The general supposedly paid up on the spot and apologized for violating the laws of God and man. That anecdote does not emit the resounding peal of truth. Crumrine, the Washington scholar, dismissed the story, noting that the son of one of the squatters later denied that Washington had made any such oath. But Crumrine endorsed the son's account of what Washington told the squatters in this testy moment. The general, the son said, pulled out a red silk handkerchief, held it by one corner, and said: "Gentlemen, I will have this land just as surely as I now have this handkerchief."

What we know of the general and his personality leads us to doubt that he would taunt the squatters. Usually an icy stare served his purposes well enough.

Washington now found himself in an uncomfortable position. The squatters believed that they'd called his bluff. He knew it wasn't a bluff -- but he also knew he lacked sufficient documentary proof of ownership. He held out hope that somewhere in the motley bunch there might be men willing to abandon this stance, and he decided to resort to a little theatricality. As commander in chief of the Continental Army, he had managed to quell rebellions through the force of his personality. The most famous incident happened late in the war, when his officers, furious at Congress for failing to provide money or support, threatened to stage a military coup. Washington rebuked them and then, in a wonderfully theatrical gesture, pulled out glasses to read an otherwise inconsequential letter. "Gentleman, you will permit me to put on my spectacles," he said, "for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country." The mutinous atmosphere suddenly evaporated. Blind in the service of his country! Tears ran down the faces of the officers. Washington had won again.

So now Washington had to stage a little more theater and see if it would work. He asked each of the settlers if he would stand up individually to attest an intention to go to court over the land dispute. The general said he would call out the names of the settlers one by one. He wanted to break up this gaggle of Seceders into its constituent parts. It was time to fight man to man.

"James Scott," the general said.

James Scott rose to his feet.

"William Stewart."

William Stewart stood.

"Thomas Lapsley . . . Samuel McBride . . . Brice McGeechin . . . Thomas Biggar . . . David Reed . . . William Hillas . . . James McBride . . . Duncan McGeechin . . . Matthew Johnson . . . John Reed . . . John Glen."

One by one, they all stood. Thirteen backwoods settlers were defying the great George Washington.

WASHINGTON'S TESTY ENCOUNTER with the squatters destroyed his western momentum. He wanted to go home. The Grand Tour of America had already been downsized into a mere business trip to his western properties, and now even that was turning into a bust.

He'd been thinking of turning back even before he'd run into the Seceders. He had been told that the Indians were in arms, and had recently killed a number of white settlers who had encroached on Indian lands north of the Ohio. Washington didn't want to push his luck. Discretion is different from cowardice. Later he wrote in a letter that it was "better to return, than to make a bad matter worse by hazardous abuse from the Savages of the Country." Thomas Freeman, his land agent, subsequently informed him that the Indians knew Washington was headed to his western lands, and they were preparing to greet him with an ambush. "The Indians by what means I can't say had Intelligence of your Journey and Laid wait for you," Freeman informed the general.

Washington in his reluctance to go farther west surely had in mind the fate of Crawford, the surveyor who'd obtained these Pennsylvania lands for him. In a gentler world, Crawford would have been on hand at Washington's Bottom to greet the arriving general and would have been a handy witness for Washington in his ejectment suit. But Crawford was a warrior as well as a surveyor, and, in 1782, he discovered directly the price of the settlement of the West.

Earlier that year, an expedition of Pennsylvanians had launched a campaign against Indians in the Ohio country. They soon encountered a group of Christianized Indians known as Moravians (from the Protestant missionaries who had converted them). They were considered friendly Indians. They had adopted many of the ways of white farmers. But to the fierce settlers of western Pennsylvania, they were still a suspect class. The Moravians had traded with the hostile Indians for pewter dishes that had been stolen from the whites. They also traded for branded horses stolen from the whites. Worst of all, they had a bloody dress -- purchased from Indians who had massacred a Pennsylvania family named Wallace.

The militiamen rounded up the Moravians -- women and children included -- and led them, with ropes around their necks, to two huts that the whites called their "slaughter houses." A debate broke out among the whites: How, exactly, should they kill these Indians? They chose scalping. The Indians asked for a moment to prepare their souls for death.

Then the militiamen scalped them -- 42 men, 20 women and 34 children.

