text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/410

 commission from James II. William Oldys and another civilian were displaced from their offices for holding the contrary view (see under, (1696–1761); and, Brief Relation, &c. iii. 183). Tindal is said to have been rewarded for his services on this and other occasions by a pension of 200l. a year from the crown. He published several pamphlets of a whig and low-church tendency; but first made a sensation in 1706 by a book called ‘The Rights of the Christian Church asserted against the Romish and all other Priests who claim an Independent Power over it,’ &c., and intended to show that the church had no rights of the kind claimed by the high-church party. He was answered by many writers, including his old tutor, Hickes, now a nonjuror, who reports Tindal as saying that he ‘was writing a book which would make the clergy mad.’ In that aim he succeeded pretty well; over twenty answers appeared. William Oldisworth [q. v.] seems to have made the most popular reply in a ‘Dialogue between Timothy and Philatheus,’ filling three volumes. Le Clerc made a complimentary reference to the book, and Tindal became one of the most hated antagonists of the high-church party. He was accused of having changed his religion from base motives and of having bought Le Clerc's favourable opinion—a statement which Le Clerc indignantly denied in the ‘Bibliothèque Choisie’ (x. art. vii, and xxiii. art. viii. 23–6). The book was ordered by the House of Commons to be burnt by the common hangman along with Sacheverell's sermon (25 March 1710) by way of proving, apparently, that the whigs did not approve deists. Tindal carried on the war against the high-churchmen and Jacobites by various pamphlets in the time of the Sacheverell excitement. After the accession of George I he wrote a variety of political pamphlets. He attacked Walpole in 1717 for splitting the party by his resignation, but defended him again upon his return to power. His pamphlets do not appear to have had any special effect. He returned to his old arguments, and in 1729 attacked some references to the freethinkers in Bishop Gibson's ‘Pastoral Letter.’ In 1730 he published the book by which he is best known, ‘Christianity as Old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature.’ The title expresses the contention of the contemporary deists, and the book marked the culminating point of the controversy to which these writings gave rise. It received a great number of answers; more than thirty are given in the catalogue of the British Museum. Tindal called himself a ‘Christian deist,’ and made formal professions of accepting Christianity as a ‘most holy religion.’ There could be no doubt, however, that his aim was to show that any positive revelation was superfluous. A letter from another fellow of All Souls', J. Proast, was published in a ‘preliminary discourse’ by Hickes to a book called ‘Spinoza Revived’ (1709), one of the answers to the ‘Rights of the Christian Church.’ Proast declared that Tindal had, in a private conversation, renounced all belief in Christianity. No doubt Tindal thought it fair to avoid the danger of persecution by using conventional phrases in his books. ‘Christianity as Old as the Creation’ was, in any case, an able and effective statement of the rationalist creed of the time. Tindal is said to have left a second volume in manuscript in reply to his opponents, the publication of which was prevented by Bishop Gibson. He died on 16 Aug. 1733 at a lodging in Coldbath Fields, and was buried in Clerkenwell church. [For the forgery of his will, see under ; and .]

Tindal had retained his fellowship at All Souls' till his death, and passed his time between Oxford and London. In the life of Young of the ‘Night Thoughts,’ contributed by Herbert Croft to Johnson's ‘Lives of the Poets,’ a story is told upon Johnson's authority. Young became a fellow of All Souls' in 1708, and frequently argued with Tindal. ‘I can always answer the other boys,’ Tindal is reported to have said, ‘because I know their arguments beforehand; but Young is continually pestering me with arguments of his own.’ Naturally Tindal was not loved at Oxford. Hearne makes frequent references to him in his diary, and calls him a ‘notorious ill-liver’ and a ‘noted debauchee.’ Similar accusations are made in detail by an anonymous fellow of All Souls' in a pamphlet published upon Tindal's death; and Professor Burrows says that he was once publicly admonished for immorality (Worthies of All Souls', p. 381). The anonymous fellow also insists upon Tindal's gluttony, which, it appears, sometimes monopolised dishes intended to be shared by the other fellows of the college. Hearne admits, however, that Tindal had one awkward virtue. He was very abstemious in drink, which gave him ‘no small advantage’ in after-dinner arguments with his colleagues. He made a few converts among them, but was generally regarded as a centre of opposition to the reputable college authorities.

Tindal's works are: 1. ‘Essay concerning the Law of Nations and the Rights of Sove-


text:
The New International Encyclopædia/Ziska, John

ZISKA, zĭs'kȧ, Boh. ZIŽKA, zhĭzh'kȧ, (c.1360-1424). A famous leader of the Hussites. He was born at Trocnoy, near Budweis, Bohemia. He became a page to King Wenceslas of Bohemia|, and spent his youth at Prague. In 1410 he took part as a volunteer on the side of the Teutonic Knights in the great battle of Tannenberg. Later he fought against the Turks and at the battle of Agineourt. Returning to Bohemia, soon after the burning of John Huss, he became prominent among the leaders of the Hussites. In 1419 the Hussites took up arms against the Emperor Sigismund, and Ziska displayed extraordinary activity in organizing their forces. He was soon recognized as their leader. He built a mountain stronghold which he named Tabor, whence the extreme party among the Hussites took the name of ../Taborites/ (q.v.). In 1420 he took up a strong position near Prague on an eminence since known as the ‘Zizkaberg,’ and with a few thousand men beat off an army of 30,000 (July 14th). On November 1st he won a victory over the Emperor Sigismund and again on January 8, 1422, he was victorious at Deutschbrod. His course was everywhere marked by the destruction of monasteries, the burning of priests' houses, and the introduction of the communion with both elements. (See .) As the leader of the Taborites, Ziska waged a relentless war against the section of the Hussites known as the Calixtines. In 1424 it is said that Sigismund proposed an arrangement with the Hussites, by which full religious liberty was to be allowed and Ziska, who had an interview with the Emperor on the footing of an independent chief, was to be appointed Governor of Bohemia and her dependencies, but if this is true, the war-worn old chief did not live long enough to complete the treaty, for while besieging the castle of Pribyslav* he was seized with the plague, and died October 11, 1424. He was buried in a church at Czaslav, and his iron war-club was hung up over his tomb. A story was long current that, in accordance with Ziska's express injunctions, his skin was flayed off, tanned, and used as a cover for a drum, which was afterwards employed in the Hussite army, in order that even when dead he might be a terror to his enemies. From early boyhood Ziska had been blind in one eye and he lost his other eye in 1421. As he has become a popular hero, it is difficult in many parts of his life to separate fact from fiction. Meissner was the author of an epic poem on Ziska which has passed through more than a dozen editions; and George Sand wrote a

prose Life. Consult Millauer, Diplomatisch-historische Aufsätze über Johann Ziska (Prague, 1824); Tomck, Johann Ziska (Ger. ed., Prague, 1882).

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


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/31

27 other persons (who do not interfere with them) in peace? Until they have tried the experiment for themselves, how can they have the face to impose the Constitution upon, or even to recommend it to, others? Plainly the reason for such absurd and inconsistent conduct is that they want the Constitution, not solely for any honest or legitimate use it can be of to themselves or others, but for the dishonest and illegitimate power it gives them over the persons and properties of others. But for this latter reason, all their eulogiums on the Constitution, all their exhortations, and all their expenditures of money and blood to sustain it, would be wanting.

VIII.

The Constitution itself, then, being of no authority, on what authority does our government practically rest? On what ground can those who pretend to administer it, claim the right to seize men's property, to restrain them of their natural liberty of action, industry, and trade, and to kill all who deny their authority to dispose of men's properties, liberties, and lives at their pleasure or discretion?

The most they can say, in answer to this question, is, that some half, two-thirds, or three-fourths of the male adults of the country have a tacit understanding that they will maintain a government under the Constitution; that they will select, by ballot, the persons to administer it; and that those persons who may receive a majority, or a plurality, of their ballots, shall act as their representatives, and administer the Constitution in their name, and by their authority.

But this tacit understanding (admitting it to exist) cannot at all justify the conclusion drawn from it. A tacit understanding between A, B, and C, that they will, by ballot, depute D as their agent, to deprive me of my property, liberty, or life, cannot at all authorize D to do so. He is none the less a robber, tyrant, and murderer, because he claims to act as their agent,

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/31


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/411

 reigns, &c. …’ 1693; 2nd edition in 1694 with ‘An Account of what was said at the Council-board. …’ (upon the piracy question: see above). 2. ‘Essay concerning Obedience to the Supreme Powers …,’ 1694 (, Athenæ). 3. ‘Letter to the Clergy. …’ 1694 (Biogr. Brit.) 4. ‘Reflections on the 28 Propositions,’ 1695 (Biogr. Brit.) 5. ‘An Essay concerning the Power of the Magistrate and the Rights of Mankind in Matters of Religion,’ 1697. 6. ‘Reasons against restraining the Press,’ 1704; reprinted as Tindal's in R. Barron's ‘Pillars of Priestcraft,’ 1768, vol. iv. 7. ‘The Rights of the Christian Church asserted against the Romish and all other Priests who claim an independent Power over it, with a preface,’ &c., 1706. Tindal published two ‘Defences’ of this in the following years. 8. ‘New High Church turned Old Presbyterian,’ 1709 (Biogr. Brit.) 9. ‘Merciful Judgements of the High Church Triumphant … in the reign of Charles I,’ 1710 (reprinted in Barron's ‘Pillars of Priestcraft,’ 1768, vol. iii. 10. ‘High-Church Catechism,’ 1710 (''Biogr. Brit''.) 11. ‘The Jacobitism, Perjury, and Popery of High-Church Priests,’ 1710. 12. ‘The Nation vindicated from the Aspersions cast on it’ (in a ‘representation’ from the lower house of convocation), 1711. 13. ‘Defection considered, and the Designs of those who divided the Friends of Government set in a true Light,’ 1717. 14. ‘Destruction a certain Consequence of Division,’ &c., 1717. The last two refer to Walpole's secession. 15. ‘The Judgement of Dr. Prideaux concerning the Murder of Julius Cæsar … maintained’ (in answer to Cato in the ‘London Journal’), 1721. 16. ‘A Defence of our present Happy Establishment, and the Administration Vindicated …’ 1722. 17. ‘Enquiry into the Causes of our present Disaffection. …’ 1722. The last three are in defence of Walpole. 18. ‘Address to the Inhabitants … of London and Westminster in relation to the Pastoral Letter [of Bishop Gibson],’ 1729. 19. ‘Second Address’ (in answer to second pastoral letter), 1730. 20. ‘Christianity as Old as the Creation: or the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature,’ 1730.

