Showing posts with label colonies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label colonies. Show all posts

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Happy Thanksgiving! Giving Thanks to Our Ancestry

Editor, DL Mullan 
Thanksgiving / Holiday / History 
_____________________________

My family's progenitors have been here for at least 397 years.

Documented Colonial Line
Ralph Wallen II (as Ralfe Walen) b. 1595 d. about 1644, Halton, Lancashire, England
marriage: before 1623, England
Joyce Clark (Nell Small), Barnstable, Barnstable Co., MA, Colonial America.. b. about 1600 d. 1633

Ralf Walen arrived in 1623 on the HMS "Anne," Plymouth, British Colonies, England on July 10, 1623 as Pilgrims

 ______

William Tuttle b. 1607 d. 1673
marriage: about 1630, Northamptonshire, England
Elizabeth unknown b. 1613 d. 1684

William Tuttle arrived: 1635, Boston, Massachusetts Bay, British Colonial America

 ______

Richard Chisholm (Cheesome) 1613-1670
-Margaret Isham 1615, Virginia Colonies

Richard arrived in the American Colonies by 1643 when William Batt used the headright of Richard Cheesome to acquire 250 acres of land in York County, Virginia, lying along the banks of the North River, which flows into Mobjack Bay (today's Mathews County, VA)

 

Who are your Pilgrims? 


Source: Our Rugged Individualism

Friday, September 2, 2016

And, History Repeats Itself

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
History / Declaration of Independence
_________________________________

Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. The United States is in the midst of a historical political rebellion. Here is some history written in the years leading up to the Declaration of Independence. 

Does any of this sound familiar to today's struggles against the corrupt and useless Globalist machine of imperialism?
The American Revolution was precipitated, in part, by a series of laws passed between 1763 and 1775 that regulating trade and taxes. This legislation caused tensions between colonists and imperial officials, who made it clear that the British Parliament would not address American complaints that the new laws were onerous. British unwillingness to respond to American demands for change allowed colonists to argue that they were part of an increasingly corrupt and autocratic empire in which their traditional liberties were threatened. This position eventually served as the basis for the colonial Declaration of Independence.

The Boston Tea Party

In 1763, the British government emerged from the Seven Years’ War burdened by heavy debts. This led British Prime Minister George Grenville to reduce duties on sugar and molasses but also to enforce the law more strictly. Since enforcement of these duties had previously been lax, this ultimately increased revenue for the British Government and served to increase the taxes paid by the colonists. The colonial governments of New York and Massachusetts sent formal letters of protest to Parliament.

The end of the war had also brought about a postwar recession, and British merchants began to request payment for debts that colonists had incurred buying British imports. Moreover, they wanted payment in British pounds sterling rather than colonial currency of more questionable value. The result was that the British Parliament passed the 1764 Currency Act which forbade the colonies from issuing paper currency. This made it even more difficult for colonists to pay their debts and taxes.

Soon after Parliament passed the Currency Act, Prime Minister Grenville proposed a Stamp Tax. This law would require colonists to purchase a government-issued stamp for legal documents and other paper goods. Grenville submitted the bill to Parliament for questioning, and only one member raised objections to Parliament’s right to tax the colonies.

After news of the successful passage of the Stamp Act reached the colonies, the Virginia House of Burgesses passed resolutions denying the British Parliament’s authority to tax the colonies. In Boston, colonists rioted and destroyed the house of the stamp distributor. News of these protests inspired similar activities and protests in other colonies, and thus the Stamp Act served as a common cause to unite the 13 colonies in opposition to the British Parliament. In October of 1765, delegates from 9 colonies met to issue petitions to the British Government denying Parliament’s authority to tax the colonies. An American boycott of British goods, coupled with recession, also led British merchants to lobby for the act’s repeal on pragmatic economic grounds. Under pressure from American colonists and British merchants, the British Government decided it was easier to repeal the Stamp Act than to enforce it.

The repeal of the Stamp Act temporarily quieted colonial protest, but there was renewed resistance to new taxes instituted in 1767 under the Townshend Acts. However, in 1773, the colonists staged more vocal widespread protests against the British Parliament’s decision to grant the East India Company a monopoly on the tax-free transport of tea. Although Parliament did lower taxes levied on other tea importers, the tax-free status of the British East India Company meant that colonial tea traders could not compete. Enraged colonists responded by encouraging a general boycott of British goods. On December 16, 1773, American colonists disguised as Indians boarded East India Company ships in Boston Harbor and threw crates of tea overboard. This famous protest came to be known as the Boston Tea Party.