The campaign against the Indians continued months later with another expedition, this time led by Crawford. Crawford and his men camped initially in the ruins of the Moravian village, where orphaned corn still stood in the fields. They were being watched. Wyandot, Delaware and Shawnee Indians, accompanied by a white compatriot, Simon Girty, quickly routed the militiamen, and during Crawford's retreat, he was captured by Delawares.

Because another captured man, a surgeon, witnessed the ensuing events, there is an elaborate narrative of what took place. According to the surgeon, the Indians found the most flamboyant means of putting an end to Crawford's earthly existence. They stripped him naked, beat him, cut off his ears, prodded him with burning sticks, made him walk on coals, tied him to a stake, scalped him, fired gunpowder into his body and poured hot coals on his head. He begged Girty to shoot him, but Girty just laughed. Instead the Indians built a hot fire in a circle about 15 feet from the stake. That was far enough to ensure that he wouldn't burn to death quickly. They slowly roasted him.

And so, George Washington did not want to go to the West if the Indians were in arms. He rode south again, back toward Gilbert Simpson's, and along the way received assurances from some of the local gentry that they would hunt up proof of his ownership of the Millers Run land. The next day, he rode south to Beeson's Town (now Uniontown, Pa.), where he found himself a good lawyer. In fact, he found a great one: Thomas Smith, a Scotsman who had emigrated to America and had become one of the leading land lawyers in the state, a kind of traveling salesman of legal services. In a single year, by Smith's calculation, he'd ridden 4,000 miles on horseback, all over the craggy Pennsylvania terrain. He had seen a lot of different characters in his day, and when George Washington came calling, Smith had to use all his legal and psychological skill to guide the case toward a positive outcome.

Washington was almost too eager to sue. Had it not violated his maxims on personal deportment, he would have been literally hopping mad. But Smith quickly detected the lack of documentation behind Washington's claim. This would not be an easy case.

The general told Smith he would return to western Pennsylvania to testify against the squatters. But he knew it would be no minor matter to make yet another trip over the mountains. Events might easily detain him elsewhere. This was only the second time since 1758 that he had managed to venture to the West. He might never see this part of the world again.

In a couple of weeks, after a detour through a remote section of the backcountry, Washington reached Mount Vernon and resumed his life as a plantation owner and generator of grand ideas. He vigorously pursued his Potomac project and became president of the Patowmack Company, a venture designed to improve navigation in the river and turn it into a commercial artery. His Potomac scheme absorbed him, but he took time out to prosecute his case against the Seceders. They were still rooted on his land at Millers Run, still growing crops and raising livestock and acting as though they weren't the lowlife squatters that Washington knew them to be.

The lawsuit dragged on for two years. After Washington's western trek in 1784, he regularly corresponded with Smith. The general might have been a master of delegation in certain arenas of combat, but in this lawsuit he intended to lead the charge personally. Not even Cornwallis had faced such rage.

Washington vigorously compiled a packet of information for Smith's scrutiny. The general made it clear that the only acceptable outcome of the case would be the total surrender of the enemy. He was rankled by all the paperwork he needed to obtain to support his case, which he believed was self-evident. "I think nothing more is necessary but to state facts," he wrote.

In a later letter, he told Smith that he had heard a rumor that the squatters might voluntarily leave before the suit went to trial. He requested of Smith that, even if the Seceders did abandon their homes and relinquish their claims, "you will sue them respectively for Trespasses, rents or otherwise as you shall judge best & most proper to obtain justice for me." The general wanted his lawyer to chase these people through the American backcountry and punish them. He was not about to forgive and forget. (He'd been winning freedom! And to be treated like this . . .)

Smith wrote back with gentle words to cool the litigious ardor of his client. Any move that seemed designed to punish the squatters might backfire, Smith informed Washington. Juries in similar cases had sided with the defendants. To bring trespassing suits against the squatters "may produce a bad effect, in the minds of the Jury who are to try the Ejectments -- their modes of thinking may lead them to believe the Defendants rather unfortunate, then blamable, and that as these double actions will well nigh ruin most of them; will not the jury be willing to lay hold of every point however trifling which may make against your title or in favour of the Defendants."