[A contemporary life called ‘Memoirs of … M. Tindall, LL.D.,’ by Curll, and a pamphlet called ‘The Religious, Rational, and Moral Conduct of Matthew Tindal, LL.D., late fellow of All Souls', by a member of the same college,’ appeared just after his death. The article in the Biogr. Brit. has a few details communicated by Sir Nathaniel Lloyd [q. v.] See also Burrows's Worthies of All Souls', 1874, pp. 247, 289, 291, 381, 430; Hearne's Collections (Oxford Hist. Soc.), i. 8, 193, 223, 237, 260, 284, 293, ii. 72, 97, 179, 336, 367, iii. 74, 83, 255, 341, 381; Reliquiæ Hearnianæ (1857), pp. 783–4; and Wood's Athenæ (Bliss), iv. 584. For accounts of his theological works see Lechler's Geschichte des englischen Deismus, pp. 324–34, and the Rev. J. Hunt's Religious Thought in England, ii. 431–62.]  TINDAL, NICHOLAS (1687–1774), historical writer, born at Plymouth on 25 Nov. 1687, was the only son of John Tindal, vicar of Cornwood, Devonshire, by his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Nicholas Prideaux, president of the council of Barbados. His father's only brother was Matthew Tindal [q. v.], and his sister Elizabeth was mother of Nathaniel Forster (1718–1757) [q. v.] Nicholas matriculated from Exeter College, Oxford, on 6 March 1706–7, aged 19, graduated B.A. in 1710, and M.A. in 1713. In 1716 he was presented to the rectory of Hatford, Berkshire, and in 1721 to the vicarage of Great Waltham, Essex.

Soon afterwards Tindal began preparations for the chief work of his life, the translation and continuation of Rapin's ‘History of England,’ of which the first edition had appeared in French at Paris in 1723 [see ]. His translation, ‘with additional notes,’ began to appear in 1725. The second volume was dedicated on July 12 1726 to Sir Charles Wager, to whom Tindal was then acting as chaplain in the Baltic; the fourth was dated ‘on board the Torbay in Gibraltar Bay, Sep. 4, 1727.’ The whole work ran to fifteen octavo volumes, the last being published in 1731; a second edition, in two folio volumes, was brought out in 1732–3, and a third in 1743. Tindal had meanwhile set to work to continue Rapin's ‘History’ which ended with the revolution of 1688. The first volume of his ‘Continuation’ was published in 1744, being numbered as the third volume of Rapin's ‘History.’ The second volume (vol. iv. of the ‘History’) appeared in two parts in 1745, bringing the ‘History’ down to the accession of George II in 1727. The whole work was embellished with Houbraken and Vertue's ‘Heads and Monuments of the Kings’ (which had been separately published in 1736, fol.). Another folio edition, with a continuation to the end of George II's reign by Smollett, was published during 1785–9 in five volumes. An octavo edition of Tindal's ‘Continuation’ had come out concurrently with the folio edition during 1745–7; this was in thirteen volumes uniform with the first edition of Rapin's work, the whole comprising twenty-eight volumes. Other octavo editions of the whole ‘History’ appeared in 1751, 21 vols.,


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/32

28 than he would be if he avowedly acted on his own responsibility alone.

Neither am I bound to recognize him as their agent, nor can he legitimately claim to be their agent, when he brings no written authority from them accrediting him as such. I am under no obligation to take his word as to who his principals may be, or whether he has any. Bringing no credentials, I have a right to say he has no such authority even as he claims to have: and that he is therefore intending to rob, enslave, or murder me on his own account.

This tacit understanding, therefore, among the voters of the country, amounts to nothing as an authority to their agents. Neither do the ballots by which they select their agents, avail any more than does their tacit understanding; for their ballots are given in secret, and therefore in a way to avoid any personal responsibility for the acts of their agents.

No body of men can be said to authorize a man to act as their agent, to the injury of a third person, unless they do it in so open and authentic a manner as to make themselves personally responsible for his acts. None of the voters in this country appoint their political agents in any open authentic manner, or in any manner to make themselves responsible for their acts. Therefore these pretended agents cannot legitimately claim to be really agents. Somebody must be responsible for the acts of these pretended agents; and if they cannot show any open and authentic credentials from their principals, they cannot, in law or reason, be said to have any principals. The maxim applies here, that what does not appear, does not exist. If they can show no principals, they have none.

But even these pretended agents do not themselves know who their pretended principals are. These latter act in secret; for acting by secret ballot is acting in secret as much as if they were to meet in secret conclave in the darkness of the night. And they are personally as much unknown to the agents they select,

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/32


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/412

 and in 1757–9, also 21 vols. An ‘Abridgment’ was issued in 1747, and a ‘Summary’ in 1751. Tindal's ‘work is partly original and partly a compilation, but it deserves the praise of having been written without party spirit, and of being a temperate and candid narrative of carefully ascertained facts, although destitute of those higher merits which attest original historic power’ ( and, Introduction to English History, p. 375). According to Burton, it ‘has perhaps been more amply founded on by later historians, as an authority, than any other book referring to the period it covers’ (Reign of Queen Anne, ii. 324). Archdeacon Coxe, however, asserts that the ‘Continuation’ was principally written by Thomas Birch [q. v.], with the assistance of ‘persons of political eminence.’ Tindal himself acknowledges valuable assistance rendered him by Philip Morant [q. v.] In August 1757 William Duncombe [q. v.] published anonymously an attack on Tindal's style, entitled ‘Remarks on Mr. Tindal's Translation’ (, Lit. Anecd. viii. 267).

While still vicar of Waltham, Tindal projected a ‘History of Essex’ in three volumes, but the scheme did not meet with much support, and two numbers only appeared (1732? 4to). The first included the history of Felsted and Pantfield, and the second the history of Raine, Stebbing, and part of Bocking. They were based upon the manuscripts of William Holman [q. v.], which had been entrusted to Tindal on Holman's death in 1730. In 1731 Tindal was appointed master of the royal free school at Chelmsford, and in 1732 chaplain in ordinary at Chatham. In 1733, his uncle, Matthew Tindal, died, and Nicholas believed himself to have been left his sole heir. A will, however, generally thought to have been forged, was produced by Eustace Budgell, which left practically all his effects to Budgell [see ]. Tindal published in the same year ‘A Copy of the Will of Matthew Tindal, with an Account of what pass'd concerning the same between Mrs. Lucy Price, Eustace Budgell, Esq., and Mr. Nicolas Tindal,’ London, 8vo; but he failed to obtain restitution from Budgell (cf., Works, ed. Elwin and Courthope, iii. 270). In 1738 Tindal was appointed chaplain to Greenwich Hospital, and in 1740 was presented to the rectories of Calbourne, Isle of Wight, and Alverstoke, Hampshire. In 1764 he published a ‘Guide to Classical Learning, or Polymetis Abridged’ [see ]; this abridgment proved a very popular handbook, and subsequent editions appeared in 1765, 1777, 1786, and 1802, all in duodecimo. Tindal also translated from the French, the text of De Beausobre and Lenfant's ‘Commentary on St. Matthew's Gospel,’ published by Morant in 1725, and Calmet's ‘Antiquities Sacred and Prophane,’ published in monthly parts in 1724.

Tindal died at Greenwich Hospital, on Monday, 27 June 1774, in his eighty-seventh year, and was buried in the second burial-ground of the hospital, known as Goddard's Garden (, Kent, ed. 1886, i. 76; Gent. Mag. 1774, p. 333). A portrait of Tindal, painted by Knapton and engraved by Picart, formed the frontispiece of the second volume of the second edition of Rapin. It was retouched by Vertue for his ‘Heads of the Kings of England’ (1736), and was reproduced in the ‘Essex Review’ (ii. 168).

Tindal married, first, Anne, daughter of John Keate of Hagborn, Berkshire; by her he had three sons, of whom George, a captain in the royal navy, was grandfather of Sir Nicholas Conyngham Tindal [q. v.] Another son, James, was father of William Tindal [q. v.] Nicholas Tindal married, secondly, on 11 Aug. 1753, at the chapel of Greenwich Hospital, ‘Elizabeth, daughter of I. Gugelman, Captain of Invalids,’ by whom he had no issue (Tindal's own pedigree of the Tindal family in Lit. Anecd. ix. 302–3).

[Authorities cited; Essex Review, ii. 168–79; Works in Brit. Mus. Library; Foster's Alumni Oxon. 1500–1714; Hasted's Kent; Chalmers's Biogr. Dict.; Cazenove's Rapin-Thoyras, 1866; Lowndes's Bibl. Manual, ed. Bohn.]  TINDAL, NICHOLAS CONYNGHAM (1776–1846), chief justice of the common pleas, born at Coval Hall, near Chelmsford, on 12 Dec. 1776, was son of Robert Tindal, a solicitor of Chelmsford, by his wife Sarah, only daughter of John Pocock of Greenwich. Matthew Tindal [q. v.], the deist, was of his family, and his great-grandfather was Nicholas Tindal [q. v.], the historical writer. Nicholas Conyngham was sent to the Chelmsford grammar school, of which Thomas Naylor was then master, and at nineteen went to Trinity College, Cambridge. In 1799 he graduated B.A. as eighth wrangler, winning the chancellor's gold medal. He was elected fellow of his college in 1801, and next year he graduated M.A. and entered as a student at Lincoln's Inn. In 1834 he received the honorary D.C.L. degree at Oxford.

On 20 June 1809 Tindal was called to the bar, having previously read with Sir John Richardson (1771–1841) [q. v.], and practised as a special pleader. He joined the northern circuit, and, on the strength of his wide and accurate learning (for he never was a good


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/33

 as they are to others. No pretended agent therefore can ever know by whose ballots he is selected, or consequently who his real principals are. Not knowing who his principals are, he has no right to say that he has any. He can, at most, say only that he is the agent of a secret band of robbers and murderers, who are bound by that faith which prevails among confederates in crime, to stand by him, if his acts, done in their name, shall be resisted.

