text:
Index talk:Shakespeare - First Folio Faithfully Reproduced, Methuen, 1910.djvu

I have amended the guidance to achieve consistency across the whole book and have preserved as much of what was here previously as practicably possible. Chrisguise (talk) 05:33, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Subdivision of the work
Each play should have its own sub page because transclusion of a whole play isn't consistent with general guidance on the length of a work on an individual page. Each play should be broken down as per the text. In some cases only Acts are delineated (e.g. Much adoe about Nothing), in others the are both Acts and Scenes (e.g.The Two Gentlement of Verona). Follow what is there.

For each play, should be used to form the contents list so that the conversion to PDF/e-book works properly.

Typography / spelling
Preserve the existing spelling (i.e. the use of 'i' for 'j' and 'u' for 'v', etc.)

Do not duplicate the long 's' (see below).

Abbreviations
A number of abbreviations are used throughout the work. In most cases these appear to have been used by the printer in the interests of preserving page layout. These abbreviations should be expanded - it's usually obvious what they stand for.

ў (found in cyrillic alphabet)

ɯ̃ (found in IPA)

ã - ñ - õ - ẽ - Ã - Ñ - Õ - Ẽ

very approximate, I haven’t found anything better. --Zyephyrus (talk) 18:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

 * I think it's common to use y$e$ for "the" and y$e$  for "thou". (Example of both here, and the same page transcribed at U.Vic.) Mudbringer (talk) 02:25, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Other sources: see here, or here. --Zyephyrus (talk) 21:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There's a, that's backed by (which means we can easily add ), which uses a small superscript that's slightly offset to appear above. Better would be yͤ and yͭ which uses Unicode combining characters, but these are often a pain to enter (so we'd probably have to create templates for them). --Xover (talk) 07:33, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Page numbering
There are a number of page numbering errors throughout the work. Duplicate as-is and use [sic] to indicate the correct number (e.g. for page 77 misnumbered as 73, use 7773 [sic] to give 7773 [sic].

For example, in the 'Tragedies' section Pages 77 and 78 are apparently missing, but

 * There is no page 77 nor page 78 in the First Folio. The page numbering jumps from 76 to 79 with no text missing.  That is the lines spoken by the Friar continue without interruption from the bottom of page "76" to the top of page "79".  The printer of the First Folio made an error, and this error is faithfully reproduced in the facsimile.  So, these pages are not "missing" after all. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Header/Footer
Replicate text and italicisation. No need to duplicate font size. Include the line using not

Stage directions
Directions are italicised. Entrances are centered. Exits and other directions are if on the same line as dialogue or , if on a separate one.

Character names
For clarity, names are on a separate line and italicised (not bold).

The abbreviation of names is erratic. Duplicate what is there, don't standardise them.

General page formatting
The page border is not to be replicated.

There are two options for laying out the pages; or.

The Ppoem template was only introduced relatively recently, but is now the preferred option. When using this option, for text that is not in verse, preserve the line layout, as text wrapping in Ppoem introduces a large hanging indent, which is both inconsistent with the layout, and unattractive in this particular work.

Where words, re-join the word and place it either at the end of the line it begins on, or at the beginning of the line it ends on, whichever balances the line lengths better.

Where words, do not use the Ppoem functionality for continued lines, as this will introduce the hanging indent. Frig the layout as follows:

Using 'understanding' as an example, with 'under-' at the end of one page, and 'standing' at the beginning of the next.

At the end of the first page put 'under-' (i.e. including the hyphen) in. Follow it immediately (i.e. no spaces) by 'understanding' in. At the beginning of the following page put 'standing' in. This markup will result in the text on both pages appearing as printed, and it will also transclude properly.

In full, 1st page ends: under- understanding 2nd page begins: standing

Earlier transcription work has used this mark-up. The content of each page has been wrapped in. This (generally) makes it much easier to control line breaks - no need for hundreds of  or.

On pages where a transition from one act or scene to another occurs, the end of the act or scene must be followed by and the following one begun with, otherwise the act/scene won't format correctly when transcluded.

If a character's speech ends at the bottom of a page, insert  between it and, then start the next character's words immediately after on the next page. This will maintain correct spacing when the pages are transcluded.

Using, , etc. within  generates additional blank lines so to make the layout look right sometimes requires a bit of adjustment. The following gives an example, the text width having been constrained to make the effect easier to see. Note the difference between:-

With these mortals on the ground. Winde Hornes. Enter Theseus, Egeus, Hippolita and all his traine. Thes. Goe one of you, finde out the Forrester, For now our obseruation is perform’d; With these mortals on the ground. Winde Hornes.Enter Theseus, Egeus, Hippolita and all his traine.Thes. Goe one of you, finde out the Forrester, For now our obseruation is perform’d;

With these mortals on the ground. Winde Hornes. Enter Theseus, Egeus, Hippolita and all his traine. Thes. Goe one of you, finde out the Forrester, For now our obseruation is perform’d; With these mortals on the ground. Winde Hornes.Enter Theseus, Egeus, Hippolita and all his traine.Thes. Goe one of you, finde out the Forrester, For now our obseruation is perform’d;

Verse and normal speech
Some speech is in verse, some is not. Preserve the line breaks in all cases. Note the differences when using Ppoem identified above.

Poems and songs
Some plays feature songs. These should be centered and follow the formatting as required (italics, etc.). The easiest way to do this is to use and.

The text should be normal size, since these are not quotations (most books reproduce quoted poetry in a slightly smaller type size than the text around them).

Typical example
Enter Ariell with Musicke and Song. '' Ariel. '' My Master through his Art foresees the danger That you (his friend) are in, and sends me forth (For else his proiect dies) to keepe them liuing.

While you here do snoaring lie,  Open-ey’d Conspiracie  His time doth take:

Result:

Enter Ariell with Musicke and Song. '' Ariel. '' My Master through his Art foresees the danger That you (his friend) are in, and sends me forth (For else his proiect dies) to keepe them liuing.

While you here do snoaring lie,  Open-ey’d Conspiracie  His time doth take:

Transcription advice
Various sources of the text are available (see below). The Internet Archive/Google ones are mostly just OCR derived and contain many errors. With Gutenberg it is not always clear exactly what it is they've used as the basis of the text (there were several editions of the first folio). I have found the best one to be the Oxford Text Archive, which is from the 1623 version. This has transcribed the spelling as-is (without the long 's') and it's easy to see the page breaks. The other benefit is that the abbreviations have been expanded. The downside is that with my IT skill level, I haven't found a way to carry over the italicisation.

I open the HTML version in a browser and copy and paste. All that is then required is some formatting, most of which can be easily done using a combination of a clipboard manager and find and replace. I use a free software package called 'Ditto' and, as a Firefox user, an add-on called 'Find & Replace for Text Editing'. Alternatively, use whatever method suits you, including, for example, the methods suggested below.

Two methods:
1. Copy-paste the Google Books text and correct it.

or

2. Transform the modernized text. (see here ).

Other ideas? --Zyephyrus (talk) 10:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that with the title "The Plays of William Shakespeare as published in the first folio of 1623" it is unlikely that the OTA text is actually transcribed from a copy of the First Folio. It seems likely that it is a transcription of later facsimile. --Xover (talk) 07:44, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Policy on long S
Since this is a facsimile of the First Folio, should we have a requirement to preserve long s? Languageseeker (talk) 03:23, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No. The First Folio has a ton of similar quirks that we definitely should not try to reproduce, so singling out the long s makes no sense. I'd worry more about which First Folio it is we're reproducing, and how we can ensure consistency if and when we eventually reproduce another copy. --Xover (talk) 14:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Themes
Themes(Fate Vs Free Will) 41.113.180.126 11:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


text:
User talk:72.85.160.14

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * Help pages
 * Style Guide
 * Inclusion policy

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to  [ create an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. For one thing, if you continue to edit without a username, your IP address is used to publicly identify you.

In any case, I hope you enjoy donating your time to grow the Wikisource library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click  [ edit] ) and place  before your question. Again, welcome! — billinghurst  sDrewth  15:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:72.85.160.14


text:
User talk:Phentos

— billinghurst  sDrewth  15:19, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Phentos. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Phentos~enwikisource that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Phentos


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/194

 general, royal (late Bombay) engineers, served with distinction during the Indian mutiny; was made C.B. in 1861, and retired on major-general's full pay in 1874 (Times, 3 Nov. 1898).

The eldest son, Hugh Seymour, was educated at Winchester school from 1816, and matriculated as a scholar from New College, Oxford, on 30 Jan. 1824. He was a fellow of his college from 1824 to 1856, graduated B.A. 1827 and M.A. 1832, and was called to the bar at the Inner Temple on 21 Nov. 1834. After three years' practice he was made a revising barrister on the western circuit. Shortly afterwards he entered the public service, and was sent in 1839 to Newport to investigate the circumstances connected with John Frost's rebellion. He subsequently served on numerous royal commissions, and was instrumental in bringing about fourteen acts of parliament, all having for their object the amelioration of the condition of the working classes.

In January 1840 he was appointed an inspector of schools and made nine reports to the committee of the council on education on the state of schools in England and Wales. In October 1842 he became an assistant poor-law commissioner, and in 1843 a commissioner for inquiring into the state of the population in the mining districts, on which he made fifteen reports between 1844 and 1858. In 1855 and 1861 he made inquiries into the management of bleaching works and lace manufactories. Appointed one of the commissioners in 1861 for inquiring into the employment of children and young persons in trades and manufactures, he joined in making six exhaustive reports on this subject between 1863 and 1867. As one of the commissioners on the employment of young persons and women in agriculture, he took part in furnishing four reports to parliament between 1867 and 1870. He likewise reported on the grievances complained of by the journeymen bakers, on the operations of the bakehouse regulations, and on the tithe commutation acts. On his retirement on 1 March 1871, after thirty-one years' public service, he was made a C.B. on 8 Aug.

He succeeded his uncle, Henry Pendarves Tremenheere, in 1841 in the property of Tremenheere and Tolver, near Penzance. For three years, 1869–71, he was president of the Royal Geological Society of Cornwall. He died at 43 Thurloe Square, London, on 16 Sept. 1893.

He married, on 2 April 1856, Lucy, third daughter of Ralph Bernal, M.P., and widow of Vicesimus Knox. She died on 7 Oct. 1872, leaving two daughters, Florence Lucy Bernal who married Ernest Edward Leigh Bennett, and Evelyn Westfaling who married George Marcus Parker, barrister of the Inner Temple.

