text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/155

 Lanercost, p. 215); Gaveston was present, but Lancaster ignored his presence, much to the king's anger. The homage was repeated in London on 26 Aug. (''Parl. Writs'', ii. 42). The ordinances which were published on 10 and 11 Oct. contained a decree of banishment on Gaveston, to which Edward, after a humble entreaty that his ‘brother Piers’ might be forgiven, had been obliged at length to consent. But Lancaster and others had to be forbidden to attend parliament in arms (Cal. Close Rolls, p. 442). Gaveston returned in January 1312, and the king countermanded the summons for a parliament on the first Sunday in Lent (12 Feb.) Lancaster, acting for the others, demanded Gaveston's withdrawal, and sent a private message to the queen that he would not rest till he had rid her of his presence. Armed bands were collected under the pretext of tournament, and Lancaster stole north by night. He surprised Edward and Gaveston at Newcastle-on-Tyne, and captured the greater part of their baggage. They fled hastily to Scarborough by sea, where Edward left Gaveston, proceeding himself to York. Then the earls of Pembroke and Warenne besieged Gaveston in Scarborough, while Lancaster hovered between to cut off Peter from all chance of rejoining the king. On 19 May Gaveston surrendered to Pembroke on condition of his safety being guaranteed until the parliament which was to meet on the first of August. If Edward and Gaveston could come to no agreement with the barons then, Gaveston was to be replaced in Scarborough Castle, as he was at the time of his surrender. Pembroke proceeded southward with his prisoner, but the Earl of Warwick took advantage of Pembroke's over-confidence to kidnap Gaveston at Deddington, sixteen miles north of Oxford, and carry him off to Warwick. Here, with the full concurrence of the earls of Lancaster and Hereford, Gaveston was condemned to death. Lancaster assumed the chief responsibility for his death by having him conveyed to Blacklow Hill in his lands to be beheaded (, ii. 180).

Neither the king nor Pembroke ever forgave Lancaster for this act of violence, though Edward was too weak at the time to bring the offenders to justice. Lancaster thought it prudent to come to the parliament to which Edward summoned him on 20 Aug. at the head of a small army. The earls of Gloucester and Richmond mediated, and after the earls had made a formal submission on 19 Oct., the king timore ductus granted them a full pardon on 9 Nov. (Flor. Hist. iii. 337). This did not conclude matters, however, and negotiations still went on under safe-conducts. Lancaster restored the jewels and horses he had captured at Newcastle on 27 Feb. and 29 March 1312, but it was not until 16 Oct. 1313 that a complete amnesty for all offences committed since the beginning of the reign was granted (, ii. 195). Lancaster refused to be reconciled with Hugh le Despenser. Edward summoned him to accompany him in an expedition against the Scots as early as 23 Dec. 1313 (, ii. 238). But Thomas and his party refused, alleging that the king had not carried out the ordinances, especially as regards the removal of evil counsellors. All they did was to send the strict legal contingents due from them (, p. 224). Edward's disaster at Bannockburn obliged him to seek a new reconciliation with Lancaster, who had assembled an army at Pontefract under the pretext that the king, if successful in Scotland, intended to turn his arms against him. This took place in a parliament held in the last three weeks of September. The ordinances were confirmed. Edward was obliged to dismiss his chancellor, treasurer, and sheriffs, who were replaced by Lancaster's nominees. Hugh le Despenser went into hiding, though he still remained one of the king's counsellors (Chron. Edw. I and Edw. II, ii. 208; Flor. Hist. iii. 339). In the parliament which lasted from January to March 1315 he and Walter Langton were removed from the council, the king was put on an allowance of 10l. a day, and Thomas was made his principalis consiliarius (Chron. Edw. I and Edw. II, ii. 209).

On 8 Aug. Thomas was appointed chief commander against the Scots, superseding his enemy, the Earl of Pembroke. In the autumn one of his own tenants, Adam de Banastre, rose against him, fearful of punishment for a murder he had committed. Banastre seems to have made use of the king's name, and is said to have borne his banner. But Lancaster's lieutenants easily crushed him (, ii. 214). The parliament which met on 28 Jan. 1316 was postponed till his arrival on 12 Feb., after which he was requested by the king in parliament to be president of the council, and accepted the office on certain conditions on 17 Feb. (Parl. Writs, i. 156–7). But neither had any confidence in the other. An assemblage at Newcastle was postponed from 24 June to 10 Aug., and then to Michaelmas. Thomas started towards Scotland, only to find that the king refused to follow him. Edward went only as far as York, and, if we are to believe the somewhat pro-Lancastrian account of Robert of Reading (Flor. Hist. iii.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/156

 176), he plundered the north of England and then returned south. Lancaster retired to his castle at Pontefract, while the royal party met at Clarendon on 9 Feb., probably to plot his overthrow. The Earl of Warenne was selected to surprise him, but was seized with a sudden panic on approaching Lancaster's country. One of the knights of his household, however, succeeded in carrying off the countess at Canford in Dorset, very probably with her connivance, for she was accused of infidelity to her husband (ib. p. 178). This led to a private war between the two earls. Thomas harried Warenne's lands, and some of his followers took Knaresborough Castle. Thomas received renewed summons for an expedition to Scotland, but, as before, there were continual postponements. The efforts of the cardinal legates and Pembroke issued in another abortive agreement between the king and the earl in July to reserve their differences for the parliament which was to meet on 27 Jan. 1318. This did not of course prevent Edward threatening Thomas with the army he had gathered under the pretext of the Scottish war, and the private war still went on merrily as ever. On 3 Nov. the king intervened, ordering Lancaster to desist (Cal. Close Rolls, p. 575). The parliament summoned at Lincoln for 27 Jan. was prorogued until 12 March, and then until 19 June, and finally revoked on account of the invasion of the Scots. But the capture of Berwick on 2 April 1318 by the latter was more potent than all the negotiations in bringing the parties to agreement. Thomas insisted on the punishment of the grantees of the royal grants made contrary to the ordinances, and the removal of his enemies from the king's councils. A solemn reconciliation took place near Leicester on 5 Aug.; among the conditions were a confirmation of the ordinances and the establishment of a sort of council consisting of two bishops and a baron with a baron or banneret of the household of the Earl of Lancaster, who were always to accompany the king to execute and give counsel on all weighty matters (ib. p. 113). Edward and Thomas entered Scotland together about 15 Aug. and laid siege to Berwick, but mutual distrust and the king's ill-concealed projects of vengeance led to the abandonment of the siege through Lancaster's departure. He was accused by the king's party of having been bribed by the Scots. He refused to attend the two councils of magnates held in January and October of the next year, but there was a lull for a time in the struggle.

With the private war which arose early in 1321 between the younger Despenser and his rivals for the Gloucester inheritance, Hugh de Audley and Roger d'Amory began the last act. At a meeting summoned by Lancaster at Sherburn in Elmet, he and his party declared against Despenser, and on 15 July Edward had to consent to the banishment of both father and son. But Lady Badlesmere's insult to the queen on 13 Oct. and the capture of Leeds Castle on 31 Oct. strengthened his hands. The conference which, in spite of Edward's formal prohibition, Thomas summoned at Doncaster on 29 Nov. (ib. p. 505) did nothing. Thomas's holding aloof when the king was besieging Leeds Castle can be explained by his enmity to Badlesmere, but his vacillation after its capture and the recall of the Despensers proved his incompetence as a leader. However effective his policy of sulky inaction had been on previous occasions, it was of no avail against the sudden burst of energy which Edward now put forth. Instead of marching to the assistance of his adherents in the south, the earl lingered in the north, and even on 8 Feb. 1322 his attitude was still so undecided that Edward could write to him inhibiting him from adhering to the king's contrariants (ib. p. 515). The royal levies assembled at Coventry on 28 Feb. Thomas tried with the small force at his disposal to check the king's advance at Burton-on-Trent. He was successful for three days, but the royal army crossed the river at another place, so that, after some show of offering battle, he and his followers set fire to Burton, and went north to Tutbury and thence to Pontefract. Robert de Holand deserted with five hundred men he had collected, if we are to believe a story in the chronicle of William de Packington which has come down to us, epitomised in Leland's ‘Collectanea’ (ii. 464, ed. Hearne). Lancaster's followers held a council at this last place, and resolved to push on to his castle of Dunstanburgh in Northumberland; but Lancaster refused, proposing to stay at Pontefract, until Robert de Clifford drew out his dagger and threatened to kill him. They left Pontefract, hoping to find refuge in the last resort with the Scots, with whom Thomas had already been in correspondence under the pseudonym of ‘King Arthur.’

On 16 March they reached Boroughbridge, but found their passage over the Ure barred by Sir Andrew Harclay and a force which had been collected to act against the Scots. The Earl of Hereford fell in the attempt to force a passage, and, deserted by most of his followers during the night, Thomas had to surrender next morning. He was taken to York, and then to the king at Pontefract on

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


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 4, 1893.djvu/283

 Rh CELTIC VARIANTS OF "CINDERELLA".

Now in the "English" versions there is practical unanimity in the concluding portions of the tale. Magic dresses—Meeting-place {Church)—Flight—Lost shoe—Shoe marriage-test—Mutilated foot—False bride—Bird witness—Happy marriage, follow one another with exemplary regularity in all four (six) versions. The introductory incidents vary somewhat. Chambers has evidently a maimed version of the introduction of Catskin. The remaining three enable us, however, to restore with some confidence the Ur-Cinderella in English, somewhat as follows: Helpful


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1115

§ 1115. Property of the estate

 * (a) In a case in which the debtor is an individual, property of the estate includes, in addition to the property specified in section 541—
 * (1) all property of the kind specified in section 541 that the debtor acquires after the commencement of the case but before the case is closed, dismissed, or converted to a case under chapter 7, 12, or 13, whichever occurs first; and
 * (2) earnings from services performed by the debtor after the commencement of the case but before the case is closed, dismissed, or converted to a case under chapter 7, 12, or 13, whichever occurs first.

 * (b) Except as provided in section 1104 or a confirmed plan or order confirming a plan, the debtor shall remain in possession of all property of the estate.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/157

 21 March. The principal count in his indictment was his late rebellion, but it also raked up his attack on the king and Gaveston at Newcastle, and accused him of intimidating the parliaments of the reign by appearing at them with armed men, and of being in league with the Scots. Refused even a hearing, he was condemned to a traitor's death, the usual revolting details being commuted to beheading in consideration of his near relationship to the king. Seven earls are mentioned as present at his trial, presumably as members of the court (22 March). He was taken the next day on a sorry nag to a slight hill just outside the town and there beheaded (, pp. 112–24; Chron. Edw. I and Edw. II, i. 303, ii. 77, 270; Flor. Hist. iii. 206, 347).

