text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Bromsgrove, Richard


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/418

  name does not appear in contemporary lists of persons present at the council. Bromyarde is the author of a work entitled 'Summa Prædicantium,' printed at Nuremberg by A. Koberger in 1485, and reprinted several times, the last edition having appeared at Venice in 1586. It is also probable that he was the author of 'Opus trivium perutilium materiarum prædicabilium ordine alphabetico e divina canonica civilique legibus eleganter contextum per ven. F. Philippum de Bronnerde, ord. præd.,' printed without date or place, but probably from the press of Fust and Schœffer at Mayence, about 1475. This book was reprinted at Paris in 1500, with the author's name given as Joannes Bromyard.

 BRONTË, CHARLOTTE (1816–1855), afterwards, novelist, was the daughter of Patrick Brontë (1777-1861), and sister of (1817-1848), author:Emily Brontë (1818-1848), and author:Anne Brontë (1820-1849). Patrick Brontë, born on 17 March 1777 at Ahaderg, co. Down, was one of the ten children of Hugh Prunty or Brontë. He changed his paternal name to Brontë shortly before leaving Ireland. At the age of 16 he had tried to make his own living by opening a school at Drumgooland in the same county. The liberality of Mr. Tighe, vicar of Drumgooland, enabled him to go to Cambridge, with a view to taking orders. He entered St. John's College in October 1802, and graduated as B.A. in 1806. He was ordained to a curacy in Essex, and in 1811 to the curacy of Hartshead in Yorkshire. His improved means enabled him to allow 20l. a year to his mother during her life (, Brontë Family, 9). At Hartshead he met Maria, third daughter of Thomas Branwell of Penzance, then on a visit to her uncle, the Rev. J. Fennel, head-master of a Wesleyan academy near Bradford, and afterwards a clergyman of the church of England. They were married on 29 Dec. 1812 by the Rev. W. Morgan, who was at the same time married by Brontë to Fennel's daughter (Gent. Mag. 1813, p. 179). Brontë published two simple-minded volumes of verse, 'Cottage Poems' (Halifax, 1811) and the 'Rural Minstrel' (Halifax, 1813), and a tract called 'The Cottage in a Wood, or the Art of becoming Rich and Happy' a new version of the Pamela Story (reprinted in 1859 from the 2nd edition of 1818). In 1818 he also published the 'Maid of Killarney.' These, and some letters upon catholic emancipation, which appeared in the 'Leeds Intelligencer' for January 1829, were his only publications. After five years at Hartshead, Brontë became perpetual curate of Thornton. His eldest child, Maria, was born at Hartshead. The parish register of Thornton shows that his second daughter, Elizabeth, was baptised there on 26 Aug. 1815; Charlotte (born 21 April) on 29 June 1816; Patrick Branwell on 23 July 1817; Emily Jane on 20 Aug. 1818; and Anne on 25 March 1820. On 25 Feb. 1820 the Brontës had moved to Haworth, nine miles from Bradford, of which Brontë had accepted the perpetual curacy), worth about 200l. a year and a house. Mrs Brontë had an annuity of 50l. a year. A previous incumbent of Haworth had been the famous William Grimshaw, one of Wesley's first followers. Haworth was a country village, but great part of the population was employed in the woollen manufacture, then rapidly extending in the rural districts of Yorkshire. Dissent was strong in Haworth, and methodism had flourished there since the time of Grimshaw. Bronte, a strong churchman and a man of imperious and passionate character, extorted the respect of a sturdy and independent population. He is partly represented by Mr. Helston in 'Shirley,' though a Mr. Roberson, vicar of Heckmondwike, and a personal friend of Brontë's, supplied some characteristic traits (, Life of Charlotte Brontë (2nd edition), i. 120, ii. 121;, p. 21). His behaviour is described by his daughter's biographer as marked by strange eccentricity. He enforced strict discipline; the children were fed on potatoes without meat to make them hardy. He burnt their boots when he thought them too smart, and for the same reason destroyed a silk gown of his wife's. He generally restrained open expression of his anger, but would relieve his feelings by firing pistols out of his back-door or destroying articles of furniture. He became unpopular by supporting the authorities against the Luddites, but afterwards showed equal vigour in supporting men on strike against the injustice of the millowners. He was unsocial in his habits, loved solitary rambles over the moors, and, in consequence of some weakness of digestion, dined alone even before his wife's death and to the end of his own life (, i. 49-53; , pp. 20-23, 195, 198). Brontë himself complained of some of these statements as false, and Mr. Leyland (i. 41-56) accounts for the shooting and the silk-gown stories by misunderstandings and village gossip. Mrs. Brontë died of cancer on 15 Sept. 1821, and a year later

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/434

 Brooke vigorously he discovered the second plot. Brooke was arrested and sent to the Tower July 1603; he was arraigned on the 15th. He pleaded not guilty, though his confessions had gradually laid bare the whole details of the plots. Brooke appears to have hoped to the last to obtain a pardon by means of Cecil, who had married his sister. Mrs. Thompson, in the appendix to her ‘Life of Raleigh,’ gives a letter from Brooke to Cecil, in which the former inquires ‘what he might expect after so many promises received, and so much conformity and accepted service performed by him to Cecil.’ What these services were is entirely uncertain, but Tytler has endeavoured to build out of this a theory that Cecil himself employed Brooke to arrange the plot, and draw the minister's political opponents into the net, in order that he might be rid of them. This is to the last degree improbable, because Raleigh and Cobham were not concerned in the Bye plot, and were not executed. Brooke, in fact, alone of the lay conspirators suffered on the scaffold in the castle yard at Winchester 5 Dec. 1603. He married Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas, lord Borough, and by her had a son, William, and two daughters. Although his children were restored in blood, his son was not allowed to succeed to the title. Brooke was the author of two poems, which are preserved in the Ashmole MSS.

 BROOKE, GUSTAVUS VAUGHAN (1818–1866), actor, is said in a biographical sketch, presumably dictated by himself, to have been born on 25 April 1818, at Hardwick Place, Dublin, and to have received his education at a school conducted by a brother of Maria Edgeworth. When about fifteen years of age he applied to Calcraft, the manager of the Theatre Royal, Dublin, for an engagement. The manager, embarrassed by a sudden indisposition of Edmund Kean, allowed the youth to appear on Easter Tuesday 1833 as William Tell. An engagement followed, in course of which Brooke played Virginius, Douglas, Uolla, and other characters of the class. He then travelled in the country, and was received with favour in Limerick, Londonderry, Glasgow, Edinburgh, and other places. His first appearance in London took place at the Victoria as Virginius, and attracted little attention. In 1840 he accepted from Macready an engagement to appear at Drury Lane, but was dissatisfied with his part, and threw up the engagement. On 3 Jan. 1848 what was practically his debut took place as Othello at the Olympic. A failure at one time seemed imminent, but in the stronger scenes Brooke triumphed, and the performance excited much interest. During this engagement Brooke appeared as Sir Giles Overreach, Richard III, Shylock, Virginius, Hamlet, Brutus, and in one original part, the hero of the 'Lords of Ellingham,' a play by his manager, Mr. Spicer. Refusing liberal offers from Webster for the Haymarket, Brooke returned into the country, but reappeared in London at the Marylebone Theatre, and subsequently under Farren at the Olympic. He then went to America, and played as Othello with unqualified success on 15 Dec. 1851 at the Broadway Theatre, New York. After visiting Philadelphia, Boston, Washington, and Baltimore, he took the Astor Place Opera House, New York, which he opened in May 1852. The experiment was disastrous, and was abandoned after a few weeks. A fresh tour through the United States followed. On 5 Sept. 1853 Brooke reappeared at Drury Lane, then under the management of E. T. Smith. A visit to Australia followed, and was at the outset eminently successful. Brooke once more, in partnership with Coppin, went into management, taking the Theatre Royal, Melbourne. Ruin again came upon him, and he returned to London practically penniless. Upon his reappearance at Drury Lane as Othello he failed to hit the taste of the town. At the beginning of 1866 he started again for Australia. The London, the vessel in which, with his sister, he started, foundered at sea on 10 Jan. 1866, and Brooke, whose conduct throughout the shipwreck has been described by the few survivors as manly and even heroic, perished, lie married in his later years Miss Avonia Jones, an actress of no conspicuous merit. Brooke had a fine presence and a noble voice, both of which he turned at first to good account. To the influence of these, rather than to the display of any eminent intellectual gifts, his success was attributable. His first appearance as Othello elicited, however, from men of judgment more favourable criticism than has often been passed upon any actor of secondary mark. When last he appeared in London, his tragic acting was little more than rant. Habits of dissipation interfered with his success. He is said, when fortunate, to have paid in full the claims upon him contracted previous to his insolvency, for which he was not legally liable.


text:
Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/26

Rh with anxious eyes, and, true to her early training, grasped her red bandanna, containing a few last things, while the satchel she scorned to use hung empty on her arm.

