text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Lloyd George, David

LLOYD GEORGE, DAVID (1863-), British statesman (see ). After the constitutional conference of 1910 had failed, Mr. Lloyd George took his full share in the party campaign which ushered in the second general election of that year.

He was especially sarcastic about the proposal for a Referendum, which was put in the forefront of Unionist policy. “A prohibition tariff against Liberalism,” he called it. After the general election of Dec. 1910, which showed that the campaign of the Liberals against the Lords' veto had merely enabled them to maintain the somewhat precarious position established by the general election of the previous Jan., Mr. Lloyd George left the prosecution of the Parliament bill, and the subjugation of the Lords by means of a threat of promiscuous swamping, to the Prime Minister and other colleagues; and he devoted himself to the enthusiastic forwarding of his social programme, which was to show Labour that he and his party could and would do more to raise the condition of the workers than their professed advocates. His budget, which, owing to a realized surplus of £5,600,000, did not raise taxation, provided £1,500,000 for sanatoria for consumptives and £250,000 for the payment of members — a cause dear to the heart of Labour. This latter provision was carried in Aug. after a somewhat perfunctory Unionist protest in debate, by a majority of nearly a hundred.

But his principal contribution to social reform was in his National Insurance bill, providing insurance for all workers by means of contributions from employers, employed and the State. By it there was set up not merely unemployment insurance, administered under the Board of Trade, but National health insurance, which imposed a somewhat complicated card and stamp system on all employments, including even that of domestic service. In order to work the system, the coöperation of the doctors was essential, and the terms offered were hardly attractive. Mr. Lloyd George soared to uncommon heights of eloquence in pressing his scheme upon Parliament and the country, appealing earnestly for a measure which would relieve undeserved misery, help to prevent much wretchedness, and arm the nation until it conquered “the pestilence that walketh in darkness and the destruction that wasteth at noonday.” Though benevolently received at first, the bill soon met with the banded opposition of the doctors, who protested that the terms offered the profession were absurdly inadequate; and it was far from popular with either the employing or the employed class, both of whom resented the liabilities imposed upon them, and the cumbersome process of stamp-affixing. This general unpopularity cost the Government some seats at by-elections; but Mr. Lloyd George stood firm, and the bill duly became law. But the doctors held out even after the bill was passed. The negotiations, carried on for more than a year, produced no agreement, and it looked as if the Act would break down through a boycott by the medical profession. But owing to Mr. Lloyd George's mingled diplomacy and tenacity, the minority in favour of acceptance slowly grew, and a sufficient number of panel doctors were registered to bring the medical benefit into effect on the appointed day early in Jan. 1913. Thereafter the opposition to the Act gradually died away, as its benefits to all parties became evident. A year later, in Feb. 1914, Mr. Lloyd George could claim that, out of 22,500 general practitioners in Great Britain, over 20,000 were on the panels.

In the discussions of the two bills going forward in the years 1912-4 under the Parliament Act, the Irish Home Rule bill and the Welsh Church bill, Mr. Lloyd George did not take a prominent part, though he was heartily in favour of both. Indeed he had been throughout one of the principal promoters of disestablishment in Wales, and, when he did speak, advocated it with almost apostolic fervour; but the conduct of the measure was in the hands of Mr. McKenna. This cause appealed to him not merely on its religious, but also on its social, side. It was, however, another social change, that affecting the land, to which, after National Insurance, he devoted his principal attention from the autumn of 1912 down to the outbreak of the World War. He even accused his opponents of dragging the red herring of Ulster across the trail of his projects of land reform. His earliest political campaign in Wales had been aimed against the landed interest; and he had made a further move in that direction in the taxation of land values in his budget of 1909. Though the Prime Minister, Mr. Asquith, formally disclaimed the notorious specific of advanced land reformers, the single tax on land, he sanctioned

an unofficial committee of inquiry which Mr. Lloyd George desired to institute in order to investigate rural grievances. The first essential condition of every social reform, Mr. Lloyd George said at Aberdeen in Nov. 1912, was change in the land system, which was still in its essence feudal. The first purpose of the land, he said, should be the provision of sustenance and shelter for the cultivator. The movement attracted a considerable amount of public support; and he found it a convenient subject to which to direct public attention after the shock to confidence produced in the spring of 1913 by the Marconi revelations, which showed, in the general estimation, a reprehensible carelessness in the private financial operations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer (see ). He advised purists to recall the manner in which landlord parliaments had bartered away the common land. The Liberals, he said at Sutton-in-Ashfield in Aug., were about to march against the central position where land monopoly was entrenched. During the autumn he made many eloquent speeches in different districts of England and Wales in support of his movement, denouncing agricultural conditions, bad wages, atrocious housing, damage to crops by game, insufficient prospect of small holdings; and also promising relief to harassed leaseholders in towns. At Swindon on Oct. 22 he detailed a ministerial scheme, which should recast the whole conditions of land monopoly. The main provision was the establishment of a Ministry of Lands, with comprehensive powers for the supervision of everything connected with land, and with a number of roving or local commissioners by whom in a general way these powers would be exercised. The Unionists scoffed at the idea of these hordes of despotic officials; and the course of events in 1914 prevented the scheme from ever seeing the light as a Government bill. But the spirit in which Mr. Lloyd George pursued his campaign was shown in a speech at Pwllheli in December. The landlord, he said then, was no more necessary to agriculture than a gold chain to a watch; a breath of liberty must be brought into the villages.

To realize the promises of these social campaigns Mr. Lloyd George required ever-increasing millions from the national purse. Indeed he may fairly be charged with having turned the Treasury from a department to control and limit expenditure into a spending department. Between the time when he took over the Exchequer in 1908 from Mr. Asquith and his last budget before the war, that of 1914, the national revenue and expenditure increased by about £55,000,000, reaching in 1914 nearly £210,000,000 in all. Besides the social expenditure, the other main item of increase was, of course, the navy estimates; and Mr. Lloyd George, in an interview published on the first day of 1914, declared that Liberalism would be false to its trust if it did not seize the opportunity of what he asserted to be the improvement in Anglo-German relations to diminish expenditure on armaments. Happily, though many Liberal associates responded, the common sense of the Cabinet and of the public prevented any such suicidal operation, and the navy estimates laid before the House were the highest on record. To meet the increased expenditure Mr. Lloyd George, who had been content to mark time in his budget for 1913, made, in 1914, new proposals which carried to a further pitch the principles of the budget of 1909. He had to meet a deficit of £5,330,000, which he increased to £9,800,000 by further larger grants for social purposes, such as education, health and insurance. To procure this heavy additional sum he took £1,000,000 from the Sinking Fund and then fell back once more on income tax, supertax and death duties. There were to be increases of the higher grades of income tax, which was to rise to 1s. 4d.; supertax was to begin with incomes of £3,000, rising to the same maximum of 1s. 4d.; and the rates of death duties were to be raised from all estates over £60,000, rising to a maximum of 20% for a million. There was also to be a national system of valuation for local taxation, including the taxation of site values. An outcry from Liberals no less than Conservatives caused him to abandon the extra penny on the income tax, so that the maximum would be only 1s. 3d., and therefore to postpone many of the grants for social purposes for a year. But, with some modifications, the rest of the budget passed, not without difficulty, into law.

With all these schemes of social betterment in his head he was eager for short-cuts in the matter of Irish Home Rule. At Huddersfield on March 21 he violently attacked the House of Lords and the province of Ulster, denounced the doctrine of “optional obedience,” and dwelt on the necessity of settling the Home Rule controversy in order to open the way to deliverance from social wretchedness. At the Mansion House in July he insisted that in view of the threatened war between capital and labour at home and between Nationalist and Orangeman in Ireland, it was the duty of responsible men of all parties to work for peace; and he himself took part in the abortive Buckingham Palace Conference, and impressed his opponents with the sincerity of his desire for an agreed settlement.

The sudden approach of the World War threatened an even more complete end to his social Utopias. Accordingly, in spite of the fact that he had made in 1911, at the time of the Agadir incident, a spirited declaration that Great Britain was determined at all hazards to maintain her place among the Great Powers, he was slow to realize her peril and her duty in the last days of July, and clung, down to a late hour, to the policy of neutrality. When once, however, he was convinced, by the German violation of Belgium, that honour and justice and human liberty demanded British intervention in arms, he reverted to his position of 1911, and was from the beginning to the end the most resolute of all British ministers to prosecute the war to a triumphant conclusion.

As Chancellor of the Exchequer it was his duty to provide at once against a financial collapse. Ever since the budget of 1909 there had been a coldness between him and the natural friends of the Exchequer, the bankers and merchants of the City of London; but he and they buried the hatchet at once, and he had their advice and aid in the measures which were promptly taken. He availed himself liberally of the assistance of his friend, Lord Reading, in this connexion, with excellent results. On Nov. 17 1914 he introduced the first war budget. He had to meet a deficit of nearly £340,000,000; and he determined to follow the precedents set by Pitt and Gladstone and to raise a considerable portion by taxation. Accordingly he doubled the income tax and supertax; added an extra ½d. a half-pint on beer; and raised the tax on tea by 3d. a pound. He calculated that in a full year his new taxation would provide over £65,000,000, and for the current year he raised £2,750,000 by a partial suspension of the Sinking Fund. To meet the remainder of the deficit he announced a War Loan of £350,000,000 at 3½% issued at 95. Moreover, in order to further the recruiting campaign he made eloquent appeals this autumn to those sections of the people with whom he was peculiarly associated, to Welshmen at the Queen's Hall in London and at Criccieth, and to the Nonconformists at the City Temple. He dwelt on his own record as a man of peace; but insisted that peace could not have been had this August without national dishonour. If treaties could be disregarded as “scraps of paper,” why should any regard be paid to bank-notes and bills of exchange? He appealed to the great principles of Duty, Patriotism, Sacrifice. Peace at any price was not a Christian principle. The only way to establish peace on earth was by making the way of the peace-breaker too hard for rulers to tread.