Despite his tragic end, it is difficult to say anything favourable of Thomas of Lancaster. Marked out by birth and by his position as holder of five earldoms for the rôle of leader of the barons in their revolt against the favouritism, extravagance, and misgovernment of Edward II, he signally failed to show either patriotism, farsightedness, or even the more common virtues of a good party leader. His only policy was a sort of passive resistance to the crown, which generally took the form of refusing to do anything whatever to aid his cousin so long as his personal enemies remained unbanished. In the invention of pretexts for this refusal he displayed an ingenuity in legal chicanery far surpassing that of his uncle, Edward I. Though it was obviously personal aims and personal grievances that influenced his action throughout, some of these pretexts are interesting illustrations of the growth of the idea of a full parliament. In 1317 he refused to violate his oath to the ordinances by attending a council of magnates summoned by the king, because the matters there to be discussed ought to be debated in a full parliament (, pp. 271–4). Yet if Lancaster had any political ideal at all, it was the revival of Simon de Montfort's abortive scheme for government by a council of magnates with himself, in the place of Simon, as the chief and most powerful member. The only thing in which he was consistent was the unrelenting hatred with which he pursued those who offended him. Popular idealism, however, made him into a saint and a martyr. All the misfortunes which befell the country were laid at Edward's door, though Thomas's futile policy was quite as much to blame for them. While Edward personified misgovernment, disorder, misfortune abroad, Thomas was converted, though probably not till after his death, into a second Simon de Montfort. Miraculous cures were effected at his tomb at Pontefract, as also at an effigy of him in St. Paul's, to which crowds of worshippers came with offerings. Guards had to be placed to prevent people approaching the places of his execution and burial, and the king wrote an indignant letter to the bishop of London and the dean and chapter of St. Paul's, forbidding them to countenance such proceedings (Flor. Hist. iii. 213; French Chronicle of London, Camden Soc., p. 54;, ii. 528). Time brought further revenges. On 28 Feb. 1327 Edward III wrote to Pope John XXI, requesting him to canonise Thomas (, ii. 695). The request was repeated in 1330 and 1331 (ib. pp. 782, 814). Edward III also on 8 June 1327 authorised Robert de Werynton, clerk, to collect alms for building a chapel on the hill where Thomas of Lancaster was beheaded (ib. p. 707). This chapel, which was never finished, still existed in Leland's time.

Thomas built and endowed in his castle of Kenilworth the chapel of St. Mary, to be served by thirteen regular canons (, Papal Registers, ii. 184).

He married Alice, daughter and heiress of Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln and Salisbury, but had no children. His relations with his wife were sufficiently strained to give rise to more than a suspicion of connivance when the Earl of Warenne carried her off in 1317. She was accused of adultery with a lame squire of the name of Ebulo Le Strange, who married her after Lancaster's death.

[The chief narrative sources for Thomas's life are the Annales Londonienses; Annales Paulini; Gesta Edwardi auctore canonico Bridlingtoniensi; and the Monachi cuiusdam Malmesberiensis Vita Edwardi II, all edited by Bishop Stubbs in Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I and Edward II (Rolls Ser.); the Chron. of Robert of Reading in vol. iii. of the Flores Historiarum, ed. Luard; the Annals of John de Trokelowe; the Chronicles of Adam de Murimuth (Rolls Ser.); Walter de Hemingburgh (English Historical Soc.); Lanercost (Maitland Club); and Scalachronica and Walsingham; the continuator of Trivet (ed. Hall, 1722); and the Chronicon Henrici de Knighton (Rolls Ser.). The Rolls of Parliament, the Parliamentary Writs, and Rymer's Fœdera (all published by the Record Comm.); and the Calendars of the Close Rolls (1307–1323, 3 vols.), and Patent Rolls 1292–1301, 1307–13 (2 vols.) (Rolls Ser.) form an invaluable supplement and corrective to these sometimes partial narratives. Dugdale's Baronage of England, though prolix, supplies many facts; Stubbs's Constitutional Hist. vol. ii. and Pauli's Geschichte von England give the best modern accounts of Thomas and his times.]


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/15

 Rh To cradle me and feed me with their snows,

And hollowed out the great sea to receive

My overplus of flowing energy:

Blessèd for ever be our Mother Earth.

Only, the mountains that must feed my springs

Year after year and every year with snows

As they have fed innumerable years,

These mountains they are evermore the same,

Rooted and motionless; the solemn heavens

Are evermore the same in stable rest;

The sun and moon and stars that shine on me

Are evermore the same although they move:

I solely, moving ever without pause,

Am evermore the same and not the same;

Pouring myself away into the sea,

And self-renewing from the farthest heights;

Ever-fresh waters streaming down and down,

The one old Nilus constant through their change.

The creatures also whom I breed and feed

Perpetually perish and dissolve,

And other creatures like them take their place,

To perish in their turn and be no more:

My profluent waters perish not from life,

Absorbed into the ever-living sea

Whose life is in their full replenishment.


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/16

 6 Of all these creatures whom I breed and feed,

One only with his works is strange to me,

Is strange and admirable and pitiable,

As homeless where all others are at home.

My crocodiles are happy in my slime,

And bask and seize their prey, each for itself,

And leave their eggs to hatch in the hot sun,

And die, their lives fulfilled, and are no more,

And others bask and prey and leave their eggs.

My doves they build their nests, each pair its own,

And feed their callow young, each pair its own,

None serves another, each one serves itself;

All glean alike about my fields of grain,

And all the nests they build them are alike,

And are the self-same nests they built of old

Before the rearing of the pyramids,

Before great Hekatompylos was reared;

Their cooing is the cooing soft and sweet

That murmured plaintively at evening-tide

In pillared Karnak as its pillars rose;

And they are happy floating through my palms.

But Man, the admirable, the pitiable,

These sad-eyed peoples of the sons of men,

Are as the children of an alien race

Planted among my children, not at home,

Changelings aloof from all my family.

The one is servant and the other lord,


title: Template:Font-size90%


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1116

§ 1116. Duties of trustee or debtor in possession in small business cases

In a small business case, a trustee or the debtor in possession, in addition to the duties provided in this title and as otherwise required by law, shall—
 * (1) append to the voluntary petition or, in an involuntary case, file not later than 7 days after the date of the order for relief—
 * (A) its most recent balance sheet, statement of operations, cash-flow statement, and Federal income tax return; or
 * (B) a statement made under penalty of perjury that no balance sheet, statement of operations, or cash-flow statement has been prepared and no Federal tax return has been filed;
 * (2) attend, through its senior management personnel and counsel, meetings scheduled by the court or the United States trustee, including initial debtor interviews, scheduling conferences, and meetings of creditors convened under section 341 unless the court, after notice and a hearing, waives that requirement upon a finding of extraordinary and compelling circumstances;
 * (3) timely file all schedules and statements of financial affairs, unless the court, after notice and a hearing, grants an extension, which shall not extend such time period to a date later than 30 days after the date of the order for relief, absent extraordinary and compelling circumstances;
 * (4) file all postpetition financial and other reports required by the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure or by local rule of the district court;
 * (5) subject to section 363 (c)(2), maintain insurance customary and appropriate to the industry;
 * (6)
 * (A) timely file tax returns and other required government filings; and
 * (B) subject to section 363 (c)(2), timely pay all taxes entitled to administrative expense priority except those being contested by appropriate proceedings being diligently prosecuted; and
 * (7) allow the United States trustee, or a designated representative of the United States trustee, to inspect the debtor’s business premises, books, and records at reasonable times, after reasonable prior written notice, unless notice is waived by the debtor.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/158

 THOMAS, and  (1300–1338), was the eldest child of Edward I by his second wife, Margaret, the sister of Philip the Fair. Edward II was his half-brother. He was born on 1 June 1300 at Brotherton, near Pontefract, where his parents were halting on their way to Scotland (Chron. Lanercost, p. 193). He was called Thomas because of the successful invocation of St. Thomas of Canterbury by his mother during the pains of labour. A story is told that the life of the child was despaired of in his infancy, but that his health was restored by the substitution of an English nurse for the Frenchwoman to whom his mother had entrusted him (Ann. Edwardi I in, pp. 438–9, Rolls Ser.). Edward I destined for Thomas the earldom of Cornwall, which escheated to the crown on 1 Oct. 1300, on the death, without heirs, of Earl Edmund, the son of Richard, king of the Romans (, p. 169), and some of the chroniclers (Worcester Annals, p. 547;, p. 74) say that the grant was actually made. On his deathbed Edward specially urged upon his eldest son the obligation of caring for his two half-brothers. Edward II, however, soon conferred Cornwall on his favourite, Piers Gaveston [q. v.] Nevertheless he made handsome provision for Thomas. In September 1310 he granted to Thomas and his brother Edmund of Woodstock [q. v.] jointly the castle and honour of Strigul (Chepstow) for their maintenance (Cal. Close Rolls, 1307–13, p. 279), and in October 1311 he granted Thomas seisin of the honour (Flores Hist. iii. 334). Larger provision followed. The earldom of Norfolk and the dignity of earl marshal, which Roger Bigod, fifth earl of Norfolk [q. v.], had surrendered to the crown and had received back entailed on the heirs of his body, had recently escheated to the king on Roger's death without children. On 16 Dec. 1312 Edward II created Thomas Earl of Norfolk, with remainder to the heirs of his body, and on 18 March the boy of twelve received a summons to parliament, which was repeated in January and May 1313 (Cal. Close Rolls, 1307–13, pp. 564, 584). He also obtained the grant of all the lands in England, Wales, and Ireland that had escheated on Roger Bigod's death, and on 10 Feb. 1316 he was further created marshal of England, thus being precisely invested with the dignities and estates of the previous earl. He got the last fragment of the estate in 1317, when Alice, the dowager countess, died (ib. 1313–1318, p. 504). On 20 May 1317 Thomas received his first summons to meet at Newcastle in July to serve against ‘Scotch rebels’ (ib. 1313–18, p. 473).

In the early part of 1319 Thomas acted as warden of England during Edward II's absence in the field against the Scots, holding on 24 March of that year a session along with the chief ministers in the chapter-house of St. Paul's, where they summoned before them J. de Wengrave, the mayor; Wengrave was engaged in a controversy with the community with regard to municipal elections, which was appeased at Thomas's intervention (Ann. Paulini, pp. 285–6). After being knighted, on 15 July, Thomas proceeded to Newcastle, where a great army was mustering against Scotland. He crossed the border on 29 Aug., but nothing resulted from the invasion save the vain siege of Berwick (, pp. 241–2; Ann. Paulini, p. 286).