Men honestly engaged in attempting to establish justice in the world, have no occasion thus to act in secret; or to appoint agents to do acts for which they (the principals) are not willing to be responsible.

The secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret government is a secret band of robbers and murderers. Open despotism is better than this. The single despot stands out in the face of all men, and says: I am the State: My will is law: I am your master: I take the responsibility of my acts: The only arbiter I acknowledge is the sword: If anyone denies my right, let him try conclusions with me.

But a secret government is little less than a government of assassins. Under it, a man knows not who his tyrants are, until they have struck, and perhaps not then. He may guess, beforehand, as to some of his immediate neighbors. But he really knows nothing. The man to whom he would most naturally fly for protection, may prove an enemy, when the time of trial comes.

This is the kind of government we have; and it is the only one we are likely to have, until men are ready to say: We will consent to no Constitution, except such an one as we are neither ashamed nor afraid to sign; and we will authorize no government to do any thing in our name which we are not willing to be personally responsible for.

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/33


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/413

 advocate), he obtained a considerable practice. His vast store of learning even in obsolete law was shown to advantage in the case Ashford v. Thornton (1 and  Reports, p. 405), in which he successfully claimed for his client the right of wager of battle, a feat which produced the statute 59 George III, c. 46, abolishing this right for the future. Brougham and Parke (afterwards Lord Wensleydale) were among his pupils. He was subsequently with Brougham as counsel for Queen Caroline (Life of Brougham, ii. 381), and had he not already been retained for the queen would have been engaged for the crown.

He entered parliament in 1824 as tory member for the Wigtown Burghs, and became solicitor-general in September 1826, when changes were occasioned by Copley's appointment to the mastership of the rolls. At the same time he received the honour of knighthood. In the same year he was returned to parliament for Harwich; but in 1827, Copley becoming lord chancellor, there was a vacancy in the representation of the university of Cambridge, and Tindal was elected by 479 votes against 378 for William John Bankes [q. v.] With characteristic modesty he declined to assert his claim to the attorney-generalship, either against James Scarlett (afterwards first Baron Abinger) [q. v.] in 1827 or against Sir Charles Wetherell [q. v.] in 1828 (Life of Lord Denman, i. 206). On 9 June 1829 he was appointed chief justice of the common pleas in succession to William Draper Best, first baron Wynford [q. v.], and occupied that position until his death. Among the celebrated cases he tried were Norton's action against Lord Melbourne for criminal conversation and the trials for murder of Courvoisier and MacNaghten. He attended to his duties to within ten days of his death, when he was seized with paralysis, and died at Folkestone on 6 July 1846. He was buried at Kensal Green cemetery. He left 45,000l. and freeholds at Chelmsford and Aylesbury.

He married, on 2 Sept. 1809, Merelina (d. 1818), youngest daughter of Thomas Symonds, captain, R.N., by whom he had four sons and a daughter. Of these the eldest, Rev. Nicholas Tindal, M.A., was vicar of Sandhurst in Gloucestershire, and predeceased him in 1842; and the youngest, Charles John, a barrister of Lincoln's Inn, died in 1853.

As a judge all Tindal's best qualities found the widest scope. His sagacity, impartiality, and plain sense, his industry and clear-sightedness, made him the admiration of non-professional spectators; while among lawyers he was very highly esteemed for an invariable kindness to all who appeared before him, for his grasp of principle, accuracy of statement, skill in analysis, and vast stores of case law. In his latter days he became somewhat procrastinating and eccentric, but he retained to the last the respect and affection of those who practised before him. He had considerable wit of a highly legal kind, of which several illustrations are given in Robinson's ‘Bench and Bar’ (pp. 153–8).

There is a portrait of Tindal by T. Philips, R.A., in the National Portrait Gallery, London. It was engraved by Henry Cousins.

[Gent. Mag. 1846, ii. 199; Daily News, 7 July 1846; Law Mag. v. 105; Ballantyne's Experiences; Foss's Lives of the Judges; Foster's Scottish Members of Parl.]  TINDAL, WILLIAM (1484-1536), translator of the New Testament. [See .]

TINDAL, WILLIAM (1756–1804), antiquary, born at Chelmsford on 14 May 1756, was son of James Tindal (d. 1760), captain in the 4th regiment of dragoons, youngest son of Nicholas Tindal [q. v.] James married Miss Shenton, who, after his death, was married to Dr. Smith, a physician at Cheltenham and Oxford. At four years of age William and his mother went to reside with her brother, a minor canon of Chichester, and six years later they removed to Richmond. On 19 May 1772 he matriculated from Trinity College, Oxford, and was elected a scholar in the same year. He graduated B.A. in 1776 and M.A. in 1778, in which year he was ordained deacon and obtained a fellowship, which he held until his marriage. After serving as curate at Evesham, he became rector of Billingford in Norfolk in 1789, and on 6 July 1792 he was also instituted to the rectory of Kington, Worcestershire. In 1799 he exchanged the rectory of Billingford for the chaplainship of the Tower of London. In the same year he was elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries (, Lit. Illustr. vi. 772).

Tindal committed suicide at the Tower on 16 Sept. 1804 while in a state of mental depression. He married before 1794, and his wife survived him.

Besides writing several political pamphlets, he was the author of: 1. ‘Remarks on Dr. Johnson's Life and Critical Observations on the Works of Gray,’ 1782, 8vo. 2. ‘Juvenile Excursions in Literature and Criticism,’ London, 1791, 16mo. 3. ‘The History and Antiquities of the Abbey and Borough of Evesham,’ Evesham, 1794, 4to. The last work won high praise from Horace Walpole. Tindal is also said to have written


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/34

 IX.

What is the motive to the secret ballot? This, and only this: Like other confederates in crime, those who use it are not friends, but enemies; and they are afraid to be known, and to have their individual doings known, even to each other. They can contrive to bring about a sufficient understanding to enable them to act in concert against other persons; but beyond this they have no confidence, and no friendship, among themselves. In fact, they are engaged quite as much in schemes for plundering each other, as in plundering those who are not of them. And it is perfectly well understood among them that the strongest party among them will, in certain contingencies, murder each other by the hundreds of thousands (as they lately did do) to accomplish their purposes against each other. Hence they dare not be known, and have their individual doings known, even to each other. And this is avowedly the only reason for the ballot: for a secret government; a government by secret bands of robbers and murderers. And we are insane enough to call this liberty! To be a member of this secret band of robbers and murderers is esteemed a privilege and an honor! Without this privilege, a man is considered a slave; but with it a free man! With it he is considered a free man, because he has the same power to secretly (by secret ballot) procure the robbery, enslavement, and murder of another man, that that other man has to procure his robbery, enslavement, and murder. And this they call equal rights!

If any number of men, many or few, claim the right to govern the people of this country, let them make and sign an open compact with each other to do so. Let them thus make themselves individually known to those whom they propose to govern. And let them thus openly take the legitimate responsibility of their acts. How many of those who now support the Constitution, will ever do this? How many will ever dare openly

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/34


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/57

O'GORMAN, MAELMUIRE (d. 1181), called, according to Colgan,, and by the 'Four Masters' , martyrologist, was abbot of Cnoc na Seangan, or Pismire Hill, near the town of Louth. This place was afterwards known as Cnoc na n Apstal, or the Hill of the Apostles, from the time of the consecration of the church there by Archbishop [q. v.], when it was dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul. It was an establishment for Augustinian canons, the founders being Donnchadh O'Carroll, chief of Oriel, and Edan O'Caellaighe, bishop of Clogher. Marianus is termed in the 'Martyrology of Donegal' abbot of Louth. Ware, Harris, and Archdall believed the abbey of Louth to be distinct from the abbey of Cnoc na Seangan; but in that case two monasteries, both for Augustinian canons, and both founded by the same prince and bishop, must have existed within a few perches of each other. This seems highly improbable, and we may assume with confidence that they are identical.

Marianus is the author of a 'Martyrology' composed during the reign of [q. v.], king of Ireland, and between 1156 and 1173, while Gilla mac Liag or Gelasius was archbishop of Armagh. This work was unknown in Ireland except by name until 1847, when the Rev. Matthew Kelly of Maynooth procured a copy of the only known manuscript preserved in the Royal Library at Brussels. Two years after, the Rev. Dr. Todd obtained a loan of this and other manuscripts from the Belgian government, and had a copy of it made by Eugene O'Curry. The 'Martyrology,' which has never been published, is now about to be brought out by the Henry Bradshaw Society, under the editorship of Mr. Whitley Stokes, D.C.L. It is a poem in the Irish language, and consists of 2,780 lines in the rather rare and difficult metre known as 'Rinnard,' in which the' Calendar of Œngus Ceile Dé' is also composed. The poem is arranged in months, and has a stanza for every day in the year, which contains the names of those saints whose festivals fall on that day. There are also interlined and marginal glosses relating to the situation of the churches belonging to the saints mentioned when those saints are Irish, for Marianus does not confine himself to native saints. These glosses or scholia add much to its value as an historical authority. The preface informs us that it was taken largely from the 'Martyrology' of Tallaght. O'Clery made great use of it in the compilation of the 'Martyrology of Donegal,' which was published in 1864 under the editorship of Bishop Reeves and the Rev. Dr. Todd. All the names given in that work without a local designation are from Marianus, as well as those which have short local notices; of these last many, if not all, are taken from the scholia.

Marianus tells us he was led to undertake the work first by the hope of thereby securing entrance into the kingdom of heaven for himself as well as for every one who should make a practice of chanting it; in the second place he wished to supply the names of many saints, Irish and foreign, who were omitted from the 'Calendar of Œngus,' saints for whom the church had ordained festivals or prescribed masses; and, lastly, in order to correct the 'Calendar of Œngus,' in which days of commemoration were assigned to many different from those appointed by the church at that time. He died in 1181. His day in the 'Martyrology of Donegal' is 3 July.