Early in the next year, 1915, Mr. Lloyd George attended a conference of finance ministers in Paris, where it was agreed that each of the Allies should bring to the common cause that which they were most competent to supply, without reference to any principle of equal sharing by all. This was one of the first of those services to the cause of more intimate coöperation among the Allies which he was to make peculiarly his own in subsequent years. There was no change of taxation in his budget this spring. He bent his whole energies this year to the increase of munitions of war, wherein British supplies were lamentably deficient. He first sounded the note on March 9 in introducing a new and drastic Defence of the Realm bill, whose object was the mobilization of industrial resources, and which gave Government wide powers of commandeering factories capable of turning out munitions. He called a conference of trade-union representatives on March 17 with a view to preventing strikes and stoppage of work and

removing all restrictions on output; and announced that Government would limit the profits of employers. He pointed to drink as one of the great drawbacks to increased output. “We are fighting,” he said, “Germany, Austria and drink; and as far as I can see the greatest of these three deadly foes is drink.” The regulation of drink was relegated to a Board of Control with wide powers. But, in the face of a minimizing speech from Mr. Asquith at Newcastle, Mr. Lloyd George enlarged in the House of Commons on the absolute necessity of an enormously increased output of munitions, and of munitions of a different kind. Public opinion strongly supported him, with the result that, in the Coalition Ministry which Mr. Asquith formed in May, a new department of munitions was created, with Mr. Lloyd George as Minister of Munitions.

He flung himself with ardour into this new work; appealed for and obtained the coöperation of eminent men of business and experts, divided up the country into 10 munition areas, went in person to the great centres of trade and manufacture, Manchester, Liverpool, Cardiff, Glasgow, and urged the imperious necessity of setting to work as one man, of removing all limiting restrictions, of planting the flag on the workshops. He was indefatigable in conferences with the unions to persuade men to consent to abrogate the Eight Hours' Act and to consent to labour dilution, and to suspend all hampering rules, promising that all should be restored in their integrity after the war. He had a considerable measure of success, owing largely no doubt to the confidence felt by the working-men in a minister who had devoted himself so whole-heartedly to social betterment. He took special powers in the various Munitions Acts to deal summarily with labour difficulties in the factories. Meanwhile, all over the country, shops that had previously turned out utensils of peace were converted into factories of munitions; new factories were rising, sometimes in the most secluded and unlikely spots, and volunteers, men and women, were pressed into the service. The heartening orations which Mr. Lloyd George had made since the war broke out were collected into a shilling volume in the autumn under the title “Through Terror to Triumph.” In this winter and in the spring of 1916 there were troubles on the Clyde, where the very small leaven of revolutionary feeling was concentrated; but the strong measures, including the arrest of six ringleaders, which Mr. Lloyd George and his Munitions Ministry took, brought appeasement before long.

His absorption in his new and engrossing work did not leave Mr. Lloyd George much leisure for dealing with other aspects of the critical situation; but he made a strong speech in May in favour of the second and comprehensive Military Service bill of 1916, in which he said that he would rather be driven out of the Liberal party and indeed out of public life than have on his conscience that he opposed a bill calculated to supply the men who, in the opinion of the military authorities, would make all the difference between defeat and victory. No country, he maintained, had saved itself from great military peril without resort to compulsory service. A call was also made by his ministerial colleagues on his powers as a peacemaker after the Dublin rebellion had convinced Mr. Asquith that the system of Irish government had broken down and that there was a unique opportunity for a new departure. He was authorized to put himself in communication with all Irish parties and endeavour to promote a settlement. Accordingly in June be came to a preliminary arrangement with both Nationalists and Ulstermen, on the basis of bringing the Home Rule Act into immediate operation, and of introducing an Amending bill to cover only the period of the war and a short interval after it, during which the Irish members were to remain at Westminster and the six Ulster counties to continue under the Imperial Government. Neither southern Irish Unionists nor English ministers were happy about these proposals; and some small changes made to conciliate them were taken by Mr. Redmond as a ground for abandoning the negotiations, though Mr. Lloyd George maintained that the arrangement was still one that might well be accepted.

Meanwhile Mr. Lloyd George's relations to the war had become still more intimate and responsible. On the sudden death

of Lord Kitchener, it was felt necessary to instal in the War Office a statesman on whose determination and energy both the nation and the Allies could rely; and Mr. Lloyd George had now come to fill so large a space in the civilian administration of the war that no other choice would be acceptable. He took Lord Derby, the hero of the voluntary recruiting campaign, as his Under-Secretary. The spirit in which -he proposed to administer his office was shown in an interview which he granted in Sept. to an American journalist. Britain, he said, had only begun to fight. The British Empire had invested thousands of its best lives to purchase future immunity for civilization. After all these sacrifices “the fight must be to a finish — to a knock-out” — a view which, when it was challenged, the House of Commons warmly supported. Desiring to promote the war in this spirit, he showed justifiable anxiety both about the number of exemptions allowed under the Military Service Acts and about the unsatisfactory results of recruiting in Ireland. But what gave him the keenest anxiety was the defective constitution and limited authority of the War Committee of the Cabinet. It was too large, it did not meet sufficiently often, it was subject to the over-ruling of the Cabinet, and its chairman, Mr. Asquith, was overburdened with other duties, including the leadership of the House of Commons, and had hardly the temperament of a resourceful and enterprising controller of war. Public opinion, in the press and in the Parliamentary War Committees, was becoming mobilized in this sense. Accordingly, on Dec. 1 Mr. Lloyd George wrote to Mr. Asquith demanding, on threat of resignation, that the conduct of the war should be placed in the absolute control of a small committee of four, sitting day by day, including himself but not including Mr. Asquith. In the negotiations which followed and in which Mr. Lloyd George made some concessions in order to win Mr. Asquith if possible, it became clear that the result would be to transfer the main conduct of the war from Mr. Asquith to Mr. Lloyd George. This was eventually effected by the formation of a Ministry under Mr. Lloyd George, with Mr. Bonar Law as his partner, and with the support not only of the Ministry but of the Labour party, and a large contingent of the Liberals, while Mr. Asquith and his immediate friends remained outside but did not oppose.

Mr. Lloyd George's advent to supreme power was well received, as his reputation as a War Minister had steadily augmented from Aug. 1914 onwards; and by constituting a War Cabinet of four persons in permanent session with full powers, and transferring the leadership of the House of Commons to Mr. Law in order to devote himself to the conduct of the war, he strengthened the good impression of the public. They welcomed also the evidence of determination given by the creation of new departments — Food, Labour, Shipping, Pensions, National Service; by the assumption by Government of control over shipping and mines, and by the appointment of business men and experts to some of the more important posts. They welcomed too his firm reply to the German Chancellor's peace overture: “We shall put our trust in an unbroken army rather than in a broken faith”; and his decision to summon the Prime Ministers of the Dominions to a series of special meetings of the War Cabinet. His popularity was increased by the discovery in Jan. 1917 of a conspiracy in a Derby family of anarchists to murder him and Mr. Henderson, his Labour colleague in the War Cabinet. Three of the family were found guilty at the Central Criminal Court and sentenced to substantial terms of penal servitude. Sympathy was again roused later in the year when it was suggested by a portion of the press that he — one of the most courageous of men — had left London to avoid an air-raid. The offenders apologized and withdrew, agreeing to indemnify the Prime Minister for his costs.

The successive measures taken by the Government in the next two years and a half to carry out its policy of subordinating everything to the prosecution of the war to a victorious conclusion, and of marshalling the whole of the resources of the nation for that one purpose, are detailed in the article on. So far as the work was done in Parliament it was carried through mainly by Mr. Bonar Law. Mr. Lloyd George adhered closely to his programme of concentrating his own energies on the

conduct of the war in the War Cabinet, and in the War Councils of the Allies of which he was so keen a promoter; and he spoke comparatively seldom in the House of Commons save at critical moments, or in order to give Parliament from time to time an authentic statement of the progress of the national cause. But he took upon himself the duty of heartening and inspiriting the nation, and made, as occasion served, eloquent appeals to his countrymen, sometimes by letters and messages, sometimes by speeches in the City of London or in big towns. In these he constantly sounded that note of sacrifice which had been the text on which he had preached in the first of his great war orations, in the City Temple in the autumn of 1914. Thus in Carnarvon in Feb. 1917 he appealed for support to the Government in men, money and labour, in the sacrifices of conveniences and even of comforts. In order to win, Britons must endure more. In the past the sacrifices had been too much relegated to the trenches. He appealed to housewives to see, each one in her own home, that not an ounce of food was eaten beyond the amount laid down by Lord Devonport, the Food Controller. Those who were doing nothing should do something; those who were doing something should do more and all should do their best. Everyone who had got enough land to grow a potato or a cabbage must use it for that purpose. If train services were inconvenient and fares increased, people should remember that the limitation of railway facilities helped the army in France. At Dundee in July he urged the cheerful acceptance of restrictions which, he declared, could not yet be regarded as privations. In a message to the nation at the beginning of the critical last year of war, he wrote: —

He appealed during this year to Labour men to surrender the pledges given them about recruiting, to farmers to concentrate on potato-growing, to women to abandon a life of ease and come upon the land, and to munition workers to remember their exemption from the dangers of the front and not imperil the national cause by wanton strikes.

At the same time he never failed to proclaim that victory could be won if all did their best and maintained a stout heart. At the Guildhall in Jan. 1917 he told his hearers that the feeling of the Allies at their recent conference in Rome was that if victory was difficult defeat was impossible. The Allied peoples were looking more and more to Great Britain. She was to them like a great tower in the deep: the hope of the oppressed and the despair of the oppressor. While there was much, he told the people of Carnarvon in Feb., in the existing state of affairs — especially the “piratical devices” of the German submarine — to cause anxiety, he had never had any doubt of ultimate victory; neither had he any doubt that, before we reached it, there were many broad and turbulent rivers to cross which the nation must help to bridge. Even at the period when the losses from submarines were greatest, he refused to be daunted and reassured the country by his confidence in the Admiralty's plan of defence, and in the adequacy of the food supplies. He constantly declared that British difficulties were declining while those of the enemy were augmenting. He welcomed, in April, the entry of the United States into the war as not merely a vindication of the character of the struggle as a great fight for human liberty, but also as an assurance that the war would be effective and successful and would result in a beneficent peace. In her, he said in Oct., the Central Powers had to deal with a country of infinite resources that had never yet been beaten. He set her advent against the defection of Russia, which was a bitter disappointment to him, as he had hailed her revolution as a sure promise that the Prussian military autocracy would, before long, be overthrown, and as he clung, till the establishment of Soviet government in Oct.,

to the hope that the demoralization of her armies was not beyond repair. Still, although his war plans and those of the Allies, which had been based on the assumption that the Germans would have to retain large forces on the eastern front, were ruined by her cessation of fighting, he could point in Dec. to the number of battles fought during the year on the western front in which the Germans had been beaten, and to the prestige which British arms had won by the capture of Bagdad and Jerusalem.

