#william plumer

[antebellumite]

top 5 antebellum politicians, not including presidents

For the sake of not making this response boring, Im going to personally remove all three of the triumvirs from the running. All three of them are now in Spot 0. Benton and Hayne can be there too.

Which leaves five spots for...

John Randolph of Roanoke literally the MOST fascinating guy. Hes wilder than a herd of horses hoarse on meth. literally created a slur. he brought dogs into congress and stripped in the house of reps and got into verbal and physical fights. he dueled everyone to the point where his contemporaries commented that he should be in a straightjacket. he asked the cousin of the person he was dueling with to be his second in the same duel. he was a dramatic bitch who ordered a european badge of honor to be made for him in honor of that duel. he bemoaned that no one would care about him when he died. when he was near death he painstakingly made his way to the us congress gallery to hear henry clays beautiful voice one last time. whenever the wife of a congressmen he was insulting was in the gallery he doubled down on his insults. when he died he freed the people he enslaved but he did a piss poor job so everything just fell apart. he has tuberculosis but it was contained solely to his dick and so he suffered an inferiority complex and an inability to progress past puberty because of it. and also maybe he had klinefelter syndrome bc of a imbalance either ways, my name on discord is john randolph hrt not because i GENUINELY think he would support hrt, but because the fact that there is a CHANCE he would is still higher than the rest of his colleagues.

Henry Wise also the most insane guy of the time period. like jror, got into fights, but this was way more about slavery. he picked fights with jqa all throughout the gag war. surprisingly woke on several topics including thanksgiving and the rights of native americans. he says some of the funniest things ever sometimes. he thinks abolitionist is a slur. he became a general in the confederate army but got kicked out for being a bitch. somehow flip flopped between every. single. political. party. of his era. including almost becoming a republican near the end of his life. his irreverence for law and order is astounding. he bullied john tyler and literally everyone in congress. the fact that he was drinking buddies with franklin pierce and got him elected but also got pierces friend killed in the cilley graves duel is insane. the fact that in order to try and get henry clay the presidential nomination he literally bent his knee at hugh lawson white and did the equivalent of the uwu face is insane. the fact he more or less murdered john brown is insane. the fact that ralph waldo emerson said that if brown and wise were in a different life, they could have been friends is even more insane. like damn ralph waldo emerson now is NOT the time to be shipping abolitionist john brown and the slavery supporting secessionist governor of virginia who murdered him together. also not going to lie the fact that he never sought a pardon after his involvement in the confederacy is actually a breath of fresh air for this time period. go girl acknowledge that you are undeserving of a pardon or forgiveness for your crimes. i honestly cant do this guy justice without just telling you gto look at my #the field of blood tag. this guy. also i will not lie i did not actually understand his violent tendancies (which to his credit he wasnt like a maniac or anything ) until i saw his photograph. and uh yeah. shaking hands meme between jror and henry wise and the connecting factor is looking feminine and having a serious complex because of it.

Hugh Lawson White his hair. the way hes the only antebellum politician whos wikipedia page actually says what his personality and style was like. fascinating.

Charles Sumner hes such a loser. he deserved so much better. once he fell of a train. he was called his great impotency. he got caned one time and thats all everyone ever remembers about him. his main biographer did him SO DIRTY. he might be ace he might be gay. the hermaphrodite by julia ward howe is probably about the love triangle between julia him and samuel howe, julias husband. he has incredibly modern beliefs about things! hes funny and he has a three way benign rivalry betwen himself seward and douglas. he waxed poetic about daniel websters head and then felt betrayed by him. he once stroked his own head glumly. his eyebags. he got hit with a brick once. his handsomeness is the work of legends. hes awkward and gentlemanly and depressing and optimistic and so many many things its beautiful and he was beautiful and i love him so much! i love his friendship with mary todd lincoln and the way he was basically looming in abraham lincolns window every other night throughout the civil war.

William Plumer Jr. LITERALLY my guy!! his anecdotes are all so fascinating. the time he had a very dramatic meeting with daniel webster about Fate and Destiny. his involvement with preserving american history from the very beginning. just lovely and wonderful and i basically yassify him whenever i imagine him in my head. just wonderful. and these are basically all of them i think, though i like a lot of congressmen of this era.

Bonus, have a drawing of henry wise, a calhouny hugh lawson white for some reason, and fem plumer!

[istanbulkizlar-harika]

*Devocional Diário.*

Domingo 30/06/24

*Tema:* Diante de Deus

1 Crônicas 16:27

O esplendor e a majestade

estão diante dele;

força e alegria, na sua habitação.

🙏🏻 *Frases do Dia.*

Cada uma das obras de Deus é grandiosa à sua maneira.

*William S Plumer*

🌅 *Provérbios do Dia.*

Pv 30.5

Toda a Palavra de Deus é pura; escudo é para os que confiam nele.

📖 *Leitura Biblíca Diária.*

1 Samuel 12.18

Então invocou Samuel ao Senhor, e o Senhor deu trovões e chuva naquele dia; por isso todo o povo temeu sobremaneira ao Senhor e a Samuel.