In all this confusion no one was cross. We rushed and gasped through the one day given us for preparation, and I had only time to be glad with my husband that he was going back to the life of activity that he so loved. His enforced idleness made it seem to him that he was cumbering the earth, and he rejoiced to feel that he was again to have the chance to live up to his idea of a soldier. Had I dared to stop in that hurried day and think of myself all the courage would have gone out of me. This removal to Dakota meant to my husband a reunion with his regiment and summer campaigns against Indians; to me it meant months of loneliness, anxiety, and terror. Fortunately there was too much to do to leave leisure for thought.

Steamers were ready for us at Memphis, and we went thither by rail to embark. When the regiment was gathered together, after a separation of two years, there were hearty greetings, and exchanges of troublous or droll experiences; and thankful once more to be reunited, we entered again, heart and soul, into the minutest detail of one another's lives. We went into camp for a few days on the outskirts of Memphis, and exchanged hospitalities with the citizens. The bachelors found an elysium in the society of many very pretty girls, and love-making went on either in luxurious parlors or in the open air as they rode in the warm spring weather to and from our camp. Three steamers were

title: Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/26


text:
Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/27

14 at last loaded and we went on to Cairo, where we found the trains prepared to take us into Dakota.

The regiment was never up to its maximum of twelve hundred men, but there may have been eight or nine hundred soldiers and as many horses. The property of the companies—saddles, equipments, arms, ammunition, and forage—together with the personal luggage of the officers, made the trains very heavy, and we travelled slowly. We were a week or more on the route. Our days were varied by the long stops necessary to water the horses, and occasionally to take them out of the cars for exercise. My husband and I always went on these occasions to loose the dogs and have a frolic and a little visit with our own horses. The youth and gamins of the village gathered about us as if we had been some travelling show. While on the journey one of our family had a birthday. This was always a day of frolic and fun, and even when we were on the extreme frontier, presents were sent for into the States, and we had a little dinner and a birthday cake. This birthday that came during the journey, though so inopportune, did not leave utterly without resources the minds of those whose ingenuity was quickened by affection. The train was delayed that day for an unusually long time; our colored cook, Mary, in despair because we ate so little in the "twenty-minutes-for-refreshments" places, determined on an impromptu feast. She slyly took a basket and filled it at the shops in the village street. She had already made friends with a woman who had a little cabin tucked in between the rails and the

title: Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/27


text:
Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/28

Rh, and there the never absent "eureka" coffee-pot was produced and most delicious coffee dripped. Returning to the car stove, which she had discovered was filled with a deep bed of coals, she broiled us a steak and baked some potatoes. The general and I were made to sit down opposite each other in one of the compartments. A board was brought, covered with a clean towel, and we did table-legs to this impromptu table. We did not dare move, and scarcely ventured to giggle, for fear we should overturn the laden board in our laps. For dessert, a large plate of macaroons, which were an especial weakness of mine, was brought out as a surprise. Mary told me, with great glee, how she had seen the general prowling in the bakers' shops to buy them, and described the train of small boys who followed him when he came back with his brown paper parcel. "Miss Libbie," she said, "they thought a sure enough gen'l always went on horseback and carried his sword in his hand."

We were so hungry we scarcely realized that we were anything but the embodiment of picturesque grace. No one could be otherwise than awkward in trying to cut food on such an uncertain base, while Mary had taken the last scrap of dignity away from the general's appearance by enveloping him in a kitchen towel as a substitute for a napkin. With their usual independence and indifference to ceremony, troops of curious citizens stalked through the car to stare at my husband. We went on eating calmly, unconscious that they thought the picture hardly in keeping with their preconceived ideas of a commanding officer. When we

title: Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/28


text:
Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/29

16 thanked Mary for our feast, her face beamed and shone with a combination of joy at our delight and heat from the stove. When she lifted up our frugal board and set us free, we had a long stroll, talking over other birthdays and those yet to come, until the train was ready to start.

title: Page:Boots and Saddles.djvu/29


text:
Page:Three Books of Occult Philosophy (De Occulta Philosophia) (1651).djvu/192

 Rh

Prince Elector, Duke of Westphalia, and Augaria, Lord and Arch-prelate of Colonia, and Pader- bornia, by his most gracious Master, Henry Cor- nelius Agrippa of Nettes-heym wisheth health.

Ehold now (most illustrious Prince, and most honorable Prelate!) the rest of the books of Occult Philosophy, or Magick, which I promised Your Worthiness that I would put forth when 1 published the first of them: but the suddain, and almost unexpected death of holy Margaret of Austria ''my Princess coming upon it, hindred me then from the endavoring to put it forth. Then the wickedness of some Pulpit-sycophants, and of some School-Sophisters incessantly raging against me for a declamation I put forth concerning the Vanity of things, and the excellency of the word of God, and contending against me continually with bitter hatred, envy, malice, and calumnies, hindered me from putting of it forth; whereof some very proudly, with a full mouth, and loud voice aspersed me with impiety in the Temple amongst a promiscuous people. Others with corner-whisperings from house to house, street by street, did fill the ears of the ignorant with my infamy: others in publicke, and private assemblies did instigate Prelates, Princes, and Caesar himself against me. Hence I began to be at a stand, whether I should put forth the rest of the book or no, whilest I did doubt that I should by this means expose my self to greater calumnies, and as it were cast my self out of the smoke into the fire, a certain rude fear seised [seized] upon me, least by putting them forth I should seem more offensive then officius to you,'' Rh


text:
Page:Three Books of Occult Philosophy (De Occulta Philosophia) (1651).djvu/193

 ''and expoe your highnes to the envy of malicious Carpers, and tongues of detracters. Whilet thee things troubled me with a various deparation, the quicknes of your undertanding, exact dicretion, uprightnes of Judgement, Religion without upertition, and other mot known vertues in you, your authority, and integrity beyond exception, which can eaily check, and bridle the tongues of landerers, removed my doubting, and inforced me to et upon that again more boldly, which I had almot left off by reaon of depaire. Therefore (mot Illutrious Prince) take in good part this econd book of Occult Philoophy, in which we hew the myteries of the Celetiall Magick, all things being opened, and manifeted, which experienced antiquity makes relation of, and which came to my knowledge, that the ecrets of Celetiall Magick (hitherto neglected, and not fully apprehended by men of latter times) may with your portection be by me, after the hewing of natural vertues, propoed to them that are tudious, and curious of thee ecrets : by which let him that hall be profited and receive benefit, give you the thanks, who have been the occaion of this Edition, and etting of it at liberty to be een abroad.''


text:
Author:Elizabeth Bacon Custer

Works

 * Boots and Saddles (1885)
 * Tenting on the Plains (1887)
 * Following the Guidon (1891)

title: Author:Elizabeth Bacon Custer


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Roosevelt and the Progressive Party

ROOSEVELT AND THE PROGRESSIVE PARTY. The Progressive movement in the Republican party, like its counterpart in the Democratic party, laid emphasis on the need of freeing government, both State and Federal, from the domination of special interests and the prostitution of government to serve the needs of a small moneyed minority. The fight more especially developed into a struggle against corporations. This struggle has had three principal phases: first, the attempt to control and regulate corporate activities; second, to resist the efforts made by vested corporate interests to exploit the natural resources of the country in their own interest and, third, the revolt against the tariff revision of 1909 which was made in the interests of the same predatory classes. The Sherman Law was the effort made to accomplish the first end; it was not very successful and had a disastrous effect on business. When Roosevelt became President in 1901 he regarded this law as of doubtful efficacy. His chief objection to it was that it failed to discriminate between good corporations and bad corporations, assuming that all combinations were trusts and, therefore, dangerous and to be suppressed. Roosevelt in 1903 prevailed on Congress to establish a Bureau of Corporations in the Department of Commerce and Labor, through which “power and authority,” were granted, “to make. . . diligent investigation into the organization, conduct and management of the business of any corporation, joint-stock company or corporate combination engaged in commerce among the several states and with foreign nations.”

Roosevelt, however, before the bureau made its reports of the activities of “big business” determined to try out the Sherman Law in the cases of the Standard Oil Company and the American Tobacco Company. While nominally successful the punishment of the delinquent corporations was more apparent than real. The financial panic of 1907 further stayed the President's hand but it was clearly his intention and desire that Taft, his successor, should carry on the work of government control of corporations.