In 1321 Thomas, being summoned with his brother Edmund to the siege of Leeds Castle in Kent (Flores Hist. iii. 199), adhered to the king's side, and is described as ‘strenuous for his age’ (, p. 263). He took a prominent part in persuading Mortimer to submit (, p. 35). Yet in September 1326 he was one of the first to join Queen Isabella [q. v.] on her landing at Orwell. The landing-place was within his estates (, p. 46). On 27 Oct. he was one of the peers who condemned the elder Despenser at Bristol (Ann. Paulini, p. 317). In May 1327 he was ordered to raise troops against the Scots. He was chief of a royal commission sent to Bury St. Edmunds to appease one of the constant quarrels between the abbey and the townsmen (ib. p. 334). He was bribed to accept the rule of Isabella and Mortimer by lavish grants of the forfeited estates of the Despensers and others, and was so closely attached to Mortimer that he married his son Edward to Beatrice, Mortimer's daughter, and attended the solemn tournament at Hereford with which they celebrated the match (, p. 578;, p. 42). But he soon became discontented with the rule of Isabella and Mortimer, and joined the conference of magnates which met on 2 Jan. 1329 at St. Paul's (cf. details in, and in the notes to , pp. 217–20, ed. Thompson, from MS. Brut Chron.); he acted with his brother Edmund, the archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishop of London as envoys from the barons to the government; but the defection of Henry of Lancaster broke up the combination (Ann. Paulini, p. 344). On 17 Feb. 1330 Thomas and Edmund escorted the young queen Philippa on her solemn entry into


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/14

 4 As Memphis and the hundred-gated Thebes,

Sais and Denderah of Isis queen ;

Have grown because I fed them with full life,

And flourish only while I feed them still.

For if I stint my fertilising flood,

Gaunt famine reaps among the sons of men

Who have not corn to reap for all they sowed,

And blight and languishment are everywhere ;

And when I have withdrawn or turned aside

To other realms my ever-flowing streams,

The old realms withered from their old renown,

The sands came over them, the desert-sands

Incessantly encroaching, numberless

Beyond my water-drops, and buried them,

And all is silence, solitude, and death,

Exanimate silence while the waste winds howl

Over the sad immeasurable waste.

Dusk memories haunt me of an infinite past,

Ages and cycles brood above my springs,

Though I remember not my primal birth.

So ancient is my being and august,

I know not anything more venerable ;

Unless, perchance, the vaulting skies that hold

The sun and moon and stars that shine on me ;

The air that breathes upon me with delight ;

And Earth, All-Mother, all-beneficent,

Who held her mountains forth like opulent breasts


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ferry, Orris Standford

FERRY, Orris Standford, American statesman and solider: b. Bethel, Conn., 15 Aug. 1823; d. Norwalk, Conn., 21 Nov. 1875. He was graduated at Yale in 1844. He studied law and was admitted to the bar in 1846. After filling important political places in his native State he was in 1859 elected to Congress as a Republican, and sat as one of the famous Committee of Thirty-Three appointed to consider and report upon the condition and relations of the seceded States. He was colonel of the Fifth Connecticut Volunteer Infantry (1861), and served from 1862 to the end of the war as brigadier-general of volunteers. He was elected to the United States Senate as a Republican in 1866, and re-elected in 1872.


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/17

 Rh And many myriads serve a single lord :

So was it when the pyramids were reared,

And sphinxes and huge columns and wrought stones

Were haled long lengthening leagues adown my banks

By hundreds groaning with the stress of toil

And groaning under the taskmaster's scourge,

With many falling foredone by the way,

Half-starved on lentils, onions, and scant bread ;

So is it now with these poor fellaheen

To whom my annual bounty brings fierce toil

With scarce enough of food to keep-in life.

They build mud huts and spacious palaces ;

And in the huts the moiling millions dwell,

And in the palaces their sumptuous lords

Pampered with all the choicest things I yield :

Most admirable, most pitiable Man.

Also their peoples ever are at war,

Slaying and slain, burning and ravaging,

And one yields to another and they pass,

While I flow evermore the same great Nile,

The ever-young and ever-ancient Nile :

The swarthy is succeeded by the dusk,

The dusky by the pale, the pale again

By sunburned turbaned tribes long-linen-robed :

And with these changes all things change and pass,

All things but Me and this old Land of mine,


text:
United States Code/Title 11/Chapter 11/Section 1121

§ 1121. Who may file a plan

 * (a) The debtor may file a plan with a petition commencing a voluntary case, or at any time in a voluntary case or an involuntary case.

 * (b) Except as otherwise provided in this section, only the debtor may file a plan until after 120 days after the date of the order for relief under this chapter.

 * (c) Any party in interest, including the debtor, the trustee, a creditors’ committee, an equity security holders’ committee, a creditor, an equity security holder, or any indenture trustee, may file a plan if and only if—
 * (1) a trustee has been appointed under this chapter;
 * (2) the debtor has not filed a plan before 120 days after the date of the order for relief under this chapter; :or
 * (3) the debtor has not filed a plan that has been accepted, before 180 days after the date of the order for relief under this chapter, by each class of claims or interests that is impaired under the plan.

 * (d)
 * (1) Subject to paragraph (2), on request of a party in interest made within the respective periods specified in subsections (b) and (c) of this section and after notice and a hearing, the court may for cause reduce or increase the 120-day period or the 180-day period referred to in this section.
 * (2)
 * (A) The 120-day period specified in paragraph (1) may not be extended beyond a date that is 18 months after the date of the order for relief under this chapter.
 * (B) The 180-day period specified in paragraph (1) may not be extended beyond a date that is 20 months after the date of the order for relief under this chapter.

 * (e) In a small business case—
 * (1) only the debtor may file a plan until after 180 days after the date of the order for relief, unless that period is—
 * (A) extended as provided by this subsection, after notice and a hearing; or
 * (B) the court, for cause, orders otherwise;
 * (2) the plan and a disclosure statement (if any) shall be filed not later than 300 days after the date of the order for relief; and
 * (3) the time periods specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), and the time fixed in section 1129 (e) within which the plan shall be confirmed, may be extended only if—
 * (A) the debtor, after providing notice to parties in interest (including the United States trustee), demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that it is more likely than not that the court will confirm a plan within a reasonable period of time;
 * (B) a new deadline is imposed at the time the extension is granted; and
 * (C) the order extending time is signed before the existing deadline has expired.


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/18

 8 Their dwellings, habitudes, and garbs, and tongues:

I hear strange voices; never more the voice

Austere priests chanted to the boat of death

Gliding across the Acherusian lake,

Or satraps parleyed in the Pharaoh's halls;

Never the voice of mad Cambyses' hosts,

Never the voice of Alexander's Greece,

Never the voice of Caesar's haughty Rome:

And with the peoples and the languages,

With the great Empires still the great Creeds change;

They shift, they change, they vanish like thin dreams,

As unsubstantial as the mists that rise

After my overflow from out my fields,

In silver fleeces, golden volumes, rise,

And melt away before the mounting sun;

While I flow onward solely permanent

Amidst their swiftly-passing pageantry.

Poor men, most admirable, most pitiable,

With all their changes all their great Creeds change:

For Man, this alien in my family,

Is alien most in this, to cherish dreams

And brood on visions of eternity,

And build religions in his brooding brain

And in the dark depths awe-full of his soul.

My other children live their little lives,


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/159

 London the day before her coronation (ib. p. 349). Luckier than Edmund, Thomas gave no opportunity to the jealousy of Mortimer, and survived to welcome Edward III's attainment of power. On 17–19 June 1331 he fought along with the king on the side of Sir Robert de Morley [q. v.] in a famous tournament at Stepney, riding, gorgeously attired, through London on 16 June, and making an offering at St. Paul's (ib. pp. 353–354). In 1337 he was employed in arraying Welsh soldiers for the king's wars (Fœdera, iii. 986). Knighton (ii. 4) says that he was one of the lords who accompanied Edward III to Antwerp in July 1338, but the other chroniclers do not seem to substantiate this. Thomas died next month (August 1338), and was buried in the choir of the abbey church, where a monument was erected to him that perished after the dissolution at Bury St. Edmunds. In September Edward, at Antwerp, appointed William de Montacute, first earl of Salisbury [q. v.], his successor as marshal (Fœdera, iii. 1060).

Thomas married, first, Alice, daughter of Sir Roger Hales of Harwich; and, secondly, Mary, daughter of William, lord Roos, and widow of Sir William de Braose. Mary Roos survived her husband, married Ralph, lord Cobham, and died in 1362. Thomas's only son, Edward, was born of his first wife, and married Beatrice, daughter of Roger Mortimer, first earl of March [q. v.], but died without issue in his father's lifetime. His widow, who subsequently married Thomas de Braose (d. 1361), died herself in 1384. She founded a fraternity of lay brothers within the Franciscan priory at Fisherton, Wiltshire, and also a chantry for six priests at the same place.

Thomas's estates were divided between his two daughters, Margaret and Alice. Alice married Sir Edward de Montacute, brother of William, earl of Salisbury, and had by him a daughter Joan, who married William de Ufford, the last earl of Suffolk [q. v.] of his house. On the death of her niece Joan, countess of Suffolk, daughter of Alice, Margaret became in 1375 the sole heiress of her father's estates. On the accession of Richard II she petitioned to be allowed to act as marshal at the coronation, but the request was politely shelved (Munim. Gildhall. Lond. ii. 458). She married, first, John Segrave, third lord Segrave [q. v.], by whom she had a daughter and heiress, Elizabeth, married to John, lord Mowbray (d. 1368), to whose son, Thomas Mowbray, first duke of Norfolk [q. v.], the estates and titles ultimately went. Margaret married, secondly, Sir Walter Manny [q. v.], who died in 1372. She was created on 29 Sept. 1397 Duchess of Norfolk for life, on the same day that her grandson, Thomas Mowbray, was made Duke of Norfolk. She died on 24 March 1400, and was buried in the church of the London Franciscans at Newgate.