" *Deus é Fiel e abençoará a sua Vida* "

[theworstfoundingfathers]

Who is the worst founding father? Round 5: Henry Laurens vs James Monroe

Henry Laurens (March 6, 1724 [O.S. February 24, 1723] – December 8, 1792) was an American Founding Father, merchant, slave trader, and rice planter from South Carolina who became a political leader during the Revolutionary War. A delegate to the Second Continental Congress, Laurens succeeded John Hancock as its president. He was a signatory to the Articles of Confederation and, as president, presided over its passage.

Laurens had earned great wealth as a partner in the largest slave-trading house in North America, Austin and Laurens. In the 1750s alone, this Charleston firm oversaw the sale of more than 8,000 enslaved Africans.

Laurens’ oldest son, Colonel John Laurens, was killed in 1782 in the Battle of the Combahee River, as one of the last casualties of the Revolutionary War. He had supported enlisting and freeing slaves for the war effort and suggested to his father that he begin with the 40 he stood to inherit. He had urged his father to free the family’s slaves, but although conflicted, Henry Laurens never manumitted his 260 slaves.

---

James Monroe (April 28, 1758 – July 4, 1831) was an American statesman, lawyer, and diplomat who served as the fifth president of the United States from 1817 to 1825. He is perhaps best known for issuing the Monroe Doctrine, a policy of opposing European colonialism in the Americas while effectively asserting U.S. dominance, empire, and hegemony in the hemisphere. He also served as governor of Virginia, a member of the United States Senate, U.S. ambassador to France and Britain, the seventh Secretary of State, and the eighth Secretary of War.

As president, Monroe signed the Missouri Compromise, which admitted Missouri as a slave state and banned slavery from territories north of the 36°30′ parallel. 

Monroe sold his small Virginia plantation in 1783 to enter law and politics. He owned multiple properties over the course of his lifetime, but his plantations were never profitable. Although he owned much more land and many more slaves, and speculated in property, he was rarely on site to oversee the operations. Overseers treated the slaves harshly to force production, but the plantations barely broke even. Monroe incurred debts by his lavish and expensive lifestyle and often sold property (including slaves) to pay them off. 

Two years into his presidency, Monroe faced an economic crisis known as the Panic of 1819, the first major depression to hit the country since the ratification of the Constitution. The severity of the economic downturn in the U.S. was compounded by excessive speculation in public lands, fueled by the unrestrained issue of paper money from banks and business concerns.

Before the onset of the Panic of 1819, business leaders had called on Congress to increase tariff rates to address the negative balance of trade and help struggling industries. Monroe declined to call a special session of Congress to address the economy. When Congress finally reconvened in December 1819, Monroe requested an increase in the tariff but declined to recommend specific rates. Congress would not raise tariff rates until the passage of the Tariff of 1824. The panic resulted in high unemployment and an increase in bankruptcies and foreclosures, and provoked popular resentment against banking and business enterprises.

The collapse of the Federalists left Monroe with no organized opposition at the end of his first term, and he ran for reelection unopposed. A single elector from New Hampshire, William Plumer, cast a vote for John Quincy Adams, preventing a unanimous vote in the Electoral College. He did so because he thought Monroe was incompetent. 

[nesiacha]

Turreau, brutal husband and tyrannical father

In this link https://www.tumblr.com/nesiacha/758106798113914880/fate-of-marie-ang%C3%A9lique-lequesne-wife-of-ronsin?source=share, @chickenmadam rightly pointed out that if Turreau was a horrible person with his wife Marie Angélique (an understatement), it's therefore likely that he was also a terrible father to his children.

On this site https://rembarre.fr/g_tur_ec.htm, it seems that Louis Marie was indeed awful to his daughter Alexandrine Cléophée, who was a boarder at the Maison de la Légion d'Honneur in Saint Denis, either in 1809 or 1813. However, her father removed her and forced her into a convent in Conches. Marie Angélique was not able to secure permission to remove her daughter, despite a court order on September 22, 1814.

I feel like this was a final petty act by Turreau, especially since they were apparently separated from 1806 (the official divorce took place later, in 1813). The municipal authorities even had to move her to safer quarters, forcing her to live in poverty to the point that William Thornton collected funds for her so she could return to France. He wrote these words: "It is a shame that such a man represents a nation." A member of Congress stated that Turreau was a savage. Madison Dolley, the politically active First Lady of the United States and a friend of Marie Angélique, despised Turreau. As has been mentioned before, the way Turreau treated his wife shocked the political class. In addition to what he had done in Vendée did nothing to improve his reputation.

According to Plumer, Thomas Jefferson remained cautious and paid no attention to Turreau's private life (in my opinion, to avoid a diplomatic incident, though surely he had his own opinions). As for Napoleon, he didn't recall Turreau until 1811, so I don't get the impression he understood the severity of Turreau's actions. I mean, I wouldn’t expect much from a man (Bonaparte) who laughed at the suggestion/joke that a man could knock out his wife to bring her back forcibly to their home. But honestly, Turreau represented France in the United States, and his frequent mistreatment of his wife shocked the Washington political class, who were charmed by her. Apparently, some Americans even wondered when they saw him if all Frenchmen treated their wives that way. So, if Napoleon didn't see the moral reasons to reprimand Turreau (after all, he promoted quite a few bloody and oppressive laws regarding women), he should have recognized the pragmatic reasons to reprimand him. Fouché was just as criminal and detestable as Turreau but at least he was a good husband and father unlike him.