The conservation movement to protect the natural resources of the nation in the interest of all the people and from exploitation by private individuals and interests was the second great objective of the progressive forces during Mr. Roosevelt's incumbency of the White House. The President in March 1907 appointed the Interstate Waterways Commission to investigate conservation as far as the waterways of the country were concerned. A preliminary investigation by the commission caused it to recommend to the President the calling of a conference to discuss conservation from all angles. The result was the memorable conference at the White House on 13 May 1908 and the subsequent appointment of Gifford Pinchot as head of the National Conservation Commission. In the fight to conserve the natural resources of the country Mr. Roosevelt received no aid from the majority of the Congress. Everything possible was done to hamper him and the special private interests were sufficiently powerful to prevent him in his effort to put the conservation movement on a secure basis. The lasting benefit of his struggle was the awakening of public interest in the question which in later years put the movement beyond the power of the special interests and their subservient tools among the politicians.

In endorsing Taft as his successor, Mr. Roosevelt firmly believed that his favorite measures, “his policies,” would be carried out faithfully. Roosevelt's disappointment was keen, therefore, when the Payne-Aldrich tariff raised certain schedules upward instead of downward as had been promised by Taft and his political sponsors during the pre-election campaign. Taft's support of Ballinger, his advocacy of a sham reciprocity treaty with Canada and his yielding to the old conservative standpatters and reactionaries made it impossible for the progressive members of his party to support him for re-election in 1912. The tariff discussion of 1909 was the most potent factor in widening the breach between the Progressives and the reactionaries among the Republicans and helped define the progressive movement for the country. An open break with the Taft administration followed and the National Progressive Republican League was formed by the Progressive senators and members of the House of Representatives, pledged to these specific reforms: (1) election of United States senators by popular vote; (2) direct primaries; (3) direct election of delegates to national conventions; (4) initiative, referendum and recall clauses in all State constitutions; and (5) a corrupt practices law with adequate provision for its enforcement. The league grew rapidly and was sufficiently powerful to cause progress and reform legislation to be passed in the last year of the Taft administration. Its growth proved that the Republican party as then constituted had no room for real progressives and either a new party must be created or the old effectively regenerated.

Already in April 1911 the Progressive wing of the Republicans made preparation to ensure the nomination of one of their members in 1912. For a time it appeared that Senator La Follette would be the Progressive leader against reaction in the Republican National Convention of 1912. Certain interests, however, were able to cause his candidacy to be dropped and his followers at once transferred their allegiance to Roosevelt. The latter was less uncompromising than La Follette, having yielded to the special interests whenever he could make an advance by so doing. Good government had no more doughty champion than he and popular rights no advocate more sincere. The contest for the Republican nomination by the spring of 1912 dwindled to a struggle between the followers of Taft and Roosevelt. The contest was one of the most bitter in our political history because of the former close relations existing between the two candidates. The issues, however, were sharply defined. Taft stood forth the champion of privilege while Roosevelt as throughout his career espoused the cause of democracy, or government by the people.

The crisis came at the Chicago Convention of the Republican party, 18-22 June 1912. The delegates to that convention were of three classes according to mode of selection: Those elected by State conventions, those chosen directly by the people and those chosen directly under pledge to vote for designated candidates. The reactionaries under Taft controlled the first or “machine” group; the two other groups were largely controlled by Roosevelt. It was soon observed that the contest

would be close and the fight was soon centred on those delegates whose seats were contested, neither candidate having a clear majority of uncontested seats. The reactionary National Committee, appointed four years before, now proceeded to award the contested seats and adjusted matters so that Taft was ensured a majority. The Progressives claimed that these decisions were made in bad faith, that the nomination was stolen, and they withdrew from the convention. They held a rump convention to discuss future plans. Roosevelt told the delegates to return to their homes, sound the popular sentiment and return to Chicago on 5 August, when if the popular demand should be sufficiently strong, a third party would be established. On 5 August the Progressive delegates met again in Chicago and reported an overwhelming popular demand for a new party opposed to boss rule and machine politics. On 6 August Mr. Roosevelt in what he called his “Confession of Faith” outlined the purposes of the new party, stating that: “the old parties are husks, with no real soul within either, divided on artificial lines, boss-ridden and privilege-controlled, each a jumble of incongruous elements, and neither daring to speak out wisely and fearlessly what should be said on the vital issues of the day.” The new Progressive movement he characterised as “a movement of truth, sincerity and wisdom, a movement which proposes to put at the service of all our people the collective power of the people, through their governmental agencies, alike in the Nation and in the several States. . . . We propose to raise aloft a standard to which all honest men can repair, and under which all can fight, no matter what their political differences, if they are content to face the future and no longer to dwell among the dead issues of the past.” Roosevelt was nominated for the Presidency and Hiram Johnson of California for Vice-President. The platform of the new party promised the five reforms outlined above as the demands of the National Progressive League and also outlined a program of social and industrial justice, to correct or mitigate the injurious effects incident to our modern industry. Within the three months following the convention the Progressive party organized itself from the national committee down to the local election district and at the November election polled more than 4,000,000 votes — a feat unparalleled in all political history. When the Presidential campaign of 1916 arrived and Mr. Hughes became the Republican candidate, old animosities were laid aside and Mr. Roosevelt and nearly all of his Progressive followers supported the old party, believing rightly that a division would again make for a Democratic victory and four more years of Wilson and Democratic administration. Tactless blunders by a few campaign managers nullified Mr. Roosevelt's efforts and Wilson secured a second term. In October 1919 an intimate friend of Mr. Roosevelt disclosed the fact that the latter was preparing to secure the nomination for the Presidency in 1920, when he prophesied that the standpatters would have to take him and “with a larger dose” of reform than in 1904. His untimely death removed America's most progressive and most earnest leader; perhaps,

the only man who was able to place a strong government in Washington instead of a cabal of theorists and impractical idealists. Consult La Follette, R. M., ‘Autobiography’ (1918); Roosevelt, Theodore, ‘Thou Shalt Not Steal’ (in the Outlook of 12 July 1913); id. ‘Progressive Principles,’ edited by Elmer H. Youngman (New York 1913); De Witt, B. P., ‘The Progressive Movement’ (ib. 1915); Walling, W. E., ‘Progressivism — and After’ (ib. 1914); New York Times of 17 Oct. 1919; Literary Digest of 18 Oct. 1919.


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Humour

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Humour


text:
Talk:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Humour

Sources:
 * http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tim_Starling/ScanSet_PNG_demo&vol=13&page=EC3A932


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hummock

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hummock


text:
Talk:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hummock

Sources:
 * http://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tim_Starling/ScanSet_PNG_demo&vol=13&page=EC3A932


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 19.djvu/275

 advantage, but at the same time stated that the pretensions of the emigrants to be regarded as an independent community could not be admitted. Various measures were proposed which would but have aggravated the situation. Finally, in deference to the strongly urged views of Sir George Napier, Lord Stanley, in a despatch of the 13th of December, received in Cape Town on the 23rd of April 1843, consented to Natal becoming a British colony. The institutions adopted were to be as far as possible in accordance with the wishes of the people, but it was a fundamental condition “that there should not be in the eye of the law any distinction or disqualification whatever, founded on mere difference of colour, origin, language or creed.” Sir George then appointed Mr Henry Cloete (a brother of Colonel Cloete) a special commissioner to explain to the Natal volksraad the decision of the government. There was a considerable party of Natal Boers still strongly opposed to the British, and they were reinforced by numerous bands of Boers who came over the Drakensberg from Winburg and Potchefstroom. Commandant Jan Mocke of Winburg (who had helped to besiege Captain Smith at Durban) and others of the “war party” attempted to induce the volksraad not to submit, and a plan was formed to murder Pretorius, Boshof and other leaders, who were now convinced that the only chance of ending the state of complete anarchy into which the country had fallen was by accepting British sovereignty. In these circumstances the task of Mr Henry Cloete was one of great difficulty and delicacy. He behaved with the utmost tact and got rid of the Winburg and Potchefstroom burghers by declaring that he should recommend the Drakensberg as the northern limit of Natal. On the 8th of August 1843 the Natal volksraad unanimously agreed to the terms proposed by Lord Stanley. Many of the Boers who would not acknowledge British rule trekked once more over the mountains into what are now the Orange Free State and Transvaal provinces. At the end of 1843 there were not more than 500 Dutch families left in Natal. Cloete, before returning to the Cape, visited Panda and obtained from him a valuable concession. Hitherto the Tugela from source to mouth had been the recognized frontier between Natal and Zululand. Panda gave up to Natal all the territory between the Buffalo and Tugela rivers, now forming Klip River county.

Although proclaimed a British colony in 1843, and in 1844 declared a part of Cape Colony, it was not until the end of 1845 that an effective administration was installed with Mr Martin West as lieutenant-governor, and the power of the volksraad finally came to an end. In that year the external trade of Natal, almost entirely with Cape Colony, was of the total value of £42,000—of which £32,000 represented imported goods.