[Dugdale's Baronage, ii. 63–4; Nicolas's Hist. Peerage, ed. Courthope, p. 351; G. E. C[okayne]'s Complete Peerage, vi. 40–1; Sandford's Genealogical History, pp. 205–6; Cals. of Patent Rolls, Edward I 1292–1307, Edward II 1327–1338; Cal. Close Rolls, 1307–23; Rymer's Fœdera; Annales Monastici; Rishanger; Flores Hist.; Knighton; Chron. Edward I, Edward II, and Murimuth, the last six in Rolls Ser.; Chron. Geoffrey le Baker, ed. E. M. Thompson.]  THOMAS of, and  (1355–1397), seventh and youngest son of Edward III and Philippa of Hainault, was born at Woodstock on 7 Jan. 1354–5 (, i. 280). Edward provided for his youngest son by affiancing him in 1374 to a rich heiress, Eleanor, the elder of the two daughters of the last Bohun, earl of Hereford, Essex, and Northampton. The earls of Hereford having been hereditary constables of England, Thomas received a grant on 10 June 1376 of that office during pleasure, with a thousand marks a year to keep it up, and was summoned as constable to the parliament of January 1377 (Rot. Parl. ii. 363). He appears later at all events to have been styled Earl of Essex in right of his wife (Complete Peerage, iv. 43). Having been knighted by his father at Windsor on 23 April 1377 he carried the sceptre and the dove at the coronation of his nephew, Richard II, and was created Earl of Buckingham (15 July), with a grant of a thousand pounds a year out of the alien priories (Cal. of Pat. Rolls, i. 372). A considerable part of the Bohun estates had already, in anticipation of his wife's majority, been placed in his keeping, including Pleshey Castle in Essex, which became his chief seat; and in May 1380, his wife being now of age, he was also given custody of the share of her younger sister, Mary (ib. pp. 66, 502).

A French and Spanish fleet ravaging the southern coast in the summer, Buckingham and his brother Edmund averted a landing at Dover (, viii. 237). In October he was sent against the Spaniards, who were windbound at Sluys, but his squadron was scattered by a storm. Refitting and following the Spaniards down the Channel, he captured eight of their ships off Brest, returning after Christmas (, i. 343, 364). On


text:
Portal:Diogenes of Sinope

Works

 * "Diogenes" in Lives of the Eminent Philosophers by Diogenes Laërtius

Modern works about Diogenes

 * A Dialogue between Alexander the Great, and Diogenes the Cynic by Henry Fielding
 * Imaginary Conversations of Greeks and Romans/Diogenes and Plato by Walter Savage Landor

title: Portal:Diogenes of Sinope


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/20

 10 The goddess crescent-horned, the babe divine,

Then I flow forward some few thousand years,

And see new temples shining with all grace,

Whose sculptured gods are beautiful human forms.

Then I flow forward not a thousand years,

And see again a woman and a babe,

The woman haloed and the babe divine;

And everywhere that symbol of the cross

I knew aforetime in the ancient days,

The emblem then of life, but now of death.

Then I flow forward some few hundred years,

And see again the crescent, now supreme

On lofty cupolas and minarets

Whence voices sweet and solemn call to prayer.

So the men change along my changeless stream,

And change their faiths; but I yield all alike

Sweet water for their drinking, sweet as wine,

And pure sweet water for their lustral rites:

For thirty generations of my corn

Outlast a generation of my men,

And thirty generations of my men

Outlast a generation of their gods:

O admirable, pitiable Man,

My child yet alien in my family.

And I through all these generations flow

Of corn and men and gods, all-bountiful,

Perennial through their transientness, still fed


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ferry, Thomas White

FERRY, Thomas White, American politician: b. Mackinac, Mich., 10 June 1827; d. Grand Haven, Mich., 13 Oct. 1896. Early in life he moved with his family to Grand Haven, Mich., and was educated in its public schools, entering business there. He served in the State legislature and from 1865 to 1871 was a Republican member of Congress. He was elected to the United States Senate and served from 1871 to 1883. On the death of Henry Wilson he became acting Vice-President of the United States and president of the Senate pro tempore from 1875 to 1877. He presided over the high court of impeachment of Secretary of War Belknap and over the 16 joint meetings of the two houses of Congress during the Hayes-Tilden contest. After the end of his term as acting Vice-President he was re-elected president of the Senate pro tempore in 1877, 1878 and 1879.


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/21

 Rh By earth with waters in abundancy ;

And as I flowed here long before they were,

So may I flow when they no longer are,

Most like the serpent of eternity :

Blessèd for ever be our Mother Earth.

November 1881.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/160

 the Duke of Brittany handing over (April 1378) Brest Castle to the English king for the rest of the war, Buckingham was one of those appointed to take it over (Fœdera, iv. 36). But the duke's position soon began to grow untenable, and Buckingham was sent to his aid in June 1380, as lieutenant of the king, at the head of some five thousand men (Fœdera, iv. 92;, ix. c.). His staff included some of his father's most distinguished warriors—Sir Hugh Calveley [q. v.], Sir Robert Knollys [q. v.], Sir Thomas Percy (afterwards Earl of Worcester) [q. v.] and others. Avoiding the dangers of the Channel, the army landed at Calais (19 July) and plunged into the heart of northern France (ib. ix. 238 sqq.;, i. 434). Penetrating as far south as Troyes (about 24 Aug.), where the Duke of Burgundy had collected an army but did not venture to give battle, Buckingham struck westwards, through Beauce and Maine, for Brittany. The death of Charles V on 16 Sept. weakened the resistance opposed to his progress; the passage of the Sarthe was forced, Brittany entered late in the autumn, and siege laid to Nantes. But the duke soon made his peace with Charles VI, and about the new year Buckingham raised the siege of Nantes and quartered his troops in the southern ports of Brittany, whence they were shipped home in the spring. The chagrin of failure was enhanced by a private mortification which awaited him. His relations with his ambitious elder brother, John of Gaunt, had never been cordial. At the close of the late reign Lancaster had inflicted a marked slight upon him by putting his own son Henry (afterwards Henry IV), a mere boy, into the order of the Garter in preference to his uncle, and Buckingham did not enter the order till April 1380. Since Richard's accession the younger brother had been as popular as the elder was generally hated. During Buckingham's absence in France Lancaster married his son to Mary Bohun, younger sister of Buckingham's wife (Complete Peerage, v. 9). This could not be agreeable to her brother-in-law, who had secured the custody of her estates, and, according to Froissart, hoped to persuade her to become a nun.

In June 1381 Buckingham dispersed the insurgents in Essex, and in the following October held an ‘oyer and terminer’ at Cambridge (, ii. 18;, ii. 19). By 1384 the young king's evident determination to rule through instruments of his own drew together Buckingham and Lancaster. They were associated in the expedition into Scotland early in this year, and in the negotiations with France and Flanders. When Lancaster was accused of treason in the April parliament at Salisbury, Buckingham burst into the king's chamber and swore with great oaths to kill any one, no matter whom, who should bring such charges against his brother (, ii. 114). Richard for a time deferred more to his uncles, and during his Scottish expedition in the following year created Buckingham Duke of Gloucester (6 Aug. 1385), and granted him a thousand pounds a year from the exchequer by letters patent, dated at Hoselowelogh in Teviotdale (Rot. Parl. iii. 206). In the parliament which met in October Richard formally confirmed this elevation, and invested his uncle with the dignity, girding him with a sword and placing a cap with a circlet of gold on his head (ib.;, p. 231). To this parliament, curiously enough, he was summoned as Duke of Albemarle, though neither he nor his children ever again assumed that style, and he did not get possession of Holderness, which usually went with it, until 1388 (, ii. 170). It has been suggested that this may be a case of a foreign title, i.e. a Norman dukedom (Complete Peerage, i. 56). In elevating his two younger uncles, Gloucester and Edmund, duke of York [see ], to the ducal dignity, Richard perhaps hoped to sow fresh dissension between them and John of Gaunt, and to cover his promotion of his humbly born minister, Michael de la Pole, to the earldom of Suffolk. If so, it did not serve its purpose, for Gloucester, on John of Gaunt's departure to Spain, placed himself openly at the head of the opposition to the king, and was one of the judges who condemned Suffolk in 1386, and a member of the commission for the reform of the household and realm. Richard is alleged to have plotted his murder at a dinner. Such charges were made too freely at the time to command implicit credence; but Gloucester, who forced Richard to dismiss Suffolk by threatening him with the fate of Edward II, had certainly given extreme provocation. When the king in August 1387 procured a declaration from the judges that the authors of the commission were guilty of treason and began to raise forces, Gloucester and his friends sought to avert the storm by swearing a solemn oath on the gospels before the bishop of London that they had been actuated by no personal motives, but only by anxiety for Richard's own honour and interests. Gloucester, however, refused to forego his revenge upon De Vere, whom the king had made duke of Ireland. De Vere had repudiated his niece for a Bohemian serving-woman. Failing to get


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/161

 support from the Londoners against Gloucester, who took up arms with the Earls of Arundel and Warwick, Richard spoke them fair, and affected to agree to the impeachment of his favourites in the parliament which was to meet in February 1388. But on his sending the Duke of Ireland to raise an army in Cheshire, and attempting to pack the parliament, the three lords met at Huntingdon (12 Dec.) and talked of deposing the king. Joined by the Earls of Derby and Nottingham, they routed De Vere at Radcotbridge (20 Dec.), and, the Londoners opening their gates, they got admission to the Tower on the 27th, and entered the presence of the helpless king with linked arms. Gloucester showed him their forces on Tower Hill, and ‘soothed his mind’ by assurances that ten times their number were ready to join in destroying the traitors to the king and the realm (, ii. 256). Had Gloucester not been overruled by Derby and Nottingham, Richard would have been deposed, and he was no doubt chiefly responsible for the vindictiveness of the Merciless parliament. His insistence on the execution of Sir Simon Burley [q. v.] involved him in a heated quarrel with the Earl of Derby (, ii. 174).

Gloucester and his associates held the reins of power for more than twelve months, not without some attempt to justify their promises of reform, but they did not hesitate to obtain the enormous parliamentary grant of 20,000l. by way of reimbursing them for their patriotic sacrifices. Gloucester also secured the lordship of Holderness, the castle, town, and manor of Oakham, with the sheriffdom of Rutland (which had belonged to his wife's ancestors), and the office of chief justice of Chester and North Wales, which gave him a hold over a district attached to Richard by local loyalty (, ii. 170;, i. 63). The king resuming the government in May 1389, and promising his subjects better government, Gloucester was naturally in disgrace. But through the good offices of the Earl of Northumberland and of John of Gaunt, now returned from Spain, his peace was made. As early as 10 Dec. he once more appeared in the council, was given, with his brothers, some control over crown grants, and allowed to retain his chief-justiceship of Chester (Ord. Privy Council, i. 17, 18 b). Grants of money were also made to him (, ii. 170). But he doubtless felt that he had no real influence with the king, and this, combined with emulation of his nephew Derby's recent achievements in Prussia [see ], may have induced him to undertake in September 1391 a mission to the master of the Teutonic order. But a storm drove him back along the coasts of Denmark, Norway, and Scotland; and, narrowly escaping destruction, he landed at Tynemouth, whence he returned home to Pleshey (Fœdera, vii. 705–6;, ii. 202). He must have been disquieted to find that the king during his absence had secured an admission from parliament that the proceedings of 1386–8 had in no way curtailed his prerogative (Rot. Parl. iii. 286).