As for the fate of Turreau’s daughter, here’s an excerpt from the Bien Public of March 24, 1878: “We draw the attention of the Minister of War to a grave misfortune in need of relief. It concerns the daughter of Republican General Louis-Marie Turreau, aged 78, who lived in Nancy, in the Faubourg Sainte-Anne. Miss Turreau, one of our correspondents writes, has no resources; she has lived for a long time in true destitution. In 1876, a local newspaper, La Sentinelle, organized a subscription in her favor, which yielded the meager sum of 225 francs, and that was all.”

I console myself by thinking that at least it was better for her and her mother to face financial difficulties (though it must have been tough to go from having no material needs to living in some poverty), at least they were far away and safe from that man. I wonder why she didn’t receive financial support from her brothers. Did their father turn them against her? Couldn’t they help, or didn’t they want to? I’ll need to look into that.

[ivan-fyodorovich-k]

from William Plumer's Memorandum of Proceedings in the United States Senate, 1803-1807

[alexanderhamiltonschastityattic]

William Plumer, ten minutes into interviewing Thomas Jefferson:

[deepsouthreformation]

10 Quotes from The Pastor

The Pastor contains 9 essays from men associated with Princeton Theological Seminary. Those men are William S. Plumer, J.W. Alexander, Archibald Alexander, Charles Hodge, Samuel Miller, Ashbel Green, and Nicholas Murray. To purchase a copy of The Pastor from Westminster Bookstore, click here. For more information about The Pastor from Banner of Truth, click here. Quotes from The Pastor 1.…

[christophe76460]

"La justification est un acte. Ce n'est pas une œuvre, ni une série d'actes. Ce n'est pas progressif. Le croyant le plus faible et le saint le plus fort sont pareillement également justifiés. La justification n'admet aucun degré. Un homme est soit entièrement justifié, soit entièrement condamné aux yeux de Dieu."

William Plumer

[mybeautifulchristianjourney]

God is indeed on a throne of grace, but that is no less glorious and suited to inspire reverence than a throne of judgment.

William Plumer

[autodidact-adventures]

World War I (Part 59): More Politics

After the February Revolution and the Battle of Arras & Nivelle Offensive, political turmoil increased once again, with struggles for power erupting in Russia, Germany and Berlin.

Russia

In Russia, the tsar's regime had been toppled; the tsar's ministers were under arrest and rival factions battled for control of the provisional government.  The politicians had to decide what form of government to use, and how to organize its worsening economy.

For the first half of 1917, there was still strong support for continuing the war.  Minster of Justice Alexander Kerensky claimed that the revolution had been partially an angry reaction to rumours that the Romanov government might settle for a separate peace.  He and the general staff were preparing a summer campaign, one that was smaller than the late 1916 Chantilly one.

But resistance against the war was growing, especially among the army and industrial workforce, which was where the most support was needed.  By May, over 35,000 troops were deserting each month.  On the home front, the situation was still volatile.  Soviets had been recently formed, representing soldiers, sailors and workers; they were very skeptical about what Kerensky was doing.  Lenin had returned from exile and was now in charge of the Communist Party's Bolshevik faction, which was stirring up opposition and becoming more & more bold in doing so.

Germany

In Germany, the struggle was simpler, focusing on who would be in control of the government.  Nearly all the elite of German society were united against any meaningful reform, and their only real opposition was Chancellor Bethmann von Hollweg.  The kaiser floated between both camps, and was overall a fence-sitter.  He often agreed with Bethmann – for example, in 1917 he issued an Easter message endorsing his proposals for electoral reform.  But he knew that he was being increasingly overshadowed by Hindenburg and Ludendorff.

These two blamed Bethmann for pretty much everything.  They claimed that his failure to keep control over domestic policies was lessening the Reichstag's loyalty.  Trying to arrange peace negotiations was making Germany look weak, and also encouraging the Entente nations to keep fighting.  When strikes broke out in Berlin, they blamed him for that, too.

A standoff between them and Bethmann was lasting for months.  A conference was held on April 23rd, where Hindenburg & Luidendorff demanded a war aims memorandum be approved – one that declared Germany's intentions to annex parts of Belgium and France, and large parts of the Balkans.  Bethmann didn't resist, but a week later he placed a note in the files, in which he stated that he viewed the memorandum as meaningless – it implied Germany's ability to dictate peace terms to the Entente, which was completely unrealistic.  He wrote, “I have co-signed the protocol because it would be laughable to depart over fantasies.”