When news of the Tea Party reached England, British officials moved to enforce discipline and order in the colonies. The British Government ordered the closure of the port of Boston until the East India Company was compensated for the destroyed tea. Parliament also passed several pieces of legislation in 1774 which attempted to place Massachusetts under direct British control. In the American colonies, these laws were referred to as the Intolerable Acts. British control was further solidified by the appointment of General Thomas Gage as military governor of Massachusetts.

By 1774, opinion among the colonists was mixed. Some Bostonians felt that the time had come to ease tensions and sent to London a written offer to pay for the destroyed tea. Others put out a colony-wide call for a boycott. However, many colonial merchants were reluctant to participate in a difficult-to-enforce boycott. Despite this disagreement, most colonists agreed that a meeting to discuss an appropriate collective response to British actions was a good idea. Colonial legislatures sent representatives to Philadelphia, and the First Continental Congress convened in September of 1774. The Continental Congress agreed to the Articles of Association on October 20. These Articles listed colonial grievances and called for a locally-enforced boycott in all the colonies to take effect on December 1. The delegates also drafted a petition to King George III laying out their grievances, although by then they doubted that the crisis would be resolved peacefully.

Realizing that further coercive steps would only enrage the colonists and might lead to war, British military governor Gage wrote to London recommending suspension of the Intolerable Acts. Gage hoped to appease many of the colonists and thereby split colonial moderates from radicals. If London was not amenable to his recommendations, Gage stated that he would need significant reinforcements to crush the growing rebellion.

British ministers responded to Gage’s suggestions by removing him from his post. They felt that further punitive measures were necessary and pushed Parliament to pass additional trade restrictions on New England. London declared the colonies to be in rebellion, but also offered to stop taxing those colonies that supported the British Government.

By this time, the most astute leaders from both sides viewed armed conflict as inevitable. Gage’s attempts to secure his position in Boston only brought him into conflict with local militias and a hostile populace, and it was only a matter of time until open war began in 1775. The opportunity for peaceful negotiation came to an end, and the war for American Independence began on April 19, 1775 when British troops and American colonists clashed at Lexington and Concord.
Americans, isn't it time for a new declaration? 




Wednesday, November 12, 2014

History Unhinged: All Hail... the Pope? Part One

Staff Writer, R. Patrick Chapman
Government / History 
____________________________________

What if everything taught in school left out key points in the history of America? The history of the world? 

In this two part article, which the full version is linked to at Source, we learn the origins of British and Vatican influence in America. 
Part One 
1. Who funded the grants for the land development in the original 13 Colonies?
ANSWER:There were several entities involved in exploring America, but the King of England was the point of contact. Other countries said that they had claim to lands; however, they were not clever enough to get the paperwork straight, nor were they strong enough to defend their legal Claim; hence, they lost both the legal and physical battle for occupation of America.

2. What were the names, founding dates, and connections to the King of England by the original 13 colonies?

[SOURCE: World Book Encyclopedia (WBE)]

ANSWER:
1067-Virginia – Charter by King to the Virginia Company of London
1620-Massachusetts – Charter granted by the King to the Puritans
1623-New Hampshire – King appointed Council of New England for settlement
1624-New York – Charter by King to Duke of York
1622-Connecticut – Charter by King to John Winthrop
1634-Maryland – Charter by King to Lord Baltimore
1636-Rhode Island – King granted “Charter of Rhode Island & Providence Plantations”
1638-Delaware – Charter by King to Duke of York
1643-Pennsylvania – Grant by King to William Penn
1653-North Carolina – Grant by King to Sir Robert Heath
1660-New Jersey – Grant by King to Duke of York
1670-South Carolina – Grant by King to Eight “Lords Proprietors”
1733-Georgia – Grant by King to a Corporation entitled: “Trustees for Establishing the Colony of Georgia in America

3. Who owned the colonies?
ANSWER: The legal contracting documents for the colonies were of three types, but all of them were under the direction of the King of England:

(a) royal – under the direct control of the King
(b) proprietary-under the control of a Proprietor, an appointed by the King
(c) corporate-under a charter obtained from the King of England by a company with stockholders. [SOURCE: WBE]

4. Did each colony have its own form of government?
ANSWER:Each colony had a governor and a legislature; however, the King of England appointed the governor over the royal colonies. In proprietary colonies, the King appointed the Proprietor, who appointed the governor. In Connecticut and Rhode Island the people elected the governor; however, Connecticut was under the Fundamental Orders until it received a royal charter in 1662 and Rhode Island was under the English charter of 1663, which served as its constitution. [SOURCE: WBE]

5. Did the colonies have laws?
ANSWER:The laws that were passed by any of the colonial legislatures had to be approved by the English government. Governors appointed by the King had the responsibility of carrying out his orders. The King expected them to enforce the laws of England, especially acts of Parliament that regulated colonial trade. [SOURCE: WBE]

6. Did Christopher Columbus discover and claim any of the original 13 colonies for Spain or Portugal?
ANSWER:No. Columbus traveled around the areas of Jamaica, Costa Rica, Panama, etc. [SOURCE: WBE]

7. What is a Commodity Exchange?

ANSWER: “Commodity exchanges are voluntary trade associations. They are called organized markets, because all members must follow certain trading rules. All business, for example, must be conducted on the trading floor within certain hours. Rules set the commission (fee) that may be charged in a transaction, and the time within which payment must be made.” [SOURCE: WBE]

8. Did the colonies have connections to a Commodity Exchange in England?
ANSWER: Yes, It was called the Board of Trade (1621-1970)
QUOTE:
URL: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/
“The1621 Privy Council, directed by the King, ‘to take into their consideration, the true causes of the decay of trade and scarcity of coin within the Kingdom and to consult the means for the removing of these inconveniences.’ As a result a committee of inquiry was set up named ‘The Committee of Privy Council for Trade and Foreign Plantations’ (this is still the formal title of the ‘Board of Trade’) and this committee can be regarded as the germ of the Board of Trade.”

“Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, trade matters remained the responsibility of Privy Council Committees. In 1696 William III set up a body of eight paid Commissioners ‘for promoting the trade of our Kingdom and for inspecting and improving our plantations in America and elsewhere.’”

9. Does the word “plantation” mean a large farming enterprise?
ANSWER: No. The definition found in Burke onConciliation of the Colonies stated, “Plantations–colonies; the plantings of a new society or race. The term is regularly so used in Acts and Charters, and has no reference whatever to cultivation of the soil.”

10. Did the King of England operate on his own as a free agent in the creation of the colonies?
ANSWER:No. The King of England was bound to the Treaty of 1213. The following brief history explains who was actually in charge of the colonies.

QUOTE:
[ INTRO: The King refused to accept Stephen Langton as the Archbishop of Canterbury by Pope Innocent III in 1208, and the King was excommunicated from the Catholic Church by the Pope for his disobedience to contractual agreements to the Crown. The Pope and the King owed money to the Crown bankers, so the Pope had to reign in a naughty King in order to avoid default to The Crown.]

“Faced with defeat by the forces aligned against him by the Vatican, King John ran for cover, and sought to regain the support of the Pope. He returned the title to his kingdoms of England and Ireland to the Pope, as vassals, swore submission and loyalty to him, accepted Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, and offered the Pope a vassal’s bond of fealty and homage, an annual tribute of 1,000 marks (equivalent to a bit more than 666 pounds sterling) and the return of the Church property he had seized when he had rebelled against it.

“Two months later, in July 1213, King John was: absolved of excommunication, at Winchester, by the return Arch Bishop of Canterbury Langton.

“Three months later, on October 3, 1213, King John ratified his surrender of his kingdoms to the Pope, who by virtue of his position as Vicar of Christ claims ownership of everything and everyone, on earth in the tradition of the Nazarene-Communist supercapitalist superdictatorship that is true fundamentalist Christianity.

“On April 21, 1214, the Pope, in Rome, formally accepted King John’s surrender of his kingdoms and his pledge of vassal (together with the moneys paid in tribute); and three months later, in July 1214, Pope Innocent III raised the interdict against the English.