Washington replied in the tone of a man recognizing that he had momentarily lost control of his passion (a maxim violation). He didn't intend, he said, for Smith to file additional suits for trespassing, but rather believed they might be pursued after the main ejectment cases had been settled. But now that he had heard about other cases that had not gone well, he wrote, he would leave such suits entirely to Smith's discretion.

"I never should have thought of this mode of punishment, had I not viewed the Defendants as willful and obstinate sinners -- persevering after timely & repeated admonition, in a design to injure me," Washington wrote, and then added, incredibly, "but I am not at all tenacious of this matter."

The general separately prepared a long legal brief that laid out both sides of the case, as he saw it. Washington had never prepared a legal argument, but he demonstrated such a grasp of the adversarial nature of the courts that one might have assumed him a member of the bar. Giving his own side of the story would clearly not be sufficient: He first would prepare the most persuasive arguments in favor of the defendants, and only then, Socratically, demolish them one by one. To make this point-counterpoint legal brief all the easier to follow, he wrote down the squatters' "Pleas" side by side with his "Answers."

Plea: "Supposing (they may say, because they have said it) that my Patent was originally good, yet, my right is forfeited for want of that cultivation and improvement which was required by Law, and which is conditional of the Grant."

Answer: "It may be asked how I could improve or cultivate the Land when they had taken possession of it & violently detained it from me? . . ."

Plea: "That one of the Defendants, in behalf of the rest had been sent to the Land Office of this State to ascertn the truth of the Report of my having a Grant of the Land; -- but finding no Record of the Patent or Survey, the presumption was, that none had ever been made . . ."

Answer: "Whether this search was really made, or not, is not for me to determine; but admitting it, it can be no reason why I should loose my right, because they did not, or even could not, discover a record of it . . ."

Plea: "Under these circumstances, and this conviction, they took possession; and at great expense have improved the Land; and ought not in Law or equity to be deprived of it."

Answer: "[T]hey knew this Land was reputed to be mine. That as soon as they set down upon it, they were so informed, and repeatedly warned off, and admonished of the consequences thereon . . . [If the law did not protect absentee owners], no one could be secure in Lands at a distance -- as possession & occupancy wd. set aside the best title, and put legal Right at defiance."

The legal brief ran pages and pages, covering every conceivable point of law and, more importantly, every shade of right and wrong.

PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT Justice Thomas McKean, riding circuit in the western part of the state, presided over the trial in Washington, Pa., in October 1786. Because the record of the trial is extremely sparse, it is impossible to know if anyone involved asked for a change of venue to a community that had not been named after the plaintiff.

(The following received from Alec Stewart on December 1, 2008. "It would appear that the seceders never had a chance in their squabble with George Washington. Look at the background of the presiding judge in the case. In today's judicial system, McKean would have never been allowed to preside over the trial, as it is quite obvious he had a quite close relationship with George Washington."

Thomas McKean (March 19, 1734 – June 24, 1817) was an American lawyer and politician from New Castle, Delaware, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He was a militia officer during the American Revolution, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a Continental Congressman from Delaware, and the second President of the Continental Congress under the Articles of Confederation. He was at various times a member of the Federalist and Democratic-Republican Parties, who served as President of Delaware, Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, and Governor of Pennsylvania.)

A flamboyant Pittsburgher represented the Seceders: Hugh Henry Brackenridge, the leading literary figure west of the mountains, a title for which, admittedly, there were few rival claimants. Brackenridge started the first newspaper in the West, having contrived, with a partner, to haul a printing press over the Alleghenies. He also wrote plays, pamphlets and a novel titled Modern Chivalry. He would someday be a savvy advocate of restraint during the Whiskey Rebellion, which would incite the wrath of then-President Washington. But that was in the future: There was no such thing yet as a U.S. president. For now, Brackenridge was a local lawyer taking on a case against a retired war hero.

Washington said he wanted to travel to western Pennsylvania for the trial, but he pleaded illness. Possibly he couldn't stomach another encounter with the western rabble.

Smith, Washington's attorney, took the case to trial with great anxiety. He'd never been more agitated, he later told Washington. He was a successful man, elected to public offices, but to represent such a client was clearly the pinnacle of his career. (No doubt he told his associates: Yes, the George Washington.) It could not have been a palliative to his nerves to be reminded with each letter from Mount Vernon precisely how much the client cared about the suit. Failure was not an option.