On May 15th, he gave a speech to the Reichstag, declaring himself to be “in complete accord” with the generals on war aims, but also willing to offer Russia a settlement “founded on mutually honourable understanding.”  These two things contradicted each other, of course, and caused Bethmann to lose potential support in the Reichstag – there was a growing number of Reichstag members who realized that the U-boat campaign was failing and wanted a negotiated settlement.  On the other hand, Ludendorff became even more hostile towards Bethmann because of the peace-with-Russia section.

There were two sources of support for Hindenburg and Ludendorff – the first was their success as generals going all the way back to the Battle of Tannenberg.  The second was from the most powerful & conservative parts of German society.  This elite believed that only victory could prevent the ordinary people from demanding reform of the entire system after the war finished.

Pressure began to grow for Bethmann to be dismissed.  The kaiser resisted strongly (to a surprising degree), because he realized that the new chancellor would be Ludendorff's pawn, which would cause the end of Bismarck's system.  But the pressure was great – even his wife and son (the Crown Prince Wilhelm) took part.  And the generals were willing to do almost anything to get what they wanted, whereas the kaiser was not.

Britain

Here, as in Germany, the struggle was between the head of the government (PM David Lloyd George) and the general staff, but apart from that there were few similarities.  Unlike in Germany, a military-based challenge to government control of policy was impossible.  The struggle was only over control of the BEF, but was still very intense.

Lloyd George faced off against Douglas Haig and General Sir William Robertson (Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and based in London). As the summer of 1917 began [June], the question of what to do with the BEF was paramount.  Lloyd George's government had began shakily, but now had solid public support; he was very skeptical about the generals' tactics and strategies (with good reason).  Any inclination he might have previously had to leave military things to the military, had been destroyed with the failures at Arras and the Chemin des Dames.  He insisted that they wait for a great number of American troops to arrive before launching any more large offensives. He pushed for an Italian offensive while the French and Russians recovered & rested, and the Americans got an army ready.

There was actually no guarantee that America would send a whole lot of troops into the field.  After Wilson's declaration of war, it wasn't certain that they were going to do anything more than send money, equipment and ships to their new allies.  The Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee declared that “Congress will not permit American soldiers to be sent to Europe,” but Wilson quickly proved him wrong on that.  However, America didn't have much of an army yet – until a gradual buildup was authorized in late 1916, their regular army had only 130,000 men (barely putting them among the 20 biggest armies in the world).  They had no tanks, almost no aircraft, and very few machine-guns (even though the machine-gun was an American invention).  The general staff was legally limited to only 55 officers, with only 29 being allowed to be based in Washington – the country distrusted military establishments.

Also, their largest army unit was a regiment – there were no divisions.  The military quickly organized a First Division and sent it to France to show theyr were serious.  It was led by General John Persing, who had begun his career in fighting against the Native Americans.  On July 4th, it marched through the streets of Paris to an enthusiastic reception.  But it was much too small to be of any importance, and wasn't ready for combat.  There weren't any other divisions ready yet.

The first draft since the Civil War was authorized.  By mid-1917, every male from 21-31yrs was registered (it would later be 21-45yrs). 32 training camps were built within two months, each covering 8,000 – 12,000 acres (32.4 – 48.5 square km), and with 1,500 buildings capable of holding 40,000 men.

Nearly every noncom in the regular army was commissioned.  New schools (with specialties from gunnery to baking) were established along the East Coast.  The Entente sent veterans over to America to train American instructors in modern war.  The French specialized in artillery, tactics, liaison and fortifications; the British specialized in mortars, machine-guns, sniping, bayonets and gas.

In order to manage all this, the War Department and general staff had to be greatly expanded and restructured.  But even with all this expansion, Washington was not prepared for Pershing's estimate of how many troops he would require within a year.  Soon after he arrived in France, he reported, “It is evident that a force of about one million is the smallest unit which in modern war will be a complete, well-balanced and independent fighting organization.  Plans for the future should be based...on three times this force – i.e., at least three million men.”

Battle of Messines

Douglas Haig was still obsessed with Flanders, believing he could make a breakthrough at Ypres.  The Royal Navy leaders agreed with him – on the Belgian coast, their naval guns could support the infantry; and it was a strategic objective that they had to take. The Admiralty had been working on plans for an amphibious invasion of the region since 1915.  By spring [March-May] 1917, they were building huge floating docks that could land infantry and tanks.

Haig and his staff decided to seize this opportunity.  With his staff, he worked out a plan to combine a new offensive out of the Ypres salient with an amphibious landing.  They would thus be attacking Germany from two different directions, and force them to give up the Belgian coast.  They might even be able to drive Germany out of Belgium entirely, by giving them no room to manouevre.  And with their flank exposed, they might be forced back from the Hindenburg Line.

At the very least, the British would capture the Belgian ports of Ostend, Zeebrugge and Blankenberge.  Germany would lose the ports that they were using to send some of their smaller submarines out from into the Channel – and this would strengthen Britain's position when it came to any peace negotiations.

But although the amphibious landing was a new idea, the Ypres offensive would be the same old strategy that had just failed in the Nivelle Offensive – a massive artillery bombardment followed by an infantry attack, supposedly leading to a breakthrough that the cavalry could exploit.  Lloyd George was angry when he heard about it; and the amphibious landing wouldn't be possible until this supposed breakthrough had been achieved.