O'GORMAN MAHON, The (1800–1891), politician. [See ]

O'GRADY, STANDISH, first (1766–1840), was the eldest son of Darby O'Grady of Mount Prospect, Limerick, and of Mary, daughter of James Smyth of the same county. He was born on 20 Jan. 1766, and, entering Trinity College, Dublin, graduated B.A. in 1784. He was called to the bar, and went the Munster circuit. He was remarkable for wit as well as learning, and attained considerable practice. On 28 May 1803, after the murder of Lord Kilwarden, he became attorney-general, and was one of the prosecuting counsel at the trial of Robert Emmet. In 1805 he was made lord chief baron, in succession to Yelverton, lord Avonmore. He was a sound judge, and [q. v.], of the Irish exchequer, expressed the opinion: 'O'Grady was the ablest man whose mind I ever saw at work.' His witticisms on and off the bench were long remembered (, Ireland and its Rulers, i. 126). O'Grady was one of the first to suspect the duplicity of


text:
The Happy Failure

A STORY OF THE RIVER HUDSON

appointment was that I should meet my elderly uncle at the riverside, precisely at nine in the morning. The skiff was to be ready, and the apparatus to be brought down by his grizzled old black man. As yet, the nature of the wonderful experiment remained a mystery to all but the projector.

I was first on the spot. The village was high up the river, and the inland summer sun was already oppressively warm. Presently I saw my uncle advancing beneath the trees, hat off, and wiping his brow; while far behind struggled poor old Yorpy, with what seemed one of the gates of Gaza on his back.

"Come, hurrah, stump along, Yorpy!" cried my uncle, impatiently turning round every now and then.

Upon the black's staggering up to the skiff, I perceived that the great gate of Gaza was transformed into a huge, shabby, oblong box, hermetically sealed. The sphinx-like blankness of the box quadrupled the mystery in my mind.

"Is this the wonderful apparatus," said I in amazement. "Why, it's nothing but a battered old dry-goods box, nailed up. And is this the thing, uncle, that is to make you a million of dollars ere the year be out ? What a forlorn-looking, lack-lustre, old ash-box it is." "Put it into the skiff!" roared my uncle to Yorpy, without heeding my boyish disdain.

"Put it in, you grizzled-headed cherub put it in carefully, carefully! If that box bursts, my everlasting fortune collapses."

"Bursts?—collapses?" cried I, in alarm. "It ain't full of combustibles ? Quick, let me go to the further end of the boat !"

"Sit still, you simpleton!" cried my uncle again. "Jump in, Yorpy, and hold on to the box like grim death while I shove off. Carefully! carefully! you dunderheaded black! Mind t'other side of the box, I say! Do you mean to destroy the box?"

"Duyvel take te pox !" muttered old Yorpy, who was a sort of Dutch African. "De pox has been my cuss for de ten long 'ear."

"Now, then, we're off—take an oar, youngster ; you, Yorpy, clinch the box fast. Here we go now. Carefully! carefully! You, Yorpy, stop shaking the box ! Easy ! there's a big snag. Pull now. Hurrah! deep water at last! Now give way, youngster, and away to the island."

"The island!" said I. "There's no island hereabouts."

"There is ten miles above the bridge, though," said my uncle, determinately.

"Ten miles off! Pull that old dry-goods box ten miles up the river in this blazing sun?"

"All that I have to say," said my uncle, firmly, "is that we are bound to Quash Island."

"Mercy, uncle! if I had known of this great long pull of ten mortal miles in this fiery sun, you wouldn't have juggled me into the skiff so easy. What's in that box?—paving-stones? See how the skiff settles down under it. I won't help pull a box of paving-stones ten miles. What's the use of pulling 'em?"

"Look you, simpleton," quoth my uncle, pausing upon his suspended oar. "Stop rowing, will ye! Now then, if you don't want to share in the glory of my experiment; if you are wholly indifferent to halving its immortal renown ; I say, sir, if you care not to be present at the first trial of my Great Hydraulic- Hydrostatic Apparatus for draining swamps and marshes, and converting them, at the rate of one acre the hour, into fields more fertile than those of the Genesee ; if you care not, I repeat, to have this proud thing to tell—in far future days, when poor old I shall have been long dead and gone, boy—to your children and your children's children; in that case, sir, you are free to land forthwith."

"Oh, uncle! I did not mean—

"No words, sir! Yorpy, take his oar, and help pull him ashore."

"But, my dear uncle; I declare to you that—"

"Not a syllable, sir; you have cast open scorn upon the Great Hydraulic-Hydrostatic Apparatus. Yorpy, put him ashore, Yorpy. It's shallow here again. Jump out, Yorpy, and wade with him ashore."

"Now, my dear, good, kind uncle, do but pardon me this one time, and I will say nothing about the apparatus."

"Say nothing about it ! when it is my express end and aim it shall be famous ! Put him ashore, Yorpy."

"Nay, uncle, I will not give up my oar. I have an oar in this matter, and I mean to keep it. You shall not cheat me out my share of your glory."

"Ah, now there—that's sensible. You may stay, youngster. Pull again now." We were all silent for a time, steadily plying our way. At last I ventured to break water once more.

"I am glad, dear uncle, you have revealed to me at last the nature and end of your great experiment. It is the effectual draining of swamps; an attempt, dear uncle, in which, if you do but succeed (as I know you will), you will earn the glory denied to a Roman emperor. He tried to drain the Pontine marsh, but failed."

"The world has shot ahead the length of its own diameter since then," quoth my uncle, proudly. "If that Roman emperor were here, I'd show him what can be done in the present enlightened age."

Seeing my good uncle so far mollified now as to be quite self-complacent, I ventured another remark.

"This is a rather severe, hot pull, dear uncle."

"Glory is not to be gained, youngster, without pulling hard for it—against the stream, too, as we do now. The natural tendency of man, in the mass, is to go down with the universal current into oblivion."

"But why pull so far, dear uncle, upon the present occasion? Why pull ten miles for it? You do but propose, as I understand it, to put to the actual test this admirable invention of yours. And could it not be tested almost anywhere?"

"Simple boy," quoth my uncle, would you have some malignant spy steal from me the fruits of ten long years of high-hearted, persevering endeavor? Solitary in my scheme, I go to a solitary place to test it. If I fail—for all things are possible—no one out of the family will know it. If I succeed, secure in the secrecy of my invention, I can boldly demand any price for its publication."

"Pardon me, dear uncle; you are wiser than I."

"One would think years and gray hairs should bring wisdom, boy."

"Yorpy there, dear uncle; think you his grizzled locks thatch a brain improved by long life?"

"Am I Yorpy, boy? Keep to your oar!"

Thus padlocked again, I said no further word till the skiff grounded on the shallows, some twenty yards from the deep-wooded isle.

"Hush!" whispered my uncle, intensely; "not a word now!" and he sat perfectly still, slowly sweeping with his glance the whole country around, even to both banks of the here wide-expanded stream.

"Wait till that horseman, yonder, passes!" he whispered again, pointing to a speck moving along a lofty, riverside road, which perilously wound on midway up a long line of broken bluffs and cliffs. "There—he's out of sight now, behind the copse. Quick! Yorpy! Carefully, though! Jump overboard, and shoulder the box, and—Hold!"

We were all mute and motionless again.

"Ain't that a boy, sitting like Zaccheus in yonder tree of the orchard on the other bank? Look, youngster—young eyes are better than old—don't you see him?"

"Dear uncle, I see the orchard, but I can't see any boy."

"He's a spy—I know he is," suddenly said my uncle, disregardful of my answer, and intently gazing, shading his eyes with his flattened hand. "Don't touch the box, Yorpy. Crouch! crouch down, all of ye!"

"Why, uncle—there—see—the boy is only a withered white bough. I see it very plainly now."

"You don't see the tree I mean," quoth my uncle, with a decided air of relief, "but never mind; I defy the boy. Yorpy, jump out, and shoulder the box. And now then, youngster, off with your shoes and stockings, roll up your trousers legs, and follow me. Carefully, Yorpy, carefully. That's more precious than a box of gold, mind."

"Heavy as de gelt anyhow," growled Yorpy, staggering and splashing in the shallows beneath it.

"There, stop under the bushes there—in among the flags—so—gently, gently—there, put it down just there. Now youngster, are you ready? Follow—tiptoes, tiptoes!"

"I can't wade in this mud and water on my tiptoes, uncle; and I don't see the need of it either."

"Go ashore, sir—instantly!"

"Why, uncle, I am ashore."

"Peace! follow me, and no more."

Crouching in the water in complete secrecy, beneath the bushes and among the tall flags, my uncle now stealthily produced a hammer and wrench from one of his enormous pockets, and presently tapped the box. But the sound alarmed him.

"Yorpy," he whispered, "go you off to the right, behind the bushes, and keep watch. If you see any one coming, whistle softly. Youngster, you do the same to the left."

We obeyed; and presently, after considerable hammering and supplemental tinkering, my uncle's voice was heard in the utter solitude, loudly commanding our return.

Again we obeyed, and now found the cover of the box removed. All eagerness, I peeped in, and saw a surprising multiplicity of convoluted metal pipes and syringes of all sorts and varieties, all sizes and calibres, inextricably interwreathed together in one gigantic coil. It looked like a huge nest of anacondas and adders.

"Now then, Yorpy," said my uncle, all animation, and flushed with the foretaste of glory, "do you stand this side, and be ready to tip when I give the word. And do you, youngster, stand ready to do as much for the other side. Mind, don't budge it the fraction of a barley-corn till I say the word. All depends on a proper adjustment."

"No fear, uncle. I will be careful as a lady's tweezers."

"I s'ant life de heavy pox," growled old Yorpy, "till de wort pe given; no fear o' dat."

"Oh, boy," said my uncle now, upturning his face devotionally, while a really noble gleam irradiated his gray eyes, locks, and wrinkles; "Oh, boy! this, this is the hour which for ten long years has, in the prospect, sustained me through all my painstaking obscurity. Fame will be the sweeter because it comes at the last ; the truer, because it comes to an old man like me, not to a boy like you. Sustainer! I glorify Thee."

He bowed over his venerable head, and—as I live something like a shower-drop somehow fell from my face into the shallows.

"Tip!"

We tipped.

"A leetle more!"

We tipped a little more.

"A leetle more!"

We tipped a leetle more.

"Just a leetle, very leetle bit more."

With great difficulty we tipped just a leetle, very leetle more.

All this time my uncle was diligently stooping over, and striving to peep in, up, and under the box where the coiled anacondas and adders lay; but the machine being now fairly immersed, the attempt was wholly vain.