Tremenheere was the author of:
 * 1) ‘Observations on the proposed Breakwater in Mount's Bay and on its Connection with a Railway into Cornwall,’ 1839.
 * 2) ‘Notes on Public Subjects made during a Tour in the United States and in Canada,’ 1852.
 * 3) ‘The Political Experience of the Ancients, in its bearing upon Modern Times,’ 1852, republished as ‘A Manual of the Principles of Government,’ 1882 and 1883.
 * 4) ‘The Constitution of the United States compared with our own,’ 1854.
 * 5) ‘Translations from Pindar into English Blank Verse,’ 1866.
 * 6) ‘A New Lesson from the Old World: a summary of Aristotle's lately discovered work on the Constitution of Athens,’ 1891.
 * 7) ‘How Good Government grew up, and how to preserve it,’ 1893.

 TRENCH, FRANCIS CHENEVIX (1805–1886), divine and author, born in 1805, was the eldest son of Richard Trench (1774–1860), barrister-at-law, by his wife [q. v.] [q. v.] was his younger brother.

Francis entered Harrow school early in 1818, and matriculated from Oriel College, Oxford, on 12 Nov. 1824, graduating B.A. in 1834 and M.A. in 1859. On 4 June 1829 he entered Lincoln's Inn with the intention of studying law, but in 1834 he was ordained deacon and became curate of St. Giles, Reading. In the following year he was ordained priest, and on 13 Sept. 1837 he was appointed perpetual curate of St. John's, Reading. In 1857 he was instituted to the rectory of Islip, Oxfordshire, which he held till 1875, when he retired from active work. He died in London on 3 April 1886. On 6 Dec. 1837 he married Mary Caroline (d. 1886), daughter of [q. v.], honorary canon of Worcester. By her he had a son, Richard William Francis (1849–1860), and two daughters, Mary Melesina and Maria Marcia Fanny.

Trench's chief works were:
 * 1) ‘Remarks on the Advantages of Loan Funds for the Poor and Industrious,’ London, 1833, 8vo.
 * 2) ‘Sermons preached at Reading,’ London, 1843, 8vo.
 * 3) ‘Diary of Travels in France and Spain,’ London, 1845, 12mo.
 * 4) ‘Scotland: its Faith and its Features,’ London, 1846, 12mo.
 * 5) ‘A Walk round Mont Blanc,’


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/195

  :: London, 1847, 12mo. He also issued in 1869 and 1870 a series of miscellaneous papers, entitled ‘Islipiana.’ He was a contributor to ‘Macmillan's Magazine’ and to ‘Notes and Queries.’
 * 1) ‘The Portrait of Charity,’ London, 1847, 16mo.
 * 2) ‘The Life and Character of St. John the Evangelist,’ London, 1850, 8vo.
 * 3) ‘G. Adey: his Life and Diary,’ London, 1851, 8vo.
 * 4) ‘A Ride in Sicily,’ London, 1851, 12mo.
 * 5) ‘Theological Works,’ London, 1857, 8vo.
 * 6) > ‘A few Notes from Past Life,’ Oxford, 1862, 8vo.

TRENCH, FREDERICK WILLIAM (1775–1859), general, born in 1775, was the only son of Frederick Trench of Heywood, Ballinakill, Queen's County. , second earl of Clancarty [q. v.], was a distant relative. He obtained a commission as ensign and lieutenant in the 1st foot-guards on 12 Nov. 1803, and became lieutenant and captain on 12 Nov. 1807. He was employed on the quartermaster-general's staff in Sicily in 1807, and in the Walcheren expedition in 1809. He went to Cadiz with his company in June 1811; but on 1 Aug. he was appointed assistant quartermaster-general, with the rank of major, in the Kent district, and returned to England. On 25 Nov. 1813 he was made deputy quartermaster-general, with the rank of lieutenant-colonel, to the corps sent to Holland under Graham [see ]. In 1814 he was placed on half-pay; and on 27 May 1825 he was appointed aide-de-camp to the king, with the rank of colonel. He was storekeeper of the ordnance under the Wellington administration (1828–30).

He sat in parliament nearly continuously for forty years, viz. for St. Michael, 1807–12; Dundalk, 1812–18; Cambridge, 1819–32; Scarborough, 1835–47. He was a conservative, but followed Peel in regard to the corn laws. A man of energy and of large ideas, he worked out (in conjunction with the Duke and Duchess of Rutland) several schemes for the embellishment of London. Of these the most important was the Thames Embankment from Charing Cross to Blackfriars. On 17 July 1824 a meeting was held, with the Duke of York in the chair, at which Trench explained his plans. It was estimated that the work might be done for less than half a million, and that it would yield an income of 5 per cent. on the expenditure. A committee of management was formed, and applications for shares were invited. On 15 March 1825 he obtained leave to bring in a bill to give the necessary powers. But the scheme met with strong opposition and slack support, and the bill was dropped. In 1827 he published ‘A Collection of Papers relating to the Thames Quay, with Hints for some further Improvements.’ In 1841 he returned to the subject in a public letter to Lord Duncannon, first commissioner of woods and forests. An overhead railway was now added to the scheme, and the quay was to be extended to London Bridge. But it was not till nearly five years after his death that the first stone of the Embankment was laid (8 July 1864).

Another project, which met with more immediate success but deserved it less, was for the colossal statue of Wellington placed on the arch opposite Hyde Park Corner. Trench took an active part in the promotion of it, and in the selection of Matthew Cotes Wyatt [q. v.] as sculptor. Wellington told Greville that it was ‘the damnedest job from the beginning’ (Journals, 29 June 1838), but once up he was unwilling that it should come down, and it remained there till 1883.

Trench was secretary to the master-general of ordnance from 1842 to 1846. He was made K.C.H. in 1832. He was promoted major-general on 10 Jan. 1837, lieutenant-general on 9 Nov. 1846, and general on 25 June 1854. He died at Brighton on 6 Dec. 1859.

 TRENCH, MELESINA (1768–1827), authoress, was the daughter of Philip Chenevix, by his wife Mary Elizabeth, daughter of Archdeacon Gervais, and granddaughter of [q. v.], bishop of Waterford, who owed his see to the cordial liking of the famous Lord Chesterfield, lord-lieutenant of Ireland from 1745 to 1746. Born in Dublin on 22 March 1768, Melesina was brought up after the death of her parents by her grandfather, Bishop Chevenix, and her kinswoman, Lady Lifford, and after the death of the bishop in 1779 she went to live with her maternal grandfather, Archdeacon Gervais, through whose library she rambled at large, and, with precocious taste and intelligence, selected as her favourites Shakespeare, Molière, and Sterne. She developed


text: User:Vivekkrishnaa

title: User:Vivekkrishnaa


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/196

 great personal beauty, and on 31 Oct. 1786 she married Colonel Richard St. George of Carrick-on-Shannon and Hatley Manor, co. Leitrim, whose deathbed she attended in Portugal only two years after the marriage. For ten years she lived in great seclusion with her child, and it is not until 1798 that her deeply interesting journal commences. During 1799 and 1800 she travelled in Germany, mixing in the very best society, and noting many items of historical interest. From Berlin and Dresden she proceeded to Vienna, of the society of which place she relates some curious anecdotes. At Dresden, on her return journey, she met Nelson and Lady Hamilton, of whose lack of refinement some unpleasant instances are afforded. ‘One is sorry for the account of Nelson, but one cannot doubt it’ (, Letters; cf., Life of Nelson, i. 380, ii. 43–5). She also met while in Germany Rivarol, Lucien Bonaparte, and John Quincy Adams, the sixth president of the United States (an account of this ‘Tour’ was privately issued by her son Richard in 1861; it was then incorporated in the ‘Remains’ of 1862). In July 1802, after a short stay in England, Mrs. St. George landed from Dover at Calais, on what proved a five years' sojourn in France. On 3 March 1803 she married at Paris Richard (1774–1860), the sixth son of Frederick Trench (1724–1797) of Moate, co. Galway. Her husband's eldest brother, Frederic, was created Lord Ashtown in 1800. From his ancestor, Frederick Trench (d. 1669) of Garbally, co. Galway,, second earl of Clancarty [q. v.], also descended. Both Chenevixes and Trenches were of Huguenot origin.

Henceforth in the record of her life the place of the journal is supplied by the charming letters to her husband and to her old friends in England and Ireland. After the rupture of the peace of Amiens her husband was detained in France by Napoleon, and was confined to the Loire district. She made repeated visits to Paris to urge his release, and in August 1805 she delivered in person a petition to Napoleon for a passport for her husband; but it was not until 1807 that the requisite document was obtained and the Trenches were enabled to make their way to Rotterdam, whence, after a stormy voyage, they reached England. At Dublin, in November, she met her old friend and correspondent,, whom she had employed as almoner among her husband's tenants in Ireland. Her beauty and simplicity won the hearts of the people. During a summer visit to the Leadbeaters it is related how she was discovered in the scullery surrounded by a small class of peasant children. The same charm made her much sought after in society, but the frivolities of a ‘modish’ life became more and more repugnant to her; and her letters represent more and more exclusively ‘la vie intérieure.’ The absence of external facts and detail certainly detracts to some extent from the interest of her correspondence. There are some interesting touches respecting Wellington, Jekyll, Mrs. Piozzi, Mrs. Fry, and Lord John Russell, but the references to the political society with which she mixed at Paris under the first empire are tantalisingly brief. No mean judge, Edward Fitzgerald, to whom her son Richard submitted her letters and papers in manuscript, classes her letters with those of Walpole and Southey, praising them especially for their ‘natural taste and good breeding’ (letter dated 3 July 1861). Mrs. Trench died at Malvern on 27 May 1827. Her husband survived her many years, dying at Botley Hill, Hampshire, aged 86, on 16 April 1860 (Gent. Mag. 1860, i. 640). At that date three of their children were surviving: [q. v.]; [q. v.], afterwards archbishop of Dublin; and Philip Charles (1810–1888) of Botley.

Apart from the ‘Remains,’ including the journal and correspondence, of which two editions appeared in 1862 under the editorship of Richard Chenevix Trench, then dean of Westminster, Mrs. Trench's writings comprise: ‘Mary Queen of Scots, an historical Ballad, and other Poems’ (n.d. privately issued); ‘Campaspe, an historical Tale, and other Poems,’ Southampton, 1815, inscribed to her daughter; ‘Laura's Dream, or the Moonlanders,’ London, 1816, 8vo. All these were issued anonymously, and show the influence of Thomson, whose ‘Seasons’ she greatly admired, and, among contemporary poets, of Byron and Rogers. Posthumously appeared her ‘Thoughts of a Parent on Education, by the late Mrs. Richard Trench,’ London, 1837, 12mo.

A portrait engraved by Francis Holl from an oil painting by Romney, and showing a very sweet and delicate countenance, was prefixed to the ‘Remains’ (1862). An oil portrait of her, called ‘The Evening Star,’ was painted by Sir Thomas Lawrence. A miniature was executed by Jean-Baptiste Isabey at Paris in 1805. Another miniature by Hamilton was engraved by [q. v.]