The critical situation produced by the rapid and victorious German advance in March 1918 called forth all his energy. He had already largely coördinated Allied military operations by means of the Supreme War Council at Versailles; he now, through his colleague, Lord Milner, secured a unity of military command at the front. He sent immediately across to France a large portion of the home defence force — it was complained with some justice that he should have reënforced Sir Douglas Haig with these troops some weeks earlier; he effected a further drastic comb-out from essential industries; he introduced in Parliament a man-power bill of excessive stringency; he sent his most capable and vigorous colleague, Lord Milner, to the War Office; he was urgent with the American authorities to hurry up as many of their troops as possible into the fighting line. The situation was saved, owing mainly to the skilful strategy of Gen. Foch and to the magnificently efficient fighting machine into which Sir Douglas Haig had converted his armies. Accordingly, Mr. Lloyd George could assure the Empire, in a message on the fourth anniversary of the war in Aug., that although the battle was not yet won, yet, thanks to the extraordinary bravery of all the Allied armies, the prospects of victory had never been so great. All that was wanted was to “hold fast.”

Mr. Lloyd George was reproached by his critics with too great a disposition to encourage and strengthen the various subsidiary fronts, such as Mesopotamia, Palestine, Salonika and Italy, at the expense of the western front, where the struggle must mainly be decided; and in this and other respects to overrule, on questions of what may be called the higher strategy, the decisions of his military advisers. If that be so, he might plead the example of Chatham; and at any rate the eventual and dramatic success of what were called derisively “side-shows” contributed not a little to the downfall of the Central Powers. He was also charged with reducing his colleagues to ciphers, and acting as a dictator rather than a first minister. The loyalty with which he was served by eminent men who had been formerly in sharp antagonism to him is sufficient to show that his colleagues recognized that he assumed no more authority than was inevitable when the State was in danger. But undoubtedly the system of a Supreme Council of the Allies represented by their Prime Ministers, which he helped to establish in war and which continued for a while in peace, tended to enhance his authority and position, and in particular to reduce the importance of his Foreign Minister. Moreover, it was impossible for him and his colleagues not to realize that it was preëminently in him, after Lord Kitchener's death, that the British nation and Empire trusted to bring them safely through the war. He never contemplated, or allowed the country to consider conceivable, any other termination of the war than a fight to a finish. He would not palter either with any of the insincere or inadequate German overtures, with President Wilson's early formula of “peace without victory,” with the Russian phrase “no annexations and no indemnities,” or with Lord Lansdowne's negotiated peace; he insisted on eliminating the doctrine of the “freedom of the seas” from President Wilson's Fourteen Points. He steadily pressed for the war aims originally laid down by Mr. Asquith, though, an idealist himself, he expressed them in terms agreeable to idealists, such as President Wilson and the loftier spirits among the Labour men. On the publication of Lord Lansdowne's letter he made his position clear. It was not the extreme pacifist, he said, who was the danger, but the man who thought there was a halfway-house between defeat and victory. To end a war entered upon to enforce a treaty, without reparation for the infringement of that treaty, merely by entering into a new and more comprehensive treaty, would indeed be a farce in the setting of a tragedy. “To stop

short of victory,” he wrote in Aug. 1918, “would be to compromise the future of mankind.” He was as good as his word. Hostilities were closed with each of the enemy allies in succession — Bulgaria, Turkey, Austria-Hungary and Germany — by what was virtually a surrender, and a surrender on terms implying severe defeat. It was in keeping with the character of a man who, a lay preacher himself, regarded the war as a sacred, religious duty, that, after reading the terms of the Armistice from his place in the House of Commons on Nov. 11, he should ask Parliament to come, with Chancellor and Speaker at their head, to render thanks to God at St. Margaret's.

In spite of his bitter partisan sallies in the past, Mr. Lloyd George was a great conciliator, as he showed over and over again both in his dealings with Britain's Allies, and in his interventions in Labour disputes; and therefore it is not unnatural that he should appreciate highly the value of government by Coalition. Owing to it he had the satisfaction, even during the war, of promoting social welfare by means of a comprehensive Education bill; and of settling on a wide basis the question of reform, including the extension of the franchise to women — an extension of which he was always a warm advocate, though the militants had, in the past, unfairly flouted him as a renegade. It was his firm belief that by Coalition it would be possible to settle the Irish question. The convention which he set up in 1917 gave hope of success but its report was not sufficiently unanimous; and his vacillation in first promising, and then refusing, to introduce a Home Rule bill after the convention in 1918, together with his attempt to force conscription upon Ireland, contributed to the spread of Sinn Fein disaffection; though there was a plausible justification at the time for each of his actions. Coalition also helped towards that great constitutional development of the Imperial War Cabinet, with its corollaries of imperial preference and conservation of the essential raw materials of the Empire, for which, even apart from the war, Mr. Lloyd George's Ministry will always be honourably remembered.

Hence, when a general election, long overdue, and now rendered inevitable by the passage of a reform bill, was impending on the termination of hostilities, Mr. Lloyd George, with the cordial assent of Mr. Law, determined to maintain the Coalition, and to ask the country to return candidates pledged to support the Government in the negotiations of peace and in the problems of reconstruction that must immediately arise. As he wrote to Mr. Law, the Government had had a unity both in aims and in action which was very remarkable in a Coalition Government. This was, it may be pointed out, the less surprising, as the platform of social reform united Mr. Lloyd George and his followers among the Liberals not merely to the moderate Labour leaders but to Mr. Law and the great majority of his party, who inherited the Disraelian tradition of Sybil and of the social measures of the 1874 Government. It was a policy of this character that the joint leaders put forward in their manifesto, and they invited candidates who agreed with their aims to pledge them their support. This was surely not unreasonable, as they could not rely upon organized parties; but the Liberals who followed Mr. Asquith, and the Labour party as a whole, though they both claimed independence of the Coalition and stood practically as opposition candidates, denounced the practice as unfair, and nicknamed the pledge a “coupon.” The result was an overwhelming vote of confidence in the Coalition, and the absolute rout of the pacifists, the discomfiture of Mr. Asquith and the Liberals who refused to follow Mr. Lloyd George, and the comparative failure of an ambitious effort by the Labour party.

This enormous majority gave Mr. Lloyd George a position of exceptional strength and authority at the Peace Conference of 1919 at Paris, which he attended as the principal British plenipotentiary. He established a new precedent by taking to the conference with him not merely some of his principal colleagues, but also the Prime Ministers and other representatives of the Dominions and of India; who, as representing peoples whose fighting strength had contributed materially to the victory, were obviously entitled to have their share in arranging terms of peace and to sign the treaty ultimately agreed upon. At the conference

he was one of three principal figures, along with President Wilson and M. Clemenceau; and his remarkable powers of conciliation were often required to harmonize the very divergent points of view of these eminent men. He strongly supported the President's idealistic scheme of a League of Nations, having himself always regarded the war as one to end war. At the same time he sympathized with M. Clemenceau's resolve to obtain security for France, though he refused to consent to the annexation, with that object, of German populations, either to France herself or her protégé, Poland. But he was ready to protect France in another fashion by signing along with President Wilson a separate Treaty of Alliance with her, whereby Great Britain and the United States agreed to come to her assistance in the event of an unprovoked attack on her by Germany. The agreement with England was, however, only to come into force after the ratification of that with the United States — a ratification which was never accorded. He insisted also on German disarmament and German reparations — which latter should only be limited by German ability to pay. Further, he pressed for the due trial of war criminals, and, among them, for that of the most responsible of all, the Emperor William. He signed the Treaty of Versailles on June 28, and obtained its prompt acceptance by the House of Commons. The King in Aug. conferred on Mr. Lloyd George the Order of Merit in recognition of his preeminent services, “both in carrying the war to a victorious end and in securing an honourable peace.”

But the signing of the treaty with Germany, and of the treaties with the other enemy Powers, by no means settled finally the issues between the Allies and their late foes. Mr. Lloyd George had on frequent occasions in the next two years to attend meetings of the Supreme Council at Paris, San Remo, Spa, Lympne and occasionally in London, in order to deal with difficult questions arising — to take a few of the most critical points — now out of the provisions relating to German reparations or disarmament, now out of those providing for the future of Silesia. In regard to some of these matters the points of view of France and Britain were so different that even Mr. Lloyd George was hard put to it to find an acceptable formula; and in regard to Silesia he dexterously managed in the summer of 1921 to avoid an open breach by referring the whole matter to the League of Nations. One provision of the Treaty of Versailles, which both Mr. Lloyd George and the British public considered important — namely, that which provided for the trial of Emperor William — proved abortive; as the Government of the Netherlands maintained its right of asylum, and refused to surrender him to the Allies. One foreign question, indirectly connected with the treaty, occasioned Mr. Lloyd George great trouble. He strongly condemned the Soviet Government of Russia, and the principles upon which it was based; but he gradually extricated British troops from their commitments to various Russian generals who were waging civil war upon it; and, as it established its position, yielded to the desire of the Labour party for the reopening of trade with Russia, but on the conditions of a release of all British prisoners and a cessation of foreign revolutionary propaganda.

The immediate prospect of the Peace Conference in Paris and the probability that international complications arising out of the war and of the peace would necessarily weigh heavily on the Prime Minister for many months, if not years, caused Mr. Lloyd George, when he made a partial reconstruction of his ministry after the general election, to continue the arrangement by which Mr. Bonar Law led the House of Commons. But, after the close of the conference, he himself was more frequently in his place in Parliament than during the last three years; and the rank and file after a while began to question whether this war arrangement should not come, with other war arrangements, to an end. On this point, however, Mr. Lloyd George remained firm; though he gratified constitutionalists by restoring, after the Treaty of Versailles, the old form of Cabinet Government, only with the addition of a permanent secretariat.