He rose erect, and waded slowly all round the box ; his countenance firm and reliant, but not a little troubled and vexed.

It was plain something or other was going wrong. But as I was left in utter ignorance as to the mystery of the contrivance, I could not tell where the difficulty lay, or what was the proper remedy.

Once more, still more slowly, still more vexedly, my uncle waded round the box, the dissatisfaction gradually deepening, but still controlled, and still with hope at the bottom of it.

Nothing could be more sure than that some anticipated effect had, as yet, failed to develop itself. Certain I was, too, that the water-line did not lower about my legs.

"Tip it a leetle bit—very leetle now."

"Dear uncle, it is tipped already as far as it can be. Don't you see it rests now square on its bottom?"

"You, Yorpy, take your black hoof from under the box!"

This gust of passion on the part of my uncle made the matter seem still more dubious and dark. It was a bad symptom, I thought.

"Surely you can tip it just a leetle more !"

"Not a hair, uncle."

"Blast and blister the cursed box then!" roared my uncle, in a terrific voice, sudden as a squall. Running at the box, he dashed his bare foot into it, and with astonishing power all but crushed in the side. Then seizing the whole box, he disemboweled it of all its anacondas and adders, and, tearing and wrenching them, flung them right and left over the water.

"Hold, hold, my dear, dear uncle!—do for heaven's sake desist. Don't destroy so, in one frantic moment, all your long calm years of devotion to one darling scheme. Hold, I conjure!"

Moved by my vehement voice and uncontrollable tears, he paused in his work of destruction, and stood steadfastly eyeing me, or rather blankly staring at me, like one demented.

"It is not yet wholly ruined, dear uncle; come put it together now. You have hammer and wrench ; put it together again, and try it once more. While there is life there is hope."

"While there is life hereafter there is despair," he howled.

"Do, do now, dear uncle—here, here, put those pieces together ; or, if that can't be done without more tools, try a section of it—that will do just as well. Try it once; try, uncle."

My persistent persuasiveness told upon him. The stubborn stump of hope, plowed at and uprooted in vain, put forth one last miraculous green sprout.

Steadily and carefully pulling out of the wreck some of the more curious-looking fragments, he mysteriously involved them together, and then, clearing out the box, slowly inserted them there, and ranging Yorpy and me as before, bade us tip the box once again.

We did so; and as no perceptible effect yet followed, I was each moment looking for the previous command to tip the box over yet more, when, glancing into my uncle's face, I started aghast. It seemed pinched, shriveled into mouldy whiteness, like a mildewed grape. I dropped the box, and sprang toward him just in time to prevent his fall.

Leaving the woeful box where we had dropped it, Yorpy and I helped the old man into the skiff and silently pulled from Quash Isle.

How swiftly the current now swept us down! How hardly before had we striven to stem it! I thought of my poor uncle's saying, not an hour gone by, about the universal drift of the mass of humanity toward utter oblivion.

"Boy!" said my uncle at last, lifting his head. I looked at him earnestly, and was gladdened to see that the terrible blight of his face had almost departed.

"Boy, there's not much left in an old world for an old man to invent."

I said nothing.

"Boy, take my advice, and never try to invent anything but—happiness."

I said nothing.

"Boy, about ship, and pull back for the box."

"Dear uncle!"

"It will make a good wood-box, boy. And faithful old Yorpy can sell the old iron for tobacco-money."

"Dear massa! dear old massa! dat be very fust time in de ten long 'ear yoo hab mention kindly old Yorpy. I tank yoo, dear old massa ; I tank yoo so kindly. Yoo is yourself agin in de ten long 'ear."

"Ay, long ears enough," sighed my uncle; "Esopian ears. But it's all over now. Boy. I'm glad I've failed. I say, boy, failure has made a good old man of me. It was horrible at first, but I'm glad I've failed. Praise be to God for the failure!"

His face kindled with a strange, rapt earnestness. I have never forgotten that look. If the event made my uncle a good old man as he called it, it made me a wise young one. Example did for me the work of experience.

When some years had gone by, and my dear old uncle began to fail, and, after peaceful days of autumnal content, was gathered gently to his fathers—faithful old Yorpy closing his eyes—as I took my last look at his venerable face, the pale resigned lips seemed to move. I seemed to hear again his deep, fervent cry— "Praise be to God for the failure!"

title: The Happy Failure


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/35

31 claim their right to govern? or take the legitimate responsibility of their acts? Not one!

X.

It is obvious that, on general principles of law and reason, there exists no such thing as a government created by, or resting upon, any consent, compact, or agreement of "the people of the United States" with each other; that the only visible, tangible, responsible government that exists, is that of a few individuals only, who act in concert, and call themselves by the several names of senators, representatives, presidents, judges, marshals, treasurers, collectors, generals, colonels, captains, &c., &c.

On general principles of law and reason, it is of no importance whatever that these few individuals profess to be the agents and representatives of "the people of the United States"; since they can show no credentials from the people themselves; they were never appointed as agents or representatives in any open authentic manner; they do not themselves know, and have no means of knowing, and cannot prove, who their principals (as they call them) are individually; and consequently cannot, in law or reason, be said to have any principals at all.

It is obvious, too, that if these alleged principals ever did appoint these pretended agents, or representatives, they appointed them secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all personal responsibility for their acts; that, at most, these alleged principals put these pretended agents forward for the most criminal purposes, viz.: to plunder the people of their property, and restrain them of their liberty; and that the only authority that these alleged principals have for so doing, is simply a tacit understanding among themselves that they will imprison, shoot, or hang every man who resists the exactions and restraints which their agents or representatives may impose upon them.

Thus it is obvious that the only visible, tangible government we

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/35


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Zither

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Zither


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/415

 shire, was born at Wheatfield in 1598. He entered Queen's College, Oxford, as a commoner, matriculated 23 June 1615, and graduated B.A. on 23 Oct. 1617. He became a student at Lincoln's Inn in 1618, but afterwards abandoned the law, returned to Oxford, lived a studious life, and was added to the commission of the peace. He was summoned before the court of high commission for puritan practices in 1635 and 1636, and in the civil war joined the parliament, took the covenant, and was inducted into the family living of Shabbington, Buckinghamshire. He appears as one of the parliamentary visitors of Oxford in 1647 (, Reg. Visit. pp. lxi, 2), and on 12 April 1648 was created M.A.. He died in the neighbouring parish of Waterstock on 2 Feb. 1648–9, and was there buried on the 8th.

Tipping, who was unmarried, bequeathed an annuity for a Good Friday sermon in All Saints', Oxford, and during his lifetime gave 300l. to build a bridewell outside the north gate of Oxford. He has been confused with a relative of the same name who married Ursula, daughter of Sir John Brett of Edmonton (Visitations of Oxfordshire, Harl. Soc. p. 275; cf., Hist. of Buckinghamshire, i. 453).

He wrote: 1. ‘A Discourse of Eternity,’ Oxford, 1633, 4to, from which he was known as ‘Eternity Tipping.’ A second (anonymous) edition was published in London, 1646. 2. ‘A Return of Thankfulness for the unexpected Recovery out of a dangerous Sickness,’ Oxford, 1640, 8vo. 3. ‘The Father's Counsell,’ London, 1644, 8vo; republished in ‘Harleian Miscellany,’ vol. ix. 1808. 4. ‘The Preacher's Plea, or a short Declaration touching the Smallness of their Maintenance,’ London, 1646, 8vo. 5. ‘The remarkable Life and Death of the lady Apollonia Hall, widow, aged 20,’ London, 1647, 8vo. Of these none save the ‘Harleian Miscellany’ reproduction is in the British Museum.

[Wood's Athenæ Oxon. ed. Bliss, iii. 243; Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1635–6; Lipscomb's Hist. of Buckinghamshire, i. 309, 450–3; Bodleian Catalogue; Madan's Early Oxford Press, pp. 174, 223.]  TIPTOFT or TIBETOT, JOHN, (1375?–1443), born probably about 1375, was son and heir of Sir Pain de Tibetot by his wife Agnes, sister of Sir John Wroth of Enfield, Middlesex. Sir Pain, who acquired wide estates in Cambridgeshire, was the youngest son of John, second baron Tibetot or Tiptoft (d. 1367) [see under ], by his second wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Robert Aspall and widow of Sir Thomas Wauton [see under or ]. John Tiptoft was in 1397 in the service of Henry, earl of Derby, afterwards Henry IV, with 7½d. a day wages. Probably he shared Derby's exile in France during the next two years, and returned with him when he came to overthrow Richard II in 1399. He was rewarded by various grants, among them being the apparel of the attainted Thomas Mowbray, first duke of Norfolk [q. v.] In 1403 he was styled ‘miles camerarii regis et aulæ,’ and he was elected for Huntingdonshire to the parliament which sat from 3 Dec. in that year to 14 Jan. 1403–4. In November 1404 a vessel which he had sent to the relief of Bayonne was captured by Castilian pirates and sold at Bilbao with a cargo worth 2,500l. (Harl. MS. 431, f. 134). Tiptoft was again returned for Huntingdonshire to the parliaments which met at Coventry on 6 Oct. 1404 and at Westminster on 1 March 1405–6. In the latter he was elected speaker, and was naturally accepted by Henry IV, though officially protesting his ‘youth’ and ‘lack of sense.’ In spite of his close personal connection with the king, Tiptoft seems to have acted with considerable independence; his tenure of the speakership, extending over two sessions, March–April and November–December 1406, was marked by several important advances in the power of the commons, and ‘the parliament of 1406 seems almost to stand for an exponent of the most advanced principles of mediæval constitutional life in England’ (, Const. Hist. iii. 57). It attained a less enviable fame by its severe legislation against the lollards, for which Prynne unjustly held Tiptoft to be especially responsible (cf., Speakers, pp. 40–2).