The new administration found it hard to please the Dutch farmers, who among other grievances resented what they considered the undue favour shown to the Kaffirs, whose numbers had been greatly augmented by the flight of refugees from Panda. In 1843, for instance, no fewer than 50,000 Zulus crossed the Tugela seeking the protection of the white man. The natives were settled in 1846 in specially selected locations and placed under the general supervision of Sir (then Mr) Theophilus Shepstone (q.v.). Sir Harry Smith, newly appointed governor of the Cape, met, on the banks of the upper Tugela, a body of farmers preparing to recross the Drakensberg, and by remedying their grievances induced many of them to remain in Natal. Andries Pretorius and others, however, declined to remain, and from this time Pretorius (q.v.) ceased his connexion with Natal. Although by this migration the white population was again considerably reduced, those who remained were contented and loyal, and through the arrival of 4500 emigrants from England in the years 1848–1851 and by subsequent immigration from oversea the colony became overwhelmingly British in character. From the time of the coming of the first considerable body of British settlers dates the development of trade and agriculture in the colony, followed somewhat later by the exploitation of the mineral resources of the country. At the same time schools were established and various churches began or increased their work in the colony. Dr Colenso, appointed bishop of Natal, arrived in 1854. In 1856 the dependence of the country on Cape Colony was put to an end and Natal constituted a distinct colony with a legislative council of sixteen members, twelve elected by the inhabitants and four nominated by the crown. At the time the white population exceeded 8000. While dependent on the Cape, ordinances had been passed establishing Roman-Dutch law as the law of Natal, and save where modified by legislation it remained in force.

The British settlers soon realized that the coast lands were suited to the cultivation of tropical or semi-tropical products, and from 1852 onward sugar, coffee, cotton and arrow-root were introduced, tea being afterwards substituted for coffee. The sugar industry soon became of importance, and the planters were compelled to seek for large numbers

of labourers. The natives, at ease in their locations, did not volunteer in sufficient numbers, and recourse was had to coolie labour from India. The first coolies reached Natal in 1860. They came under indentures, but at the expiration of their contract were allowed to settle in the colony. This proved one of the most momentous steps taken in the history of South Africa, for the Indian population rapidly increased, the “free” Indians becoming market gardeners, farmers, hawkers, traders, and in time serious competitors with the whites. But in 1860 and for many years afterwards these consequences were not foreseen, and alone among the South Africa states Natal offered a welcome to Asiatics.

In 1866 the borders of the colony were extended on the south-west by the annexation of part of Kaffraria that had formerly been under the sway of the Pondo chief Faku, who found himself unable to maintain his authority in a region occupied by many diverse tribes. The newly acquired territory was named Alfred county in memory

of a visit paid to Natal by Prince Alfred (afterwards duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha). In 1867 R. W. Keate (1814–1873) became lieutenant-governor, a post which he filled until 1872. His administration is notable, not so much for internal affairs but from the fact that he twice acted as arbitrator in disputes in which the Boer states were involved. In a dispute between the Transvaal and the Orange Free State he decided (February 1870) that the Klip river and not the upper Vaal was the frontier stream. A more famous decision, that known as the Keate Award, was given in October 1871. It concerned the south-western frontiers of the Transvaal, and the award, which was against the Transvaal pretensions, had important effects on the history of South Africa (see and ).

During all this time little was done to alter the condition of the natives. There was scarcely an attempt to copy the policy, deliberately adopted in Cape Colony, of educating and civilizing the black man. Neither was Natal faced with the Cape problem of a large half-caste population. The Natal natives were left very much in the state in which they were before the advent of the white men. While this opportunity of educating and training a docile people was in the main neglected, savage abuse of power by their chiefs was prevented. Under the superintendence of Shepstone the original refugees were quiet and contented, enjoying security from injustice and considerable freedom. This ideal lot, from the native point of view, drew such numbers of immigrants from disturbed districts that with the natural increase of population in thirty years the native inhabitants increased from about 100,000 to fully 350,000. New generations grew up almost as ignorant as their fathers, but not with the same sense of dependence upon the white men. In this way was sown the seed of future trouble between the two races. The first serious collision between the natives and the government occurred in 1873. The Amahlubi, one of the highest in rank of the Bantu tribes of South Africa, fleeing from the cruelties of

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 19.djvu/275


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Roosevelt, Theodore

ROOSEVELT, Theodore, American author, naturalist, explorer, statesman and soldier, and 26th President of the United States: b. New York City, 27 Oct. 1858; d. Sagamore Hill, N. Y., 6 Jan. 1919. He was born at No. 28 East 20th street, New York City. His father (of the same name) was a prominent merchant and a man noted for patriotism, public spirit and enlightened interest in many movements for social betterment. His mother's maiden name was Martha Bullock; she was a native of Georgia and had two brothers who served in the Confederate navy during the Civil War. The Roosevelt family is descended from Klaes Martensen Roosevelt, who came from Holland to what was then “New Amsterdam” in 1644; for seven generations thereafter all of Theodore's paternal ancestors bearing the family name were born on the island of Manhattan, and were well known there as leading citizens. Young Theodore was a sickly child, greatly troubled with asthma and extremely near-sighted; the condition of his health somewhat retarded his education, but he developed, when he was still very young, a passion for serious reading and an intelligent interest in natural history. In 1876 he entered Harvard College and received his degree of bachelor of arts in 1880. Before going to college and while there, as well as afterward, he gave much time to athletic exercises of various kinds and, although seriously handicapped by physical deficiencies, became, by sheer force of will and indomitable perseverance, a good boxer, a good rider and a good marksman, while, by frequently living in the open air and persistence in strenuous exercise, he not only threw off the maladies of his childhood, but became a tireless walker and rider and developed a magnificent physique, able to respond for many years to the exhausting calls he made upon it. While in college he began a History of the Naval War of 1812, which he completed after graduation; this is a work of much greater literary merit than he himself afterward ascribed to its opening chapters, but the most interesting and significant incident connected with its preparation is the generally admitted fact that he undertook it because he found all the American narratives of that conflict, then current, untrustworthy, prejudiced and unfair to the public enemy; then, as ever throughout his life, his love of truth and fair play was, perhaps, his most striking characteristic; hypocrisy, humbug and obtaining praise through false pretenses were always, for him, the very abomination of desolation.

At the age of 23 he was elected to the New York assembly. Through family tradition and personal conviction he was a Republican, and

his district was normally Republican also; but, two years before, the local bossling, to please the supreme party boss, had caused the nomination and election of a candidate whose record at Albany of unscrupulous subserviency to the boss in question had so disgusted decent people among his constituents as to make the choice of a Democrat reasonably certain, were he renominated by the Republicans. Nevertheless, the boss insisted on his tool's renomination, and the bossling proceeded to obey orders; young Roosevelt reluctantly consented to be a candidate in the primaries, at the urgent entreaty of a local politician named Joe Murray, who pointed out to him how his party was about to suffer defeat merely to promote the discreditable personal ends of its unscrupulous leaders; and, to the great astonishment of these leaders, the supposed stripling was nominated, despite their hostility, and easily elected. In the assembly his independence, courage, devotion to duty, outspoken enmity to corruption in every form and enlightened and fearless efforts to promote practical reforms and truly progressive legislation, in the face of bitter hostility on the part of wealthy “interests” and politicians owned by them, soon made him a figure of national prominence. The sudden deaths of his mother and his first wife within a few hours of each other in February 1884, and the discouraging political outlook after the nomination by the Republicans of James G. Blaine for the Presidency, a nomination which Roosevelt, as a delegate to the National Convention, had sought vainly to prevent, caused his temporary retirement from public life and led him to become for some two years a ranchman in the wild country then given over to cowboys and their herds.

Two years later he returned to New York to accept the Republican nomination for mayor, tendered him principally because the more wealthy and conservative element of his party was alarmed by the candidacy of Henry George, representing an ephemeral “United Labor” organization; Roosevelt was defeated on this occasion, mainly by reason of defections among the same class of his supporters who deemed Abram S. Hewitt, the Tammany nominee, a “safer” mayor for their purposes. In February 1889 he attended a National Conference of Civil Service Reformers in Baltimore and there expressed such outspoken and unqualified devotion to the principles of the merit system that President Harrison appointed him a member of the Civil Service Commission. In this post he made the Civil Service Law a living force for good government and pure politics and himself a source of real terror to politicians who had previously believed, with good reason, and acted on the belief that this statute and the commission it created could be safely ignored and defied by officials having “pull.” He remained in office for more than three years after President Cleveland had succeeded President Harrison, resigning to become one of the police commissioners of New York City, appointed by Mayor Strong after the Reform victory of 1894. Here again he showed himself the fearless and inflexible enemy of the many abuses which had become chronic in the New York police, and thereby incurred the rancorous hostility of all those who profited, in one way or another, by these abuses, including many citizens outwardly

reputable and ready to favor reforms so long as these led only to talk, but shocked by Roosevelt's thoroughgoing and practical discharge of his sworn duty. After two years of what he called a “grimy struggle” he was given a new field of useful activity by his appointment as Assistant Secretary of the Navy.