Smith spent months figuring out how to get a friendly jury and the best possible judge. He personally served many of the subpoenas to Washington County residents who had been named to the jury. He decided to "take the Bull by the Horns," as he later told Washington, and brought the first suit against James Scott Jr., the group's ringleader and the man with the strongest claim to ownership of the land. It was a smart move, because Smith would smoke out all the best arguments in favor of the Seceders' claim, but risk only the solitary defeat, reserving the chance to try the other cases with knowledge of what to expect. Smith called as a witness Charles Morgan, who had been with William Crawford when he had surveyed the land and who had seen Crawford pay five pounds to a man named Thomas Crooke to build a cabin on the property. Smith had many more witnesses as well, including another surveyor and several prominent members of the community.

Smith had one tremendous handicap: Washington's warrant to the land, as the general himself discovered unhappily in the summer of 1786, showed a date of 25 November 1773 -- "posterior," as Washington put it, to the arrival of the Seceders in October 1773. The date on the warrant was simply a bureaucratic mistake, but on paper, it appeared the Seceders had been on the property before Washington officially owned it. Washington hoped to dig up the original survey by Crawford, which would have showed a date of 1770 or 1771, but he learned that the survey and many other public documents had been destroyed by the British during their 1781 romp through Virginia.

The jury learned about the complex history of the land, the shifting jurisdictions, the missing paperwork, etc. Smith won an important ruling from the judge, who barred any evidence about improvements to the land. The trial began the afternoon of October 24, 1786, and lasted through the next day and until 11 in the morning of the 26th. There is no record of how long the jury deliberated, but Smith perceived that the jury wanted badly to give verdicts in favor of James Scott. "We had very strong prejudices artfully fomented to encounter," he told Washington. Yet even as Smith steeled himself for defeat, the jury came back with a verdict in favor of the general.

It is not entirely clear why a jury with natural sympathies for settlers sided with an absentee landlord, even one as famous as Washington. There were limited means in America for turning anyone into what would later be called a celebrity, and Washington himself hadn't appeared; the jury had to render a verdict in favor of someone far away and against James Scott, who was right there in the courtroom. Perhaps Smith, a lawyer of considerable talents, destined to be on the state Supreme Court, had managed to show beyond any doubt that the general had legitimate title to the land and had been unable to pay more attention to it because of his service to the country. Or perhaps the verdict was just another example of the Washington magic. Bullets couldn't hit him, and squatters couldn't defy him.

Smith persuaded Justice McKean to consolidate the other 12 cases, and that trial was quickly and efficiently concluded with yet another verdict in Washington's favor.

"You have now thirteen plantations -- some of them well improved," Smith informed the general, and then delicately raised the possibility that now would be a good time to back off and show these frontier families some mercy. "[They] are now reduced to Indigence; they have put in crops this season which are now in the ground they wish to be permitted to take the grain away. To give this hint may be Improper in me -- to say more would be presumptuous."

Smith advised Washington to employ an agent to take possession of the land immediately, because the squatters were likely to burn down all the houses and barns and even the fences. Washington turned to John Cannon, a major landowner, and asked him if he would handle the matter, ideally by demanding rent from the Seceders. Washington, softening a bit, indicated that he didn't want back rent from the past 12 years.

But the Seceders wanted nothing to do with Washington. They would not be his tenants. They would own their own land. The Mount Pleasant Township Warrantee Map, compiled from early plats, shows a kind of splatter effect from the explosive visit of Washington in 1784. Several of the Seceders obtained warrants for land adjacent to or near Washington's land. They pulled out their axes once again, hacked down trees, burned the stumps, broke the ground. For years, settlers had been pulling up stakes and moving toward deeper wilderness to start anew, and perhaps, as they scouted nearby land to settle, they could pretend they were another band of restless Americans. But just as surely a few of them thought of George Washington as they swung their axes at the oaks and pines and hemlocks of the Pennsylvania forest.