Early in 1392 Richard appointed Gloucester his lieutenant in Ireland only to supersede him suddenly in favour of the young Earl of March in July, just as he was about to start, ‘par certeynes causes qui a ce nous mouvent’ (King's Council in Ireland, pp. 255, 258). Gloucester was then holding an inquiry into a London riot, but this may not have been the sole cause of his supersession (Rot. Parl. iii. 324). The king, it is worth noticing, was seeking the canonisation of Edward II, with whose fate he had been threatened by his uncle six years before (Issues, p. 247).

The Cheshire men rose against Gloucester and Lancaster in the spring of 1393, while they were negotiating at Calais, in the belief that it was the king's wish, and Richard had to publish a disavowal (Annales, p. 159; Fœdera, vii. 746). There is some reason to think the Earl of Arundel was trying to force on a crisis. Gloucester had now to give up his post of chief justice of Chester to Richard's henchman Nottingham, but was consoled with a fresh grant of Holderness and Oakham, and certain estates that had belonged to De Vere (Pat. Rolls, 17–18 Ric. II). Yet he cannot but have been rendered uneasy by the king's quiet attacks upon the work of the Merciless parliament and his serious breach with Arundel after the queen's death in June 1394 (Rot. Parl. iii. 302, 316; Annales, p. 424). Richard took him with him to Ireland in September, but sent him back in the spring of 1395 to obtain a grant from the new parliament. It is plain from Froissart's account of his visit to England in the ensuing summer that Gloucester's relations with the court were getting strained. The courtiers accused the duke of malice and cunning, and said that he had a good head, but was proud and wonderfully overbearing in his manners. His advocacy of coercion to make the Gascons receive John of Gaunt as their duke was put down to his desire to have the field to himself at home. He disapproved too of the proposed French marriage and peace, and the negotiations were carried through by others, though he was


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/7

 CONTENTS LAST POEMS PAGE A VOICE FROM THE NILE 3 RICHARD FOREST'S MIDSUMMER NIGHT. . 12 INSOMNIA 31 HE HEARD HER SING 44 TO H. A. B 59 PROEM 6l THE POET AND HIS MUSE 64 THE SLEEPER 71 MODERN PENELOPE 75 AT BELVOIR. . . . . -79 A STRANGER. . . ... .84 LAW V. GOSPEL 90 THE OLD STORY AND THE NEW STOREY. . 95 DESPOTISM TEMPERED BY DYNAMITE. . 98 ADDRESS ON THE OPENING OF THE NEW HALL OF THE LEICESTER SECULAR SOCIETY, March 6, 1881 100


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/8

 vi EARLY POEMS— THE DOOM OF A CITY .... RONALD AND HELEN SHELLEY 244 THE DEAD YEAR 259 THE DELIVERER 277 A FESTIVAL OF LIFE 286 TASSO TO LEONORA 303 A HAPPY POET 320 THE LORD OF THE CASTLE OF INDOLENCE. 332 BERTRAM TO THE MOST NOBLE AND BEAUTIFUL LADY GERALDINE 337 AN OLD DREAM 351 THE FADELESS BOWER 359 SUGGESTED BY MATTHEW ARNOLD'S "STANZAS FROM THE GRANDE CHARTREUSE". . 368 FOUR POINTS IN A LIFE 381 MATER TENEBRARUM 388 A REAL VISION OF SIN 391 ARCH ARCHERY 399 THE DREAMER 403 ROBE-RT BURNS 406 THE PURPLE FLOWER OF THE HEATHER. . 408 A WINTER'S NIGHT 412 SIREN'S SONG 414 GARIBALDI REVISITING ENGLAND. . . 416


text:
Page:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu/9

CONTENTS vii EARLY POEMS (continued} PAGE WITHERED LEAVES ...... 419 THE CYPRESS AND THE ROSES . . . .421 MEETING AGAIN 422 " ALLACE ! THAT SAMYN SWEIT FACE ! " . . 424 A REQUIEM 426 THE JOLLY VETERANS 427 A CAPSTAN CHORUS 429 TO A PIANISTE 431 A RECUSANT 432 A SERGEANT'S MESS SONG 433 SONNET 434 A CHANT 435 ON GEORGE HERBERT'S POEMS .... 436 ON A BROKEN PIPE 437 A PROEM 438 NOTES 439


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/162

 present, willingly or unwillingly, at the marriage festivities in October 1396 near Calais. In the early months of 1397 mutual provocations followed swiftly upon one another. Gloucester may have prompted Haxey's petition in the January parliament in which Richard saw an attempt to repeat the coercion of 1386 [see ]. It was afterwards alleged by French writers favourable to Richard that Gloucester, Arundel, and Warwick engaged in a conspiracy which aimed at the perpetual imprisonment of the king and his two elder uncles (Chronique de la Traison, pp. 3–7). But Richard himself did not attempt to bring home to them any such definite charge, and everything points to his having resolved upon their destruction, and taken them by surprise. He had at first intended to arrest them at a dinner, to which they were invited, but Gloucester, who was at Pleshey, excused himself on the plea of illness (Annales, p. 201). On the evening of 10 July, after the arrest of Warwick and Arundel, Richard, accompanied by the London trained bands, set off for Pleshey, which was reached early the next morning. Gloucester, who was perhaps really ill, came out to meet him at the head of a solemn procession of the priests and clerks of his newly founded college (, p. 130;, p. 345; Annales, pp. 203 sqq.) As he bent in obeisance, Richard with his own hand arrested him, and, leading the procession to the chapel, assured his ‘bel oncle’ that all would turn out for the best. According to another version, Gloucester begged for his life, and was told that he should have the same grace he had shown to Burley (Eulogium, iii. 372). After breakfast Richard set off with most of his followers, leaving Gloucester in charge of the Earl of Kent and Sir Thomas Percy, who conveyed him direct to Calais. The statement that he was first taken to the Tower sounds doubtful (, p. 345;, p. 542; Traison, p. 8). At Calais Gloucester was in the keeping of its captain, the Earl of Nottingham, a prominent partisan of the king. About the beginning of September it was announced (‘feust notifié,’ which surely implies more than mere report) both in England and in Calais that he was dead; the date given was 25 or 26 Aug., and the former is the day of his death entered on the escheat roll (Rot. Parl. iii. 431, 452;, p. 96; , ii. 172). It was therefore with intense surprise that Sir William Rickhill [q. v.], a justice of the common pleas, who by order of the king accompanied Nottingham to Calais on 7 Sept., heard on his arrival that he was to interview Gloucester and carefully report all that he should say to him. What made the matter more mysterious still, his instructions were dated three weeks before (17 Aug.) There is no reason to doubt Rickhill's account of his interview with Gloucester on 8 Sept. He took care to have witnesses, and his story was fully accepted by the first parliament of the next reign. It is obvious that Richard could not safely produce his uncle for trial in the forthcoming parliament, and there was only less danger in meeting the houses with a bare announcement of his death. Rickhill was introduced to his presence in the castle early on the morning of 8 Sept., and, in the presence of two witnesses, begged him to put what he had to say in writing and keep a copy. Late in the evening he returned, and Gloucester, before the same witnesses, read a written confession in nine articles, which he then handed to Rickhill. He admitted verbally that he had threatened the king with deposition in 1388 if the sentence on Sir Simon Burley were not carried out, and requested Rickhill to come back next day in case he should remember any omission. This he did, but was refused an audience of the duke by order of Nottingham (Rot. Parl. iii. 431–2). Parliament met on 17 Sept., and on the 21st a writ was issued to the captain of Calais to bring up his prisoner. Three days later he briefly replied that he could not do this because the duke was dead. On the petition of the lords appellant and the commons, the peers declared him guilty of treason as having levied arms against the king in 1387, and his estates consequently forfeited. His confession, which is in English, was read in parliament next day, but omitting, as Rickhill afterwards declared, those articles which were ‘contrary to the intent and purpose’ of the king. He admitted helping to put the king under restraint in 1386, entering his presence armed, opening his letters, speaking of him in slanderous wise in audience of other folk, discussing the possibility of giving up their homage to him, and of his deposition. But he declared that they had only thought of deposing him for two days or three and then restoring him, and that if he had ‘done evil and against his Regalie,’ it had been in fear of his life, and ‘to do the best for his person and estate.’ Since renewing his oath of allegiance on God's body at Langley he had never been guilty of fresh treason. He therefore besought the king ‘for the passion that God suffered for all mankind, and the compassion that he had of his mother on the cross and the pity that he had of Mary Magdalen,’ to grant him his mercy and grace. The confession is printed


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ferry

FERRY, a franchise or right to maintain a boat upon a river or other body of water and carry people, animals, vehicles and other property between certain places for a reasonable toll. It is considered to be in the nature of a public highway over the water, and the franchise can only be acquired by legislative authority, either directly, as by a special act, or indirectly, through courts, municipalities, counties, commissioners or other subordinate bodies acting under powers conferred by the legislature. The grant by which the franchise is given usually specifies certain conditions as to time, service, etc., and whether the privilege is exclusive within certain limits or not. Either an individual or a corporation may hold this franchise, and preference is given to riparian owners. A ferryman is a common carrier, subject to the same duties and liabilities.