For Roosevelt it was a labor of love to promote the efficiency of the American navy, and to his energy, eminent talents for administration and fervent patriotism the brilliant success of our fleets in the war with Spain must be fairly ascribed in very large measure. He took part in the war, however, in another capacity; as soon as its outbreak became certain he tendered his services as a soldier, was offered the command of a regiment of volunteer cavalry, declined this in view of the superior experience of his old friend, afterward Maj. Gen. Leonard Wood, then a surgeon with a notable record as an Indian-fighter, but accepted a commission as lieutenant-colonel in the same organization, soon to be known as the famous Rough Riders, and served with distinction at the engagement of Las Guasimas and the battle of San Juan Hill. He became colonel of the regiment when Colonel Wood was promoted, was nominated brevet brigadier-general “for gallantry in battle” and was warmly commended by Generals Wheeler, Young, Sumner and Wood and several other officers of rank who were eye-witnesses of his conduct. When his regiment was disbanded he became at once the Republican candidate for governor of New York.

He owed his nomination to the extremity of the bosses and bosslings then in control of the party, who at that time hated Roosevelt, but hated yet more their own exclusion from power and its profits, and recognized that he was the only man they could then put up with any hope of victory. The result justified both their forecast and their antipathy, for Roosevelt was elected by a good majority and also proved himself as unsatisfactory a governor, for their purposes, as he had been an assemblyman 17 years before. Especially did he render himself obnoxious to wealthy corporations and to the prominent politicians (both Republicans and Democrats) employed by such corporations by insisting on their paying reasonable taxes on their franchises. As the only means to prevent his obtaining a second term as governor, the leading Republican politicians tried to force and finally succeeded in forcing upon him the nomination for the Vice-Presidency at the National Convention of 1900 in Philadelphia.

It had been the hope of these politicians that, when thus “kicked upstairs,” he would be reduced to ornamental impotency; but these calculations were falsified by the murder of President McKinley, and, on 14 Sept. 1901, Theodore Roosevelt took the oath of office as President at the house of Mr. Ansley Wilcox in Buffalo. On 8 Nov. 1904 he was elected to the same office against Judge Alton B. Parker, the Democratic candidate, by 330 electoral votes to 136 and a popular majority of some two millions and a half.

To relate, even in the barest outline, the events of Roosevelt's Presidency would be quite impossible within the limits of this article. His virtually enforced adjustment of the great coal strike, his long struggle, in Congress and the courts, with “trusts” and combinations in restraint of trade and actual or threatened monopolies, his successful mediation between Russia and Japan, his restoration of order in Cuba, his vindication of the Monroe Doctrine in the case of Venezuela, his rescue of the Isthmus from Colombia and construction of the Panama Canal, his steadfast and untiring efforts to preserve the public lands from misappropriation and trespass on the part of land thieves, to develop the country's natural resources for the benefit of the people and to detect, root out and punish corruption and breach of trust in all branches of the public service — each of these subjects could be fairly and adequately treated only if it had an article to itself as long as the present. The history of his Presidency was, in short, the history of the United States during seven and a half years of great moment. On the evening of election day 1904 he said publicly that he would not accept a nomination for another term. To this determination he adhered inflexibly in 1908, resisting a tremendous pressure from almost every part of the country, based upon the universal conviction that his nomination and election were absolutely certain if his consent could be obtained, and a large measure of doubt as to whether he could transfer to any other candidate enough of his own immense popularity to assure the latter's choice. He succeeded, however, in bringing about the nomination and election, as his successor, of William Howard Taft, whom he had selected, after very serious consideration and some hesitancy, as on the whole the most suitable among the public men connected with his administration to continue the practical application of his theories and principles in the conduct of the government. A few weeks after Mr. Taft's inauguration Roosevelt started on a hunting trip to East Africa.

On his return he found the Republican party threatened with defeat and the administration gravely discredited by Mr. Taft's complete failure to justify the hopes of those who had secured his nomination and most signally of all, of Roosevelt himself; he found also a general conviction, which every day strengthened, that only his own acceptance of the Republican nomination for the Presidency in 1912 could prevent a Democratic victory. Against both his own inclination and his own judgment he finally yielded to the overwhelming pressure brought upon him, and consented, in his own words, to “cast his hat into the ring.” The party primaries gave him an undoubted majority in the convention held at Chicago in June 1912, but the wealthy “interests” which controlled the National Committee, and, through it, the preliminary organization of the convention, and the unscrupulous politicians who did their bidding deliberately preferred defeat at the polls to four years more of Roosevelt, and unseated enough of his delegates to ensure the formal renomination of Mr. Taft. An improvised “Progressive” party, created largely as a protest against the injustice and dishonesty of this nomination, put Roosevelt in the field, and a bitter, three-cornered contest followed; during this a partially demented man, maddened by the violent abuse of Roosevelt's enemies, attempted to kill him at Milwaukee, inflicting a wound which obliged him to remain two weeks in a hospital. At the election Mr. Taft met probably the most humiliating defeat ever experienced by a candidate for the Presidency, carrying only two small States and receiving only eight electoral votes; Roosevelt obtained 80, and a popular vote of over 4,000,000, but the division of the Republicans made inevitable the election of the Democratic candidate, Woodrow Wilson.

In October 1913, Roosevelt sailed for South America to explore a virtually unknown portion of the Brazilian wilderness. This expedition was attended by great dangers and hardships; his party was for months entirely cut off from civilization and suffered terribly from the tropical fevers always lurking in those regions. He was himself so very ill and the whole party so utterly exhausted that he urged them to leave him to die; but his companions, including his son Kermit, refused to do this, and finally succeeded in reaching a frontier settlement. Roosevelt returned to his home in May 1914, and thereafter was outwardly as earnest, as active and as interested in public affairs as he had ever been; but the poison of the South American fever remained in his system, undermined his strength and undoubtedly shortened his life.

Roosevelt's return to the United States was very soon followed by the outbreak of the European War. He had entirely disapproved of President Wilson's policy of “watchful waiting” and inconclusive intermeddling in Mexican affairs, and now found himself yet more radically out of sympathy with the latter's advocacy of “neutrality in thought” respecting Belgium and the settlement underlying his “too proud to fight” speech: moreover Roosevelt had naturally and strongly felt as an unseemly reflection on his own official course that a successor in the Presidency should negotiate a treaty with Colombia apologizing for the action of the United States at Panama. He became more and more critical of the administration as he realized more and more clearly the imminent danger to the United States involved in a possible German victory, and the unwillingness of President Wilson and of the political party then dominant to adopt any adequate measures of preparation for war, or even to resent with dignity and spirit repeated and insolent outrages on our citizens. To bring about Mr. Wilson's defeat in 1916, he refused to run as the Progressive candidate for the Presidency (thereby virtually destroying the short-lived Progressive party), when the same interests and, in the main, the same men responsible for Mr. Taft's candidacy four years before again showed that they preferred their party's defeat to Roosevelt's election, by giving the Republican nomination to Justice Charles E. Hughes. Roosevelt earnestly and whole-heartedly supported Hughes in the ensuing campaign, but his innumerable friends were less forgiving than himself, and their profound dissatisfaction, joined to some clumsy and arrogant blunders on the part of the Republican managers, gave Woodrow Wilson four years more in the White House.

The President's final break with Germany was to Roosevelt a very agreeable surprise. He threw himself with all possible ardor into the advocacy of an energetic participation in the war on our part, and offered to raise a division of volunteers, in which he should himself serve as one of the brigadier-generals. He was instantly overwhelmed with applications to serve in the force from all parts of the Union; it is said that more than 250,000 men asked to join it. Congress authorized its organization, notwithstanding strenuous opposition from the President; but the latter refused to avail himself of the authority thus conferred; Roosevelt could not be allowed to return home with a military record.