[Remains of the late Mrs. Richard Trench, 1862; The Leadbeater Correspondence, i. 287, 309, ii. 141–332; Hayward's Autobiogr. of


text:
User talk:212.90.8.89

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * Help pages
 * Style Guide
 * Inclusion policy

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to  [ create an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. For one thing, if you continue to edit without a username, your IP address is used to publicly identify you.

In any case, I hope you enjoy donating your time to grow the Wikisource library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click  [ edit] ) and place  before your question. Again, welcome! — billinghurst  sDrewth  15:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:212.90.8.89


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/198

 relief in poetic effort. He travelled in Spain and on the continent, and, after a short visit to England in 1830, returned to Spain with the ill-fated expedition of General Torrijos and the Spanish exiles. His love for Sterling and appreciation of the courage of Torrijos, and his enthusiasm for Spanish literature, rather than any political convictions, were the causes of this escapade. Trench was quickly disillusioned, and returned to England in 1831. In October 1832 he was ordained deacon at Norwich, and in the beginning of 1833 settled at Hadleigh, Suffolk, as curate to Hugh James Rose [q. v.] Trench identified himself with the high-church party, but his personal friendship with Sterling and Maurice gave him wide sympathies. Rose left Hadleigh before a year was out, and Trench removed to Colchester, where he acted as curate for some months, till his health broke down, and he spent the winter of 1834 in Italy. He was ordained priest on his return in July 1835, and in September appointed to the perpetual curacy of Curdridge, Hampshire, which he held for six years. At Curdridge he began the systematic patristic and theological reading of which the ‘Notes on the Parables’ in 1840 were the first fruit; and he became the intimate friend of Samuel Wilberforce, whose active patronage prevented Trench's shyness from keeping him in obscurity. In 1841 he left Curdridge and accepted the curacy of Alverstoke, of which Wilberforce was rector. In January 1843 he was special preacher at Cambridge, and in 1845 and 1846 Hulsean lecturer. The delivery of five lectures at Winchester on ‘Language as an Instrument of Knowledge,’ expanded later into the ‘Study of Words,’ marks his discovery of a field of scholarship that he made peculiarly his own. Towards the end of 1844 Lord Ashburton offered him the rectory of Itchenstoke, which he accepted. In October 1845 Wilberforce, bishop-designate of Oxford, secured Trench as his examining chaplain, and in February following he was appointed professor of divinity at King's College. The title of his professorship was changed in 1854 to that of professor of the exegesis of the New Testament. He held the post till 1858, exercising much influence upon the students. In October 1856 he was appointed to the deanery of Westminster. He instituted the evening services in the nave, and thus began the work, which his successor, Stanley, brilliantly carried forward, of bringing the abbey into touch with the people of London. The death of two sons in India at the commencement of their career cast a gloom over his private life. In November 1863 Trench was designated archbishop of Dublin, and consecrated on 1 Jan. 1864. In 1868 Gladstone began the work of disestablishing the Irish church. The archbishop tersely summed up his own policy as ‘first to fight for everything which we possess, as believing it rightly ours, recognising of course the right of parliament to redistribute within the church its revenues according to the changed necessities of the present time. If this battle is lost, then, totally rejecting the process of gradual starvation to which Disraeli would submit us, to go in for instant death at the hands of Gladstone.’ Holding these views, Trench declined Gladstone's overtures, and maintained throughout by his charges to his clergy and by his speeches in the House of Lords an opposition that was always dignified and statesmanlike. On the passing of the bill a fresh succession of difficulties awaited the archbishop in the settlement of the disestablished church. In the general convention of the church of Ireland summoned in February 1870 to draw up a constitution, Trench's influence secured a full recognition of the bishops as one of the three orders of the church. A strong party in the convention desired to make the bishops subordinate to the other two orders of clergy and laity. When the first general synod met in April 1871 a struggle began on prayer-book revision, which continued till 1877. In the offices for baptism and holy communion alterations of such a kind were proposed by the low-church party that the archbishop could not have retained his see had they been adopted. Although the high churchmen were in a minority, Trench was able to hinder any serious alterations, and kept the Irish church united until the agitation and uncertainties caused by the act of disestablishment were at an end.

In November 1875, while crossing the Irish Channel, Trench fell down a gangway and fractured both knees. A tedious illness followed, and his health never fully recovered its vigour. His advanced age incapacitated him for the duties of his office, and led in 1884 to his resignation. He died at 23 Eaton Square on 28 March 1886, and was buried in the nave of Westminster Abbey. A portrait by Sir Thomas Jones, R.H.A., hangs in the palace, Dublin. A portrait in oils and another in crayons, both by Richmond, are in private hands. A crayon portrait by Samuel Laurence belonged in 1887 to Mr. H. N. Pym (Cat. Victorian Exhib. No. 403). In May 1832 he married his cousin, Frances Mary, second daughter of his uncle, Francis Trench, and sister of the second Lord


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/199

. By her he had six sons and five daughters.

Although Trench's tenure of the Dublin archbishopric was historically of importance, it is as a poet, a scholar, and a divine that he will be chiefly remembered. As a poet he displays special mastery of the sonnet, and many of his lyrics reach a high point of excellence. As a divine his exegetical works on the parables and miracles have specially distinguished him. These scholarly books were widely popular, and their influence in raising the standard of scholarship and thoughtfulness among the clergy, and in all classes of religious people, has been unequalled in this century. He was a member of the committee for the revision of the New Testament, and the new version of the Bible owed much to his advocacy and criticism. Thirdly, as a philologist he won a place analogous to his position as a biblical critic. He popularised a rational and scientific study of language; and the Oxford English dictionary, at present proceeding under Dr. Murray's editorship, was originally suggested and its characteristics indicated by Trench in 1857.

Omitting occasional sermons and lectures and his numerous charges, his chief works may be classified as follows:

.—1. ‘The Story of Justin Martyr and other Poems,’ 1835, 12mo. 2. ‘Sabbation; Honor Neale, and other Poems’ [with notes], 1838, 12mo. 3. ‘Poems,’ privately printed, 1841, 12mo. 4. ‘Poems from Eastern Sources: the Steadfast Prince, and other Poems,’ 1842, 8vo. 5. ‘Genoveva: a Poem,’ 1842, 8vo. 6. ‘Poems from Eastern Sources: Genoveva and other Poems;’ 2nd edit., 1851, 8vo. 7. ‘Alma, and other Poems,’ 1855, 8vo. 8. ‘Poems collected and arranged anew,’ 1865, 16mo; 9th edit., 1888, 8vo. 9. ‘Poems,’ new edition, 2 vols., 1885, 8vo.

.—1. ‘Notes on the Parables of our Lord,’ 1841, 8vo; 6th edit. 1855; 15th edit. (with translations of the notes from the writings of the fathers), 1886, 8vo. 2. ‘Five Sermons preached before the University of Cambridge in January 1843,’ 1843, 8vo. 3. ‘Exposition of the Sermon on the Mount, drawn from the Writings of St. Augustine, with Observations,’ 1844, 8vo; 2nd edit., revised and improved (with introductory essay on St. Augustine's merits as an interpreter of holy scripture), 1851, 8vo; 4th edit. 1888, 8vo. 4. ‘The Fitness of Holy Scripture for unfolding the Spiritual Life of Men: being the Hulsean Lectures for 1845,’ 1845, 8vo; republished in the Hulsean lectures for 1845 and 1846; 5th edit. 1880, 8vo. 5. ‘Christ the Desire of all Nations, or the Unconscious Prophecies of Heathendom,’ 1846, 8vo. 6. ‘Notes on the Miracles of our Lord,’ 1846, 8vo; 5th edit. 1846; 13th edit. (with translations of the notes drawn from the writings of the fathers), 1886, 8vo. 7. ‘The Star of the Wise Men: being a Commentary on the Second Chapter of St. Matthew,’ 1850, 16mo. 8. ‘Synonyms of the New Testament,’ 1854, 8vo; 7th edit. 1871, on the Authorised Version of the New Testament, in connection with some recent proposals for its revision, 1858, 8vo; 10th edit. 1888, 8vo. 9. ‘Five Sermons preached before the University of Cambridge in November 1856,’ 1857, 8vo. 10. ‘Sermons preached in Westminster Abbey,’ 1860, 8vo. 11. ‘Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches in Asia, Revelations i. ii. and iii.,’ 1861, 8vo; 4th edit. 1888. 12. ‘The Subjection of the Creature to Vanity: three Sermons preached before the University of Cambridge in Lent, 1863; to which are added two Sermons preached at Cambridge on special occasions,’ 1863, 8vo. 13. ‘Studies in the Gospels,’ 1867, 8vo; 5th edit. 1888. 14. ‘Shipwrecks of Faith: three Sermons,’ 1867, 8vo. 15. ‘Sermons preached for the most part in Ireland,’ 1873, 8vo. 16. ‘Brief Thoughts and Meditations on some Passages in Holy Scripture,’ 1884, 8vo. 17. ‘Sermons, New and Old,’ 1886, 8vo. 18. ‘Westminster and other Sermons,’ 1888, 8vo.

.—1. ‘The Study of Words: five Lectures,’ 1851, 8vo; 9th edit., revised and enlarged, 1859, 8vo; 19th edit., revised and enlarged, 1886, 8vo. 2. ‘On the Lessons in Proverbs: five Lectures,’ 1853, 8vo; 3rd edit., revised and enlarged, 1854, 8vo; 7th edit., 1888. 3. ‘English, Past and Present: five Lectures,’ 1855, 8vo; 14th edit., revised and in part rewritten by the Rev. A. L. Mayhew, 1889, 8vo. 4. ‘On some Deficiencies in our English Dictionaries,’ 1857, 8vo; 2nd edit., to which is added a letter to the author from H. Coleridge on the progress and prospects of the Philological Society's new English dictionary, 1860, 8vo. 5. ‘A Select Glossary of English Words, used formerly in senses different from their present,’ 1859, 8vo; fifth edit., 1879; 7th edit., revised by the Rev. A. L. Mayhew, 1890, 8vo.