Haig attempted to placate Lloyd George by laying down a specific definition of the breakthrough – it would be counted as real once they'd captured the town of Roulers (11.3km into German territory), and then they would start the amphibious landing.  Lloyd George, however, believed that Roulers was out of reach for them.  Haig and Robertson believed he was being presumptuous to have an opinion on such things.

Weather was a very important factor in western Belgium.  The region of Flanders is extremely flat, with scattered farmhouses, small villages and some patches of trees, but very little else.  The ridges and hills of the Great War battles are barely noticeable today as more than wrinkles.

Flanders is also a very low part of the northern Europe's great coastal plain.  The inhabitants spent centuries installing drains, canals and dikes so that it could be farmed, as previously it was practically an extension of the sea.  Even today, it is the wettest a terrain can be without being an estuary.

Even in “dry” weather, you only have to dig a few spadesful of earth to strike water.  It almost always rains heavily in late summer [August], and the whole area turns into mud.  Because of the soil composition, it turns into a bottomless, gluey mess.

Haig was warned about this.  Actually, the summers of 1915 & 1916 had been very dry for Flanders, unusually so.  However, his staff looked at records going back to the 1830's, and reported that usually “in Flanders the weather broke early each August with the regularity of the Indian monsoon.”  The London Times military correspondent was a retired Lieutenant Colonel, and he warned Haig against trying to launch a major offensive in late summer: “You can fight in mountains and deserts, but no one can fight in mud and when the water is let out against you.  At the best, you are restricted to the narrow fronts on the higher ground, which are very unfavourable with modern weapons.”

“When the water is let out against you” would be referring to the Belgians in 1914, when they'd opened their dikes to flood the countryside east of the Yser River to hold back the Germans.  The Germans would have learned from that, and might also use it against the British.  Furthermore, heavy bombardment might wreck the fragile drainage system & cause flooding.

Haig didn't completely ignore these warnings, but he carried on anyway – he was impatient to begin while the Flanders region was still dry.  As soon as the Battle of Arras was finished, he began building up an attack force at Ypres.  Lloyd George hadn't given approval for this, and Pétain had warned Haig that this plan had no chance of success (this warning wasn't passed on to Lloyd George.)

For preparation, Haig wanted to establish a new strongpoint on the salient's edge, which could be an anchor for troops moving outwards. And he had a perfect way to do this, thanks to General Sir Herbert Plumer, who had been commander of the Second Army on the salient's edge for the past two years (during that time, ¼ of Britain's casualties had been at Ypres).

In 1915, Plumer had ordered tunnels to be dug towards the German positions opposite his line.  In 1916, he expanded these tunnels into the biggest mining operation of the whole war – there were 20 shafts, some almost 800m long, and many over 30m deep to escape detection.  They were drained by generator-driven pumps.  The tunnels were extended towards the Germans, eventually reaching to below the Messines Ridge, which had been an excellent vantage point for German military spotters to survey the region.  One of the mines was discovered & destroyed by the Germans, but the other 19 were finished and packed with explosives without the enemy finding out.

The Battle of Messines began with a week-long artillery bombardment, with the heaviest concentration of artillery of the whole war so far (one gun for every 7m of front).  Then on June 7th, at 3:10am, the mines were detonated.  They exploded nearly at the same time, blowing up the entire ridge into the air.  Tremors were felt as far away as London, and David Lloyd George heard a faint boom at 10 Downing Street, where he was working through the night.

A lieutenant with a machine-gun corps later said, “When I heard the first deep rumble I turned to the men and shouted, 'Come on, let's go.'  A fraction of a second later a terrific roar and the whole earth seemed to rock and sway.  The concussion was terrible, several of the men and myself being thrown down violently.  It seemed to be several minutes before the earth stood still again though it may not really have been more than a few seconds.  Flames rose to a great height – silhouetted against the flames I saw huge blocks of earth that seemed to be as big as houses falling back to the ground.  Small chunks and dirt fell all around.  I saw a man flung out from behind a huge block of debris silhouetted against the sheet of flame. Presumably some poor devil of a Boche.  It was awful, a sort of inferno.

A member of a tank crew said, “We got out of the tank and walked over to this huge crater.  You'd never seen anything like the size of it, you'd never believe that explosives could do it.  I saw about 150 Germans lying there dead, all in different positions, some as if throwing a bomb, some still with a gun on their shoulder.  The mine had killed them all.  The crew stood there for about five minutes and looked.  It made us think.  That mine had won the battle before it started.  We looked at each other as we came away and the sight of it remained with you always.  To see them all lying there with their eyes open.”

All that was left was a line of 21m-deep craters – the ridge had been destroyed, with very few British casualties.  They'd penetrated about 3.2km into the German lines (at their farthest point), but Haig didn't want to advance any further at the moment.  He'd achieved his objective; he didn't want to Second Army so far ahead that the artillery couldn't protect it; and he wanted to dig in before the Germans could counterattack.  For a few hours, there was an opportunity to break deeply into the German lines, and possibly even through their broken defences, and it wasn't taken advantage of. Plumer was a capable commander, and perhaps the most important part of this battle was that he saw the advantages of a limited attack.