Roosevelt was bitterly disappointed by this refusal; prevented by the President from serving his country in the field, he did everything in his power to arouse an imperative demand by public opinion for a prosecution of the war with unflinching vigor up to a decisive victory, without regard to the cost and sacrifices involved, and protested with all possible energy against any thought of negotiation or parley with the public enemy; for, with many others, he entertained something more than a suspicion that peace without victory was the secret aim of President Wilson. All four of his sons promptly entered the army and served with distinction; one of the four was killed; two were wounded. When on 25 Oct. 1918, the President appealed to the voters of the Nation to elect a Democratic Congress, as a mark of confidence in himself and approval of his policy, Roosevelt vigorously denounced the President's course, and united with ex-President Taft in urging that the voters should choose “a Congress which will not register the will of one man, but, fresh from the people, will enact the will of the people.” The extremely significant result of the election, which, instead of giving the President the vote of confidence he had asked, changed Democratic majorities of 10 in the Senate and five in the House into Republican majorities of 2 in the Senate and 45 in the House was the last of Roosevelt's many political triumphs; and it proved a solace to the last two months of his life. His health, fatally weakened by the results of his South American explorations, had gradually failed during the four busy and exciting years succeeding his return. About midnight on 5 Jan. 1919, he dictated from his sick-bed a communication to the chairman of the Republican National Committee; some four hours afterward, he died quietly in his sleep.

Roosevelt's political and public services were but a part of his many activities. He was a very prolific writer; beside innumerable addresses, magazine articles and occasional publications he wrote ‘The Winning of the West’ a history of the pioneer settlement of our states beyond the Alleghanies; Lives of Thomas Hart Benson, Gouverneur Morris and Oliver Cromwell; a ‘History of New York’; an ‘Autobiography’; ‘African Game Trails’; ‘Through the Brazilian Wilderness’; and a multitude of other books, some setting forth his theories or narrating his experiences as a naturalist and hunter, some expounding his views on moral, social or economic problems, many devoted to the political issues of the times or defending his opinions (always very pronounced and definite) as to disputed questions of ethics or public policy. He was likewise an indefatigable traveler, and always ready to give the brief holidays allowed him by his literary labors and his public duties to

journeys in wild regions and life in the open. He was twice married, in 1880, to Alice Lee, and, in 1886, to Edith Kermit Carow. By his first marriage, he left one daughter, Alice, the wife of Nicholas Longworth of Ohio; by his second, he left three sons, Theodore, Kermit and Archibald, and one daughter, Ethel, the wife of Dr. Richard Derby of New York; his youngest son, Quentin, had been killed in the war.

Theodore Roosevelt was a man of extraordinary powers and, to those who knew him well and understood him, a man of most attractive character and qualities. Doubtless he was sometimes gravely misunderstood; his mental processes were so abnormally rapid that he often seemed to act with little or no reflection, when he had, in fact, considered the question at issue most thoroughly and conscientiously, although, perhaps, in one-tenth of the time which would have been needed for the purpose by an ordinary man. Moreover the strength of his convictions and the vivacity of his speech and manner confused and frightened timid men or those who knew him but slightly, and led them to think of and describe him as arbitrary and overbearing; he was, in truth, somewhat exceptionally anxious for information, assistance and advice from those for whom he felt respect and in whom he had confidence; but only one who wasn't afraid of him could fairly judge or really like him. He had the stern sense of duty, the lofty purpose and the strict morals of puritanism, without any of its prudishness or pharisaism or intolerance, and, most emphatically, without any of its too common hypocrisy or affectation of virtue. He detested falsehood in every form and shams of every kind, and, throughout his long and stormy career as a public servant and a political leader, always fought fairly and in the open, and was restrained by the instincts of a gentleman and the scruples of a man of honor. It were needless to speak of his patriotism or his courage, — the events of his life sufficiently attest these, — but it is the firm belief of the writer that his profound wisdom, the unselfishness of his devotion to duty and his immense usefulness to his country will be more clearly recognized and more highly esteemed by each successive generation of Americans in our national future.

Bibliography. — ‘Autobiography’ (New York 1913); Bennett, J. W., ‘Roosevelt and the Republic,’ bitterly hostile (New York 1908); Burroughs, John, ‘Camping and Tramping with Roosevelt’ (Boston 1907); Douglas, G. W., ‘Life of Theodore Roosevelt’ (New York 1907); Greene, F. V. (in Roosevelt's ‘American Ideals’); Halstead, Murat, ‘Life of Roosevelt’ (Akron 1902); Leupp, F. E., ‘Biography of Theodore Roosevelt’ (New York 1904); Lodge, Henry Cabot, ‘Frontier Town and Other Essays’ (New York 1906); Morgan, James, ‘Theodore Roosevelt, the Boy and the Man’ (ib. 1907); Riis, Jacob A., ‘Theodore Roosevelt the Citizen’ (ib. 1904); Shaw, Albert, ‘Cartoon History of Roosevelt's Career’ (ib. 1910); Thayer, William Roscoe, ‘Theodore Roosevelt’ (New York 1919); Washburn, C. G., ‘Theodore Roosevelt’ (Boston 1916).


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 19.djvu/276

 Panda, had been located by the Natal government under their chief Langalibalele (i.e. the great sun which shines and burns) in 1848 at the foot of the Drakensberg with the object of preventing the Bushmen who dwelt in the mountains plundering the upland farmers. Here the Amahlubi prospered, and after the diamond fields had been discovered many of the young men who had been to Kimberley brought back firearms. These Langalibalele refused to register, and entered into negotiations with several tribes with the object of organizing a general revolt.

Prompt action by Sir Benjamin Pine, then lieutenant-governor of the colony, together with help from the Cape and Basutoland, prevented the success of Langalibalele’s plan, and his own tribe, numbering some 10,000 persons, was the only one which rebelled. The chief was captured, and exiled to Cape Colony (August 1874). Permitted to return to Natal in 1886, he died in 1889.

This rebellion drew the attention of the home government to the native question in Natal. The colonists, if mistaken in their general policy of leaving the natives in a condition of mitigated barbarism, had behaved towards them with uniform kindness and justice. They showed indeed in their dealings both with the natives within their borders and with the Zulus beyond the Tugela a disposition to favour the natives at the expense of their white neighbours in the Transvaal and Orange Free State, and their action against Langalibalele was fully justified and the danger of a widespread native revolt real. But there were those, including Bishop Colenso, who thought the treatment of the Amahlubi wrong, and their agitation induced the British government to recall Sir Benjamin Pine, Sir Garnet Wolseley being sent out as temporary governor. Sir Garnet reported the natives as “happy and prosperous—well off in every sense.” As a result of consultations with Shepstone certain modifications were made in native policy, chiefly in the direction of more European supervision.

Meantime the colony had weathered a severe commercial crisis brought on in 1865 through over-speculation and the neglect of agriculture, save along the coast belt. But the trade over berg largely developed on the discovery of the Kimberley diamond mines, and the progress of the country was greatly promoted by the

substitution of the railway for the ox wagon as a means of transport. There already existed a short line from the Point at Durban to the Umgeni, and on the 1st of January 1876 Sir Henry Bulwer, who had succeeded Wolseley as governor, turned the first sod of a new state-owned railway which was completed as far as Maritzburg in 1880. At this date the white inhabitants numbered about 20,000. But besides a commercial crisis the colony had been the scene of an ecclesiastical dispute which attracted widespread attention. (q.v.), condemned in 1863 on a charge of heresy, ignored the authority of the court of South African bishops and was maintained in his position by decision of the Privy Council in England. This led to a division among the Anglican community in the colony and the consecration in 1869 of a rival bishop, who took the title of bishop of Maritzburg. Colenso’s bold advocacy of the cause of the natives—which he maintained with vigour until his death (in 1883)—attracted almost equal attention. His native name was Usobantu (father of the people).

For some years Natal, in common with the other countries of South Africa, had suffered from the absence of anything resembling a strong government among the Boers of the Transvaal, neighbours of Natal on the north. The annexation of the Transvaal to Great Britain, effected by Sir Theophilus Shepstone in April 1877, would, it was hoped, put a period to the disorders in that country. But the new administration at Pretoria inherited many disputes with the Zulus, disputes which were in large measure the cause of the war of 1879. For years the Zulus had lived at amity with the Natalians, from whom they received substantial favours, and in 1872 (q.v.), on succeeding his father Panda, had given assurances of good behaviour. These promises were not kept for long, and by 1878 his attitude had become so hostile towards both the Natal and Transvaal governments that Sir Bartle Frere, then High Commissioner for South Africa, determined on his reduction. During the war (see ) Natal was used as the British base, and the Natal volunteers rendered valuable service in the campaign, which, after opening with disasters to the British forces, ended in the breaking of the Zulu power.