.—1. ‘Sacred Latin Poetry, chiefly Lyrical, selected and arranged for use, with Notes and Introduction,’ 1849, 8vo; 2nd edit. 1864, 8vo. 2. ‘Life's a Dream: the Great Theatre of the World. From the Spanish of Calderon. With an Essay on his Life and Genius,’ 1856, 8vo; rearranged and republished 1880, 8vo. 3. ‘The Remains of the late Mrs. Richard Trench, being Selections from her


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/203

 Theobalds on 14 Dec. 1613 (, Book of Knights, p. 164). Another Sir Thomas Trenchard had in 1509 entertained Philip of Castile when he was driven by a gale in the Channel to take refuge in the port of Weymouth (cf., Anecdotes, 1867, i. 329–35). The family traced descent from Paganus Trenchard, who held land in Dorset under Henry I, and from Elizabeth, daughter of Edward I. The Trenchards had intermarried during the seventeenth and preceding century with the Damorels, Moleynses, and Spekes. The politician's father, Thomas Trenchard of Wolverton (1615–1671), married in 1638 Hannah (d. 1691), daughter of Robert Henley of Bramshill, Hampshire. Grace Trenchard, who married Colonel William Sydenham [q. v.], and Jane, who married John Sadler (1615–1674) [q. v.] of Warmwell, both enthusiastic supporters of Oliver Cromwell, were cousins.

John Trenchard matriculated from New College, Oxford, on 15 Aug. 1665. In the same year, according to Wood, he became ‘a probationary fellow of New College in a civilian's place, aged 15 years or more; and entered in the public library as a student in the civil law on 22 Oct. 1668.’ He appears to have taken no degree, but went to the Middle Temple in 1674. He was elected M.P. for Taunton on 20 Feb. 1678–9, and re-elected in the following September (Memb. of Parl. i. 537, 543). His connection with a roundhead and puritan family of such old standing readily procured his admission to the club of revolutionaries which met at the King's Head tavern in Fleet Street (, Narrative of the late Popish Design, 1679, p. 31). Wood says that he was ready to promote ‘Oates his plot, busie against papists, the prerogative, and all that way.’ He became specially intimate with Aaron Smith and the Spekes. In parliament he followed the lead of William Sacheverell and Powle. On 2 Nov. 1680 he spoke against the recognition of the Duke of York as heir-apparent, enouncing the view that ‘to be secured by laws with a popish successor was not practicable.’ He cited the deposition of the queen of Sweden as a precedent, and relied on the navy to check any desire on the part of a foreign potentate to intervene. It was consequently resolved to ‘bring in a bill to disable the Duke of York from inheriting the imperial crown of this realm,’ and in the great debate on 11 Nov. Trenchard contended that the crown was held by statute law, and that, pro bono publico, the parliament must step over any private rights such as those to which James laid claim.

The prominent part which he played on this occasion, and the fact that he had been a regular frequenter of Monmouth's receptions at Soho, acquired Trenchard the reputation of a fierce partisan. He was re-elected for Taunton in March 1681. After the dissolution of the Oxford parliament he put himself, like his friend Aaron Smith, at the disposal of the revolutionary committee, sometime known as ‘The Six.’ He certainly took part in some of the meetings at Sheppards, at which the Rye House plot was concerted in the spring of 1683. He had spoken largely about the hostility to the Stuart dynasty in the west, and especially in Taunton; but when pressed to name a day for a local rising in connection with the plot he pleaded delay. According to Ford, lord Grey of Wark, the pusillanimity which he showed when it was proposed to translate words into action was so great as to provoke merriment among the conspirators (Secret Hist. of the Plot, 1754, pp. 36–7). He was named among the latter by Rumsey and West when they ‘came in’ on 28 June. He was arrested early in July, but owing to the steady refusal of William, lord Russell, to implicate him, and the great skill that he showed under examination, he was ultimately released for want of evidence (cf. Hist. MSS. Comm. 15th Rep. viii. 193). Fearing a rearrest, he spent some time in hiding, and then retired to Dorset. In June 1685, when the news arrived of Monmouth's landing, he was with the Spekes at Ilminster. Instantly recognising his peril, he mounted his horse and advised his friends—among them his brother-in-law, Charles Speke—to do the same. He rode in all haste to Lytchett, but, instead of going to the house, concealed himself in a keeper's lodge. Having obtained the money and papers that he needed, he made his way to Weymouth, and secured a passage thence to the continent. Charles Speke was hanged before his own door. At the urgent request of a common friend Lawton, William Penn, who had already spoken in behalf of Aaron Smith, approached James during the autumn of 1687 with a petition for a free pardon for Trenchard, and a formal pardon was signed by Sunderland in December (ib. 12th Rep. App. vi. 307). Shortly after his return Trenchard was elected M.P. for Dorchester. His parliamentary demeanour was strictly subdued; but early in 1688, as an influential whig who represented accurately the feeling in his county, he was introduced by Penn, along with Treby and some other whigs, to the royal closet. They were urged to speak plainly to the king as to the drift of whig


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/204

 feeling. Their communications were not without effect upon James, and at one moment it was thought that James meant to break with the jesuitical party, and to create a diversion by sending for Somers and other men who enjoyed the confidence of the country party.

In the Convention Trenchard represented Thetford, but he took no very prominent part in the debates. William showed how well he was disposed to him by giving him the degree of the coif on 21 May 1689. He was knighted at Whitehall on 29 Oct. following, and about the same time became one of ‘their majesties' serjeants,’ and received the lucrative post of chief justice of Chester, which he held by deputy until his death. In February 1690 he was elected M.P. for Poole in his native county. In March 1692 Trenchard was appointed secretary of state in place of, earl of Romney [q. v.] As was usual for a newcomer, he took the northern department. Later in the year he was appointed a privy councillor, and for a time seems to have acted as sole secretary of state. One of his first cares was to reorganise the system of spies at the chief French ports, an undertaking of no common difficulty (see the curious correspondence between Pierre Jurieu, ‘chef d'espions,’ and ‘Sir Trenchard’ in, Archives de la Bastille, t. x. pp. 82–7). But Trenchard's secretariate was chiefly distinguished by the activity displayed against the Jacobites. He seems to have convinced himself of (or was over-persuaded by the solicitor to the treasury, Aaron Smith, into believing in) the genuineness of the apocryphal Lancashire plot of 1694 (Hist. MSS. Comm. 14th Rep. App. iv. 387), and the breakdown of the crown witnesses involved him in ridicule and discredit [see ]. Of the numerous pamphlets in which the ‘Lancashire plot’ was classed with Oates's plot and other such sinister fabrications, the bitterest was a long ‘Letter to Mr. Secretary Trenchard’ signed A. B., in which the malignity of the dying [q. v.] has been traced (Macaulay thinks that Ferguson may at least have furnished some of the materials, History, 1858, iv. 523). Sir [q. v.] was associated with Trenchard in the course of May 1694, but no other events of note marked his tenure of the seals. At the close of 1693 Trenchard sent some letters (in a complicated numerical cypher) which had been intercepted on their way from Turkey, to Dr. John Wallis, the mathematician, for him to try his skill upon. Wallis succeeded in deciphering them, and Trenchard promised to commend his service to the king (this correspondence is in Addit. MS. 32499). In November 1694 Trenchard, whose health had long been failing, suffered a severe relapse. On 4 April 1695 he was given over by his physician, and he died on the 27th of that month. He was buried in Bloxworth church, where, in the west aisle, is a monument to his memory. According to Anthony à Wood, the exact date of the death of this ‘turbulent and aspiring politician’ had been predicted by an astrologer. Both Trenchard and his successor Trumbull were treated with far less consideration than subsequently attached to the post of secretary of state.

Trenchard married, in November 1682, Philippa, daughter of George Speke and sister of the notorious [q. v.] She died, aged 79, in 1743, and was buried at Bloxworth. By her he had issue four sons and three daughters. The eldest son, George Trenchard, married his cousin Mary Trenchard, the heiress of Wolverton, and soon after his father's death sold Bloxworth to his son-in-law, Jocelyn Pickard.

A portrait of Trenchard was engraved by Bestland from a miniature by [q. v.] Another portrait, by James Watson, was engraved in mezzotint for Hutchins's ‘History of Dorset’ (1796, iii. 22).

TRENCHARD, JOHN (1662–1723), political writer, born in 1662, was son of William Trenchard (1640–1710) of Cutteridge (a distant connection of Sir [q. v.]). His mother was Ellen, daughter of Sir George Norton. He was educated at Trinity College, Dublin, where, or Smyth [q. v.], afterwards bishop of Down and Connor, was his tutor. Having been called to the bar, he left the legal pro-


text: Author:Shirley Forster Murphy

title: Author:Shirley Forster Murphy


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/205

 fession to become a commissioner of the forfeited estates in Ireland. An uncle's death, and his marriage, placed him in easy circumstances, and he devoted himself to political writing as a constitutional reformer in church and state. His first publication, in conjunction with Walter Moyle [q. v.], was ‘An Argument showing … a Standing Army … inconsistent with a free Government,’ 1697 (thrice reprinted); it was followed by ‘A Short History of Standing Armies in England,’ 1698 (reprinted 1731); much angry controversy ensued. In 1709 he published anonymously ‘The Natural History of Superstition.’ In 1719 began his literary connection with Thomas Gordon (d. 1750) [q. v.], who calls him his ‘first friend’ and ‘the best friend that I ever had.’ They co-operated in the production of ‘The Independent Whig,’ published every Wednesday from 20 Jan. 1720 to 18 June 1721 (to two previous pamphlets they had given the same name), and in the writing of a series of Saturday letters from 5 Nov. 1720 to 27 July 1723, signed ‘Cato.’ The earliest were published in the ‘London Journal,’ later ones in the ‘British Journal.’ The ‘Independent Whig’ was collected into a volume (1721), and swelled by Gordon's additions to 4 volumes (1747). ‘Cato's Letters,’ with six new ones by Gordon, were collected in 4 vols. (1724). Both collections have been often reprinted; in later editions Trenchard's articles are signed ‘T,’ the conjoint articles ‘T and G.’ Some are signed simply ‘G.’ Trenchard, however, as Gordon fully allows, inspired the whole of this joint work by ‘his conversation and strong way of thinking.’

Trenchard was a whig with popular sympathies, but by no means a republican, as his opponents wished to consider him. His unsparing attacks on the high-church party were followed by counter attacks, representing him as a deist, or an enemy of all religion; but he set forth his attachment to Christianity with unequivocal sincerity, and while declaiming against abuses, affirmed his consistent loyalty to the established church. He got into parliament for Taunton, but made no figure in the house.

He died on 17 Dec. 1723, leaving no issue by his wife Anne, daughter of Sir William Blackett. Gordon, who describes him as ‘strong and well set,’ but ‘scarce ever in perfect health,’ draws a vivid picture of his strenuous character and frank disposition, and hints that on his deathbed Trenchard suggested that Gordon should marry his widow—a marriage which came about.