Lloyd George, however, still doubted Haig, and Haig still didn't have approval for the main attack.  On June 19th, Lloyd George summoned Haig to a meeting with his recently-formed Cabinet Committee on War Policy.  Haig was to explain his plans in detail, and Robertson also attended.

William “Wully” Robertson was born in 1860, the son of a tailor & postmaster; he was educated at the local church school and later became a pupil-teacher there.  He joined the army at 1917, despite his mother's shame, and spent 10yrs in the ranks.  A commission changed him from the army's youngest sergeant major to its oldest lieutenant.  He served for a long time in India, learning several languages there.  He served with distinction in the Boer War (1899-1902) and then returned to England.

After his return, he was a reform-minded authority on military training, and also an expert on the German army.  He is the only English private soldier to have risen to the rank of Field Marshal (he was given that rank at his retirement, and also a baronetcy). Throughout his career, he made no attempt to get rid of his rough Lincolnshire accent.

Robertson had been focused on victory on the Western Front from early on in the war – he'd opposed alternatives such as the Dardanelles Campaign.  In December 1915, he'd been appointed Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and become Haig's most important supporter. Because of this, Lloyd George distrusted him as well.

The June 19th London conference lasted three days.  Haig laid out his plans and what he expected to achieve; Lloyd George questioned him constantly.  He wanted to know: why they thought a Flanders offensive could succeed this time; what they thought the casualties would be; how the German forces were arranged; what the consequences of failure might be.  He wasn't satisfied with the answers, and he made that very clear.

The Royal Navy was brought in, and they sided with Haig & Robertson.  Admiral John Jellicoe (the sort-of hero of the Battle of Jutland) stated that Britain wouldn't be able to continue the war for much more than a year unless they captured the Belgian coast.  This was actually unlikely – Germany only had a small number of smaller submarines going out from those ports.  But Lloyd George couldn't prove them wrong because the claim was so completely speculative. The army & navy representatives were impatient with Lloyd George and his meddling (as they saw it).

Eventually, Lloyd George had to give in.  By the end of the discussion, he only had one other committee member firmly on his side.  The Conservative leader Andrew Bonar Law was also doubtful about Haig & Robertson's claims, but he said that he didn't think the committee could “overrule the military and naval authorities on a question of strategy” (which was pretty much what Bethmann had said 5 months earlier about the unrestricted submarine warfare issue).

Lloyd George knew that if he overruled Haig & Robertson without strong support (from both Liberal & Conservative members) then he would be exposed and vulnerable in the House of Commons.  And Haig promised that if his plans didn't succeed quickly, then they'd be called off (like Nivelle had falsely promised).  Lloyd George was still very much against the plan, but he told Haig to proceed with preparations while he waited for the final approval.

While the generals had won their case, this situation showed the strength of the British political system.  Haig and Robertson hadn't won control of strategy overall – they'd only got permission for one more attack, and this permission had been granted by the civil government, whose authority was not diminished in any way.  The PM had insisted on the conference, and it had been held, and he had had the last word.  Everyone knew & accepted (if reluctantly in some cases) that Lloyd George and his committee had the ultimate authority, even if they'd given in.  The constitution remained intact.

Germany's constitution was supposed to work in the same way, but it didn't.  The chancellor was supposed to be in control – when Bismarck was chancellor, this had been the case, even though the kaiser was allowed to dismiss him at any time, and did so in the end. But the government leaders had no actual power base of their own – they weren't chosen by the legislature (as they were in Britain), and so the complications and problems caused by a lengthy war were causing the chancellor to lose his grip on control.  Eventually, the system broke down, and a new one had to be improvised.

Hindenburg could have improvised the new system (he was the one person whom nearly all of Germany trusted) but he had no interest in it.  So it fell to Ludendorff, who had been elected by no-one, and whom the kaiser greatly disliked.  The war turned Germany's political system into a true military dictatorship, the first time that Germany had really had one.

Russia

The Russian authorities were struggling to hold their forces together.  Rudolf Hess, who would be one of Hitler's top henchmen during WW2, was a newly-commissioned officer commanding troops opposite the Russians, and had recently returned from being wounded in action.  In a letter to his parents, he described the chaos among the Russian troops:

Yesterday we saw heavy fighting, but only among the Russians themselves.  A Russian officer came over and gave himself up.  He spoke perfect German.  He was born in Baden but is a Russian citizen. He told us that whole battles are going on behind their lines. Their officers are shooting each other and the soldiers are doing the same.  He found it all too ridiculous.  They can all get lost as far as he's concerned.  We invited him to eat with us and he thanked us. He ate well and drank plenty of tea before going off.  There was a lot of noise coming from the Russian side yesterday.  They were fighting each other in the trenches.  We also heard shots coming from their infantry but they were fighting at each other.  Charming!”