Scarcely had the colony recovered from the shock of the Zulu War than it was involved in the revolt of the Transvaal Boers (1880–1881), an event which overshadowed all domestic concerns. The Natalians were intensely British in sentiment, and resented deeply the policy adopted by the Gladstone administration. At Ingogo,

Majuba and Laing’s Nek, all of them situated within the colony, British forces had been defeated by the Boers. And the treaty of retrocession was never regarded in Natal as anything but a surrender. It was clearly understood that the Boers would aim to establish a republican government over the whole of South Africa, and that the terms of peace simply meant greater bloodshed at no distant date. The protest made by the Natalians against the settlement was in vain. The Transvaal Republic was established, but the prediction of the colonists, ignored at the time, was afterwards fulfilled to the letter. In justice, however, to the colonists of Natal it must be recorded that, finding their protest with regard to the Transvaal settlement useless, they made up their minds to shape their policy in conformity with that settlement. But it was not long before their worst fears with regard to the Boers began to be realized, and their patience was once more severely taxed. The Zulu power, as has been recorded, was broken in 1879. After the war quarrels arose among the petty chiefs set up by Sir Garnet Wolseley, and in 1883 some Transvaal Boers intervened, and subsequently, as a reward for the assistance they had rendered to one of the combatants, demanded and annexed 8000 sq. m. of country, which they styled the “New Republic.” As the London Convention had stipulated that there should be no trespassing on the part of the Boers over their specified boundaries, and as Natal had been the basis for those operations against the Zulus on the part of the British in 1879, which alone made such an annexation of territory possible, a strong feeling was once more aroused in Natal. The “New Republic,” reduced in area, however, to less than 2000 sq. m., was nevertheless recognized by the British government in 1886, and in 1888 its consent was given to the territory (the Vryheid district) being incorporated with the Transvaal. Meantime, in 1887, the remainder of Zululand had been annexed to Great Britain (see ).

In 1884 the discovery of gold in De Kaap Valley, and on Mr Moodie’s farm in the Transvaal, caused a considerable rush of colonists from Natal to that country. Railways were still far from the Transvaal border, and Natal not only sent her own colonists to the new fields, but also offered the nearest route for prospectors from Cape Colony or from Europe. Durban was soon thronged; and Pietermaritzburg, which was then practically the terminus of the Natal railway, was the base from which nearly all the expeditions to the goldfields were fitted out. The journey to De Kaap by bullock-waggon occupied about six weeks. “Kurveying” (the conducting of transport by bullock-waggon) in itself constituted a great industry. Two years later, in 1886, the Rand goldfields were proclaimed, and the tide of trade which had already set in with the Transvaal steadily increased. Natal colonists were not merely the first in the field with the transport traffic to the new goldfields; they became some of the earliest proprietors of mines, and for several years many of the largest mining companies had their chief offices at Pietermaritzburg or Durban. In this year (1886) the railway reached Ladysmith, and in 1891 it was completed to the Transvaal frontier at Charlestown, the section from Ladysmith northward opening up the Dundee and Newcastle coalfields. Thus a new industry was added to the resources of the colony.

The demand which the growing trade made upon the one port of Natal, Durban, encouraged the colonists to redouble their efforts to improve their harbour. The question of a fairway

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 19.djvu/276


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Roosevelt, Robert Barnwell

ROOSEVELT, Robert Barnwell, American author and politician: b. New York, 7 Aug

1829; d. Sayville, L. I., 14 June 1906. He was admitted to the bar and practised law in New York until 1871, when he was elected to Congress. In 1888 he was appointed Minister to the Netherlands and served two years. He was active in opposing the Tweed ring, and wrote several works of natural history. His most important public service, however, was in the establishment of the United States Fish Commission, of which measure he was the originator and promoter while in Congress.


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Roosevelt, Nicholas J.

ROOSEVELT, rō'zë-vĕlt, Nicholas J., American inventor: b. New York, 27 Dec. 1767; d. Skaneateles, N. Y., 30 July 1854. He engaged in manufacturing and inventing in New York and was connected with Robert R. Livingston and John Stevens in experimental boat-building. In 1798 he conceived the idea of a vertical wheel, a suggestion which made steam navigation a success. The first experiment was made in a boat launched in 1802 and propelled by the vertical wheels. In 1809 he was associated with Fulton in the introduction of steamboats into Western waters and in 1811 built and launched the New Orleans, with which he made a pioneer trip down the Ohio and Mississippi rivers in 14 days. He obtained letters patent from the United States government in 1814 protecting his invention, but was denied protection by the New Jersey legislature. Fulton never claimed the invention as his own, and Roosevelt's title to it has never been legally proved.


text:
Page:Three Books of Occult Philosophy (De Occulta Philosophia) (1651).djvu/366

 Rh Elector, Duke of Westphalia, and Augaria, Lord Lord Arch-Biſhop of Colonia, and Paderborne, his moſt gracious Lord, Henry Cornelius Agrippa of Netteſ-heim.

IT is a very excellent opinion of the Ancient Magicians (most Illustrious Prince) that we ought to labour in nothing more in this life, then that we degenerate not from the Excellency of the mind, by which we come neerest to God and put on the Divine nature: least at any time our mind waxing dull by vain idleness should decline to the frailty of our earthly body and vices of the flesh: so we should loose it, as it were cast down by the dark precipiced of perverse lusts. Wherefore we ought so to order our mind, that it by it self being mindfull of its own dignity and excellency, should alwayes both Think, do and operate something worthy of it self; But the knowledge of the Divine science, doth only and very powerfully perform this for us. When we by the remembrance of its majesty being alwaies busied in Divine studies do every moment contemplate Divine things, by a sage and diligent inquisition, and by all the degrees of the creatures ascending even to the Archetype himself, do draw from him the infallible vertue of all things, which those that neglect, trusting only to naturall and worlfly things, are wowt often to be confounded by divers errors & fallacies, and very Rh


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Roos, Johann Heinrich

ROOS, Johann Heinrich, German painter: b. Otterberg, in the Palatinate, 27 Oct. 1631; d. Frankfort-on-Main, 3 Oct. 1685. He went to Amsterdam and applied himself to landscape and animal painting. After a visit to Italy he settled finally at Frankfort. Most of his works are animal landscapes, executed in the conventional Italian style.


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Roon, Albrecht Theodor Emil von

ROON, rōn, Albrecht Theodor Emil von, Prussian soldier: b. Pleushagen, 30 April 1803; d. Berlin, 23 Feb. 1879. He entered the army in 1821; was attached to the Topographical Bureau in Berlin, 1833-35; became captain in 1836, and major in 1842; in 1848 became chief of staff of the 8th Army corps at Coblentz, took part in the campaign at Baden of that year; and was promoted lieutenant-general in 1859. In the latter year he was appointed a member of a commission on the reorganization of the army. He had given special attention to this subject for many years, but his proposals which were in effect an extension with modifications of Scharnhorst's system, embracing a universal three years' service and a reserve, were carried only after long opposition. The Austrian War of 1866 demonstrated that value of his system. He attended the German emperor throughout the Franco-Prussian War, and was created a count in 1871. The Ministry of War which he had held since 1859 he resigned in 1871 together with the Ministry of Marine, held since 1861. In 1872 he succeeded Bismarck as president of the Prussian Cabinet and was made field-marshal shortly after; but soon resigned. He was author of several works on geography published between 1832 and 1839.


text:
Page:Three Books of Occult Philosophy (De Occulta Philosophia) (1651).djvu/367

 342 oft to be deceived by evill spirits; But the understanding of Divine things, purgeth the mind from errors, and rendreth it Divine, giveth infallible power to our works, and driveth far the deceith and obstacles of all evil spirits, and together subjects them to our commands; Yea it compels even good Angels and all the powers of the world unto our service viz. the virtue of our works being drawn from the Archetype himself, To whom when we ascend all creatures necessarily obey us, and all the quire of heaven do follow us: For (as Homer saith) none of the gods durst remain in their seats, Jove being moved; and then presently he ruleth (as saith Aristophanes'') by one of the gods, whose right it is to execute his commands, who then out of his duty doth manage our petitions according to our desire. Seeing therefore (most Illustrious Prince) you have a Divine and immortall soul given you, which seeing the goodness of the Divine providence, a well disposed fate, and the bounty of nature have in such manner gifted, that by the acuteness of your understanding, and perfectness of senses you are able to view, search, contemplate, discern and pierce thorow the pleasant theaters of naturall things, the sublime house of the heavens, and the most difficult passages of Divine things: I being bound to you by the band of these your great vertues am so far a debtor as to communicate without envy by the true account of all opinions, Those mysterues of Divine and Ceremoniall Magick which I have truly learned, and not to hide the knowledge of those things, whatsoever concerning these matters the Isiaci those old Priests of the Egyptians, and Caldeans, the ancient prophets of the Babylonians, the Cabalists, the Divine Magicians of the Hebrews, also the Orpheans, Pythagoreans and Platonists, the profoundest Philosophers of Greece, further what the Bragmanni of the Indians, the Gymnosophists of Ethiopia, and the uncorrupted Theologians of our Religion have delivered, and by what force of words, power of Seals, by what charms of Benedictions and imprecations, and by what vertue of observations they in old times wrought so stupendious and wonderfull prodigies, imitating to you in this third book of Occult Philosophy and exposing to the light those things which have been buryed in the dust of antiquity and involved in the obscurity of oblivion, as'' Rh