[Burke's Commoners, iv. 79; Gordon's pref. to Cato's Letters, 1724; Gordon's epitaph for Trenchard in Independent Whig, 1732, vol. ii.; Biographia Britannica, 1766; Toulmin's Hist. of Taunton, 1791, p. 81; Notes and Queries, 9th ser. iii. 203.]  TRENGROUSE, HENRY (1772–1854), inventor of the ‘Rocket’ life-saving apparatus, born at Helston, Cornwall, on 18 March 1772, was son of Nicholas Trengrouse (1739–1814) by his wife, Mary Williams (d. 1784). The family had long been the principal freeholders in Helston. Henry was educated at Helston grammar school, and resided there all his life. Samuel Drew [q. v.] was his intimate friend. On 24 Dec. 1807 he witnessed the wreck of the Anson frigate in Mount's Bay, when over a hundred lives were lost, and this disaster led him to devote his life and patrimony to the discovery of some means for saving lives at shipwrecks. He spent much labour in attempting to devise a lifeboat, but produced no satisfactory results, and turned his attention to the ‘Rocket’ life-saving apparatus.

As early as 1791 Lieutenant John Bell (1747–1798) [q. v.] had devised an apparatus for throwing a line to ships from the shore (Parl. Papers, 1810–11 vol. xi. No. 215, 1814 xi. 417–51; Trans. Soc. of Arts, 1807, vol. xxv.); and, concurrently with Trengrouse, Captain George William Manby [q. v.] was engaged in perfecting an apparatus very similar to Bell's. The idea occurred to Manby in February 1807, and in August he exhibited some experiments to the members of the Suffolk House Humane Society. He sought to establish communication between the shore and the shipwreck by means of a line fastened to a barbed shot which was fired from a mortar on the shore. By means of this line a hawser was drawn out from the shore to the ship, and along it was run a cradle in which the shipwrecked persons were landed. This invention had been recommended by various committees, and adopted to some extent before 1814 (Parl. Papers, new ser. 1816, xix. 193–227). Trengrouse's apparatus, which was designed in 1808, was similar to Manby's in the use of the line and hawser, but instead of a mortar he suggested a rocket, and a chair was used instead of a cradle. The distinctive features of the apparatus consisted of ‘a section of a cylinder, which is fitted to the barrel of a musket by a bayonet socket; a rocket with a line attached to its stick is so placed in it that its priming receives fire immediately from the barrel’ (Parl. Papers, 1825, xxi. 361). The advantages were that the rocket was much lighter and more portable than the mortar; that the cost was much smaller; that there was little


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1122

§ 1122. Classification of claims or interests

 * (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a plan may place a claim or an interest in a particular class only if such claim or interest is substantially similar to the other claims or interests of such class.

 * (b) A plan may designate a separate class of claims consisting only of every unsecured claim that is less than or reduced to an amount that the court approves as reasonable and necessary for administrative convenience.


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Bowman, Eddowes


text:
Confederate Military History/Volume 1/Part 2

Contents

 * Chapter I
 * Chapter II
 * Chapter III
 * Chapter IV
 * Chapter V
 * Chapter VI


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1123

§ 1123. Contents of plan

 * (a) Notwithstanding any otherwise applicable nonbankruptcy law, a plan shall—
 * (1) designate, subject to section 1122 of this title, classes of claims, other than claims of a kind specified in section 507 (a)(2), 507 (a)(3), or 507 (a)(8) of this title, and classes of interests;
 * (2) specify any class of claims or interests that is not impaired under the plan;
 * (3) specify the treatment of any class of claims or interests that is impaired under the plan;
 * (4) provide the same treatment for each claim or interest of a particular class, unless the holder of a particular claim or interest agrees to a less favorable treatment of such particular claim or interest;
 * (5) provide adequate means for the plan’s implementation, such as—
 * (A) retention by the debtor of all or any part of the property of the estate;
 * (B) transfer of all or any part of the property of the estate to one or more entities, whether organized before or after the confirmation of such plan;
 * (C) merger or consolidation of the debtor with one or more persons;
 * (D) sale of all or any part of the property of the estate, either subject to or free of any lien, or the distribution of all or any part of the property of the estate among those having an interest in such property of the estate;
 * (E) satisfaction or modification of any lien;
 * (F) cancellation or modification of any indenture or similar instrument;
 * (G) curing or waiving of any default;
 * (H) extension of a maturity date or a change in an interest rate or other term of outstanding securities;
 * (I) amendment of the debtor’s charter; or
 * (J) issuance of securities of the debtor, or of any entity referred to in subparagraph (B) or (C) of this paragraph, for cash, for property, for existing securities, or in exchange for claims or interests, or for any other appropriate purpose;
 * (6) provide for the inclusion in the charter of the debtor, if the debtor is a corporation, or of any corporation referred to in paragraph (5)(B) or (5)(C) of this subsection, of a provision prohibiting the issuance of nonvoting equity securities, and providing, as to the several classes of securities possessing voting power, an appropriate distribution of such power among such classes, including, in the case of any class of equity securities having a preference over another class of equity securities with respect to dividends, adequate provisions for the election of directors representing such preferred class in the event of default in the payment of such dividends;
 * (7) contain only provisions that are consistent with the interests of creditors and equity security holders and with public policy with respect to the manner of selection of any officer, director, or trustee under the plan and any successor to such officer, director, or trustee; and
 * (8) in a case in which the debtor is an individual, provide for the payment to creditors under the plan of all or such portion of earnings from personal services performed by the debtor after the commencement of the case or other future income of the debtor as is necessary for the execution of the plan.

 * (b) Subject to subsection (a) of this section, a plan may—
 * (1) impair or leave unimpaired any class of claims, secured or unsecured, or of interests;
 * (2) subject to section 365 of this title, provide for the assumption, rejection, or assignment of any executory contract or unexpired lease of the debtor not previously rejected under such section;
 * (3) provide for—
 * (A) the settlement or adjustment of any claim or interest belonging to the debtor or to the estate; or
 * (B) the retention and enforcement by the debtor, by the trustee, or by a representative of the estate appointed for such purpose, of any such claim or interest;
 * (4) provide for the sale of all or substantially all of the property of the estate, and the distribution of the proceeds of such sale among holders of claims or interests;
 * (5) modify the rights of holders of secured claims, other than a claim secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence, or of holders of unsecured claims, or leave unaffected the rights of holders of any class of claims; and
 * (6) include any other appropriate provision not inconsistent with the applicable provisions of this title.

 * (c) In a case concerning an individual, a plan proposed by an entity other than the debtor may not provide for the use, sale, or lease of property exempted under section 522 of this title, unless the debtor consents to such use, sale, or lease.

 * (d) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section and sections 506 (b), 1129 (a)(7), and 1129 (b) of this title, if it is proposed in a plan to cure a default the amount necessary to cure the default shall be determined in accordance with the underlying agreement and applicable nonbankruptcy law.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/207

 frequent references to his debts and requests to his father for money. He also occupied himself in calculating the profits to be obtained from sheep-farming. At the same time he continued his treasonable proceedings. In 1602 he, Catesby, and Winter consulted Father Henry Garnett [q. v.] at White Webbs as to the propriety of sending one of their number to the king of Spain to induce him to attempt an invasion of England. He also had made for him a copy of George Blackwell's book on equivocation. It was natural, therefore, that he should drift into the gunpowder plot. Catesby and the two Winters were his cousins, his family was closely connected with the Vaux of Harrowden, and had suffered much for the Roman catholic cause. The exact date of his initiation into the secret is somewhat doubtful: in the indictments against the conspirators Tresham is named with those who were said to have met, approved, and undertaken the plot on 20 May 1604, and possibly some of the money he obtained from his father may have found its way into the conspirators' pockets. On the other hand, Tresham himself declared that Catesby revealed the secret to him on 14 Oct. 1605, and others of the conspirators asserted that Tresham was the last to be initiated. In his case, as in those of Digby and Rookwood, the object of the conspirators was to draw on Tresham's wealth, for by the death of his father on 11 Sept. 1605 Tresham had succeeded to considerable property. This step was a fatal mistake on the part of Catesby and Winter; his newly acquired wealth made Tresham less ready than he had been in his penniless days to risk all in a revolution. Moreover, he was closely connected with several peers who would have perished in the destruction of parliament: Lords Stourton and Monteagle were his brothers-in-law, and Guy Fawkes admitted in his examination that Tresham was very anxious to save them. Tresham himself declared that he opposed the plot when first Catesby mentioned it, then urged its postponement, and offered Catesby money to leave the kingdom.

In any case there can be little doubt that it was Tresham who revealed the plot. The method of revelation was probably prearranged between him and his brother-in-law, Monteagle [see ], but the theory that the whole plot was encouraged or concocted by the government, and that Tresham was an agent provocateur, is especially difficult to believe so far as concerns Tresham, whose conduct is satisfactorily explained on less recondite motives. Tresham was in London on 25 or 26 Oct. when Winter came to his lodgings in Clerkenwell and obtained 100l. from him, and on the latter date Monteagle received the famous letter warning him not to attend at the opening of parliament on 5 Nov. The letter was anonymous, but the circumstantial evidence is all in Tresham's favour, and the rival claims of Mrs. Habington and Anne Vaux [q. v.] are very improbable (cf. Gent. Mag. 1835, i. 251–6). On Friday, 1 Nov., Catesby met Winter and Tresham at Barnet, where they questioned him as to how the letter was sent to Monteagle; they could not conceive ‘for Mr. Tresham foresware it, whom we only suspected’ (, Confession). On the following day Tresham was again in London, and after the discovery of the plot, ‘notwithstanding all accidents aforesaid, yet Francis Tresham remained still about the courte, who uppon the first and second newes of outrages and attemptes done by the rebellious route, offered his speciall services dessiring present imployment for their suppression and apprehension’ (, Annales, p. 879). His name does not therefore occur in the proclamations for the arrest of the other conspirators, and Tresham had time to conceal his books and papers at Rushton, where they were not discovered until 1828 (Cal. Rushton Papers, Pref.). The first indication of his complicity received by the government seems to have been Sir William Waad's letter dated 8 Nov., in which he spoke of Tresham as ‘long a pensioner of the king of Spain,’ and a suspicious person. He was thereupon ‘restrayned, examined, and then sent to the Tower’ on 12 Nov.. On 13 Nov. he confessed that Catesby had revealed the plot to him and that he had been guilty of concealment; but pleaded that he had opposed the scheme, had no hand in its attempted execution, and threw himself on the king's mercy; but that there was no intention of sparing him is evident from the fact that on 18 Nov. the king promised Lake one of Tresham's manors. On the 29th he confessed his own and Father Garnett's complicity in Thomas Winter's mission to Spain. A few days later he was seized with what Salisbury termed ‘a natural sickness, such as he hath been a long time subject to.’ His wife and servant, Vavasour, were allowed constant access to him, and the suggestion that he was poisoned is unsupported by evidence. Knowing that he was about to die, he performed what he considered a last service to the cause of religion, and dictated to Vavasour a declaration denying Garnett's knowledge of Winter's mission to Spain. He had learnt the doctrine of equivocation from Blackwell's ‘Treatise of Equivocation,’


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/208

 which he had caused Vavasour to copy; this copy, now preserved in the Bodleian Library, was published by David Jardine [q. v.] in 1851. Garnett himself was examined on the point, but ‘was reluctant to judge in the case of Francis Tresham's equivocation, as he did it to save a friend’ (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1603–10, p. 306).