On 8 Dec. 1406 Tiptoft, who was succeeded as speaker by Sir Thomas Chaucer [q. v.], was appointed keeper of the wardrobe, treasurer of the royal household, and chief butler, in succession to Chaucer. In 1407 he received, on the forfeiture of Owen Glendower [q. v.], considerable estates in South Wales, and on 8 Feb. 1407–8 he was made steward of the Landes and constable of Dax in Aquitaine. On 17 July he resigned his keepership of the wardrobe, and in the same month he was made treasurer of England. On 8 Sept. he was appointed prefect of Entre-deux-Mers, a district near Bordeaux. He was a witness to the will signed by Henry IV on 21 Jan. 1408–9, and in March following was in attendance on the king at Greenwich. In August he was selected by Henry to meet the envoys


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/36

32 have is made up of these professed agents or representatives of a secret band of robbers and murderers, who, to cover up, or gloss over, their robberies and murders, have taken to themselves the title of "the people of the United States;" and who, on the pretence of being "the people of the United States," assert their right to subject to their dominion, and to control and dispose of at their pleasure, all property and persons found in the United States.

XI.

On general principles of law and reason, the oaths which these pretended agents of the people take "to support the Constitution," are of no validity or obligation. And why? For this, if for no other reason, viz. that they are given to nobody. There is no privity, (as the lawyers say),—that is, no mutual recognition, consent and agreement—between those who take these oaths, and any other persons.

If I go upon Boston Common, and in the presence of a hundred thousand people, men, women and children, with whom I have no contract on the subject, take an oath that I will enforce upon them the laws of Moses, of Lycurgus, of Solon, of Justinian, or of Alfred, that oath is, on general principles of law and reason, of no obligation. It is of no obligation, not merely because it is intrinsically a criminal one, but also because it is given to nobody, and consequently pledges my faith to nobody. It is merely given to the winds.

It would not alter the case at all to say that, among these hundred thousand persons, in whose presence the oath was taken, there were two, three, or five thousand male adults, who had secretly—by secret ballot, and in a way to avoid making themselves individually known to me, or to the remainder of the hundred thousand—designated me as their agent to rule, control, plunder, and, if need be, murder, these hundred thousand

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/36


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Zittau

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Zittau


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/416

 of the Hanse Towns and persuade them to postpone their demand for the repayment of the loan they had advanced to the king. On 11 Dec. following he resigned the treasurership. On 20 May 1412 he was appointed steward and constable of the castles of Brecknock, Cantresell, Grosmont, and Skenfrith.

Tiptoft retained royal favour under Henry V. He represented Somerset in the first parliament of the reign, which was summoned on 5 Feb. 1413–14, and in the same year served on a committee of the privy council which reported against aliens being permitted to bring into the realm bulls and letters prejudicial to the king (, Acts P. C. ii. 60); but he was soon more actively employed in Henry's designs abroad. On 8 May 1415 he was appointed seneschal of Aquitaine, and on 4 June following received letters of protection on setting out thither (, ix. 239). In 1416 he took an important part in negotiating alliances between England and various foreign princes preparatory to Henry's invasion of France. On 13 Jan. he was commissioned to treat with the king of Castile, and on 4 May with the archbishop of Cologne (ib. ix. 328, 343, 346, 364). On 1 Sept. he was granted letters of protection for a year's sojourn at the court of the king of the Romans. On 9 Dec. he was appointed commissioner to treat for an alliance with the king of Aragon, the German princes, the Hanseatic league, and the Genoese (ib. pp. 385, 410, 427, 430). On 17 Jan. 1416–17 he was sent on a secret mission to the emperor in connection with the Duke of Burgundy's alleged offer to recognise Henry as king of France. After the conquest of Normandy Tiptoft had a prominent share in the organisation of its government. He was appointed captain of Dessay on 12 Oct., of the castle and town of Bonmoleyns on the 17th, and treasurer of Normandy and president of the exchequer and all other courts of justice in the duchy on 1 Nov. (, Rotuli Normanniæ, pp. 180, 205). On 11 Jan. 1418–19 he was made commissioner of array at Caen and Bayeux. On 8 May following he was appointed one of the commissioners to treat for peace with France. He was employed in all the negotiations preliminary to the conclusion of the treaty (, ix. 749 et passim), and then went to resume his duties as seneschal of Aquitaine (ib. x. 43, 129), where he also had command of Lesparre, an important fortress to the north-west of Bordeaux (, La Guienne Militaire, 1865, ii. 151, 337).

On the death of Henry V, 22 Aug. 1422, Tiptoft was appointed an assistant councillor to the regency during the minority of Henry VI, but on 1 Nov. following he appears to have become a full member of the privy council. He was a regular attendant at its meetings, and took an important part in its deliberations (see, Proceedings, vols. iii–v., where there are between two and three hundred references to him). He was present at the council during the winter of 1422–3, when arrangements were made for carrying on the government during the young king's minority (, iii. 97–8;, x. 270–1, 282, 289, 290, 341 et sqq.). His signature, with the words ‘nolens volo,’ appended to a minute of the council dated 16 July 1428, is of considerable interest as showing that privy councillors signed the acts of the council whether agreeing with them or not (cf., Acts P. C. vol. ii. pref. p. liv). In 1425 Tiptoft became chief steward of the castles and lordships in Wales, and about the same time he married, as his second wife, Joyce, second and youngest daughter of Edward Charlton or Cherleton, fifth and last lord Charlton of Powys [q. v.], by his first wife, Eleanor, sister and co-heiress of Edmund Holland, earl of Kent [see under ], and widow of Roger Mortimer, fourth earl of March [q. v.] This marriage added considerably to Tiptoft's importance, and on 17 Jan. 1425–6 he was summoned to parliament as Baron Tiptoft; he also assumed the title of Powis in his wife's right, and in 1440 he was styled ‘Johannes dominus de Tiptot et de Powes baro, consiliarius noster’ (, x. 834). From 1427 onwards he frequently acted as a trier of petitions in parliament, and was also employed in hearing and determining petitions left unanswered by parliament (Rot. Parl. vol. iv. passim). On 22 Feb. 1427–8 he appears as steward of the household, and in April 1429 he was placed in command of a contingent of the army which accompanied Henry VI to France (, Lancaster and York, i. 486). He was dismissed from the stewardship of the household on 1 March 1431–2, when Cromwell, the lord treasurer, and other ministers lost their offices (, iii. 114–15), but he remained a constant attendant at the meetings of the privy council. In 1436 he was again sent with reinforcements to France. On 10 Nov. following he was commissioned to treat with envoys from Prussia. In March 1437–8 he was negotiating with the king of Scotland, and in 1440 with the envoys from the Teutonic knights and the archbishop of Cologne. His last attendance at the privy council was on 24 Aug. 1442, and he died on 27 Jan. 1442–3.

Tiptoft's first wife was Philippa, daughter of


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Zittel, Karl Alfred von


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/37

 people. The fact that they had designated me secretly, and in a manner to prevent my knowing them individually, prevents all privity between them and me; and consequently makes it impossible that there can be any contract, or pledge of faith, on my part towards them; for it is impossible that I can pledge my faith, in any legal sense, to a man whom I neither know, nor have any means of knowing, individually.

So far as I am concerned, then, these two, three, or five thousand persons are a secret band of robbers and murderers, who have secretly, and in a way to save themselves from all responsibility for my acts, designated me as their agent; and have, through some other agent, or pretended agent, made their wishes known to me. But being, nevertheless, individually unknown to me, and having no open, authentic contract with me, my oath is, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity as a pledge of faith to them. And being no pledge of faith to them, it is no pledge of faith to anybody. It is mere idle wind. At most, it is only a pledge of faith to an unknown band of robbers and murderers, whose instrument for plundering and murdering other people, I thus publicly confess myself to be. And it has no other obligation than a similar oath given to any other unknown body of pirates, robbers, and murderers.

For these reasons the oath taken by members of Congress "to support the Constitution," are, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity. They are not only criminal in themselves, and therefore void; but they are also void for the further reason that they are given to nobody.

It cannot be said that, in any legitimate or legal sense, they are given to "the people of the United States;" because neither the whole, nor any large proportion of the whole, people of the United States ever, either openly or secretly, appointed or designated these men as their agents to carry the Constitution into effect. The great body of the people — that is, men, women and children — were never asked, or even permitted, to signify, in any 3

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/37


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/38

 formal manner, either openly or secretly, their choice or wish on the subject. The most that these members of Congress can say, in favor of their appointment, is simply this: Each one can say for himself:

I have evidence satisfactory to myself, that there exists, scattered throughout the country, a band of men, having a tacit understanding with each other, and calling themselves "the people of the United States," whose general purposes are to control and plunder each other, and all other persons in the country, and, so far as they can, even in neighboring countries; and to kill every man who shall attempt to defend his person and property against their schemes of plunder and dominion. Who these men are, individually, I have no certain means of knowing, for they sign no papers, and give no open, authentic evidence of their individual membership. They are not known individually even to each other. They are apparently as much afraid of being individually known to each other, as of being known to other persons. Hence they ordinarily have no mode either of exercising, or of making known, their individual membership, otherwise than by giving their votes secretly for certain agents to do their will. But although these men are individually unknown, both to each other and to other persons, it is generally understood in the country that none but male persons, of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, can be members. It is also generally understood that all male persons, born in the country, having certain complexions, and (in some localities) certain amounts of property, and (in certain cases) even persons of foreign birth, are permitted to be members. But it appears that usually not more than one-half, two-thirds, or, in some cases, three-fourths, of all who are thus permitted to become members of the band, ever exercise, or consequently prove, their actual membership, in the only mode in which they ordinarily can exercise or prove it, viz., by giving their votes secretly for the officers or agents of the band. The number of these secret

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/38


text: Page:A book of the Cevennes (-1907-).djvu/180


text: Page:A book of the Cevennes (-1907-).djvu/183


text:
Page:A book of the Cevennes (-1907-).djvu/184

Page 125


text:
Page:Popular tales from the Norse (1912).djvu/145

 Rh Odyssey as an eagle or a swallow perched on the roof of the hall, so Odin flies off as a falcon, and Loki takes the form of a horse or bird. This was only part of that omnipotence which all gods enjoy. But the belief that men, under certain conditions, could also take the shape of animals, is primeval, and the traditions of every race can tell of such transformations. Herodotus had heard how the Neurians, a Slavonic race, passed for wizards amongst the Scythians and the Greeks settled round the Black Sea, because each of them, once in the year, became a wolf for a few days, and then returned to his natural shape. Pliny, Pomponius Mela, and St. Augustin, in his great treatise, De Civitate Dei, tell the same story, and Virgil in his Eclogues has sung the same belief. The Latins called such a man a turnskin,—versipellis, an expression which exactly agrees with the Icelandic expression for the same thing, and which is probably the true original of our turncoat. In Petronius the superstition appears in its full shape, and is worth repeating. At the banquet of Trimalchion, Niceros gives the following account of the turnskins of Nero's time:—