Ferry-Boats. — Steam vessels are now employed for carrying passengers and vehicles for short distances across rivers, lakes and straits. On narrow rivers, ferries are frequently operated by means of a chain, lying along the bottom of the river, secured at both ends and passing over a drum on board the ferry-boat, the drum being revolved by the engine, or in small boats, by hand. This method is particularly suitable for working in foggy weather, or where there is a strong current. Another type of ferry-boat, used on the Rhine and elsewhere, is moved across by the combined efforts of the current and the pull exerted by a long moving chain which is fixed upstream. By directing the bow upstream, the pressure of the current against the side of the boat causes it to cross from one side to the other. The large ferry-boat for passenger traffic is now usually a screw-vessel having a screw at either end, it having been found that greater speed and more room could thus be obtained than with paddle-wheels. These vessels are found in large numbers in New York harbor where thousands of people are transported across the rivers and bay every day. There are also many large paddle-vessels, this type being usually selected for small or medium-sized ferry-boats. Large vessels are employed for conveying railway trains in places where it is impracticable or undesirable to construct bridges. These vessels are almost exclusively paddle-steamers, owing to the greater facility which they possess for stopping and reversing when being brought into position for running the trains on board. Vessels of this type plied

on Lake Baikal before the opening of the circum-Baikal section of the Trans-Siberian Railroad. They are also employed at San Francisco and New York and on Lake Michigan.

title: The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ferry


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/163

 in full in the ‘Rolls of Parliament’ (iii. 378–9) from an original sealed copy, but an examination of the roll of the actual proceedings shows that the exculpatory clauses and the final appeal were omitted, and the date of Rickhill's interview carefully suppressed. All who were not in the secret would suppose it to have taken place between 17 Aug., the date of his commission, and 25 Aug., which had been given out as the day of Gloucester's death. There were obvious reasons for not disclosing the fact that he had been alive little more than a week before parliament met. Why the murder—for the hypothesis of a natural death is practically excluded—was left to the eleventh hour we can only conjecture. Perhaps Nottingham shrank from the deed (Eulogium, iii. 373), perhaps Gloucester refused to make his confession earlier. The mutilated confession was published in every county in England. In the first parliament of Henry IV a certain John Halle, a former servant of Nottingham, swore that Gloucester, under orders from the king, had been smothered beneath a feather-bed in a house at Calais, called the Prince's Inn, by William Serle, a servant of Richard's chamber, and several esquires and valets of the Earls of Nottingham and Rutland in the month of September 1397 (Rot. Parl. iii. 452). Halle, who had kept the door, was executed, and, though he was not publicly examined, there seems no strong reason to doubt the main features of his story. Serle, on falling into Henry's hands in 1404, suffered the same fate. In France Gloucester was thought to have been strangled (, ii. 552; ).

Richard ordered Nottingham on 14 Oct. to deliver the body to Richard Maudeleyn, to be given by him to the widow for burial in Westminster Abbey (Fœdera, viii. 20, 21). But on the 31st of the same month he commanded her to take it to the priory of Bermondsey instead (ib. viii. 24). Froissart, who has been followed by Dugdale and later writers, says that he was buried in Pleshey church (which he had collegiated and endowed under a license obtained in 1393); but Adam of Usk (p. 38) expressly states that Richard buried him in Westminster Abbey, but in the south of the church (in the chapel of St. Edmund), quite away from the royal burial-place. It was removed to the chapel of the kings near the shrine of St. Edward, the spot he had selected in his lifetime, by Henry IV in 1399 (cf. Royal Wills, p. 177). His elaborate brass, in which there were some twenty figures, is engraved in Sandford (p. 227), but nothing save the matrices now remains.

Gloucester's proud, fierce, and intolerant nature, which provoked the lasting and fatal resentment of his nephew, may be read in the portrait (from Cott. MS. Nero, D. vii) engraved in Doyle's ‘Official Baronage.’ It bears no resemblance to the alleged portrait engraved in Grose's ‘Antiquarian Repertory’ (ii. 209). He composed about 1390 ‘L'Ordonnance d'Angleterre pour le Camp à l'outrance, ou gaige de bataille’ (Chronique de la Traison, p. 132 n.; Antiquarian Repertory, ii. 210–19). A finely illuminated vellum copy of Wyclif's earlier version of his translation of the Bible—now in the British Museum—was once Gloucester's property; his armorial shield appears in the border of the first page.

By his wife Eleanor Bohun he had one son and three or four daughters. His only son, Humphrey, born about 1381, was taken to Ireland by Richard in 1399, and, on the news of Bolingbroke's landing, confined with his son (afterwards Henry V) in Trim Castle. Recalled by Henry IV immediately after, he died on the road, some said by shipwreck, others more probably of the plague in Anglesey (, p. 28;, Collectanea, iii. 384; cf. Archæologia, xx. 173). He was buried at Walden Abbey in Essex. Three of his sisters were named respectively Anne, Joan, and Isabel. A fourth, Philippa, who died young, is mentioned by Sandford. Anne (1380?–1438) married, first, in 1392, Thomas, third earl of Stafford, but he dying in that year, she became in 1398 the wife of his brother Edmund, fifth earl of Stafford, by whom she was mother of Humphrey Stafford, first duke of Buckingham [q. v.]; on his death she took a third husband (1404), William Bourchier, count of Eu, to whom she bore Henry, earl of Essex, Archbishop Bourchier, and two other sons; she died on 16 Oct. 1438 (Royal Wills, p. 278). Joan (d. 1400) was betrothed to Gilbert, lord Talbot, elder brother of the first Earl of Shrewsbury, but she died unmarried on 16 Aug. 1400 (, i. 172; cf., p. 234). Isabel (b. 1384) became a nun in the Minories outside Aldgate, London.

Gloucester's widow made her will at Pleshey on 9 Aug. 1399, and died of grief at the loss of her son, it is said, at the Minories on 3 Oct. following (Royal Wills, p. 177; Annales, p. 321). She lies buried close to the first resting-place of her husband in the abbey under a fine brass, which is engraved by Sandford (p. 230). He is no doubt mistaken in asserting that she died in the abbey of Barking, where she became a nun.

[Rotuli Parliamentorum; Issues of the Exchequer, ed. Devon; Calendar of Patent Rolls,


text:
Author talk:James Thomson (1834-1882)

Indices

 * Index:Shelley, a poem, with other writings (Thomson, Debell).djvu
 * Index:A Voice from the Nile, and Other Poems. (Thomson, Dobell).djvu
 * Index:Satires and profanities -microform- (1884).djvu
 * Index:Biographical and critical studies by James Thomson ("B.V.").djvu
 * Index:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 2.djvu ocr: good
 * Index:The poetical works of James Thomson (1895), Volume 1.djvu Problematic
 * Index:Essays and phantasies by James Thomson.djvu

title: Author talk:James Thomson (1834-1882)


text:
Page:Examiner, Journal of Political Economy, v2n05.djvu/6

 AN EXPOSITION Of the Virginia Resolutions of 1798, in a series of Essays, addressed to Thomas Ritchie, by a distinguished citizen of Virginia, under the signature of "," in February, 1833.

No. II.

In the letter which I addressed to you on the 2nd inst., I propounded to you certain interrogatories, touching the great principles involved in the present measures of the Federal Government. I could not wait for your reply, even if there were better reasons than any which I can now discern, for expecting a reply at all. I do not expect it, and yet I venture to hope for it. You owe it to your own character, to your numerous patrons, and to the great cause in which you have professed to be a zealous labourer, to be no longer silent or mysterious, upon these


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ferryland

FERRYLAND, Newfoundland, the capital of a district of the same name, 35 miles south of Saint Johns. It has a good harbor with a lighthouse. Sir George Calvert, afterward Lord Baltimore, founded a settlement here named Avalon. There exist remains of an old fort. Pop. 600.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/164

  1895–7; Rymer's Fœdera, Record and original edits.; Ordinances of the Privy Council, ed. Nicolas; Walsingham's Historia Anglicana, Annales Ricardi II (with Trokelowe), Knighton, the Eulogium Historiarum, and Roll of King's Council in Ireland, 1392–3 (in Rolls Series); Chronique de la Traison et Mort de Richard II, ed. Engl. Hist. Soc.; Chron. of the Monk of Evesham, ed. Hearne; Adam of Usk, ed. Maunde Thompson; Froissart, ed. Luce and Kervyn de Lettenhove; Chronique du Religieux de St. Denys, ed. Bellaguet; Dugdale's Baronage; Sandford's Genealogical History of the Kings of England, ed. 1677; Gough's History of Pleshy; Newcourt's Repertorium Ecclesiasticum Parochiale Londinense, ii. 469 (for his college); G. E. C[okayne]'s Complete Peerage; Doyle's Official Baronage; Wallon's Richard II; other authorities in the text.]  THOMAS, (1388?–1421), second son of Henry IV, by his first wife, Mary de Bohun, was born in London before 30 Sept. 1388. On the whole it seems most likely that Henry of Monmouth was born in August 1387, and Thomas not quite a year later (but see, iii. 324, where the autumn of 1387 is preferred as the date of Thomas's birth). There are various trifling notices of Thomas as a child in the accounts of the duchy of Lancaster (ib. iii. 324–6). On his father's accession to the throne he was made seneschal of England on 5 Oct., and on the following Sunday (12 Oct.) was one of the knights created in preparation for the coronation next day. Liberal grants of land were made for his support in his office in November, but this appointment was of course only nominal, the actual duties being discharged by Thomas Percy, earl of Worcester, who after a year's time was himself made seneschal, as the prince was too young to discharge the office (Annales Henrici Quarti, pp. 287, 337). Thomas was with his father at Windsor at Christmas 1399, and was removed in haste to London on the report of the plot to seize the king and his sons. In the summer of 1401 he was made lieutenant of Ireland, Sir Thomas Erpingham and Sir Hugh Waterton being named his wardens. He crossed over in November, reaching Dublin on the 13th. A council met at Christmas, and took Thomas for a journey down the coast to reassert his authority. The difficulties of the English government in Ireland were great, and the boy lieutenant added naturally to the cares of his guardians. On 20 Aug. 1402 the archbishop of Dublin reported that Thomas had not a penny in the world, and was shut up at Naas with his council and a small retinue, who dared not leave him for fear harm might befall (Royal Letters, p. 67). Eventually, on 1 Sept. 1403, it was decided that Thomas should come home, though nominally he remained lieutenant of Ireland, which was ruled by his deputy. In the autumn of 1404 he was with his brother Henry in South Wales, and took part in the attempted relief of Coyty Castle, Glamorganshire, in November. On 20 Feb. 1405 he was given command of the fleet (Fœdera, viii. 388) which assembled at Sandwich, and on 22 May crossed to Sluys, where the English burnt some vessels in the harbour, but failed in an attack on the town. Thomas had a narrow escape in a fight with some Genoese caracks off Cadsand, and, after ravaging the coast of Normandy, the fleet returned to England by July (Annales Henrici Quarti, p. 401;, ii. 106–5). On 1 March 1406 Thomas was confirmed in his appointment as lieutenant of Ireland for twelve years (, Proc. Privy Council, i. 315–18). He did not, however, go to Ireland, but was present at the parliament in June, when the succession to the throne was regulated. In July he went to Lynn to witness the departure of his sister Philippa for Denmark, and in August accompanied his father on a progress through Lincolnshire. At the close of the year he was made captain of Guines, where he probably served through the greater part of 1407.