Tresham died on 22 Dec.; although he had not even been indicted, he was treated as a traitor, his corpse was decapitated, and his head set up over the gate at Northampton. He was attainted with the other conspirators by act of parliament passed during that session (Statutes of the Realm, iv. 1068–1069), and his lands were forfeited. By his wife Anne, eldest daughter of Sir John Tufton of Hothfield, Kent, Tresham had issue two daughters—Lucy, and Elizabeth who married Sir George Heneage. In spite of the attainder, Rushton and other lands of Tresham passed eventually to his brother Lewis (1578?–1639) of the Inner Temple, who was a baronet of the original creation, 29 June 1611, was knighted on 9 April 1612, and died in 1639. He was succeeded by his son William, on whose death in 1650–1 the baronetcy became extinct. Wood credits Tresham with the authorship of the above-mentioned ‘Treatise of Equivocation,’ and of ‘De Officio Principis Christiani,’ in which he is said to have maintained the lawfulness of deposing heretic kings. Nothing, however, is known of the manuscript, which was never printed.

[Cal. Rushton Papers, Northampton, 1871; Cal. State Papers, Dom. passim; Stow's Annales; Hist. MSS. Comm. 12th Rep. App. pt. iv.; Goodman's Court and Times of James I; Wood's Athenæ, i. 754; Abbot's Antilogia; Dodd's Church Hist. ed. Tierney; Jardine's Gunpowder Plot, 1857; Gerard's What was the Gunpowder Plot? 1896; S. R. Gardiner's History, vol. i., and What Gunpowder Plot was, 1897; Gerard's Gunpowder Plot and Plotters, 1897; Falkener's Tresham Pedigree, 1886; Bridges's Northamptonshire; Burke's Extinct Baronetcies; Brown's Genesis U.S.A.]  TRESHAM, HENRY (1749?–1814), historical painter, was born in Ireland. The date of his birth has been variously stated from 1749 to 1756. He received his first instruction in art from W. Ennis (d. 1770), the pupil and successor of Robert West (d. 1770) at the Dublin art school. For three years Tresham exhibited his works at Dublin—chalk drawings in 1771, allegorical designs for a ceiling in 1772, and ‘Andromache mourning for Hector’ in 1773. He came to England in 1775, and supported himself by drawing small portraits, till he obtained the patronage of John Campbell of Cawdor, afterwards (1796) first Baron Cawdor (d. 1821), who invited Tresham to accompany him on his travels through Italy. Tresham remained on the continent for fourteen years, staying chiefly at Rome, where he studied from the antique and from the paintings of the old masters, modelling his style especially on the works of the Roman school. He became an accomplished draughtsman of a frigid academical type, but had little sense of colour. He was a member of the academies of Rome and Bologna, and a keen student and a good critic of all kinds of works of art according to the standard of eighteenth-century connoisseurship. During his residence at Rome he published in 1784 ‘Le Avventure di Saffo,’ a series of eighteen subjects designed and engraved in aquatint by himself, which do not give a favourable impression of his draughtsmanship or taste at that period of his career. On his return to England in 1789 he resided at 9 George Street, Hanover Square, for some years, and afterwards at 20 Brook Street. He sent no fewer than twelve works, most of which were drawings, of very various subjects, to the Royal Academy in 1789. From that year to 1806 he exhibited thirty-three works in all, the majority of which were subjects from scriptural, Roman, or English history, accompanied sometimes by rather pedantic quotations in the catalogues from Cicero or Athenæus. Many of his pictures were painted for Robert Bowyer's ‘Historic Gallery,’ and engraved in the large illustrated edition of Hume's ‘History of England.’ His sepia drawings for the twofold dedication of this work, to George III and to the ‘Legislature of Great Britain,’ which were engraved by Bartolozzi and Fittler respectively, are in the print-room of the British Museum. Two illustrations of ‘Antony and Cleopatra’ by him appeared in Boydell's ‘Shakespeare,’ and a third subject from the same play in Boydell's large ‘Shakespeare Gallery.’ He also designed frontispieces for Sharpe's ‘British Classics’ and several other publications. Several of his large scriptural and classical pictures—e.g. ‘Maid Arise’ and ‘The Death of Virginia’—were engraved by the two Schiavonetti, and his ‘Ophelia’ was etched by Bartolozzi.

Tresham was elected an associate of the Royal Academy in 1791, and an academician in 1799. In 1807 he succeeded John Opie [q. v.] as professor of painting, but resigned that office in 1809 on account of bad health. He was a collector of pictures and decorative objects, and it is related that he


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1124

§ 1124. Impairment of claims or interests

Except as provided in section 1123 (a)(4) of this title, a class of claims or interests is impaired under a plan unless, with respect to each claim or interest of such class, the plan—
 * (1) leaves unaltered the legal, equitable, and contractual rights to which such claim or interest entitles the holder of such claim or interest; or
 * (2) notwithstanding any contractual provision or applicable law that entitles the holder of such claim or interest to demand or receive accelerated payment of such claim or interest after the occurrence of a default—
 * (A) cures any such default that occurred before or after the commencement of the case under this title, other than a default of a kind specified in section 365 (b)(2) of this title or of a kind that section 365 (b)(2) expressly does not require to be cured;
 * (B) reinstates the maturity of such claim or interest as such maturity existed before such default;
 * (C) compensates the holder of such claim or interest for any damages incurred as a result of any reasonable reliance by such holder on such contractual provision or such applicable law;
 * (D) if such claim or such interest arises from any failure to perform a nonmonetary obligation, other than a default arising from failure to operate a nonresidential real property lease subject to section 365 (b)(1)(A), compensates the holder of such claim or such interest (other than the debtor or an insider) for any actual pecuniary loss incurred by such holder as a result of such failure; and
 * (E) does not otherwise alter the legal, equitable, or contractual rights to which such claim or interest entitles the holder of such claim or interest.


text: Confederate Military History/Volume 1/Part 2/Chapter 1


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/209

 made a profitable investment of 100l. in purchasing some Etruscan vases which Thomas Hope (1770?–1831) [q. v.] had given to his servant as the refuse of a collection which he had bought (presumably Sir William Hamilton's vases, which Hope purchased in 1801). Tresham parted with a portion of these to Samuel Rogers for 800l., and for the remainder, with additions which Tresham himself had collected abroad, Frederick, fifth earl of Carlisle, the father-in-law of his first patron, Lord Cawdor, settled upon him an annuity of 300l. for life. Upon this annuity he largely depended during the last years of his life, when ill-health prevented him from painting. Another source of income was the salary which he received for his share (the descriptive text) in the ‘British Gallery of Pictures,’ a series of good engravings from pictures in English collections, which the firm of Longman & Co. continued to issue till 1818. Tresham was largely concerned in the selection of these pictures, and in obtaining the consent of the owners to their publication. He died in Bond Street on 17 June 1814.

Tresham published five volumes of verse: 1. ‘The Sea-sick Minstrel,’ 1796. 2. ‘Rome at the Close of the Eighteenth Century,’ 1799. 3. ‘Britannicus to Buonaparte: an Heroic Epistle,’ 1803. 4. ‘Recreation at Ramsgate’ (1805?). 5. ‘A Tributary Lay to the Memory of the Marquis of Lansdowne,’ 1810.

Four portraits of Tresham were engraved, viz. (1) a drawing by George Chinnery, 1802, etched by Mrs. Dawson Turner; (2) a profile drawing by George Dance, engraved by William Daniell; (3) a picture by Opie, exhibited at the Royal Academy, 1806, engraved by Samuel Freeman, 1809; (4) a drawing by Alexander Pope, engraved by Antony Cardon, and published on 27 Jan. 1814.

[Gent. Mag. 1814, i. 701, ii. 290; Sandby's Hist. of Royal Academy, i. 313; Redgrave's Dict. of Artists; Graves's Dict. of Artists; Brit. Mus. Cat.]  TRESHAM, THOMAS (d. 1471), speaker of the House of Commons, was the eldest son of William Tresham (d. 1450) [q. v.] by his wife Isabel, daughter of Sir William Vaux of Harrowden, Northamptonshire. He was brought up from childhood in the household of Henry VI (Rot. Parl. v. 616). He was returned to parliament for Buckinghamshire on 25 Jan. 1446–1447, and for Huntingdonshire on 8 Feb. 1448–9. He was with his father on 22 Sept. 1450 when the latter was killed at Thorpland Close, and was himself robbed and wounded. But, in spite of his father's Yorkist sympathies and his own maltreatment at the hands of Lancastrian partisans, Tresham remained a devoted adherent to Henry VI, and was appointed controller of his household. Early in 1454 he promoted a bill for the establishment of a garrison at Windsor for the defence of Henry VI and his son (Paston Letters, i. 364). In 1455 he was one of those selected to explain the king's measures for the defence of Calais and to collect a loan for his expenses (Acts of the Privy Council, ed. Nicolas, vi. 239, 242). On 23 May in the same year he fought on the Lancastrian side at the first battle of St. Albans, where the Yorkists were victorious (Paston Letters, ii. 332).