His principal domestic preoccupations during the years immediately following the peace were the industrial unrest, which continued with practically no intermission for two years and a

half, and which demanded, again and again, his personal, intervention; the social reforms promised in the joint manifesto, which were to make Britain, in his own words, “a land fit for heroes to live in”; the difficulties of finance and of controlling the extravagant expenditure which war habits had generated; and finally the settlement, if possible, of Ireland and the Irish question. He laid down his policy on the labour upheaval in the debate on the Address in 1919. The Government would welcome a general investigation into the whole causes of industrial unrest; one individual trade could not be considered without reference to the rest. A great increase in some essential ingredients like coal or transport might easily destroy the chances of restarting British export industry. Every demand which was put forward by any body of workmen would be examined fairly and carefully by the Government with the view of removing any legitimate grievance; but the Government were determined to fight Prussianism in the industrial world, as they had fought it on the continent of Europe, with the whole might of the nation. He had at once to deal with a threatened strike of coal-miners, and his was the energy which promptly set up the Sankey Commission to avert a coal-miners' strike in the early spring of 1919, and got the Commission to issue a preliminary report in three weeks. He sought also at once a wider remedy. He called an Industrial Conference of masters and men, and persuaded it to set up a provisional joint committee. He addressed this body at its first meeting, terming it a peace congress, and saying that with so much of the world in pieces, Britain might have to save civilization. It was necessary to find the legitimate boundary between wages and hours on the one side and adequate production on the other. The huge war debt must be met by saving or by increasing productivity. Employers and workmen should come to an understanding by some sort of dead level of talk. Though the committee came to an agreement on the basis of a legal 48-hour week, minimum time rates of wages of universal application, and the creation of a permanent industrial council, half masters half workmen, to advise, the Government on industrial questions, the article on shows that this well-intentioned effort was of no avail to calm the unrest.

To take one or two instances of his methods. Of the railway strike in Aug. 1919 he said that he could recall no strike entered into so lightly, with so little justification and with such entire disregard of the public interest. He pointed out that the State was running the railways at a loss due mainly to the enormous increases in the wages of railway workers since the beginning of the war. He took strong measures and succeeded in stopping the strike after 10 days, though promising hardly any further concession than was previously offered. He declined absolutely to adopt the final report of the Sankey Commission and concede the nationalization of the coal industry. The Government had never, he said, committed themselves blindfold to whatever the Commission might recommend, and they had definitely decided that they could not undertake the State management of the mines. In the great coal dispute of the autumn of 1920, he insisted that there must be guarantees as to output before there could be an advance of wages, and that wages and output must advance together. He treated the refusal of Irish railwaymen in that year to carry munitions of war, which was backed in a half-hearted way by the English railwaymen, as a challenge to the whole constitution of the country and was prepared to close the Irish railways rather than submit.

A speech which he delivered at the City Temple on Sept. 17 1919 shows his general views of reconstruction. He appealed for brotherhood between nations and brotherhood between classes. He sketched in broad outline the fundamental changes which he wished to see in the political, social and industrial conditions of the United Kingdom. Slums would have to go, and he hoped that the great armaments would disappear, as also the wretched misunderstandings between Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom. He looked forward to seeing waste in every shape and form disappear. But these changes could only be effected by patient work, in the spirit of comradeship of classes, a passionate desire to see justice done to all classes. He pleaded not only

for the League of Nations, but for fair play between employers and employed. If workmen merely considered how much they could extort from employers at the cost, perhaps, of the community, or if employers only asked at how low a price they could buy off labour, the result would be disastrous. In this spirit, while prices were high and the fictitious boom in trade born of war was still in existence, he started the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Transport on large lines, encouraged Dr. Addison in a great housing scheme, for the reason that, as he said, adequate housing would make happy homes, which were the surest guarantee against agitation and unrest; he promoted legislation guaranteeing a minimum price of wheat and security of tenure to the farmer, and a minimum wage and better hours to the labourer; and he encouraged Mr. Austen Chamberlain to continue to lay the same, or greater, burdens on the taxpayer in peace, as that patriotic citizen had borne in patience during war.

Then in the late autumn of 1920 there came without warning a sharp depression in trade, and prices suddenly fell. This at once rendered acute the question of expenditure about which there had been many sporadic protests already. Mr. Lloyd George pointed out that the depression was universal, that it was desirable to remove Government control from trade as soon as possible, and that public and private economy were necessary on the strictest lines. He had already addressed a strong letter to the spending departments, but with little result; and in the previous year he had pointed to armaments as the only item on which considerable reductions could be made. But the public thought that there were other possibilities of reduction, especially in the grandiose schemes of Mr. Fisher, Dr. Addison and Sir Eric Geddes, the Ministers of Education, Health and Transport. This opinion was forcibly brought home to Mr. Lloyd George in the spring of 1921 by the rapid growth of an “Anti-Waste” party, unaffiliated to any of the historical connexions, which defeated Government candidates in by-election after by-election; and by the formation of a growing “cave,” in the ministerial ranks, of members who announced that they held themselves free to vote against the Government on questions of expenditure. Reluctant as Mr. Lloyd George, always a social reformer rather than an economist, was to abandon his cherished policy, he recognized that it was necessary to bow to public opinion. The greater part of Mr. Fisher's scheme was postponed; Sir Eric Geddes reduced the dimensions of his railway bill; Dr. Addison's proposals were so mutilated that he resigned; the agricultural policy was reversed; the abandonment of control of mines was advanced by four months in order to save the subsidy, and incidentally the greatest strike of recent times was precipitated. But the movement for a severe reduction of expenditure still gathered force.

There was nothing nearer to Mr. Lloyd George's heart than to effect an Irish settlement, and he carried through Parliament in 1919-20 a Home Rule bill creating two self-governing Parliaments, one at Dublin and one at Belfast, with a Federal Council as a link between them making for the unity of Ireland. He explained to Parliament that the measure rested on three basic facts: — (1) three-fourths of the Irish people were bitterly hostile and rebels at heart; (2) N.E. Ireland was alien in race sympathy and tradition from the rest; (3) severance of the United Kingdom and Ireland would be fatal to both. The first of these facts was abundantly illustrated in 1919-21. The Sinn Feiners of the south kept up a ruthless campaign of assassination against soldiers, police and well-affected civilians, sparing neither age nor sex. Mr. Lloyd George reënforced both soldiers and police, and backed them up strongly, even palliating unauthorized and severe reprisals which newly recruited police without sufficient discipline committed during several weeks. But though he assured Parliament and the public, at intervals, that he had murder by the throat, the campaign was still continued; and Sinn Fein held such a control of southern Ireland that it captured in 1921 without contests the whole of the seats for the southern Parliament except those allotted to Trinity College, and then its members refused to come and take the oath. But the northern Parliament, where the Unionists had a large majority, was

opened with great éclat in the spring by the King in person, who adjured Irishmen to “forgive and forget.” The words chimed in with a great yearning in the public mind for peace. Mr. Lloyd George seized the occasion, asked Mr. De Valera, the Sinn Fein leader, and Sir James Craig, the Ulster Prime Minister, to come and see him, and a truce to bloodshed was arranged pending negotiations. Mr. Lloyd George's subsequent offer of “Dominion Home Rule,” with certain safeguards, the Sinn Fein rejections of it during August and September, and its acceptance in December, are dealt with in the article on.

Mr. Lloyd George also held further sessions in the summer of 1921 of the Imperial Cabinet, or Conference, as some prefer to call it. The decisions mainly affected the treaty with Japan, the renewal of which was approved, and the Pacific question. While the Dominion Premiers were still in session with British ministers in London, President Harding issued an invitation to a Conference on Disarmament at Washington, which was accepted. The Imperial Cabinet suggested a preliminary Pacific Conference which the Dominion ministers might attend, but the United States would not agree.

Mr. Lloyd George lost in the early spring of 1921 two valuable colleagues, Lord Milner and Mr. (afterwards Lord) Long; and he suffered a still greater loss in the sudden break-down in health of his partner in Government, Mr. Bonar Law, with whom his relations had been peculiarly intimate and cordial. But he arranged that the newly elected Unionist leader, Mr. Austen Chamberlain, should occupy exactly the same position as his predecessor. He was as convinced of the necessity of Coalition as ever, though there were some signs of disaffection on both wings, and the “Anti-Waste” movement was proving a disintegrating force. His own astounding vitality appeared to have suffered no diminution. There was no sign of weariness or lack of grasp in his prompt action after the King's speech at Belfast, in spite of the fact that he had been uninterruptedly in high office for nearly 15 years, had been in the forefront of political strife almost the whole time, had carried the country with safety and success through the greatest war in history, and had survived an amount of abuse from different quarters that would have crushed any but a very exceptional personality. Though public confidence in him was not so general in the summer of 1921 as it had been at the close of the war, no statesman had yet arisen who could seriously be put in competition with him for the post of Prime Minister. (G. E. B.)


text:
Page:1909. Is Shakespeare Dead? From My Autobiography.djvu/24

 Only for a very little while, a very, very, very little while. Then the atmosphere began to change; began to cool off.

A brighter person would have seen what the trouble was, earlier than I did, perhaps, but I saw it early enough for all practical purposes. You see, he was of an argumentative disposition. Therefore it took him but a little time to get tired of arguing with a person who agreed with everything he said and consequently never furnished him a provocative to flare up and show what he could do when it came to clear, cold, hard, rose-cut, hundred-faceted, diamond-flashing reasoning. That was his name for it. It has been applied since, with complacency, as many as several times, in the Bacon-Shakespeare scuffle. On the Shakespeare side.