Washington's litigation would keep his grip on the land for another decade. In 1796, with western land speculation in full collapse, he sold the entire tract to a local agent for the modest sum of $12,000, though the agent defaulted on the mortgage and the general retained the land until his death. The property over the years went through many hands, including those of Washington's heirs. From beginning to end, this "body of fine Rich level land" would be vexatious.

Brackenridge many years later jotted down a postscript to the case: Washington, he thought, should have compensated the Seceders for the buildings and cultivated fields they were forced to abandon. Strictly as a matter of law, Brackenridge wrote, Washington did not have to pay them anything. "He could not be considered as under more than an imperfect obligation," he concluded. Washington may have thought that the state of Pennsylvania would compensate the Seceders, since their land had been taken from them in deference to Virginia's claim to sovereignty, in the 1770s, over what became southwestern Pennsylvania. But it was all moot, Brackenridge said.

"It remains now, not a matter of legal discussion, but of history."


 
Stewart, Lieutenant William (I0010)
 
145 Byron F, Hawk, 42, of 971 2nd Ave., New Kensington, died unexpectedly at 5:05 p.m. yesterday (March 9, 1965) in Citizens General Hospital, New Kensington. Mr. Hawk was admitted to the hospital a few hours earlier after suffering an apparent heart seizure in his home.

He was born Dec 26, 1922 in New Kensington to Byron M. Hawk of New Kensington and the late Margaret Streightiff Hawk.

Mr. Hawk attended local schools and was graduated by New Kensington High School in 1941. He was an Army veteran of World War II and was employed for the past 24 years by Jones and Laughlin Steel Co., New Kensington.

He was a member of the 7th Street Sportsment Club, New Kensington.

Surviving besides his father are his widow, Mrs. Iris Betler Hawk, a son, Richard, 7, at home, and one sister, Patricia Hawk, of New Kensington. His mother died March 20, 1959.


Friends may call after 7 p.m. today in Ross G. Walker (successor to Charles H. Hankey) Funeral Home, 217 Freeport Road, New Kensington, where service will be conducted at 11 a.m. Friday. The Rev. Dr. W. Donald Whetsel, pastor of the First Methodist Church, New Kensington, will officiate. Burial will be in Greenwood Memorial Park, Lower Burrell.

All members and retirees of Local 602 of Jones and Laughlin Steel Co. will meet at 7 p.m. tomorrow in the Walker Funeral Home to pay their respects.
 
Hawk, Byron Francis (I4217)
 
146 CALLEN WILLIAM ELSMORE -- Last Saturday night as William Callen, engineer, son of the late Mr. and Mrs. T.J. Callen, was bringing a freight train down the Sligo Branch and was on a heavy down grade near Lawsonham, where the Branch intersects with the Low Grade division, he lost control of the train by reason of the fact that the air brakes would not work, and it run off. He sent his fireman back along the train to help set the brakes on the cars, but it seems the run-away train attained such speed that nothing could be done to stop it. At a sharp curve the engine swung over off the track and nineteen cars followed and all piled up in an awful wreck. The engine after running along on the roadbed and tearing up the track for about forty feet or more, ran off of the bed and turned almost upside down, pinning Mr. Callen under it, and the escaping steam scalded him in a frightful manner. His legs were crushed and his head was badly injured and crushed, while the steam had burned out his eyes and boiled parts of his flesh from his face and head and body. It took from the time of the accident, shortly after midnight, to 8 o'clock the next morning to release his body from the wreck. The train, of course, was a complete wreck, and the fireman and other men on the train were injured, but we are informed, only slightly. Mr. Callen was about 36 years of age and was married, his wife having been a Miss Henry, and leaves her with four small children, Helen, Darl, Sarah and William. The surviving brothers and sisters are: Mrs. Jennie E. Bashline, Hugh S. Callen, Mrs. Zula Over and Harry Callen, of Sligo; Mrs. Verda Seifert, Curllsville, and Curtis E. Callen, Kittanning. His parents and one sister preceded him in death. Deceased was a member of the Brotherhood of Firemen and Engineers and the Knights of Malta. The funeral of the deceased took place last Tuesday, Rev. S.L. Richards conducting the service. Source: Clarion Democrat January 9, 1919 Callen, William Ellsmore (I4091)
 