In 1459 the Lancastrians defeated the Yorkists at Ludlow, and a parliament, in which Tresham represented his father's old constituency, Northamptonshire, was summoned to meet at Coventry in November. Tresham was elected speaker, and the principal business of parliament was the attainder of the Duke of York and his chief adherents. Tresham accompanied Queen Margaret of Anjou when she marched south and defeated Warwick at the second battle of St. Albans (17 Feb. 1461); he was knighted by Henry VI's son after the battle (Collections of a London Citizen, p. 214). Six weeks later, on 29 March, he fought at Towton and was taken prisoner (ib. p. 217; Rot. Parl. v. 616–17). On 14 May a commission was issued for seizing his lands (Cal. Patent Rolls, 1461–7, pp. 35, 36), and in the parliament which met in July he was attainted of high treason. His life was, however, spared, and on 26 March 1464, ‘by the advice of the council,’ a general pardon was granted him. On 25 Jan. 1465–6 he was placed on the commission for the peace in Northamptonshire, and on 9 April 1467 he was re-elected to parliament for his old constituency. In that parliament his attainder was reversed and a partial restoration was made of his property, on the ground that he was the household servant of Henry VI and ‘durst not disobey him at Towton’ (Rot. Parl. v. 616–17). He was also placed on a commission to inquire into the state of the silver coinage (ib. v. 634). In the following year, however, Queen Margaret was again threatening to invade England, and on 29 Nov. Tresham and other Lancastrians were arrested as a precaution (, ii. 335). When Warwick restored Henry VI in October 1470, Tresham was released; he was proclaimed a traitor on 27 April 1471 after Edward IV's return to


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1125

§ 1125. Postpetition disclosure and solicitation

 * (a) In this section—
 * (1) “adequate information” means information of a kind, and in sufficient detail, as far as is reasonably practicable in light of the nature and history of the debtor and the condition of the debtor’s books and records, including a discussion of the potential material Federal tax consequences of the plan to the debtor, any successor to the debtor, and a hypothetical investor typical of the holders of claims or interests in the case, that would enable such a hypothetical investor of the relevant class to make an informed judgment about the plan, but adequate information need not include such information about any other possible or proposed plan and in determining whether a disclosure statement provides adequate information, the court shall consider the complexity of the case, the benefit of additional information to creditors and other parties in interest, and the cost of providing additional information; and
 * (2) “investor typical of holders of claims or interests of the relevant class” means investor having—
 * (A) a claim or interest of the relevant class;
 * (B) such a relationship with the debtor as the holders of other claims or interests of such class generally have; and
 * (C) such ability to obtain such information from sources other than the disclosure required by this section as holders of claims or interests in such class generally have.

 * (b) An acceptance or rejection of a plan may not be solicited after the commencement of the case under this title from a holder of a claim or interest with respect to such claim or interest, unless, at the time of or before such solicitation, there is transmitted to such holder the plan or a summary of the plan, and a written disclosure statement approved, after notice and a hearing, by the court as containing adequate information. The court may approve a disclosure statement without a valuation of the debtor or an appraisal of the debtor’s assets.

 * (c) The same disclosure statement shall be transmitted to each holder of a claim or interest of a particular class, but there may be transmitted different disclosure statements, differing in amount, detail, or kind of information, as between classes.

 * (d) Whether a disclosure statement required under subsection (b) of this section contains adequate information is not governed by any otherwise applicable nonbankruptcy law, rule, or regulation, but an agency or official whose duty is to administer or enforce such a law, rule, or regulation may be heard on the issue of whether a disclosure statement contains adequate information. Such an agency or official may not appeal from, or otherwise seek review of, an order approving a disclosure statement.

 * (e) A person that solicits acceptance or rejection of a plan, in good faith and in compliance with the applicable provisions of this title, or that participates, in good faith and in compliance with the applicable provisions of this title, in the offer, issuance, sale, or purchase of a security, offered or sold under the plan, of the debtor, of an affiliate participating in a joint plan with the debtor, or of a newly organized successor to the debtor under the plan, is not liable, on account of such solicitation or participation, for violation of any applicable law, rule, or regulation governing solicitation of acceptance or rejection of a plan or the offer, issuance, sale, or purchase of securities.

 * (f) Notwithstanding subsection (b), in a small business case—
 * (1) the court may determine that the plan itself provides adequate information and that a separate disclosure statement is not necessary;
 * (2) the court may approve a disclosure statement submitted on standard forms approved by the court or adopted under section 2075 of title 28; and
 * (3)
 * (A) the court may conditionally approve a disclosure statement subject to final approval after notice and a hearing;
 * (B) acceptances and rejections of a plan may be solicited based on a conditionally approved disclosure statement if the debtor provides adequate information to each holder of a claim or interest that is solicited, but a conditionally approved disclosure statement shall be mailed not later than 25 days before the date of the hearing on confirmation of the plan; and
 * (C) the hearing on the disclosure statement may be combined with the hearing on confirmation of a plan.

 * (g) Notwithstanding subsection (b), an acceptance or rejection of the plan may be solicited from a holder of a claim or interest if such solicitation complies with applicable nonbankruptcy law and if such holder was solicited before the commencement of the case in a manner complying with applicable nonbankruptcy law.


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1126

§ 1126. Acceptance of plan

 * (a) The holder of a claim or interest allowed under section 502 of this title may accept or reject a plan. If the United States is a creditor or equity security holder, the Secretary of the Treasury may accept or reject the plan on behalf of the United States.

 * (b) For the purposes of subsections (c) and (d) of this section, a holder of a claim or interest that has accepted or rejected the plan before the commencement of the case under this title is deemed to have accepted or rejected such plan, as the case may be, if—
 * (1) the solicitation of such acceptance or rejection was in compliance with any applicable nonbankruptcy law, rule, or regulation governing the adequacy of disclosure in connection with such solicitation; or
 * (2) if there is not any such law, rule, or regulation, such acceptance or rejection was solicited after disclosure to such holder of adequate information, as defined in section 1125 (a) of this title.

 * (c) A class of claims has accepted a plan if such plan has been accepted by creditors, other than any entity designated under subsection (e) of this section, that hold at least two-thirds in amount and more than one-half in number of the allowed claims of such class held by creditors, other than any entity designated under subsection (e) of this section, that have accepted or rejected such plan.

 * (d) A class of interests has accepted a plan if such plan has been accepted by holders of such interests, other than any entity designated under subsection (e) of this section, that hold at least two-thirds in amount of the allowed interests of such class held by holders of such interests, other than any entity designated under subsection (e) of this section, that have accepted or rejected such plan.

 * (e) On request of a party in interest, and after notice and a hearing, the court may designate any entity whose acceptance or rejection of such plan was not in good faith, or was not solicited or procured in good faith or in accordance with the provisions of this title.

 * (f) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a class that is not impaired under a plan, and each holder of a claim or interest of such class, are conclusively presumed to have accepted the plan, and solicitation of acceptances with respect to such class from the holders of claims or interests of such class is not required.

 * (g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a class is deemed not to have accepted a plan if such plan provides that the claims or interests of such class do not entitle the holders of such claims or interests to receive or retain any property under the plan on account of such claims or interests.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/210

 London, joined Margaret and fought with her at the battle of Tewkesbury on 4 May. He took refuge in Tewkesbury Abbey, and his pardon was promised by Edward. The promise was not kept; and on 6 May Tresham, with the other Lancastrian refugees, was beheaded (Paston Letters, iii. 9;, pp. 18–19). He was again attainted by act of parliament in 1475 (Rot. Parl. vi. 145–6).

By his wife Margaret, daughter of William, lord Zouch of Harringworth, Tresham left a son John, who was restored to his father's estates on the reversal of the attainder by Henry VII in 1485. John's son, Sir Thomas Tresham (d. 1559), is separately noticed.

[Rot. Parl. vols. v–vi.; Acts of the Privy Council, ed. Nicolas, vi. 239, 242, 341; Rymer's Fœdera, xi. 470; Official Returns of Members of Parl.; Cal. Patent Rolls, 1461–7; Paston Letters, ed. Gairdner; William Wyrcester apud Letters &c. of Henry VI (Rolls Ser.); Three Fifteenth-Century Chronicles, Warkworth's Chron., Collections of a London Citizen (Camd. Soc.); Hall's Chronicle, p. 254; Hardyng's Chron. p. 407; Bridges's Northamptonshire, ii. 68, 147; Manning's Speakers, pp. 108–10; Stubbs's Const. Hist. iii. 190; Ramsay's Lancaster and York, ii. 335, 382, 406.]  TRESHAM, THOMAS (d. 1559), grand prior of the order of St. John in England, was the eldest son of John Tresham of Rushton, Northamptonshire, by his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir James Harrington of Hornby, Lancashire. Sir Thomas Tresham [q. v.] was his grandfather. He began to take an active part in local matters, was sheriff of Northamptonshire in 1524–6, and again in 1539–40, and was knighted before July 1530, when he was one of those commissioned to inquire into Wolsey's possessions. On 29 June 1540 he received a license to impark 120 acres of wood, 250 acres of pasture, and 50 acres of meadow in Lyveden, where his son subsequently constructed the ‘new building,’ still standing. On 5 Jan. 1541–2 he was returned to parliament for Northamptonshire, and he regularly served on commissions for the peace in his county. In July 1546 he was employed in conveying treasure from Antwerp to Calais, and in 1548–9 once more served as sheriff of Northamptonshire (Addit. MS. 29549, f. 9; Lists of Sheriffs, 1898). In August 1549 he joined Warwick against the Norfolk rebels, and on 19 Sept. was paid 272l. 19s. 6d. for his services. He was, however, a catholic, and was one of the first to join Queen Mary on Edward VI's death. He proclaimed her queen at Northampton on 18 July 1553, and guarded her on her march to London (Chron. Queen Jane, pp. 12, 13). On 3 Aug. he was appointed to ‘stay the assemblies in Cambridgeshire’ (Acts P. C. iv. 310), and in May 1554 he conveyed Courtenay from the Tower to Fotheringhay (, Chron. ii. 116). In February 1555–6 he was executor to, and chief mourner at the funeral of, Bishop John Chambers [q. v.], and again served as sheriff of Northamptonshire. When Mary resolved to restore the order of St. John, Tresham was by charter dated 2 April 1557 appointed grand prior, Sir Richard Shelley [q. v.] being turcopolier. Later in the year he was employed in taking musters and surveying the defences of the Isle of Wight. He sat in the House of Lords in January 1557–8 as prior of St. John, and sent his proxy to Elizabeth's first parliament. He died on 8 March 1558–9, and was buried with much ceremony in St. Peter's, Rushton, on the 16th (the herald's account of the funeral is extant in the College of Arms MS. i. 9. f. 158). A white marble monument, with an inscription, was erected over his tomb.

Tresham was twice married: first, to Anne, daughter of Sir William (afterwards Lord) Parr of Horton; and, secondly, to Lettice, relict of Sir Robert Lee, who also predeceased him, leaving no issue. By his first wife Tresham had issue two sons, John and William. John married Eleanor, daughter of Anthony Catesby, and predeceased his father, leaving two sons, Thomas and William, and a daughter who married William, lord Vaux of Harrowden.