"It happened that my master was gone to Capua to dis pose of some second-hand goods. I took the opportunity and persuaded our guest to walk with me to the fifth milestone. He was a valiant soldier, and a sort of grim water-drinking Pluto. About cock-crow, when the moon was shining as bright as mid-day, we came among the monuments. My


text:
Page:Popular tales from the Norse (1912).djvu/146

cxl friend began addressing himself to the stars, but I was rather in a mood to sing or to count them; and when I turned to look at him, lo! he had already stripped himself and laid down his clothes near him. My heart was in my nostrils, and I stood like a dead man; but he 'circumminxit vestimenta,' and on a sudden became a wolf. Do not think I jest; I would not lie for any man's estate. But to return to what I was saying. When he became a wolf, he began howling, and fled into the woods. At first I hardly knew where I was, and afterwards, when I went to take up his clothes, they were turned into stone. Who then died with fear but I? Yet I drew my sword, and went cutting the air right and left, till I reached the villa of my sweetheart. I entered the court-yard. I almost breathed my last, the sweat ran down my neck, my eyes were dim, and I thought I should never recover myself. My Melissa wondered why I was out so late, and said to me,—'Had you come sooner you might at least have helped us, for a wolf has entered the farm, and worried all our cattle; but he had not the best of the joke, for all he escaped, for our slave ran a lance through his neck.' When I heard this, I could not doubt how it was, and, as it was clear daylight, ran home as fast as a robbed innkeeper. When I came to the spot where the clothes had been turned into stone, I could find nothing except blood. But when I got home, I found my friend the soldier in bed, bleeding at the neck like an ox, and a doctor dressing his wound. I then knew he was a turnskin; nor would I ever have broke bread with him again; no, not if you had killed me."


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Wright, Wilbur

WRIGHT, WILBUR (1867-1912), American inventor, was born near Millville, Ind., April 16 1867. He was the son of Milton Wright, a bishop of the United Brethren in Christ. He secured a high-school education in Richmond, Ind., and Dayton, O. Together with his brother Orville he opened a shop for repairing bicycles at Dayton in the early ‘nineties. The Wright brothers early became interested in the problem of flying, and from about 1900 made many experiments with gliding machines at Kittyhawk, N.C. On Dec. 17 1903 such a machine with a petrol motor attached flew 260 yd., the first successful flight of an aeroplane; and on Oct. 5 1905, near Dayton, they accomplished their first successful long flight, more than 24 m., at the speed of 38 m. an hour. In spite of this proof of the practicability of flight in heavier-than-air machines, they were unsuccessful in enlisting financial support in America. In 1908 Wilbur Wright went to France, and on Sept. 21 won the Michelin prize by a flight of 56 miles. This brought him international fame. In Dec. of the same year he made from Le Mans, France, a flight of 77 m. in 2 hours and 20 minutes. In 1909, during the Hudson-Fulton Exposition in New York City, he flew from Governor's I. up the Hudson river to Grant's tomb and back, travelling 21 m. in 33 minutes and 33 seconds. On March 3 1909 Congress awarded the Wright brothers a special medal. Later the U.S. Government purchased a machine for $30,000, and afterwards the invention was officially adopted by the U.S. army. The French patents were sold for $100,000. After 1910 Wilbur Wright gave up public flying and devoted his time to mechanical improvement of the Wright machine. He received many medals and honours from European countries. He died at Dayton, May 30 1912.

His brother, (1871-       ), was born at Dayton, O., Aug. 18 1871. He was educated in the Dayton schools, worked with his brother Wilbur in the bicycle repairing business, and was closely associated with him in all his experiments in developing a practicable aeroplane. He shared in the many honours awarded by foreign countries, and after the death of his brother became director of the Wright Aeronautical Laboratory at Dayton. In 1913 he received the Collier trophy for developing the automatic stabilizer. In 1915 he was appointed a member of the U.S. Naval Consulting Board. The same year the Wright Aeroplane Co. sold its patents to a New York syndicate, Orville Wright remaining chief engineer.


text:
Page:A book of the Cevennes (-1907-).djvu/188

128 One interesting lesson one learns from the overflow of this crater, and that is that the prismatic structure of basalt is due to pressure from above. Except under great superincumbent weight it has not crystallised regularly.

A beautiful fall in four dives under the bridge of the road to Genestelle, on the road to Antraigues, irresistibly obliges one with a camera to take views. But indeed the whole neighbourhood is weeping these beautiful tears—tears of joy that the fire floods are over.

The valley of the Ardèche above where it falls into the basin of Aubenas is finer still; it leads into the heart of the noblest volcanic heights.

At Pont de la Beaume one has the stately tower of the castle of Ventadour rising from the summit of a rock that commands the road up to Thueyts (pronounced Two-ets) and that to Jaujac, where the Lignon flows into the Ardèche.

The Ventadour family were Levis by origin, and claimed to be descendants of the tribe of Levi of the seed of Aaron, and therefore justified in meddling to any extent in ecclesiastical matters. It is really wonful what changes can be rung on the name of Levi. It becomes in England Lewis and Levison, Lowe and Lyons, and Lawson.

But there was absolutely no justification in the Ventadour family asserting to themselves a Hebraic origin. It is strange how eager these Levis were to assert a fabulous descent, and how desirous the modern sons of Levi are to obscure the traces of what is undoubtedly theirs.

The Levis first appear in history in the eleventh century, and derive their name not from Levi, but from


text:
Page:Popular tales from the Norse (1912).djvu/147

Rh A man who had such a gift or greed was also called lycanthropus, a man-wolf or wolf-man, which term the Anglo-Saxons translated literally in Canute's Laws verevulf, and the early English werewolf. In Old French he was loupgarou, which means the same thing; except that garou means man-wolf in itself without the antecedent loup, so that, as Madden observes, the whole word is one of those reduplications of which we have an example in lukewarm. In Brittany he was bleizgarou and denvleiz, formed respectively from bleiz, wolf, and den, man; garou is merely a distorted form of wer or vere, man and loup. In later French the word became waroul, whence the Scotch wroul, wurl, and worlin.

It was not likely that a belief so widely spread should not have extended itself to the North; and the grave assertions of Olaus Magnus in the sixteenth century, in his Treatise de Gentibus Septentrionalibus, shew how common the belief in were-wolves was in Sweden so late as the time of Gustavus Vasa. In mythical times the Volsunga Saga expressly states of Sigmund and Sinfjötli that they became were-wolves,—which, we may remark, were Odin's sacred beasts,—just in the same way as Brynhildr and the Valkyries, or corse-choosers, who followed the


text: Page:A book of the Cevennes (-1907-).djvu/189


text: Page:A book of the Cevennes (-1907-).djvu/190


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/39

35 votes, so far as we have any account of them, varies greatly from year to year, thus tending to prove that the band, instead of being a permanent organization, is a merely pro tempore affair with those who choose to act with it for the time being. The gross number of these secret votes, or what purports to be their gross number, in different localities, is occasionally published. Whether these reports are accurate or not, we have no means of knowing. It is generally supposed that great frauds are often committed in depositing them. They are understood to be received and counted by certain men, who are themselves appointed for that purpose by the same secret process by which all other officers and agents of the band are selected. According to the reports of these receivers of votes (for whose accuracy or honesty, however, I cannot vouch), and according to my best knowledge of the whole number of male persons "in my district," who (it is supposed) were permitted to vote, it would appear that one-half, two-thirds or three-fourths actually did vote. Who the men were, individually, who cast these votes, I have no knowledge, for the whole thing was done secretly. But of the secret votes thus given for what they call a "member of Congress," the receivers reported that I had a majority, or at least a larger number than any other one person. And it is only by virtue of such a designation that I am now here to act in concert with other persons similarly selected in other parts of the country. It is understood among those who sent me here, that all the persons so selected, will, on coming together at the City of Washington, take an oath in each other's presence "to support the Constitution of the United States." By this is meant a certain paper that was drawn up eighty years ago. It was never signed by anybody, and apparently has no obligation, and never had any obligation, as a contract. In fact, few persons ever read it, and doubtless much the largest number of those who voted for me and the others, never even saw it, or now pretend to know what it means. Nevertheless, it is often spoken

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/39


text:
Page:A book of the Cevennes (-1907-).djvu/191

Page 128


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/40

 of in the country as "the Constitution of the United States;" and for some reason or another, the men who sent me here, seem to expect that I, and all with whom I act, will swear to carry this Constitution into effect. I am therefore ready to take this oath, and to co-operate with all others, similarly selected, who are ready to take the same oath.

This is the most that any member of Congress can say in proof that he has any constituency; that he represents anybody; that his oath "to support the Constitution," is given to anybody, or pledges his faith to anybody. He has no open, written, or other authentic evidence, such as is required in all other cases, that he was ever appointed the agent or representative of anybody. He has no written power of attorney from any single individual. He has no such legal knowledge as is required in all other cases, by which he can identify a single one of those who pretend to have appointed him to represent them.

Of course his oath, professedly given to them, "to support the Constitution," is, on general principles of law and reason, an oath given to nobody. It pledges his faith to nobody. If he fails to fulfil his oath, not a single person can come forward, and say to him, you have betrayed me, or broken faith with me.

No one can come forward and say to him: I appointed you my attorney to act for me. I required you to swear that, as my attorney, you would support the Constitution. You promised me that you would do so; and now you have forfeited the oath you gave to me. No single individual can say this.

No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men, can come forward and say to him: We appointed you our attorney, to act for us. We required you to swear that, as our attorney, you would support the Constitution. You promised us that you would do so; and now you have forfeited the oath you gave to us.

No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men,

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/40


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/41

37 can say this to him; because there is no such association or body of men in existence. If any one should assert that there is such an association, let him prove, if he can, who compose it. Let him produce, if he can, any open, written, or other authentic contract, signed or agreed to by these men; forming themselves into an association; making themselves known as such to the world; appointing him as their agent; and making themselves individually, or as an association, responsible for his acts, done by their authority. Until all this can be shown, no one can say that, in any legitimate sense, there is any such association; or that he is their agent; or that he ever gave his oath to them; or ever pledged his faith to them.