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 06.djvu/43

 action is much simplified in the case in which the reaction-velocity is enormously great, when practically an instantaneous adjustment of the equilibrium results. Only in this case can the state of the system, which pertains after mixing the different components, be determined merely from knowledge of the equilibrium-constant. This case is realized in the reactions between gases at very high temperatures, which have, however, been little investigated, and especially by the reactions between electrolytes, the so-called ion-reactions. In this latter case, which has been thoroughly studied on account of its fundamental importance for inorganic qualitative and quantitative analysis, the degrees of dissociation of the various electrolytes (acids, bases and salts) are for the most part easily determined by the aid of the freezing-point apparatus, or of measurements of the electric conductivity; and from these data the equilibrium-constant K may be calculated. Moreover, it can be shown that the state of the system can be determined when the equilibrium constants of all the electrolytes which are present in the common solution are known. If this be coupled with the law that the solubility of solid substances, as with vapour-pressures, is independent of the presence of other electrolytes, it is sufficient to know the solubilities of the electrolytes in question, in order to be able to determine which substances must participate in the equilibrium in the solid state, i.e. we arrive at the theory of the formation and solution of precipitates.

As an illustration of the application of these principles, we shall deal with a problem of the doctrine of affinity, namely, that of the relative strengths of acids and bases. It was

quite an early and often repeated observation that the various acids and bases take part with very varying intensity or avidity in those reactions in which their acid or basic nature comes into play. No success attended the early attempts at giving numerical expression to the strengths of acids and bases, i.e. of finding a numerical coefficient for each acid and base, which should be the quantitative expression of the degree of its participation in those specific reactions characteristic of acids and bases respectively. Julius Thomsen and W. Ostwald attacked the problem in a far-seeing and comprehensive manner, and arrived at indisputable proof that the property of acids and bases of exerting their effects according to definite numerical coefficients finds expression not only in salt-formation but also in a large number of other, and indeed very miscellaneous, reactions.

When Ostwald compared the order of the strengths of acids deduced from their competition for the same base, as determined by Thomsen’s thermo-chemical or his own volumetric method, with that order in which the acids arrange themselves according to their capacity to bring calcium oxalate into solution, or to convert acetamide into ammonium acetate, or to split up methyl acetate into methyl alcohol and acetic acid catalytically, or to invert cane-sugar, or to accelerate the mutual action of hydriodic on bromic acid, he found that in all these well-investigated and very miscellaneous cases the same succession of acids in the order of their strengths is obtained, whichever one of the above chemical processes be chosen as measure of these strengths. It is to be noticed that all these chemical changes cited took place in dilute aqueous solution, consequently the above order of acids refers only to the power to react under these circumstances. The order of acids proved to be fairly independent of temperature. While therefore the above investigations afforded a definite qualitative solution of the order of acids according to strengths, the determination of the quantitative relations offered great difficulties, and the numerical coefficients, determined from the separate reactions, often displayed great variations, though occasionally also surprising agreement. Especially great were the variations of the coefficients with the concentration, and in those cases in which the concentration of the acid changed considerably during the reaction, the calculation was naturally quite uncertain. Similar relations were found in the investigation of bases, the scope of which, however, was much more limited.

These apparently rather complicated relations were now cleared up at one stroke, by the application of the law of chemical mass-action on the lines indicated by S. Arrhenius in 1887, when he put forward the theory of electrolytic dissociation to explain that peculiar behaviour of substances in aqueous solution first recognized by van’t Hoff in 1885. The formulae which must be made use of here in the calculation of the equilibrium-relations follow naturally by simple application of the law of mass-action to the corresponding ion-concentrations.

The peculiarities which the behaviour of acids and bases presents, and, according to the theory of Arrhenius, must present—peculiarities which found expression in the very early distinction between neutral solutions on the one hand, and acid or basic ones on the other, as well as in the belief in a polar antithesis between the two last—must now, in the light of the theory of electrolytic dissociation, be conceived as follows:—

The reactions characteristic of acids in aqueous solution, which are common to and can only be brought about by acids, find their explanation in the fact that this class of bodies gives rise on dissociation to a common molecular species, namely, the positively charged hydrogen-ion (H+). The specific chemical actions peculiar to acids are therefore to be attributed to the hydrogen-ion just as the actions common to all chlorides are to be regarded as those of the free chlorine-ions. In like manner, the reactions characteristic of bases in solution are to be attributed to the negatively charged hydroxyl-ions (OH–), which result from the dissociation of this class of bodies.

A solution has an acid reaction when it contains an excess of hydrogen-ions, and a basic reaction when it contains an excess of hydroxyl-ions. If an acid and an alkaline solution be brought together mutual neutralization must result, since the positive H-ions and the negative OH-ions cannot exist together in view of the extremely weak conductivity of pure water and its consequent slight electrolytic dissociation, and therefore they must at once combine to form electrically neutral molecules, in the sense of the equation

In this lies the simple explanation of the “polar” difference between acid and basic solutions. This rests essentially upon the fact that the ion peculiar to acids and the ion peculiar to bases form the two constituents of water, i.e. of that solvent in which we usually study the course of the reaction. The idea of the “strength” of an acid or base at once arises. If we compare equivalent solutions of various acids, the intensity of those actions characteristic of them will be the greater the more free hydrogen-ions they contain; this is an immediate consequence of the law of chemical mass-action. The degree of electrolytic dissociation determines, therefore, the strength of acids, and a similar consideration leads to the same result for bases.

Now the degree of electrolytic dissociation changes with concentration in a regular manner, which is given by the law of mass-action. For if C denote the concentration of the electrolyte and a its degree of dissociation, the above law states that

C2a2/C(1−a) = Ca2/(1−a) = K.

At very great dilutions the dissociation is complete, and equivalent solutions of the most various acids then contain the same number of hydrogen-ions, or, in other words, are equally strong; and the same is true of the hydroxyl-ions of bases. The dissociation also decreases with increasing concentration, but at different rates for different substances, and the relative “strengths” of acids and bases must hence change with concentration, as was indeed found experimentally. The dissociation-constant K is the measure of the variation of the degree of dissociation with concentration, and must therefore be regarded as the measure of the strengths of acids and bases. So that in this special case we are again brought to the result which was stated in general terms above, viz. that the dissociation-coefficient forms the measure of the reactivity of a dissolved electrolyte. Ostwald’s series of acids, based upon the investigation of the most various reactions, should therefore correspond with the order of their dissociation-constants, and further with the

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 06.djvu/43


text:
Page:Three Books of Occult Philosophy (De Occulta Philosophia) (1651).djvu/368

 Rh in Cymmerian'' darknes even to this day. We preent therefore now to you, a compleat and perfect work in thee three books of Occult Philoophy or Magick, Which we have perfected with diligent care, and very great labor and pains both of mind and body; and though it be untrimmed in repect of words, yet its mot elaborate truly in repect of the matter: Wherefore I deire this one favor, that you would not expect the grace of an Oration, or the elegancy of peech in thee books, which we long ince wrote in our youth when our peech was as yet rough, and our language rude; and now we have repect, not to the tile of an Oration, but only to the eries or order of entences; We have tudyed the les elegancy of peech, abundance of matter ucceeding in the place thereof; and we uppose we have ufficiently atisfied our duty, if we hall to the utmost of our power perform thoe things we have promied to declare concerning the ecrets of Magick, and have freed our concience from a due debt. But eeing without doubt, many coffing Sophisters will conpire againt me, epecially of thoe who boat themelves to be allyed to God, and fully replenihed with Divinity, and presum to cenure the leaves of the Sibilles, and will undertake to judge and condemn to the fire thee our works even before they have read or rightly undertood any thing of them (becaue uch lettice agrees not with their lips, and uch weet oyntment with their noe and alo by reaon of that parke of hatred long ince conceived againt me, and carce containing it elf under the ahes.) Therefore (mot Illustrious Prince and wie Prelate) we further ubmit this work acribed by me to the merits of your vertue, and now made yours, to your cenure, and commend it to your protection, That, if the bae and perfidious Sophiters would defame it, by the groe madnes of their envy and malice, you would by the prepicacy of your dicretion and candor of judgement, happily protect and defend it.''

Farewell and proper. Rh