147 Came to Clarion County in 1830. Craig, James (I4110)
 
148 CEM: Germantown, Montgomery Co Oh John W. (Aug 17, 1799 - July 13, 1837) and Magdalena (June 17, 1790 - December 27, 1875 per Lindsay m. Brian's Miami Valley [OH {Records: vol. 4 : Montgomery Co [OH} Cemetery Records, p. 55 {LDS film]

PROBATE: October 16, 1844 heirs of William Emerick: Christopher and wife Catherine res St. Joseph Co IN; Sam Bowen and wife Elizabeth, Jacob Emrich and wife Louisa and Jacob Gruber and wife Susannah all res Preble Co OH; Jacob Eminger and wife Catherine, William R. and wife Catherine, John and wife Mary, Sam Bechtol and wife Christian all res Montg Co OH for $1,498 to John Bleacher res Preble Co OH 45 A 65p w 1/2 (as per agmt of heirs) 
Emerick, John William (I1105)
 
149 Centre County, Pennsylvania

In 1841 Michael Spangler, Inn Keeper, with two cattle, is listed on the Resident's Tax Payer's List in Marion Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania.

He came to Clarion County around 1846-1847.

In February, 1873 a notice was published by the hotel-keepers of Penn's Valley listing a schedule of rates. John Spangler of Centre Hall was one of the signers. Relationship to Michael Spangler, if any, is not known

"The first tavern in Jacksonville, Marion Township, Centre County of which any authentic record can be gained was set up by William Smyth on the Lock Haven Road. He was followed by Uncle Jimmy McCullough who converted his dwelling to a tavern about 1825. The last tavern-keeper of whom mention is made was ------ Spangler. Since his day (years ago) there has been no pblic-house in the town." (Source - History of Centre County). There is a high degree that this is Michael Spangler. (Note to File - JP Rhein)

"The following was taken from the records of Nittany Valley Union (Lutheran - Reformed) Church in Marion Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania. It was translated by Jack Cower and typed by
Fred Houtz in 2003.

Emeleisen, born January 8, 1837, baptized July 16, 1839, son of Michael and Babara Spangler. Sponsors the parents.
This may be Ann Elizabeth, born February 28, 1837.

No name, born month not shown, 10th day 1838, baptized March 24, 1839, child of Michael and Barbara Spangler. No sponsors listed.
This is James born October 10, 1838.

Maria Caroline, born January 27, 1842, baptized August 28, 1842, daughter of Michael and Barbara Spangler, Sponsors the parents."

Clarion County, Pennsylvania

The following information on Spangler was taken from "The History of Clarion County" Edited by A.J.Davis, D. Mason & Co., Publishers, Syracuse, NY, 1887.

"W. H. Spangler, County Auditor, 1884 to 1888."

"Spangler flour mill located on Big Mill Creek in the northern part of the County."

"Grist Mill in Reidsburg, Monroe Township sold to Mr. Spangler."

Relationship to Michael Spangler, if any, is not known. (Note to File - JP Rhein)

On September 6, 1850, Michael Spanglerr, age 38, Innkeeper, and his wife, Barbara, age 36, are residing in Porter Township, Clarion County, Pennsylvania, with their children; Anthony, age 14, Ann, age 12, Sara, age 9, Mary, age 9, Electa, age 6, and Margaret, age 2. (Source - 1850 Federal Census of Pennsylvania)

Clinton county Pennsylvania was organized by an act of the Assembly passed in 1839; and was separated from Centre and Lycoming. The townships of Bald Eagle, Lamar and Logan, from Centre; and part of Lycoming, were taken to form this county. It is bounded on the north by Potter, on the west by Clearfield and Elk counties; the latter also a recently organized county, having been erected in 1843. The county is of an irregular form; about 20 miles wide and 50 miles long; not much unlike, in this respect, to its northern county, (Lycoming,) which was in 1835, 92 miles long, but now reduced to about 60 in length. (Source - History of Clinton County)

There is a William H. Spangler in the following line. It may be that the son, William H. Spangler, came to Clarion County. I have listed it here for future reference.