The elder son, (1543?–1605), was a minor fifteen years old when he succeeded his grandfather in the Rushton and Lyveden estates. Advantage seems to have been taken of his minority to bring him up as a protestant, and in 1573–4 he served as sheriff of Northamptonshire, but in 1580 he is said to have been converted back by the jesuit Robert Parsons [q. v.] From that year he became a constant friend to missionary priests and himself a stubborn recusant. On 18 Aug. 1581, for harbouring Edmund Campion [q. v.], Tresham, who had been knighted in 1577, was summoned before the council and committed to the Fleet prison. He was tried in the Star-chamber on 20 Nov. following, a detailed report of the trial being extant in Harleian MS. 859, ff. 44–51. As a result he remained in confinement for seven years, first in the Fleet, then in his own house at Hoxton, and then at Ely. In February 1581–2 Richard Topcliffe [q. v.] reported


text:
Page:The Amateur Emigrant-The Silverado Squatters.djvu/25

Rh or the clean flat smack of the parental hand in chastisement. There are, however, many advantages for the inhabitant of this strip. He does not require to bring his own bedding or dishes, but finds berths and a table completely if somewhat roughly furnished. He enjoys a distinct superiority in diet; but this, strange to say, differs not only on different ships, but on the same ship according as her head is to the east or west. In my own experience, the principal difference between our table and that of the true steerage passenger was the table itself, and the crockery plates from which we ate. But lest I should show myself ungrateful, let me recapitulate every advantage. At breakfast, we had a choice between tea and coffee for beverage; a choice not easy to make, the two were so surprisingly alike. I found that I could sleep after the coffee and lay awake after the tea, which is proof conclusive of some chemical disparity; and even by the palate I could distinguish a smack of snuff in the former from a flavour of boiling and dishcloths in the second. As a matter of fact, I have seen passengers, after many sips, still doubting which had been supplied them. In the way of eatables at the same meal we were gloriously favoured; for in addition to porridge, which was common to all, we had Irish stew, sometimes a bit of fish,


text:
Page:The Amateur Emigrant-The Silverado Squatters.djvu/26

6 and sometimes rissoles. The dinner of soup, roast fresh beef, boiled salt junk, and potatoes, was, I believe, exactly common to the steerage and the second cabin; only I have heard it rumoured that our potatoes were of a superior brand; and twice a week, on pudding-days, instead of duff, we had a saddle-bag filled with currants under the name of a plum-pudding. At tea we were served with some broken meat from the saloon; sometimes in the comparatively elegant form of spare patties or rissoles; but as a general thing, mere chicken-bones and flakes of fish, neither hot nor cold. If these were not the scrapings of plates their looks belied them sorely; yet we were all too hungry to be proud, and fell to these leavings greedily. These, the bread, which was excellent, and the soup and porridge, which were both good, formed my whole diet throughout the voyage, so that except for the broken meat and the convenience of a table I might as well have been in the steerage outright. Had they given me porridge again in the evening, I should have been perfectly contented with the fare. As it was, with a few biscuits and some whisky and water before turning in, I kept my body going and my spirits up to the mark. The last particular in which the second cabin passenger remarkably stands ahead of his brother of the steerage is one altogether of sentiment. In


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/211

 that Tresham had mass said before him in the Fleet. In 1586 he was thought likely to join the Babington conspirators (Simancas MSS. 1580–86, p. 604). But, though a staunch Roman catholic, Tresham had no sympathy with Spanish aggression, and a jesuit declared that the society regarded him as an ‘atheist’ for his ‘friendship to the state’ (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1595–7, p. 238). He was released on bail on 29 Nov. 1588 after making a protestation of allegiance, but was again imprisoned for recusancy in 1597 and 1599, and had annually to pay enormous fines. His intervals of freedom he employed in extensive building operations under the direction of John Thorpe (fl. 1570–1610) [q. v.] The chief of these were the market-house at Rothwell, the ‘triangular lodge’ at Rushton, and the ‘new building’ at Lyveden (see elaborate plans, descriptions, and views in Buildings of Sir Thomas Tresham). Tresham proclaimed James I at Northampton on 25 March 1603. He died on 11 Sept. 1605, and was buried in St. Peter's, Rushton; a portrait of him hangs in Boughton Hall.

By his wife Muriel, daughter of Sir Robert Throckmorton of Coughton, Tresham had, besides other issue, Francis Tresham [q. v.], the ‘gunpowder-plot’ conspirator; Elizabeth who married William Parker, fourth baron Monteagle and eleventh baron Morley [q. v.]; and Frances, who married Edward, ninth baron Stourton.

[Letters and Papers of Henry VIII; Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1547–1605; Acts of the Privy Council, ed. Dasent; Taylor's Cal. of Rushton Papers (Northampton 1871); Machyn's Diary (Camden Soc.); Cotton MSS. Tib. B. ii. f. 334; Harl. MS. 6164; Leland's Itinerary, vi. 38; Strype's Works; Fuller's Worthies; Bridges's Northamptonshire, ii. 69 et seq.; Official Ret. Members of Parl.; Burnet's Reformation, ed. Pocock, ii. 576; Whitworth Porter's Knights of Malta, p. 724; Gent. Mag. 1808, ii. 680; Notes and Queries, I. xi. 49, 131, 200; Simpson's Life of Campion; Morris's Troubles of our Catholic Forefathers, 2nd ser.; Bell's Ruins of Lyveden, 1847; Archæol. xxx. 80.]  TRESHAM, WILLIAM (d. 1450), speaker of the House of Commons, was the eldest son of Thomas Tresham of Rushton and Sywell, Northamptonshire. He was educated for the law, and is said to have been attorney-general to Henry V, but Dugdale (Origines Jurid. and Chronica Ser.) does not mention his appointment either as attorney-general or as serjeant-at-law. He was, however, skilled in the law, and was employed on legal business by Henry VI and Cardinal Beaufort in 1433 (, Fœdera, x. 500, 551). He began his parliamentary career on 30 Sept. 1423 by being elected knight of the shire for the county of Northampton; it extended over twenty-six years, and sixteen parliaments, in all of which he represented Northamptonshire (the writs for six of these parliaments are lost). He was re-elected on 25 Sept. 1427, 25 Aug. 1429, 3 April 1432, 30 June 1433, 15 Sept. 1435, and to the parliament which was summoned to meet, first at Oxford, and then on 12 Nov. 1439 at Westminster. In this parliament Tresham was chosen speaker, doubtless on account of his experience. On 14 Jan. 1439–1440 it was prorogued to meet at Reading on account of the prevalence of the plague in London. Nineteen statutes were passed, but the proceedings are not entered on the rolls. Tresham's conduct probably satisfied the government, as on 12 Sept. following he was one of those to whom were granted the revenues of alien priories in England (, x. 802).

Tresham again acted as speaker in the parliaments that met on 25 Jan. 1441–2, and 10 Feb. 1446–7 (Rot. Parl. v. 36 b, 172 a), and probably in that which met in February 1448–9. In the growing divergence of the two parties, Tresham, in spite of his previous connection with the court, took the Yorkist side, and in the parliament which met at Westminster on 6 Nov. 1449, and was strongly opposed to the chief minister, William de la Pole, duke of Suffolk [q. v.], Tresham was again elected speaker. He took a prominent part in Suffolk's impeachment, and on 7 Feb. 1449–50 he presented to the lords the formal indictment of the commons (, Lancaster and York, ii. 115). In the same year, possibly in consequence of this action, he was deprived of an annuity of 20l. which he held of the crown (Rot. Parl. v. 193 b). In August Richard, duke of York (1411–1460) [q. v.] crossed from Ireland to demand a redress of grievances. Tresham set out from Rushton to meet him, but on 22 Sept. was waylaid at Thorpland, near Moulton in Northamptonshire, and killed by some retainers of the Lancastrian Edmund Grey, lord Grey de Ruthin, and afterwards earl of Kent [q. v.] The parliament that met on 6 Nov. granted his widow's petition for justice on her husband's murderers, but only the agents were named, and the sheriff of Northamptonshire was afraid to apprehend even them (Rot. Parl. v. 212;, ii. 135, 140). By his wife Isabel, daughter of Sir William Vaux of Harrowden, Tresham was father of Sir Thomas Tresham (d. 1471) [q. v.]


text:
Page:The Amateur Emigrant-The Silverado Squatters.djvu/27

Rh the steerage there are males and females; in the second cabin ladies and gentlemen. For some time after I came aboard I thought I was only a male; but in the course of a voyage of discovery between decks, I came on a brass plate, and learned that I was still a gentleman. Nobody knew it, of course. I was lost in the crowd of males and females, and rigorously confined to the same quarter of the deck. Who could tell whether I housed on the port or starboard side of steerage No. 2 and 3? And it was only there that my superiority became practical; everywhere else I was incognito, moving among my inferiors with simplicity, not so much as a swagger to indicate that I was a gentleman after all, and had broken meat to tea. Still, I was like one with a patent of nobility in a drawer at home; and when I felt out of spirits I could go down and refresh myself with a look of that brass plate. For all these advantages I paid but two guineas. Six guineas is the steerage fare; eight that by the second cabin; and when you remember that the steerage passenger must supply bedding and dishes, and, in five cases out of ten, either brings some dainties with him, or privately pays the steward for extra rations, the difference in price becomes almost nominal. Air comparatively fit to breathe, food comparatively varied, and the satisfaction of being still privately a gentleman, may thus be had


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1127

§ 1127. Modification of plan

 * (a) The proponent of a plan may modify such plan at any time before confirmation, but may not modify such plan so that such plan as modified fails to meet the requirements of sections 1122 and 1123 of this title. After the proponent of a plan files a modification of such plan with the court, the plan as modified becomes the plan.

 * (b) The proponent of a plan or the reorganized debtor may modify such plan at any time after confirmation of such plan and before substantial consummation of such plan, but may not modify such plan so that such plan as modified fails to meet the requirements of sections 1122 and 1123 of this title. Such plan as modified under this subsection becomes the plan only if circumstances warrant such modification and the court, after notice and a hearing, confirms such plan as modified, under section 1129 of this title.

 * (c) The proponent of a modification shall comply with section 1125 of this title with respect to the plan as modified.

 * (d) Any holder of a claim or interest that has accepted or rejected a plan is deemed to have accepted or rejected, as the case may be, such plan as modified, unless, within the time fixed by the court, such holder changes such holder’s previous acceptance or rejection.

 * (e) If the debtor is an individual, the plan may be modified at any time after confirmation of the plan but before the completion of payments under the plan, whether or not the plan has been substantially consummated, upon request of the debtor, the trustee, the United States trustee, or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim, to—
 * (1) increase or reduce the amount of payments on claims of a particular class provided for by the plan;
 * (2) extend or reduce the time period for such payments; or
 * (3) alter the amount of the distribution to a creditor whose claim is provided for by the plan to the extent necessary to take account of any payment of such claim made other than under the plan.

 * (f)
 * (1) Sections 1121 through 1128 and the requirements of section 1129 apply to any modification under subsection (a).
 * (2) The plan, as modified, shall become the plan only after there has been disclosure under section 1125 as the court may direct, notice and a hearing, and such modification is approved.


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1128

§ 1128. Confirmation hearing

 * (a) After notice, the court shall hold a hearing on confirmation of a plan.

 * (b) A party in interest may object to confirmation of a plan.