On 8 March 1408, being then in London, Thomas agreed to accept a reduced payment for his office in Ireland. The affairs of that country required his presence, and in May it was arranged that he should cross over. He sailed accordingly on 2 Aug., and, landing at Carlingford, proceeded to Dublin. His first act was to arrest the Earl of Kildare and his sons, and in the autumn he made a raid into Leinster, in the course of which he was wounded at Kilmainham. In January 1409 he held a parliament at Kilkenny, but in March was recalled to England by the news of his father's illness (, iii. 166–9). The government was now passing into the hands of the Prince of Wales, who was supported by the Beauforts. Thomas quarrelled with Henry Beaufort over the money due to him on his marriage with the widow of his uncle, John Beaufort, earl of Somerset (Chron. Giles, pp. 61–2). This quarrel brought Thomas into opposition to his brother, whose policy rested on the support of the Beauforts. However, little is heard of Thomas during 1410 and 1411, except for some notices of his riotous conduct at London, where in June 1410 he and his brother John were involved in a fray with the men of the town at Eastcheap; in the following year the ‘Lord Thomas men’ were again concerned in a great debate in Bridge Street (Chron. Lond.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/165

 p. 93). At the beginning of 1412 the Beauforts were displaced, and Thomas seems to have supplanted his elder brother in the direction of the government. Under his influence a treaty of alliance was concluded with the Duke of Orleans in May. He was made Duke of Clarence on 9 July, and given the command of the intended expedition. In August he proceeded to France at the head of a force of eight thousand men to assist the Orleanists. He landed at Hogue St. Vast in the Cotentin, and, after capturing various towns from the Burgundians, joined Orleans at Bourges. Eventually the French court arranged that Orleans should buy the English off, and, under an agreement concluded on 14 Nov., Clarence withdrew with his army to Guienne. He was intending to interfere in the affairs of Arragon had not his father's death (20 March 1413) compelled him to return to England (, History of Henry V, p. 9).

Though Clarence was removed from his Irish command, and though in the royal council he continued to support an alliance with the Orleanists against the Burgundians, he was personally on good terms with his brother. He was confirmed as Duke of Clarence in the parliament of 1414, and was present in the council which considered the preparations for the war on 16–18 April 1415 (, Proc. Privy Council, ii. 156). He was ordered to hold the muster of the king's retinue at Southampton on 20 July (Fœdera, ix. 287). When the Cambridge plot was discovered, Clarence was appointed to preside over the court of peers summoned to consider the process against Richard of Cambridge and Lord Scrope. He sailed with the king from Portsmouth on 11 Aug., landing before Harfleur two days later. In the siege he held the command on the eastern side of the town. Like many others, he suffered much from illness, and after the fall of Harfleur was appointed to command the portion of the host which returned direct to England. In May 1416 Clarence received the Emperor Sigismund at Dartford. Monstrelet incorrectly ascribes to Clarence the command of the fleet which relieved Harfleur in August 1416 (Chron. p. 393). Clarence took part in the great expedition of 1417 which landed in Normandy on 1 Aug. He was appointed constable of the army, and, in command of the van, captured Touque on 9 Aug., and led the advance on Caen. This town was carried by assault on 4 Sept., the troops under Clarence's command scaling a suburb on the north side. After the fall of Caen he was sent to besiege Alençon in October, and in December rejoined the king before Falaise. In the spring of 1418 he was employed in the reduction of central Normandy, capturing Courtonne, Harcourt, and Chambrais. In the summer he joined in the advance on Rouen, was present at the siege of Louviers in June and of Pont de l'Arche in July, and in August took up his post before Rouen at the Porte Cauchoise. Immediately after the fall of Rouen in January 1419 Clarence was sent to push on the English advance, and in February took Vernon and Gaillon. The capture of Mantes and Beaumont followed, and after the failure of negotiations with the French court and the capture of Pontoise, Clarence commanded a reconnaissance to the gates of Paris at the beginning of August. In May 1420 he accompanied his brother to Troyes, and, after Henry's marriage, took part in the sieges of Montereau and Melun. He accompanied the king at his triumphal entry into Paris on 1 Dec. After Christmas Clarence went with Henry to Rouen, and on his brother's departure for England at the end of January 1421 was appointed captain of Normandy and lieutenant of France in the king's absence. Shortly afterwards Clarence started on a raid through Maine and Anjou, and advanced as far as Beaufort-en-Vallée, near the Loire. Meantime the dauphin had collected his forces, and, being joined by a strong force of Scottish knights, reached Beaugé in the English rear on 21 March. Clarence, on hearing the news next day, at once set out with his cavalry, not waiting for the main body of his army. He drove in the Scottish outposts, but was in his turn overwhelmed, and, together with many of the knights who accompanied him, was slain. His defeat was due to his own impatience and his anxiety to win a victory which might compare with Agincourt. After his death the archers, under the Earl of Salisbury, came up and recovered the bodies of the slain (Cotton. MS. Claud. A. viii, f. 10 a). Clarence's body was carried back to England and buried at Canterbury. The English mourned him as a brave and valiant soldier who had no equal in military prowess (Gesta Henrici Quinti, p. 149).

Clarence had no children by his duchess Margaret, daughter of Thomas Holland, duke of Surrey and earl of Kent [q. v.], and widow of his uncle, John Beaufort, earl of Somerset. He had, however, a bastard son, Sir John Clarence, who was old enough to be with his father at Beaugé, and who afterwards took part in the French wars in the reign of Henry VI.

[Annales Henrici Quarti ap. Trokelowe, Blaneforde, &c.; Royal and Historical Letters of Henry IV; Walsingham's Historia Anglicana


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Fersen, Fredrik Axel von

FERSEN, fĕr'sĕn, Fredrik Axel von, Swedish statesman: b. Stockholm, 1719; d. 1794. He was descended from a Scottish family named McPherson, entered the Swedish Life Guards in 1740 and from 1743 to 1748 was in the French army, in which he rose to the rank of brigadier-general. He was in the Swedish service in the Seven Years' War in which he won signal successes over the Prussians. He became field marshal in 1770. His later years were occupied with politics; he was one of the leaders of the “Hats” and for several years obstructed the measures of Gustavus III, whom he treated with colossal insolence. He was arrested in 1789 and thereafter remained aloof from politics. His ‘Historiska Skrifter’ is mainly autobiographical, but its historical accounts are often biased. Consult Bain, R. N., ‘Gustavus III’ (London 1895).


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/167

 Thomas was also unsuccessful in a claim that he made to twelve estates anciently belonging to the bishopric of Worcester and appropriated by Aldred to the see of York. Wulstan [q. v.], bishop of Worcester, refused to give them up, and Thomas, who before the boundary of his province was decided claimed Wulstan as his suffragan, accused him of insubordination, and later joined Lanfranc in desiring his deprivation. The estates were adjudged to the see of Worcester in a national assembly presided over by the king. Thomas was afterwards on friendly terms with Wulstan, and commissioned him to discharge episcopal functions in parts of his province into which he could not go, because they were still unsubdued, and because he could not speak English (, ii. 362; an. 1070; Gesta Pontificum, p. 285). He was present at the council of London held by Lanfranc in 1075, and it was there settled that the place in council of the archbishop of York was on the right of the archbishop of Canterbury (ib. p. 68). In that year a Danish fleet sailed up the Humber, and the invaders did damage to his cathedral church, St. Peter's, which he was then raising from its ruined state, and took away much plunder (Anglo-Saxon Chron. sub an.). After the settlement of their dispute he was very friendly with Lanfranc, who, at his request, commissioned two of his suffragans to assist Thomas in consecrating Ralph, bishop of Orkney, at York on 5 March 1077; and, when writing on that matter, Thomas assured Lanfranc that a suggestion made by Remigius [q. v.], bishop of Dorchester, that he would again put forward a claim to the obedience of the bishops of Dorchester and Worcester, was unfounded (, i. 34–6). He also received a profession of obedience from Fothad or Foderoch (d. 1093), bishop of St. Andrews, who was sent to him by Malcolm III [q. v.] and his queen Margaret (d. 1093) [q. v.], and employed him as his commissary to dedicate some churches (,, ap. Historians of York, ii. 127, 363). When the Conqueror was in the Isle of Wight in 1086, both the archbishops being with him, he was shown a charter that had been forged by the monks of Canterbury and widely distributed, to the effect that the archbishop of York was bound to make profession to Canterbury with an oath, which had been remitted by Lanfranc without prejudice to his successors. The king is said to have been angry, and to have promised to do justice to Thomas on his return from his expedition, but died in the course of it (, u.s. 101–2). Thomas refused to give advice to his suffragan William of St. Calais, bishop of Durham [see, d. 1096] when summoned before Rufus to answer to a charge of treason, and took part in the trial of the bishop in the king's court at Salisbury in November 1088 ( Opera, i. 175, 179, 183). He attended the funeral of Lanfranc at Canterbury in 1089, and during the vacancy of the see consecrated three bishops to dioceses in the southern province, they making profession to the future archbishop of Canterbury. In 1092, when Remigius [q. v.] had finished his church at Lincoln, Thomas declared that it was in his province, not as being in the old diocese of Dorchester, but because Lincoln and a great part of Lindesey anciently pertained to the province of York, and had unjustly been taken away, together with Stow, Louth, and Newark, formerly the property of his church; and he therefore refused to dedicate the church which was to be the head of a diocese subject to Canterbury. William Rufus, however, ordered the bishops of the realm to dedicate it, and they assembled for the purpose, but the death of Remigius caused the ceremony to be put off ( sub an.; vii. 19, 194). A letter from Urban II, who became pope in 1088, to Thomas, is given by a York historian; in it the pope blames Thomas for having made profession to Lanfranc, and orders him to answer for his conduct; it presents some difficulty, but cannot be rejected (, u.s. pp. 105, 135).