Then the thing happened which has happened to more persons than to me

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


text:
Page:1909. Is Shakespeare Dead? From My Autobiography.djvu/25

 when principle and personal interest found themselves in opposition to each other and a choice had to be made: I let principle go, and went over to the other side. Not the entire way, but far enough to answer the requirements of the case. That is to say, I took this attitude, to wit: I only believed Bacon wrote Shakespeare, whereas I knew Shakespeare didn't. Ealer was satisfied with that, and the war broke loose. Study, practice, experience in handling my end of the matter presently enabled me to take my new position almost seriously; a little bit later, utterly seriously; a little later still, lovingly, gratefully, devotedly; finally: fiercely, rabidly, uncompromisingly. After that, I was welded to my faith, I was theoretically ready to die for it, and I looked down with compassion not unmixed with scorn, upon everybody else's faith that didn't


text:
Author:Andrew Bonar Law

Works

 * British Prime Minister’s message to new Irish Free State (1922)

title: Author:Andrew Bonar Law


text: 1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Mineralogy

title: 1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Mineralogy


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Kneller, Sir Godfrey

KNELLER, nĕl'ėr, Godfrey, originally , Anglo-German portrait painter: b. Lübeck, 8 Aug. 1646; d. Twickenham, England, 7 Nov. 1723. He studied under Bol and Rembrandt at Amsterdam. He visited Italy in 1672, where he studied under Maratti and Bernin and painted several historical pieces and portraits, both at Rome and Venice. On his return he visited England, in 1674, and was introduced to Charles II. by whom he was much patronized and thereby enabled to quickly outstrip Lely (q.v.) in popularity. He was equally favored by James II, William III and Queen Mary, for the latter of whom he painted the “beauties” at Hampton Court, and several of the portraits in the Gallery of Admirals. He also painted the portraits of the Tsar Peter the Great, Louis XIV and Charles VI of Spain for the same sovereign, who in 1692 knighted him and made him gentleman of the privy chamber. Queen Anne continued him in the same office, and George I, in 1715, made him a baronet. There was hardly a person of note, at least resident in or visiting England, of whom he did not paint a portrait. Among his works should be mentioned also a series of 43 portraits of his co-members in the famous Kit-Cat-Ciub, He continued to practise his art to an advanced age. Naturally his earnings were very large. Although he lost a good deal of money in the South Sea Bubble and lived in great style, both in London and on his estate, Kneller Hall near Twickenham — now an army college for military musicians — he left a large fortune. He left money and instructions for a splendid monument to himself in Westminster Abbey, erected by Rysbrack in 1729, which bears an epitaph by Pope. His coloring is true and harmonious and his drawing correct, but be

a great want of imagination in his pictures, the altitudes, action and drapery being insipid, unvarying and ungraceful. Many of the portraits bearing his name were only partly painted by himself, the less important portions being done by assistants. His fame has declined considerably as time passed, a natural enough fact considering the great superiority possessed by later English portrait painters, such as Reynolds, Gainsborough, etc. His work can be studied to greatest advantage at Hampton Court and in the National Portrait Gallery, London. Comparatively few of his paintings are owned outside England, though there are specimens in the galleries at Antwerp, Brunswick, Munich and Vienna. Consult Ackermann, W. A., ‘Der Porträt-Maler Sir G. Kneller im Verhältniss zur Kunstboldung Seiner Zeit’ (Lübeck 1845); Anon., ‘Lely and Kneller’ (in Munsey's Magazine, Vol. XVII, p. 542, New York 1897); Baker, C. H. C., ‘Lely and the Stuart Portrait Painters’ (2 vols., London 1912); Buckeridge, B., ‘Life of Sir G. Kneller’ (in Piles, R. de, ‘The Art of Painting,’ 3d ed., London 1750).


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Knesebeck, Karl Friedrich von dem

KNESEBECK, knā'zĕ-bĕk, Karl Friedrich von dem, Prussian general field marshal: b. Karwe, near Neuruppin, 5 May 1768; d. 12 Jan. 1848. He entered the army (1782) and gained distinction in the campaigns of 1792-94 and was made captain (1799), major (1802), being on the general staff at Auerstadt (1806), when he saved the king from being taken prisoner. He drew up the plan of battle at Pultusk (1806) in the Russian campaign but retired, at the Treaty of Peace of Tilsit, to his estate. He was sent (1809) on a diplomatic mission to Austria during the Franco-Austrian War and went oa a mission to Russia in the winter of 1811-12, advising peace. He was made general-adjutant to the king in 1813 and carried on the negotiations with Austria for a coalition, failing which he took a prominent part in the plan of action, hindering the bold schemes of Blücher and Gneissenau, He was a prominent figure in the continuation of the campaign (1813-14) and in the plan of action. In 1847 he was appointed commander-general of the army of observation against Poland, and, on his retirement, was created field-marshal. His memoirs are said to be unreliable. He wrote also ‘Lob des Kriegs’ (1805), a poem which had great popularity. Consult Dunker, ‘Die Mission des Obersten von dem Knesebeck’ (in Abhandlungen zur preussischen Geschichte, Leipzig 1876); Lehmann, M., ‘Knesebeck und Schön’ (ib. 1875).


text:
Page:Weird Tales volume 31 number 03.djvu/97

 "Sly devil, pretending it was a rug he was so absorbed in"

And, since it was but an amorous escapade, Diane's unbelievable speculations were replaced by thoughts reasonable enough not to be terrifying.

very night, Clarke was sitting cross-legged on the floor of his studio, full under the red glow of a tall bronze mosque lamp. Before him, shimmering in the moonlight that streamed in through the French windows, lay the rug from Samarcand, mysterious and golden, with its pale sapphire corner pieces glittering like a distant sea viewed through a cleft between two mountain crests.

All the witchery and ecstasy that had ever been lost in the entire world were reassembled, pulsing in the silken pile which he contemplated. And this was the night, the Night of Power, when Fate stalked through the corridors of the world like a colossus just risen from an age-old throne of granite, resistless and unconquerable. Clarke had spent so many nights and days of staring that it was inevitable that there must be such a night. He saw more than the wonder before him: in place of the marvel woven by deft, forgotten hands, there gleamed enchantingly as through moon-touched mist a garden in the valley of Zarab-shan.

Then came a faint, oddly accented drumming and piping, music to whose tune dead years reassembled their bones and danced forth from their graves. And their ghosts as they danced exhaled an overwhelming sweetness that made Clarke's brain reel and glow, and his blood surge madly in anticipation of that which he knew must follow.

Then out of the blackness just beyond the range of the ruddy mosque lamp and full into the moonlight that marched slowly across the rug came a slim Yellow Girl, diaphanously garbed and veiled. Her anklets clicked faintly; and very faint was the tinkle of the pendant that adorned her unusual coiffure.

"All these many days I have sought you, my lord," she began, as she extended her arms in welcome. "But in vain, until tonight, when at last I parted the veil and crossed the Border."

Clarke nodded understandingly, and looked full into her dark, faintly slanted eyes.

"And I have been thinking of you," he began, "ever since someone sent me this rug on which you stand. It is strange how this rug could bridge the gap of twenty years and bring into my very house a glimpse of the valley of Zarab-shan. And stranger yet that you could esecapeescape [sic] from your father's house and find me here. Though strangest of all, time has not touched you, when by all reason you should be old, and leathery, and past forty Yet you are lovelier now than you were then, by that fountain in a garden near Samarcand."

"It is not strange," contradicted the Yellow Girl, as she pirouetted with dainty feet across the moon-lapped silk. "For you see me now as I was when I wove my soul into this very rug."

Clarke smiled incredulously; which was illogical enough, since, compared with the girl's presence, nothing else should be incredible.

"How can that be, Yellow Girl, seeing that we two met one evening twenty years ago, whereas this rug was woven when the Great Khan sat enthroned in Samarcand and reproved the Persian Hanz for his careless disposal of the Great Khan's favorite cities. This was the joy of kings hundreds of years before you and I were born"

"Before the last time we were born," corrected the Yellow Girl. "But the first time—at least, the first time that I can

(Please turn to page 376)


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/233

 independence of their rule were defeated in the battles of Vögelinsegg (1403), north-west of Trogen, and of the Stoss (1405), the pass leading from Gais over to Altstätten in the Rhine valley. In 1411 Appenzell was placed under the “protection” of the Swiss Confederation, of which, in 1452, it became an “allied member,” and in 1513 a full member. Religious differences broke up the land after the Reformation into two portions, each called Rhoden, a term that in the singular is said to mean a “clearing,” and occurs in 1070, long before the final separation. From 1798 to 1803 Appenzell, with the other domains of the abbot of St Gall, was formed into the canton Säntis of the Helvetic Republic, but in 1803, on the creation of the new canton of St Gall, shrank back within its former boundaries. The oldest codes of the laws and customs of the land date from 1409 and 1585, the original MS. of the latter (called the “Silver Book” from its silver clasps) being still used in Inner Rhoden when, at the close of the annual Landsgemeinde, the newly elected Landammann first takes the oath of office, and the assembled members then take that of obedience to him, in either case with uplifted right hands.

See also Appenzellische Jahrbücher (3 series from 1854, Trogen); G. Baumberger, “Juhu-Juuhu”—Appenzellerland und Appenzellerleut (Einsiedeln, 1903); J. G. Ebel, Schilderung d. Gebirgsvölker d. Schweiz, vol. i. (Leipzig, 1798); W. Kobelt, ''Die Alpwirthschaft im Kant. App. Inner Rhoden (Soleure, 1899); I. B. Richman, Appenzell (London, 1895); H. Ryffel, Die schweiz. Landsgemeinden (Zürich, 1903); J. J. Tobler and A. Strüby, Die Alpwirthschaft im Kant. App. Ausser Rhoden (Soleure, 1900); J. C. Zellweger, Geschichte d. app. Volkes (to 1597), 6 vols in 11 parts (Trogen, 1830–1838); J. C. Zellweger, junior, Der Kant. App. (Trogen, 1867); A. Tobler, Das Volkslied im Appenzellerland (Basel, 1906); J. J. Blumer, Staats- und Rechtsgeschichte d. schweiz. Demokratien'' (3 vols. St Gall, 1850–1859).