But on July 1st, Kerensky launched his promised offensive (the Kerensky Offensive).  Not enough troops were available for it to be as big as what had been promised before the revolution, but it had over 200,000 men and over 1,300 guns on a 48km-wide front.  General Brusilov, now Commander-in-Chief, was in charge.  It took place in Galicia – this was where Brusilov had had his earlier successes; Russian forces were more organized here & had better morale than in the north; and nearly half the enemy was Austrian rather than German.  They were also well-equipped in artillery & aircraft thanks to their allies.

The offensive went very well at first – the initial bombardment destroyed much of the enemy's forward defences, and the infantry attack took a lot of territory.  But the Russians didn't know that even the Austrians were using Ludendorff's new defensive system, and when the counterattack came, it was the final straw for the troops. They didn't even desert – they just quit the war on the spot, refusing to obey any more orders.  They shot dead officers who attempted to restore order.

Only July 8th, the Russian Eighth Army basically ceased to exist.  On the 18th, Brusilov was relieved of command. (He had had misgivings right from the start, but Kerensky had ordered him to carry out the offensive.)  By July 19th, the Germans were driving a disorderly mob of Russians before them.  Max Hoffmann (now Chief of Staff on the Eastern Front) was in command. Wherever the Germans advanced, the Russians fled; they even fled from the Austrians when they joined in.

This was basically the end of the war in the east.  Russia had suffered only 17,000 casualties (including missing & wounded), which was relatively low compared to the last 3yrs.  But the general collapse meant that they were finished.  The Germans would attack again later in the north, but success there would be extremely easy. This was also the end of the provisional government – the way was cleared for the Bolsheviks.

Germany

Their success in routing Russia on the Eastern Front emboldened Hindenburg & Ludendorff even further, and they were determined to settle the political struggle in Berlin in their favour.

On July 6th, Matthias Erzberger had delivered a speech that shocked the nation.  He was the leader of Germany's Catholic Centre Party, a moderate and a monarchist.  In his speech, Erzberger showed that the submarine campaign had failed (he used information from international contacts who had been made available by the Vatican).  He demanded reform and a stronger role in government for the Reichstag.  He also insisted that Germany renounce territorial gains to secure a “peace of reconciliation”.

At this point, there was great struggle for control over policy (with many factions & many different positions).  Erzberger's speech outraged the conservatives, and those who believed the Reichstag should be annexed attacked Bethmann.  But the kaiser continued to support him.

Until Hindenburg & Ludendorff played their final card.  On July 12th, a telegram arrived from their headquarters announcing their resignations.  It stated that other resignations from the general staff were sure to happen as well, and that the reason was the impossibility of working with Bethmann.

The kaiser was angry, but could do nothing.  (In Britain or France, these blackmail resignations would have been accepted without comment.)  He asked Hindenburg & Ludendorff to come to Berlin to see him.  Bethmann resigned.

The timing of this was not good.  Monsignor Eugenio Pacelli (who would become Pope Pius XII in 1939) had spoken to Bethmann shortly before his resignation, and presented an offer made by Pope Benedict XV – the pope would mediate between the warring sides to try and end the war.  Pacelli said that the first step would have to be for Germany to declare their intentions with regards to Belgium.  Unless Germany was willing to restore Belgium's prewar borders, peace talks would be impossible, and the Vatican realized this.

The kaiser had long insisted that they needed to control at least part of Belgium, if they were to keep the country secure.  But even he understood by now that it wasn't realistic.  Bethmann had told Pacelli that Germany would agree to restoring Belgium's prewar borders if Britain & France also did so (he didn't ask the army for their agreement on this).  He even talked about dealing with the Alsace-Lorraine issue to mutual satisfaction.

The Reichstag had a liberal majority, and that majority was growing. If they'd been given the opportunity, they would almost certainly have supported Bethmann.  But now there was no such opportunity, and the Vatican's attempt came to nothing.

Factions put forward their candidates for the a new chancellor, but were rejected.  Eventually, Georg Michaelis was chosen.  He was an obscure bureaucrat whom the kaiser had never even heard of.  He would prove to be a useless choice – he lacked experience, good judgment and strength of character, and even Ludendorff (whom he was eager to please) would soon be disappointed in him.

Ludendorff didn't actually want to be a dictator (suggestions he should become chancellor were ridiculed), but found himself responsible for everything, with no-one of any importance or any use to help him with the politics or diplomacy.  Neither he, nor his agents, nor Michaelis managed to bring the Reichstag under control.

On July 19th, a large majority of the Reichstag approved a resolution that declared, “The Reichstag strives for a peace of understanding and the permanent reconciliation of peoples.  Forced territorial acquisitions and political, economic or financial oppressions are irreconcilable with such a peace.”  This infuriated the conservatives, and the government remained at war with itself.

[antebellumite]

William Plumer founded the American Antiquarian Society. And he once inverviewed Thomas Jefferosn. And he wrote the first history of the US tracing it all the way back to Egyptian Hieroglyphics. If you even care.

[jesus-e-meu-guia]

Por que somos tão vagarosos em confiar em um Deus infinito?