On 4 Dec. 1093 Thomas and other bishops met at Canterbury to consecrate Anselm [q. v.] to that see, and before the rite began Bishop Walkelin, acting for the bishop of London, began to read out the instrument of election. When he came to the words ‘the church of Canterbury, the metropolitan church of all Britain,’ Thomas interrupted him; for though, as he said, he allowed the primacy of Canterbury, he could not admit that it was the metropolitan see of all Britain, as that would mean that the church of York was not metropolitan. The justice of his remonstrance was acknowledged, the words of the instrument were changed to ‘the primatial church of all Britain,’ and Thomas officiated at the consecration (, Historia Novorum, col. 373). The York historian, however, states that Thomas objected to the title of primate of all Britain given in the instrument; that he declared that as there were two metropolitans one could not be primate except over the other; that he went back to the vestry and began to disrobe; that Anselm and Walkelin humbly begged him to come back; that the word ‘primate’


text:
Page:Federalist, Dawson edition, 1863.djvu/96

xciv


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/168

 was erased, and that Anselm was consecrated simply as metropolitan (, u.s. 104–5, 113, who, in spite of his solemn declaration as to the truth of his story, is scarcely to be trusted here). The next day Thomas, in pursuance of his claim to include Lincoln in his province, warned Anselm not to consecrate Robert Bloet to that see; as bishop of Dorchester he might consecrate him, but not of Lincoln, which, he said, was in his province. Rufus arranged the matter by granting the abbey of Selby and the monastery of St. Oswald at Gloucester to Thomas and his successors in exchange for his claim on Lincoln and Lindesey, and to the manors of Stow and Louth. Thomas is said to have accepted this arrangement unwillingly and without the consent of his chapter (ib. p. 106;, vi. 82, viii. 1177). As Anselm was not in England when Rufus was slain in 1100, Thomas, who heard the news at Ripon, hastened to London, intending to crown Henry king, as was his right. He found that he was too late, for Henry had been crowned by Maurice [q. v.], bishop of London. He complained of the wrong that had been done him, but was pacified by the king and his lords, who represented that it would have been dangerous to delay the coronation. He was easily satisfied, for he was of a gentle temper and was suffering greatly from the infirmities of age. After doing homage to Henry he returned to the north, and died at York, ‘full of years, honour, and divine grace,’ on 18 Nov. He was buried in York minster, near his predecessor, Aldred; his epitaph is preserved (, who says that he died at Ripon; Gesta Pontificum, p. 257).

Thomas was tall, handsome, and of a cheerful countenance; in youth he was active and well proportioned, and in age ruddy and with hair as white ‘as a swan.’ He was liberal, courteous, and placable, and, though often engaged in disputes, they were of a kind that became him, for they were in defence of what he and his clergy believed to be the rights of his see, and he prosecuted them without personal bitterness. Beyond reproach in respect of purity, his life generally was singularly free from blame. He was eminent as a scholar, and especially as a philosopher; he loved to read and hold discussions with his clerks, and his mental attainments did not make him vain. Church music was one of his chief pleasures; his voice was good, and he understood the art of music; he could make organs and teach others to play on them, and he composed many hymns. He was serious in disposition, and when he heard any one singing a merry song would set sacred words to the air; and he insisted on his clergy using solemn music in their services (ib.) He was active in church-building and in ecclesiastical organisation. When he received his see a large part of his diocese lay desolate, for the north had been harried by the Conqueror the year before, and from York to Durham the land was uncultivated, uninhabited, and given over to wild beasts. York itself had been ruined and burnt in the war; the fire had spread to the minster, which was reduced to a ruin, and the other churches of the city probably shared its fate. He rebuilt his cathedral church, it is said, from the foundations, though the same author seems to speak of restoration and a new roof (, ii. 107–8). Possibly he first repaired the old church and then built a new one; possibly the words may mean that, though, as seems likely, the blackened walls were standing, he in some parts was forced to rebuild them altogether; in any case, his work was extensive, and amounted at least virtually to the building of a new church, a few fragments of which are said to remain in the crypt (, Architectural History of York, pp. 13–16;, Norman Conquest, iv. 267, 295, 373). Of the seven canons he found only three at their post; he recalled such of the others as were alive, and added to their number. At first he made them observe the Lotharingian discipline, rebuilt the dormitory and refectory, and caused them to live together on a common fund under the superintendence of a provost [see under, d. 1069]. Later he introduced the system which became general in secular chapters; he divided the property of the church, appointing a prebend to each canon, which gave him the means of increasing the number of canons, and gave each of them an incitement to build his prebendal church and improve its property (, u.s.). Further, he founded and endowed in like manner the dignities of dean, treasurer, and precentor, and revived the office of ‘magister scholarum,’ or chancellor, which had previously existed in the church. He gave many books and ornaments for use in his church, and was always most anxious to choose the best men as its clergy. In order to carry out his reforms he gave up much property that he might have kept in his own hands, and his successors complained that he alienated episcopal land for the creation of prebends (Gesta Pontificum, u.s.). Some trouble having arisen at Beverley with reference to the estates of the church, Thomas instituted the office of provost there, bestowing it on his nephew and namesake [see , d. 1114)]. In 1083 he granted a charter


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Fersen, Hans Axel, Count von

FERSEN, Hans Axel,, Swedish military officer and diplomat: b. Stockholm, Sweden, 4 Sept. 1755; d. there, 20 June 1810. He came to America in 1780 on the staff of Rochambeau; fought under Lafayette and received from Washington the Order of the Society of the Cincinnati. Later he returned to Paris where he had already been stationed in 1778-80; he became a favorite at court, and was the disguised coachman at the flight of the royal family from Versailles during the Revolution. He was deeply devoted to Queen Marie Antoinette and made a number of unsuccessful attempts to save her. His relations with her have been the subject of a number of books. He returned to Sweden, where he was received with honor, and in 1801 was made grand marshal of that country. He was entrusted with a number of important diplomatic missions. On suspicion of complicity in the death of Prince Christian of Sweden he was seized by a mob while marshaling the funeral procession, and beaten to death. After his brutal assassination his entire innocence was clearly established. Consult Carnegy, M., ‘A Queen's Knight; the Life of Count Axel de Fersen’ (London 1912); Fersen, Comte J. A. de, ‘The French Army in the Revolutionary War’ (in Magazine of American History, Vol. XXV, pp. 55 and 156, New York 1891); Gaulot, P., ‘Un Ami de la Reine’ (Paris 1894; translated into English as ‘A Friend of the Queen’ by C. Hoey, 2 vols., London 1894); Granath, W., ‘Fersenska Mordet. Historisk Roman’ (Stockholm 1904); Hansson, O, ‘L'Assassinat de Fersen’ (in Revue d'Histoire Diplomatique, Vol. XXV, p. 195, Paris 1911); Heidenstam, O. G. de, ‘Marie-Antoinette, Fersen et Barnave; leur Correspondance’ (Paris 1913); Klinckowström, R. M. de, ed., ‘Le Comte de Fersen et la Cour de France’ (2 vols., Paris 1878); O'Connor, T. P. ‘Some Old Love Stories’ (London 1895).


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/169

 freeing all the churches in his diocese belonging to the convent of Durham from all dues payable to him and his successors, being moved thereto, he says, by gratitude to St. Cuthbert, to whose tomb he resorted after a sickness of two years, and there received healing; and also by his pleasure at the substitution of monks for canons in the church of Durham by Bishop William ( i. 137–8). The epitaph, in elegiac verse, placed on the tomb of the Conqueror, was written by him, and has been preserved (, pp. 663–4).

[Raine's Fasti Ebor.; Hugh the Chantor and T. Stubbs, ap. Historians of York, vol. ii., Will. of Malmesbury's Gesta Regum and Gesta Pontiff., Gervase of Cant., Sym. Dunelm., Gir. Cambr., Rog. Hov. (all seven in Rolls Ser.); Lanfranc's Epp. ed. Giles; Ric. of Hexham, ed. Twysden; Liber Vitæ Dunelm. (Surtees Soc.); Eadmer, ed. Migne; Orderic, ed. Duchesne; Freeman's Norm. Conq. vol. iv., and Will. Rufus.]  THOMAS (d. 1114), archbishop of York, was the son of Samson (d. 1112) [q. v.], afterwards bishop of Worcester, and the brother of Richard, bishop of Bayeux from 1108 to 1133, and so the nephew of Thomas (d. 1100) [q. v.], archbishop of York, who brought him up at York, where he was generally popular (, Historia Novorum, col. 481;, col. 303; Gallia Christiana, xi. 360; apud Historians of York, ii. 112). His uncle Thomas appointed him as the first provost of Beverley in 1092, and he was one of the king's chaplains. At Whitsuntide 1108 Henry I was about to appoint him to the bishopric of London, vacant by the death of Maurice (d. 1107) [q. v.] The archbishopric of York was also vacant by the death of Gerard in May, and the dean and some of the canons of York had come to London to elect; they persuaded the king to nominate Thomas to York instead of London; he was elected, and as archbishop-elect was present at the council that Anselm held at that season at London (, col. 470; sub an.)

He then went to York, where he was heartily welcomed. He knew that Anselm would summon him to come to Canterbury to make his profession of obedience and receive consecration; and as his chapter urged him not to make the profession [see under, d. 1100], he set out to speak to the king on the matter (, pp. 112–14). At Winchester he was favourably received by the king, who appears to have told him not to make the profession at that time, but not to have spoken decidedly, intending probably to inquire further into the case. The assertion that Anselm sent Herbert de Losinga [q. v.], bishop of Norwich, to Thomas, offering to give up the profession if Thomas would recognise him as primate, and that Thomas refused (ib.), may be rejected so far as Anselm is concerned, though the bishop may have made the proposal on his own responsibility. Meanwhile Turgot [q. v.], bishop-elect of St. Andrews, was awaiting consecration, and Ranulf Flambard [q. v.], anxious to uphold the rights of the church of York, proposed to perform the rite at York with the assistance of suffragan bishops of the province, in the presence of the archbishop-elect. This would have been an infringement of the rights of Canterbury, and was forbidden by Anselm, who further wrote to Thomas requiring him to come to his ‘mother church’ at Canterbury on 6 Sept., and declaring that if he failed to do so he would himself perform episcopal functions in the province of York. Thomas wrote that he would have come but had spent all his money at Winchester; indeed, he said that he would have gone at once from Winchester to him, but the king had given him permission to send to Rome for his pall, and he was trying to raise money for the purpose. He also disclaimed any intention of consecrating Turgot. Anselm granted him an extension of time till Sunday, 27 Sept., and told him that it was no use sending for the pall before he was consecrated, and forbade him to do so. He also wrote to Paschal II, requesting him not to grant Thomas the pall until he had made profession and had been consecrated. Thomas then wrote that his chapter had forbidden him to make the profession, that he could not disobey them, and asked Anselm's advice. His letter was followed by one from the York chapter declaring that if Thomas made the profession they would disown him. Anselm replied to Thomas, repeating his command, and fixing 8 Nov. as the day for the profession and consecration. Thomas again wrote, saying that he could not act against the will of his chapter. After consulting with his suffragans, Anselm sent the bishops of London and Rochester to him to advise him on behalf of the bishops generally, either to desist from his rebellious conduct, or at least to go to Canterbury and state his case, promising that if he proved it he should receive consecration. They found him at Southwell. He told them that he had sent a messenger to the king, who was then in Normandy, and that he must wait for Henry's answer, and for further consultation with his clergy. The king's reply was that the question of the profession was to be put off until the following