APPENZELL, the political capital of the Inner Rhoden half of the Swiss canton of Appenzell. It is built in a smiling green hollow on the left bank of the Sitter stream, which is formed by the union of several mountain torrents descending from the Säntis. By light railways it is 12 m. from St Gall past Gais or 20 m. past Herisau. Its chief streets are paved, but it is rather a large village than a town, though in 1900 it had 4574 inhabitants, practically all German-speaking and Romanists. It has a stately modern parish church (attached to a Gothic choir), a small but very ancient chapel of the abbots of St Gall (whose summer residence was this village), and two Capuchin convents (one for men, founded in 1588, and one for women, founded in 1613). Among the archives, kept in the sacristy of the church, are several banners captured by the Appenzellers in former days, among them one taken in 1406 at Imst, near Lanedeck, with the inscription Hundert Teufel, though popularly this number is multiplied a thousandfold. In the principal square the Landsgemeinde (or cantonal democratic assembly) is held annually in the open air on the last Sunday in April. The inhabitants are largely employed in the production of embroidery, though also engaged in various pastoral occupations. About 2 m. by road south-east of Appenzell is Weissbad, a well-known goat’s whey cure establishment, while 1 hours above it is the quaint little chapel of Wildkirchli, built (1648) in a rock cavern, on the way to the Säntis.

APPERCEPTION (Lat. ad and percipere, perceive), in psychology, a term used to describe the presentation of an object on which attention is fixed, in relation to the sum of consciousness previous to the presentation and the mind as a whole. The word was first used by Leibnitz, practically in the sense of the modern (q.v.), by which an object is apprehended as “not-self” and yet in relation to the self. In Kantian terminology apperception is (1) transcendental—the perception of an object as involving the consciousness of the pure self as subject, and (2) empirical,—the cognition of the self in its concrete existence. In (1) apperception is almost equivalent to self-consciousness; the existence of the ego may be more or less prominent, but it is always involved. According to (q.v.) apperception is that process by which an aggregate or “mass” of presentations becomes systematized (apperceptions-system) by the accretion of new elements, either sense-given or product of the inner workings of the mind. He thus emphasizes in apperception the connexion with the self as resulting from the sum of antecedent experience. Hence in education the teacher should fully acquaint himself with the mental development of the pupil, in order that he may make full use of what the pupil already knows.

Apperception is thus a general term for all mental processes in which a presentation is brought into connexion with an already existent and systematized mental conception, and thereby is classified, explained or, in a word, understood; e.g. a new scientific phenomenon is explained in the light of phenomena already analysed and classified. The whole intelligent life of man is, consciously or unconsciously, a process of apperception, inasmuch as every act of attention involves the appercipient process.

APPERLEY, CHARLES JAMES (1777–1843), English sportsman and sporting writer, better known as “Nimrod,” the pseudonym under which he published his works on the chase and the turf, was born at Plasgronow, near Wrexham, in Denbighshire, in 1777. Between the years 1805 and 1820 he devoted himself to fox-hunting. About 1821 he began to contribute to the Sporting Magazine, under the pseudonym of “Nimrod,” a series of racy articles, which helped to double the circulation of the magazine in a year or two. The proprietor, Mr Pittman, kept for “Nimrod” a stud of hunters, and defrayed all expenses of his tours, besides giving him a handsome salary. The death of Mr Pittman, however, led to a law-suit with the proprietors of the magazine for money advanced, and Apperley, to avoid imprisonment, had to take up his residence near Calais (1830), where he supported himself by his writings. He died in London on the 19th of May 1843. The most important of his works are: Remarks on the Condition of Hunters, the Choice of Horses, &c. (1831); The Chase, the Turf, and the Road (originally written for the Quarterly Review), (1837); Memoirs of the Life of the Late John Mytton (1837); Nimrod’s Northern Tour (1838); Nimrod Abroad (1842); The Horse and the Hound (a reprint from the seventh edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica) (1842); Hunting Reminiscences (1843). APPERT, BENJAMIN NICOLAS MARIE (1797–1847), French philanthropist, was born in Paris on the 10th of September 1797. While a young man he introduced a system of mutual instruction into the regimental schools of the department of the Nord. The success which it obtained induced him to publish a Manual setting forth his system. While engaged in teaching prisoners at Montaigu, he fell under the suspicion of having connived at the escape of two of them, and was thrown into the prison of La Force. On his release he resolved to devote the rest of his life to bettering the condition of those whose lot he had for a time shared, and he travelled much over Europe for the purpose of studying the various systems of prison discipline, and wrote several books on the subject. After the revolution of 1830 he became secretary to Queen Marie Amélie, and organized the measures taken for the relief of the needy. He was decorated with the Legion of Honour in 1835.

His brother, (d. 1840), was the inventor of the method of preserving food by enclosing it in hermetically sealed tins; he left a work entitled Art de conserver les substances animales et végétables. APPIAN (Gr. ), of Alexandria, Roman historian, flourished during the reigns of Trajan, Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. He tells us that, after having filled the chief offices in his native place, he repaired to Rome, where he practised as an advocate. When advanced in years, he obtained, by the good offices of his friend Fronto, the dignity of imperial procurator—it is supposed in Egypt. His work ( ) in twenty-four books, written in Greek, is rather a number of monographs than a connected history. It gives an account of various peoples and countries from the earliest times down to their incorporation

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/233


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Kniazhnin, Jakov Borisovich

KNIAZHNIN,, Jakov Borisovich, Russian litterateur and dramatic author: b. Pskov, 3 Oct. 1743; d. 14 Jan. 1791. He was educated in the University of Saint Petersburg, entered the army, where, however, he stayed only a short time, and for a number of years was connected with the civil service. In 1783 he became a member of the Russian Academy at Saint Petersburg. Of his tragedies the majority are but imitations of French plays, containing with the exception of one or two nothing original. His comedies are replete with bright passages and full of spirit. The tragedies most worthy of mention are ‘Didon’ (1769); ‘Vladimir i Iaropolh’ (1779); ‘Vladisan’  (1786); ‘Roslav’ (1784); ‘Vadim Novgorodskii’

(1789). The two last were patriotic plays, some of the passages of the ‘Vadim’ being of such a character as to alarm Catharine II and cause its suppression, but it was published in 1793, two years after the death of the author. Of his comedies the most noteworthy are ‘Khvastum’; ‘Chudakhi’; and the light opera ‘Neachastie ot Karety.’ A complete edition of his works, in four volumes, was published in 1787, several subsequent editions being published in two volumes in 1847-48.


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Appenzell (canton)


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Appenzell (town)


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Knigge, Adolphus Francis Frederic Louis, Baron de

KNIGGE, Adolphus Francis Frederic Louis,, German author: b. Brendenbeck, near Hanover, 16 Oct 1752; d. Bremen, 6 May 1796. In 1769 he went to the University of Göttingen, where he studied law, later became assessor at Cassel, in 1777 was made a chamberlain at Weimar, and finally in 1791,

after leading a very unsettled life, became a resident of Bremen. Here he joined the Illuminati and later became implicated in the disputes relating to that secret order. Of his writings by far the most important is his ‘Ueber den Umgang mit Menschen’ (‘On Intercourse with Men ’ ), which contains much good advice and a collection of upright methods of living so as to get the greatest joy and happiness at the same time being useful. Of his other works those most read were ‘Die Roman meines Lebens’ (1781-87); and ‘Die Reise nach Braunschweig’ (1792), a humorous romance; and ‘Des seligen Etatsrates von Schafskoff hinterlassene Papiere’ (1792). Consult Goedeke, ‘Adolf Freiherr Knigge’ (1844).


text:
Page:Chronological Table and Index of the Statutes.djvu/74

56


text:
Page:Weird Tales volume 31 number 03.djvu/98

 {|

 * }


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Apperley, Charles James


text:
Page:Weird Tales volume 31 number 03.djvu/99

(Continued from page 374) recollect—the barred windows of a prince's palace failed to keep you from me. And eunuchs with crescent-bladed simitars likewise failed. But in the end—why must all loveliness have an end?—a bowstring for me, and a sword-stroke for you"

The Yellow Girl shuddered as she stroked her smooth throat with fingers that sought to wipe off the last lingering memory of a cord of hardspun silk.

"And from the first," continued the girl, "I knew what our doom would be. So I started weaving, and completed my task before they suspected us and the bowstring did its work. My soul, my self, being woven cunningly and curiously into silk rich enough to hang on the wall of the khan's palace, waited patiently and wondered whether you and I could have our day again. Thus it was in the beginning"

"Ah now it does come back to me," interrupted Clarke, "as in a dream dimly remembered. How compactly and stiflingly they would wrap me in a bale of silk and carry me past the guards and into your presence. And by what devious routes I would leave you  yes, and how painlessly swift is the stroke of a simitar"

The Yellow Girl shuddered.

"A simitar truly wielded is really nothing, after all," continued Clarke. "I might have been sawn asunder between planks Well, and that meeting in the garden these short twenty years ago was after all not our first it seems that I knew then that it was not the first. Though but for an evening"

"Yes. Just for an evening. So to what end were we spared bowstrings and the stroke of swift simitars, since we had but an evening?" And thinking of the empty years of luxurious imprisonment that followed, she smiled somberly. "For only an evening. And then you forgot, until this rug—this same rug I wove centuries ago—interrupted your pleasant adventuring, and reminded you.

"Death stared me in the face. The end of life more vainly lived than the first. I knew that I was leaving this avatar after having lived but one stolen evening. So I sent a trusted servant to carry this very rug to Meshed. For when we met in the garden, you were hunting rugs for him who now seeks them for your delight. And I knew that he would find you if you still lived. Thus it is that I have crossed the Border, and stand before you as I did once before—this time on that wry rug which I wove centuries ago, while living in hope of another meeting and in dread of the bowstring I knew would in the end find me."

The moon patch had marched toward the end of the rug from Samarcand, and was cutting into the blue web at its end. Clarke knew that when there remained no more room for her tiny feet, she would vanish, not ever to reappear. But Clarke hoped against knowledge.

"Yellow Girl," he entreated, "my door will be barred to friend and acquaintance alike, if you will but return on whatever nights the moon creeps across our rug"

Had Diane, listening at the door, understood, she would have used her key. But Diane merely heard:

"And I shall wait for these nights as long as life remains in me. For all that has happened since then is nothing and less than nothing; and all has been a dream since that one night in a garden of Zarab-shan."