William S Plumer

[theworstfoundingfathers]

Who is the worst founding father? Round 3: George Clinton vs James Monroe

George Clinton (July 26, 1739 – April 20, 1812) was an American soldier, statesman, and Founding Father of the United States. A prominent Democratic-Republican, Clinton served as the fourth vice president of the United States from 1805 until his death in 1812. He also served as the first Governor of New York from 1777 to 1795 and again from 1801 to 1804.

He became one of the most prominent opponents to the ratification of the proposed United States Constitution, which would grant several new powers to the federal government. After New York and other states had ratified the Constitution, Clinton focused on passing constitutional amendments designed to weaken the powers of the federal government.

James Monroe (April 28, 1758 – July 4, 1831) was an American statesman, lawyer, and diplomat who served as the fifth president of the United States from 1817 to 1825. A member of the Democratic-Republican Party, Monroe was the last president who was a Founding Father as well as the last president of the Virginia dynasty. He is perhaps best known for issuing the Monroe Doctrine, a policy of opposing European colonialism in the Americas while effectively asserting U.S. dominance, empire, and hegemony in the hemisphere. He also served as governor of Virginia, a member of the United States Senate, U.S. ambassador to France and Britain, the seventh Secretary of State, and the eighth Secretary of War.

After his service in the war, Monroe resumed studying law under Jefferson and continued until 1783. He was not particularly interested in legal theory or practice, but chose to take it up because he thought it offered “the most immediate rewards” and could ease his path to wealth, social standing, and political influence.

As president, Monroe signed the Missouri Compromise, which admitted Missouri as a slave state and banned slavery from territories north of the 36°30′ parallel. 

Monroe sold his small Virginia plantation in 1783 to enter law and politics. Although he owned multiple properties over the course of his lifetime, his plantations were never profitable. Although he owned much more land and many more slaves, and speculated in property, he was rarely on site to oversee the operations. Overseers treated the slaves harshly to force production, but the plantations barely broke even. Monroe incurred debts by his lavish and expensive lifestyle and often sold property (including slaves) to pay them off. The labor of Monroe’s many slaves were also used to support his daughter and son-in-law, along with a ne'er-do-well brother and his son.

Two years into his presidency, Monroe faced an economic crisis known as the Panic of 1819, the first major depression to hit the country since the ratification of the Constitution. The severity of the economic downturn in the U.S. was compounded by excessive speculation in public lands, fueled by the unrestrained issue of paper money from banks and business concerns.

Before the onset of the Panic of 1819, business leaders had called on Congress to increase tariff rates to address the negative balance of trade and help struggling industries. As the panic spread, Monroe declined to call a special session of Congress to address the economy. When Congress finally reconvened in December 1819, Monroe requested an increase in the tariff but declined to recommend specific rates. Congress would not raise tariff rates until the passage of the Tariff of 1824. The panic resulted in high unemployment and an increase in bankruptcies and foreclosures, and provoked popular resentment against banking and business enterprises.

The collapse of the Federalists left Monroe with no organized opposition at the end of his first term, and he ran for reelection unopposed. A single elector from New Hampshire, William Plumer, cast a vote for John Quincy Adams, preventing a unanimous vote in the Electoral College. He did so because he thought Monroe was incompetent. 

[banana-with-a-bow-tie]

Those who have honestly and heartily received the righteousness of Christ, will be sure to mark His footsteps and walk as He walked.

William Plumer [More gems]

[taraross-1787]

This Day in History: George Washington elected

On this day in 1789, George Washington is unanimously elected President of the United States by the Electoral College. He would be elected unanimously, again, during the election of 1792. Washington was the first and only U.S. President to be unanimously elected.

Allegedly, one other President could have achieved this feat but for the fact that one elector wanted to protect Washington’s achievement. However, the story is a bit of a myth.

In 1820, James Monroe obtained 231 of 232 electors. The final elector, William Plumer, decided to vote for John Quincy Adams instead. However, Plumer did not make his choice to protect Washington. He genuinely did not want to vote for Monroe.

A letter that he wrote to his son on January 8, 1821, explains his vote.

The story continues at the link in the comments. 

[editorialclie]

LA BIBLIA

¿Dónde está el límite o el término de la palabra de Dios? ¿Quién puede ascender a las alturas de su excelencia? ¿Quién es capaz de comprender la profundidad de sus misterios? ¿Quién alcanza a discernir el designio de sus preceptos o concebir el alcance de sus promesas? ¿Quién logra abarcar las dimensiones del amor de Dios al hombre que en ella se describe, o el amor del hombre a Dios que en ella se enseña? ¿Quién divisa las profundidades de la iniquidad que en ella se despliega, o lo precioso de la sangre propiciatoria que en ella se ofrece?

La Biblia recopila y ordena todos nuestros deberes para con Dios, para con nuestro prójimo, y con nosotros mismos. Prohíbe todo pecado. Inculca y fomenta todo principio de justicia y amor. Humilla a la vez que infunde coraje, infunde ternura a la conciencia al tiempo que fortalece el corazón como de león. Abunda en todas las excelencias».

Dice William Swan Plumer [1802-1880]:

Extraído de “El Tesoro de David” Salmo 119. Tomo II. De próxima aparición publicado por CLIE.