On general principles of law and reason, it would be a sufficient answer for him to say, to all individuals, and all pretended associations of individuals, who should accuse him of a breach of faith to them:

I never knew you. Where is your evidence that you, either individually or collectively, ever appointed me your attorney? that you ever required me to swear to you, that, as your attorney, I would support the Constitution? or that I have now broken any faith I ever pledged to you? You may, or you may not, be members of that secret band of robbers and murderers, who act in secret; appoint their agents by a secret ballot; who keep themselves individually unknown even to the agents they thus appoint; and who, therefore, cannot claim that they have any agents; or that any of their pretended agents ever gave his oath, or pledged his faith, to them. I repudiate you altogether. My oath was given to others, with whom you have nothing to do; or it was idle wind, given only to the idle winds. Begone!

XII.

For the same reasons, the oaths of all the other pretended agents of this secret band of robbers and murderers are, on

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/41


text:
Page:Popular tales from the Norse (1912).djvu/149

 Rh as we have already stated, were active, if we may use the expression, as well as passive. A man who possessed the gift frequently assumed the shape of a beast at his own will and pleasure, like the soldier in Petronius. Even now in Norway, it is matter of popular belief that Finns and Lapps, who from time immemorial have passed for the most skilful witches and wizards in the world, can at will assume the shape of bears; and it is a common thing to say of one of those beasts, when he gets unusually savage and daring, "that can be no Christian bear." On such a bear, in the parish of Oloden, after he had worried to death more than sixty horses and six men, it is said that a girdle of bearskin, the infallible mark of a man thus transformed, was found when he was at last tracked and slain. The tale called "Farmer Weathersky," in this collection (p. 285), shews that the belief of these spontaneous transformations still exists in popular tradition, where it is easy to see that Farmer Weathersky is only one of the ancient gods degraded into a demon's shape. His sudden departure through the air, horse, sledge, and lad, and all, and his answer, "I'm at home, alike north, and south, and east, and west"; his name itself, and his distant abode, surrounded with the corpses of the slain, sufficiently betray the divinity in disguise. His transformation, too, into a hawk answers exactly to that of Odin when he flew away from the Frost Giant in the shape of that bird. But in these Tales such transformations are for the most part passive; they occur not at the will of the person transformed, but through sorcery practised on them by some one else. Thus the White Bear in the beautiful story of "East o' the Sun and West


text:
Page:Popular tales from the Norse (1912).djvu/148

 cxlii god of battles to the field, and chose the dead for Valhalla when the fight was done, became swan-inaidens, and took the shape of swans. In either case, the wolf's skin or the swan's feathery covering was assumed and laid aside at pleasure, though the Völundr Quidr, in the Edda, and the stories of "The Fair Melusina," and other medieval swan-maidens, shew that any one who seized that shape while thus laid aside, had power over its wearer. In later times, when this old heroic belief degenerated into the notion of sorcery, it was supposed that a girdle of wolfskin thrown over the body, or even a slap on the face with a wolfskin glove, would transform the person upon whom the sorcerer practised into the shape of a ravening wolf, which fled at once to the woods, where he remained in that shape for a period which varied in popular belief for nine days, three, seven, or nine years. While in this state he was especially ravenous after young children, whom he carried off as the were-wolf carried off William in the old romance, though all were-wolves did not treat their prey with the same tenderness as that were-wolf treated William.

But the favourite beast for Norse transformations in historic times, if we may judge from the evidence afforded by the Sagas, was the bear, the king of all their beasts, whose strength and sagacity made him an object of great respect.

This old belief, then, might be expected to be found in these Norse Tales, and accordingly we find men transformed in them into various beasts. Of old these


text:
Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/42

 general principles of law and reason, equally destitute of obligation. They are given to nobody; but only to the winds.

The oaths of the tax-gatherers and treasurers of the band, are, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity. If any tax-gatherer, for example, should put the money he receives into his own pocket, and refuse to part with it, the members of this band could not say to him: You collected that money as our agent, and for our uses; and you swore to pay it over to us, or to those we should appoint to receive it. You have betrayed us, and broken faith with us.

It would be a sufficient answer for him to say to them:

I never knew you. You never made yourselves individually known to me. I never gave my oath to you, as individuals. You may, or you may not, be members of that secret band, who appoint agents to rob and murder other people; but who are cautious not to make themselves individually known, either to such agents, or to those whom their agents are commissioned to rob. If you are members of that band, you have given me no proof of it, and you have no proof that you ever commissioned me to rob others for your benefit. I never knew you, as individuals, and of course never promised you that I would pay over to you the proceeds of my robberies. I committed my robberies on my own account, and for my own profit. If you thought I was fool enough to allow you to keep yourselves concealed, and use me as your tool for robbing other persons; or that I would take all the personal risk of the robberies, and pay over the proceeds to you, you were particularly simple. As I took all the risk of my robberies, I propose to take all the profits. Begone! You are fools, as well as villains. If I gave my oath to anybody, I gave it to other persons than you. But I really gave it to nobody. I only gave it to the winds. It answered my purposes at the time. It enabled me to get the money I was after, and now I propose to keep it. If you expected me to pay it over to you, you relied only upon that honor

title: Page:No Treason, v6.djvu/42


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/417

 Sir John Talbot of Richard's Castle, Herefordshire, and widow of Sir Matthew de Gournay. By her he had no issue. By his second wife, Joyce, he had issue one son—John [q. v.], who succeeded as second Baron Tiptoft and was in 1449 created Earl of Worcester—and three daughters, who became coheiresses of their nephew Edward on his death in 1485: (1) Philippa, who married Thomas de Roos or Ros, tenth baron Roos or Ros by writ; from her descend in the female line the earls and dukes of Rutland and the barons De Ros; (2) Joan, who married Sir Edmund Ingoldsthorpe; (3) Joyce, who married Sir Edmund Sutton, eldest son of John (Sutton) Dudley, baron Dudley (1401?–1487) [q. v.]

[Full details of Tiptoft's early career, with references to original authorities, are collected in Wylie's History of the Reign of Henry IV, 4 vols. For his life subsequent to 1413 see Rotuli Parliamentorum, vols. iii–v. passim; Rymer's Fœdera, vols. ix. and x.; Hardy's Rotuli Normanniæ; Acts of the Privy Council, ed. Nicolas, vols. iii–v.; Palgrave's Antient Kalendars and Inventories; Official Return of Members of Parliament; Hingeston-Randolph's Royal and Hist. Letters of Henry VI; Inquisit. post mortem 20 and 21 Henry VI; Dugdale's Baronage; Manning's Speakers of the House of Commons; Stubbs's Const. Hist. vol. iii.; Ramsay's Lancaster and York; Burke's Extinct and G. E. C[okayne]'s Peerages.]  TIPTOFT or TIBETOT, JOHN, (1427?–1470), son of John, baron Tiptoft [q.v.], and his second wife Joyce, was born at Everton in Bedfordshire in or about 1427, for he is said to have been sixteen at his father's death in 1443. He was educated, according to information received by Leland (ut ego accepi), at Balliol College, Oxford. On 27 Jan. 1443 he succeeded to his father's honours and large estates, being styled Lord Tiptoft and Powys, and on 1 July 1449 he was created Earl of Worcester by patent. He was appointed a commissioner for oyer and terminer for Surrey and other counties in 1451. Being one of the party of Richard, duke of York [q. v.], whose duchess, Cicely, was aunt of Tiptoft's first wife, Cicely, daughter of Richard Neville, earl of Salisbury [q.v.], and widow of Henry de Beauchamp, duke of Warwick [q. v.], he was on 15 April 1452, immediately after the pacification between the court and the Duke of York, appointed treasurer of the exchequer, and, as one of the privy council, on 24 Oct. 1453 signed the minutes for the attendance of York at the great council for the settlement of the regency. During York's protectorate, on 3 April 1454, Worcester was appointed a joint-commissioner to keep guard by sea for three years, the expenses of the commissioners being provided for from the receipts of tonnage and poundage (Rot. Parl. v. 244). In 1456–7 he was deputy of Ireland. On 5 Aug. 1457 he was nominated to carry the king's profession of obedience to Calixtus III (Fœdera, xi. 403), and in 1459 as ambassador to Pius II and to the council of Mantua (Acts of Privy Council, vi. 302). It seems probable that Worcester's journey to Jerusalem and his residence in Italy, noticed later, took place about this time. Of the embassy of 1457 no further notice has been found, and he does not appear to have visited Rome twice. No English embassy appeared at the council of Mantua, save two priests sent by Henry VI, bearing his excuses (, Commentarii, p. 88). Worcester, however, did go to Rome, and made an oration before Pius II, then apparently pope, who was crowned on 3 Sept. 1458, and he was in Italy some time before the death of Guarino da Verona in 1460. This is contrary to the assertion of Vespasiano da Bisticci that the earl's tour, which is said to have lasted three years, took place after the cessation of the civil war in England, though the assertion would be fairly correct if Worcester did not return to England until the spring of 1461.

The accession of Edward IV opened Worcester's way to high offices. On 25 Nov. 1461 he was appointed chief justice for life of North Wales, a little later constable of the Tower of London, and on 7 Feb. 1462 constable of England, which office he held until 24 Aug. 1467. A few days after his appointment as constable he tried and sentenced to death in his court at Westminster John de Vere, earl of Oxford, his eldest son Aubrey, Sir Thomas Tuddenham, and others. Their sentences are said by Warkworth (p. 5) to have been ‘by law padowe,’ which seems an angry reference to the constable's late residence at Padua. He was rewarded by the Garter on 21 March, and was appointed treasurer on 14 April, which office he held for fourteen months. He accompanied the king on his expedition to the north in November, and was present at the sieges of Bamborough and Dunstanborough. In 1463 he was appointed lord steward of the king's household, and in August received a commission to keep guard by sea in order to prevent the escape of Queen Margaret, whom Edward designed to crush by a fresh campaign. The queen escaped, the money spent on Worcester's ships was wasted, and his operations are described as a lamentable failure (Three Fifteenth-Century Chronicles,