Very little remained of the moon


text: Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/15


text:
Page:Weird Tales volume 31 number 03.djvu/100

 {|  width="250px"

SCIENCE'S newest discovery to banish excess fat is now available to all fat folks who want to lose ugly, unhealthy fat. Medical studies have recently proven that excess weight is a heavy burden on the organs of the body. Insurance statistics prove the death rate of fat people far leads the death rate of normal weight people.

SLENDARETTE will take away fatty surplus harmlessly and quickly without demanding a starvation diet or exhaustive exercises. Thousands are daily using SLENDARETTE.

and manufactured by Registered Pharmacists, which means that it is made under the most I spection and fine health conditions.

SLENDARETTE is considered absolutely safe and and yet is amazingly effective as testified by thousands of users, many of whom gratefully report reductions of 5 lbs. per week and even more, with great benefit to their health and general well-being. Send today for a Special large package of SLENDARETTE and follow the directions.
 * | MONEY BACK GUARANTEE
 * | Certified Health Products Company, Box 32
 * | Certified Health Products Company, Box 32
 * | Certified Health Products Company, Box 32

507 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.

Send me a Special large treatment of SLENDARETTE for which I enclose $1.00 and will pay postman $1.00 and postage on delivery. I understand that MONEY WILL BE CHEERFULLY REFUNDED if I am not satisfied within 30 days.

Name ________________________________

Address ______________________________
 * | A new thriller by
 * | A new thriller by

SEABURY QUINN appears

in WEIRD TALES

every month patch. The Yellow Girl stepped a tiny pace forward, to prolong her stay yet another few moments. All but the moonlit strip of the rug from Samarcand glowed bloodily in the flare of the brazen mosque lamp.
 * }

"No, forgetful lover," eluded the Yellow Girl, "I can not return. I can not cross the Border again. In Samarcand, eight hundred years ago we mocked for a while the doom that hung over us, and in the end called the bowstring but a caress of farewell. Again, in the garden of Zarab-shan we met, we parted, and you forgot: so this time I take no chances. While I can not return, you at least can follow me if you will  for it is very easy"

She edged along the ever narrowing strip of moon-bathed silk, and with an embracing gesture, lured Clarke to rise and follow her.

"It is so easy move lightly  but be careful not to disturb your body or overbalance it"

Had Diane not turned away from the door, were she not even now strolling insouciantly clown Royal Street

"Yellow Girl, you and I have had enough of farewells!"

Something left Clarke, tottered perilously on the two handbreadths of moonlight that remained, then caught the Yellow Girl by the hand and took the lead.

The blue web of the rug from Samarcand gleamed for another moment in the moonlight, then sweltered in the red glow of the mosque lamp.


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Appert, Benjamin Nicolas Marie


text:
Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/16

A * indicates that the title given in parentheses is the original source of a story which is indexed in a collection the author's complete works not being indexed.

In magazine references to Scribner's Monthly and Scribner's Magazine, Scribner's Monthly (Volumes 1-22 of the Century, old series) is cited as Scrib o s; Scribner's Magazine is cited as Scrib M.

In the reference to the Century Magazine, the old series numbers are used. To get the new series number subtract 22.

In citing collected works [ ] are used to indicate publisher and to indicate edition.

The order of references as given under the author's name is as follows:

The list of books indexed, page 511-32, should be consulted to ascertain what editions have been indexed. Different editions of an author's works bearing the same title do not always contains the same stories. same title do not always contain the same stories.


text: Weird Tales/Volume 31/Issue 3/Beyond the Wall of Sleep


text: Weird Tales/Volume 31/Issue 3/Guarded

title: Weird Tales/Volume 31/Issue 3/Guarded


text:
Author:Mearle Prout

Works

 * "Guarded," in Weird Tales (March 1938, vol. 31, no. 3)
 * "Guarded," in Weird Tales (March 1938, vol. 31, no. 3)
 * "Guarded," in Weird Tales (March 1938, vol. 31, no. 3)
 * "Guarded," in Weird Tales (March 1938, vol. 31, no. 3)

title: Author:Mearle Prout


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/777

I] called Hormah. Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof. And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. And they gave Hebron unto Caleb, as Moses said: and he expelled thence the three sons of Anak. And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day.

And the house of Joseph, they also went up against Beth-el: and the Lord was with them. And the house of Joseph sent to descry Beth-el. (Now the name of the city before was Luz.) And the spies saw a man come forth out of the city, and they said unto him, Shew us, we pray thee, the entrance into the city, and we will shew thee mercy. And when he shewed them the entrance into the city, they smote the city with the edge of the sword; but they let go the man and all his family. And the man went into the land of the Hittites, and built a city, and called the name thereof Luz: which is the name thereof unto this day.

Neither did Manasseh drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shean and her towns, nor Taanach and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns, nor


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/778

Rh the inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: but the Canaanites would dwell in that land. And it came to pass, when Israel was strong, that they put the Canaanites to tribute, and did not utterly drive them out.

Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer; but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them.

Neither did Zebulun drive out the inhabitants of Kitron, nor the inhabitants of Nahalol; but the Canaanites dwelt among them, and became tributaries.

Neither did Asher drive out the inhabitants of Accho,nor the inhabitants of Zidon, nor of Ahlab, nor of Achzib, nor of Helbah, nor of Aphik, nor of Rehob: but the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: for they did not drive them out.

Neither did Naphtali drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh,nor the inhabitants of Beth-anath; but he dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: nevertheless the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh and of Beth-anath became tributaries unto them. And the Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountain: for they would not suffer them to come down to the valley: but the Amorites would dwell in mount Heres in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim: yet the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tribu-


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/779

II] taries. And the coast of the Amorites was from the going up to Akrabbim, from the rock, and upward.

an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you. And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this? Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you. And it came to pass, when the angel of the Lord spake these words unto all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voice, and wept. And they called the name of that place Bochim: and they sacrificed there unto the Lord.

And when Joshua had let the people go, the children of Israel went every man unto his inheritance to possess the land. And the people served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that outlived Joshua, who had seen all the great works of the Lord, that he did for Israel. And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died, being an hundred and ten years old. And they buried him in the border of his inheritance in Timnath-heres, in the mount of


text: Weird Tales/Volume 31/Issue 3/The Girl from Samarcand


text: Weird Tales/Volume 31/Issue 3/The Head in the Window


text:
Author:Edgar Hoffmann Trooper Price

Works

 * Triangle with Variations (1924)
 * The Prophet's Grandchildren (1925)
 * The Stranger from Kurdistan (1925)
 * (verse)
 * Saladin's Throne-Rug (1927)
 * with Otis A. Kline
 * The Word of Bentley (1933)
 * Pale Hands (1933)
 * The King's Peacock (1933)
 * Chapter 8 of Cosmos (1934), with Otis Adelbert Kline
 * Tarbis of the Lake (1934)
 * Live Bait (1934)
 * Through the Gates of the Silver Key, 1934, by H. P. Lovecraft and E. Hoffmann Price in Weird Tales (July 1934, Vol. 24, No. 1)
 * The Cat Goddess (1935)
 * Plunder of Kurdistan (1935)
 * Corpse Crypt (1935)
 * The Garden of Evil (1935)
 * Night in Manila (1935)
 * The Walking Dead (1935)
 * Scourge of the Silver Dragon (1935)
 * Tomb Dweller (1935)
 * Medusa's Kiss (1936)
 * Desert Magic (1936)
 * The Girl from Penang (1936)
 * Pit of Madness (1936)
 * Scarlet Rendezvous (1936)
 * Triangle by Arrangement (1936)
 * Tailor Made Dummy (1936)
 * Crystal Clues (1936)
 * The Destroying Demon (1936)
 * Treasure from Kurdistan (1936)
 * Hasheesh Wisdom (1936)
 * Keeper of the Gateway (1936)
 * Chaste Goddess (1936)
 * Borrowed Blood (1936)
 * Tenderfoot (1936)
 * Double Catspaw (1936)
 * Revolt of the Damned (1937)
 * Hands of the Dead (1937)
 * Mojave Madness (1937)
 * Woman in the Case (1938)
 * Sweetheart from the Tomb (1938)
 * Princess of Pain (1938)
 * Two Against the Gods (1938)
 * Wolves of Kerak (1938)
 * "The Girl from Samarcand," in Weird Tales (March 1938, vol. 31, no. 3), reprinted from Weird Tales (May 1929, vol. 13, no. 5)
 * Hat Rack Crosses the River (1939)
 * You Can't Fight a Woman (1939)
 * Strange Gateway (1939)
 * Daughter of the Gods (1939)
 * Envoy to the Kahn (1939)
 * Apprentice Magician (1939)
 * Corpse Parade (1939)
 * Snake Goddess (1939)
 * One Step from Hell (1939)
 * Spanish Vampire (1939)
 * Allah Sends a Reaper (1939)
 * Spotted Satan (1940) with Otis Adelbert Kline
 * Heart of a Thief (1940)
 * Message for McTavish (1940)
 * 3 Graves in the Desert (1940)
 * Crab Bait (1940)
 * Khosru's Garden (1940)
 * Vengeance in Samarra (1940)
 * Selene Slays by Night (1940)
 * Another Road to Destiny (1940)
 * Dawn of Discord (1940) with Clark Ashton Smith
 * House of Monoceros (1941) with Clark Ashton Smith
 * One More River (1941)
 * She Herded Him Around (1941)
 * Fugitives from the Future (1941)
 * Murder Salvage (1941)
 * Man Without Memory (1942)
 * Exiles of Hyper-Space (1942)
 * Prayer to Satan (1942)
 * Web of Wizardry (1942)
 * The Fire and the Flesh (1943)
 * Land of Living Flame (1943)
 * Shadow Captain (1943)
 * Drink or Draw (1943)
 * Murderer's Moon (1943)
 * The Throne of King Kawoma (1944)
 * Sanctuary (1944)
 * The Hands of Janos (1944)
 * Graven Image (1944)
 * Desert Romance (1946)
 * You Can't Eat Glory (1946)
 * The Shadow of Saturn (1950)
 * Short-Cut to Hell (1950)
 * Exile from Venus (1951)
 * Escape from Hyper-Space (1951)
 * When in Doubt, Mutate! (1952)
 * The Seven Securities (1952)
 * Sanctuary (1944)
 * The Hands of Janos (1944)
 * Graven Image (1944)
 * Desert Romance (1946)
 * You Can't Eat Glory (1946)
 * The Shadow of Saturn (1950)
 * Short-Cut to Hell (1950)
 * Exile from Venus (1951)
 * Escape from Hyper-Space (1951)
 * When in Doubt, Mutate! (1952)
 * The Seven Securities (1952)

title: Author:Edgar Hoffmann Trooper Price


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/780

Rh Ephraim, on the north side of the hill Gaash. And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there arose another generation after them, which knew not the Lord, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel.