1. WILLIAM H. SPANGLER was born on 01 Dec 1779 in York, York, Pennsylvania, United States. He
died on 04 Oct 1841 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United States. He married ANN BARR on
27 May 1812 in Maytown, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United States. She was born in 1788 in
Maytown, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United States. She died in 1877 in Marietta, Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, United States.
William H. Spangler and Ann Barr had the following children:
i. ELIZABETH A SPANGLER was born in 1817. She died in 1859 in Marietta, Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, United States.
ii. WILLIAM H SPANGLER.
iii. JANE R SPANGLER was born in 1832 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United
States. She died in 1890.
iv. ELIZABETH SPANGLER was born in 1830 in York, York, Pennsylvania, United States.
v. FRANCES C SPANGLER was born in 1828 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania,
United States. She died in 1847.
vi. WILLIAM A SPANGLER was born in 1814 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United
States. He died on 01 Aug 1849 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United
States.
vii. BARR SPANGLER was born on 13 Jan 1820 in Lancaster, Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
(Note to File - JP Rhein)
Notes for Michael Spangler:

In 1841 Michael Spangler, Inn Keeper, with two cattle, is listed on the Resident's Tax Payer's List in Marion Township, Centre County.

He came to Clarion County around 1846-1847.

The following information on Spangler was taken from "The History of Clarion County" Edited by
A.J.Davis, D. Mason & Co., Publishers, Syracuse, NY, 1887.

"W. H. Spangler, County Auditor, 1884 to 1888."

"Spangler flour mill located on Big Mill Creek in the northern part of the County."

"Grist Mill in Reidsburg, Monroe Township sold to Mr. Spangler."

Relationship to Michael Spangler, if any, is not known. (Note to File -JP Rhein)

On September 6, 1850, Michael Spanglerr, age 38, Innkeeper, and his wife, Barbara, age 36, are
residing in Porter Township, Clarion County, Pennsylvania, with their children; Anthony, age 14,Ann, age 12, Sara, age 9, Mary, age 9, Electa, age 6, and Margaret, age 2. (Source -1850 Federal Census of Pennsylvania)

Clinton county Pennsylvania was organized by an act of the Assembly passed in 1839; and was
separated from Centre and Lycoming. The townships of Bald Eagle, Lamar and Logan, from
Centre; and part of Lycoming, were taken to form this county. It is bounded on the north by Potter,on the west by Clearfield and Elk counties; the latter also a recently organized county, having been erected in 1843. The county is of an irregular form; about 20 miles wide and 50 miles long; not much unlike, in this respect, to its northern county, (Lycoming,) which was in 1835, 92 miles long,but now reduced to about 60 in length. (Source -History of Clinton County)

This explains the several different addresses in Centre County parts of which were later Clinton County. (Note to File JP Rhein)

There is a William H. Spangler in the following line. It may be that the son, William H. Spangler, came to Clarion County. I have listed it here for future reference.

1. WILLIAM H. SPANGLER was born on 01 Dec 1779 in York, York, Pennsylvania, United States. He
died on 04 Oct 1841 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United States. He married ANN BARR on
27 May 1812 in Maytown, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United States. She was born in 1788 in
Maytown, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United States. She died in 1877 in Marietta, Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, United States.
William H. Spangler and Ann Barr had the following children:
i. ELIZABETH A SPANGLER was born in 1817. She died in 1859 in Marietta, Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, United States.
ii. WILLIAM H SPANGLER.
iii. JANE R SPANGLER was born in 1832 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United
States. She died in 1890.
iv. ELIZABETH SPANGLER was born in 1830 in York, York, Pennsylvania, United States.
v. FRANCES C SPANGLER was born in 1828 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania,
United States. She died in 1847.
vi. WILLIAM A SPANGLER was born in 1814 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United
States. He died on 01 Aug 1849 in Marietta, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, United
States.
vii. BARR SPANGLER was born on 13 Jan 1820 in Lancaster, Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
(Note to File - JP Rhein)
 
Spangler, Michael (I0080)
 
150 Changed his name from Herman to Harold in Oklahoma. He worked as a travelling laborer doing construction. He arrived in the Penn Yan area to build some bridges, mainly, the span across the Keuka Outlet on Route 14, approximately .5 miles south of Dresden, NY. Hartman, Herman Reichard (I4210)
 

      «Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 12» Next»



This site powered by The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding, Copyright © 2001-2006, created by Darrin Lythgoe, Sandy, Utah. All rights reserved.