And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim: and they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, which brought them out of the land of Egypt, and followed other gods, of the gods of the people that were round about them, and bowed themselves unto them, and provoked the Lord to anger. And they forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.

And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he delivered them into the hands of spoilers that spoiled them, and he sold them into the hands of their enemies round about, so that they could not any longer stand before their enemies. Whithersoever they went out, the hand of the Lord was against them for evil, as the Lord had said, and as the Lord had sworn unto them: and they were greatly distressed.

Nevertheless the Lord raised up judges, which delivered them out of the hand of those that spoiled them. And yet they would not hearken unto their judges, but they went a whoring after other gods, and bowed themselves unto them: they turned quickly out of the


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/781

III] way which their fathers walked in, obeying the commandments of the Lord; but they did not so. And when the Lord raised them up judges, then the Lord was with the judge, and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge: for it repented the Lord because of their groanings by reason of them that oppressed them and vexed them. And it came to pass, when the judge was dead, that they returned, and corrupted themselves more than their fathers, in following other gods to serve them, and to bow down unto them; they ceased not from their own doings, nor from their stubborn way.

And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel; and he said. Because that this people hath transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and have not hearkened unto my voice; I also will not henceforth drive out any from before them of the nations which Joshua left when he died: that through them I may prove Israel, whether they will keep the way of the Lord to walk therein, as their fathers did keep it, or not. Therefore the Lord left those nations, without driving them out hastily; neither delivered he them into the hand of Joshua.

Now these are the nations which the Lord left, to prove Israel by them, even as many of Israel as had not known all the wars of Canaan; only that the gene-


text:
Page:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha.djvu/782

Rh rations of the children of Israel might know, to teach them war, at the least such as before knew nothing thereof; namely, five lords of the Philistines, and all the Canaanites, and the Sidonians, and the Hivites that dwelt in mount Lebanon, from mount Baal-hermon unto the entering in of Hamath. And they were to prove Israel by them, to know whether they would hearken unto the commandments of the Lord, which he commanded their fathers by the hand of Moses.

And the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, Hittites, and Amorites, and Perizzites, and Hivites, and Jebusites: and they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods. And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and forgat the Lord their God, and served Baalim and the groves.

Therefore the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he sold them into the hand of Chushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia: and the children of Israel served Chushan-rishathaim eight years. And when the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, the Lord raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, who delivered them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother. And the Spirit of the Lord came upon him, and he judged Israel, and went out to war: and the Lord delivered Chushan-rishathaim


text: Page:Index To Short Stories 1923.djvu/549


text:
Author:Wilhelm von Scholz

Works

 * "The Head in the Window," translated by Roy Temple House in Weird Tales (March 1938, vol. 31, no. 3)

title: Author:Wilhelm von Scholz


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/234

 into the Roman empire. Besides a preface, there are extant eleven complete books and considerable fragments. In spite of its unattractive style, the work is very valuable, especially for the period of the civil wars.

APPIANI, ANDREA (1754–1817), the best fresco painter of his age, was born at Milan. He was made pensioned artist to the kingdom of Italy by Napoleon, but lost his allowance after the events of 1814 and fell into poverty. Correggio was his model, and his best pieces, which are in the church of Santa Maria presso San Celso and the royal palace at Milan, almost rival those of his great master. He also painted Napoleon and the chief personages of his court. Among the most graceful of his oil-paintings are his “Venus and Love,” and “Rinaldo in the Garden of Armida.” He is known as “the elder,” to distinguish him from his great-nephew Andrea Appiani (1817–1865), an historical painter at Rome. Other painters of the same name were Niccolo Appiani (fl. 1510) and Francesco Appiani (1704–1792). APPIA, VIA, a high-road leading from Rome to Campania and lower Italy, constructed in 312 by the censor Appius Claudius Caecus. It originally ran only as far as Capua, but was successively prolonged to Beneventum, Venusia, Tarentum and Brundusium, though at what dates is unknown. Probably it was extended as far as Beneventum not long after the colonization of this town in 268, and it seems to have reached Venusia before 190 Horace, in the journey to Brundusium described in Sat. i. 5, followed the Via Appia as far as Beneventum, but not beyond.

The original road was no doubt only gravelled (glarea strata); in 298 a footpath was laid saxo quadrato from the Porta Capena, by which it left Rome, to the temple of Mars, about 1 m. from the gate. Three years later, however, the whole road was paved with silex from the temple to Bovillae, and in 191 the first mile from the gate to the temple was similarly treated. The distance from Rome to Capua was 132 m. For the first few miles the road is flanked by an uninterrupted series of tombs and other buildings (see L. Canina, Via Appia, Rome, 1853). As far as Terracina it ran in an almost entirely straight line, even through the Alban Hills, where the gradients are steep. A remarkably fine embankment belonging to it still exists at Aricia. At Forum Appii it entered the Pomptine Marshes; that this portion (19 m. long, hence called Decennovium) belonged to the original road was proved by the discovery at Ad Medias (Mesa) of a milestone of about 250 (Ch. Hülsen, in Römische Mitteilungen, 1889, 83; 1895, 301). A still older road ran along the foot of the Volscian mountains past Cora, Norba and Setia; this served as the post road until the end of the 18th century. At the time of Strabo and Horace, however, it was the practice to travel by canal from Forum Appii to Lucus Feroniae; to Nerva and Trajan were due the paving of the road and the repair of the bridges along this section. Theodoric in 486 ordered the execution of similar repairs, the success of which is recorded in inscriptions, but in the middle ages it was abandoned and impassable, and was only renewed by Pius VI. The older road crossed the back of the promontory at the foot of which Terracina stands; in imperial times, probably, the rock was cut away perpendicularly for a height of 120 ft. to allow the road to pass. Beyond Fundi it passed through the mountains to Formiae, the engineering of the road being noteworthy; and thence by Minturnae and Sinuessa (towns of the Aurunci which had been conquered in 314 ) to Capua. The remains of the road in this first portion are particularly striking.

Between Capua and Beneventum, a distance of 32 m., the road passed near the defile of Caudium (see ). The modern highroad follows the ancient line, and remains of the latter, with the exception of three well-preserved bridges, which still serve for the modern highroad, are conspicuous by their absence. The portion of the road from Rome to Beneventum is described by Sir R. Colt Hoare, Classical Tour through Italy, 57 seq. (London, 1819). He was accompanied on his journey, made in 1789, by the artist Carlo Labruzzi, who executed a series of 226 drawings, the greater part of which have not been published; they are described by T. Ashby in Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome (1903), p. 375 seq., and Atti del Congresso Internazionale per le Scienze Storiche, vol. v. (Rome, 1904), p. 125 seq.

From Beneventum to Brundusium by the Via Appia, through Venusia and Tarentum, was 202 m. A shorter route, but more fitted for mule traffic, though Horace drove along part of it, ran by Aequum Tuticum, Aecae, Herdoniae, Canusium, Barium, and Gnatia (Strabo vi. 282); it was made into a main road by Trajan, and took the name Via Traiana. The original road, too, adopted in imperial times a more devious but easier route by Aeclanum instead of by Trevicum. This was restored by Hadrian for the 15 m. between Beneventum and Aeclanum. Under Diocletian and Maximian a road (the Via Herculia) was constructed from Aequum Tuticum to Pons Aufidi near Venusia, where it crossed the Via Appia and went on into Lucania, passing through Potentia and Grumentum, and joining the Via Popilia near Nerulum. Though it must have lost much of its importance through the construction of the Via Traiana, the last portion from Tarentum to Brundusium was restored by Constantine about 315.

APPIN, a coast district of Argyllshire, Scotland, bounded W. by Loch Linnhe, S. by Loch Creran, E. by the districts of Benderloch and Lorne, and N. by Loch Leven. It lies north-east to south-west, and measures 14 m. in length by 7 m. in breadth. The scenery of the coast is extremely beautiful, and inland the country is rugged and mountainous. The principal hills are the double peaks of Ben Vair (3362 ft. and 3284 ft.) and Creag Ghorm (2372 ft.) in the north, and Fraochie (2883 ft.), Meall Ban (2148 ft.) and Ben Mhic na Ceisich (2093 ft.) near the right flank of Glen Creran. The chief streams are the Coe and Laroch, flowing into Loch Leven, the Duror and Salachan flowing into Loch Linnhe, and the lola and Creran flowing into Loch Creran. The leading industries comprise slate and granite quarries and lead mining. Ballachulish, Duror, Portnacroish, Appin and Port Appin are the principal villages. Ballachulish and Port Appin are ports of call for steamers, and the Caledonian railway company’s branch line from Connel Ferry to Ballachulish runs through the coast land and has stations at Creagan, Appin, Duror, Kentallen and Ballachulish Ferry. Appin was the country of a branch of the Stewarts. APPLAUSE (Lat. applaudere, to strike upon, clap), primarily the expression of approval by clapping of hands, &c.; generally any expression of approval. The custom of applauding is doubtless as old and as widespread as humanity, and the variety of its forms is limited only by the capacity for devising means of making a noise. Among civilized nations, however, it has at various times been subject to certain conventions. Thus the Romans had a set ritual of applause for public performances, expressing degrees of approval: snapping the finger and thumb, clapping with the flat or hollow palm, waving the flap of the toga,

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 02.djvu/234


text: The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha/Volume 1/Joshua


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Appian

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Appian