“Thus the Pope assured the English of ‘access to Heaven,’ from which they had been ‘barred’ by their king’s opposition to the church’s Nazarene, or Communist, totalitarianism and denial of civil rights to mankind.”

[SOURCE: British Museum Publication G. R. C. Davis, entitled Magna Carta (211), and American Counsel of Christian Laymen: How Red is The Federal Counsel of Churches.]

11. Did the Treaty of 1213 actually affect the ownership of the colonies?

ANSWER:The Vatican owned the colonies, but let the King serve as the manager for the enterprise. The Vatican was busy fighting Crusades and expanding The Kingdom.

12. What did the Treaty of 1213 actually say?
ANSWER:The original Treaty of 1213 is located in the London Archives and is available to Ph.D.s; however, a copy of a translation has been made available. It remains in power to this day. It states:

QUOTE:“The King’s Concessions of May 15, 1213 to the Pope–“We wish it to be known to all of you, through this our charter, furnished with our seal, that inasmuch as we had offended in many ways God and our mother the holy church, and in consequence are known to have very much needed the divine mercy, and can not offer anything worthy for making due satisfaction to God and to the church unless we humiliate ourselves and our kingdoms: we, wishing to humiliate ourselves for Him who humiliated Himself for us unto death, the grace of the Holy Spirit inspiring,not induced by force or compelled by fear, but of our own good and spontaneous will and by the common counsel of our barons, do offer and freely concede to God and His holy apostles Peter and Paul and to our mother the holy Roman church, and to our lord pope Innocent and to his Catholic successors, the whole kingdom of England and the whole kingdom Ireland, with all their rights and appurtenances, for the remission of our sins and of those of our whole race as well for the living as for the dead; and now receiving and holding them, as it were a vassal, from God and the Roman church, in the presence of that prudent man Pandulph, subdeacon and of the household of the lord pope Innocent, and his catholic successors and the Roman church, according to the form appended; and in the presence of the lord pope, if we shall be able to come before him, we shall do liege homage to him;binding our successors aid our heirs by our wife forever, in similar manner to perform fealty and show homage to him who shall be chief pontiff at that time, and to the Roman church without demur. Concessions of May 15, 1213 to the Pope.” [END QUOTE]
End of Part 1

Source: A Nation Beguiled

Monday, January 20, 2014

Mars Attacks! Oh, Nevermind, It's Just a Rock

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
Mars Rovers / NASA
______________________________

"A comparison of two raw Pancam photographs from sols 3528 and 3540 of Opportunity's mission (a sol is a Martian day). Notice the "jelly doughnut"-sized rock in the center of the photograph to the right. Minor adjustments for brightness and contrast."

Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

"It's about the size of a jelly doughnut," NASA Mars Exploration Rover lead scientist Steve Squyres of Cornell University at a special NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory told Discovery News. "It was a total surprise, we were like 'wait a second, that wasn't there before, it can't be right. Oh my god! It wasn't there before!’ We were absolutely startled."
Well it looks as if NASA has an alien prankster on Mars, or the Rover, Opportunity, flipped a rock and it landed onto top of this other rock during maneuvers. Either way, NASA scientists are excited about the find:
“It obligingly turned upside down, so we’re seeing a side that hasn’t seen the Martian atmosphere in billions of years and there it is for us to investigate. It’s just a stroke of luck.”  
“You think of Mars as being a very static place and I don’t think there’s a smoking hole nearby so it’s not a bit of crater ejecta, I think it’s something that we did … we flung it.”
These little robots sent to Mars has given the people on the Earth the opportunity to see beyond our little blue planet. We are getting to experience life on another planet. 

A brief history of the rover program: 
Opportunity has outlived its 3-month primary missionby ten years, notching up nearly 23 miles on the odometer so far. Sister rover Spirit succumbed to the Martian elements in 2009 when it became stuck in a sand trap in Gusev Crater. Spirit’s mission was declared lost when it stopped transmitting in March 2010, likely drained of energy. Although Spirit had the rougher time on Mars and was the first to die, it was also a huge success, aiding our understanding of Mars' geological history and outliving its warranty by 5 years. But now it's just Opportunity and Mars' new arrival Curiosity that soldier on to reveal more than we ever dreamed about our neighboring Red Planet.
These rovers has given every child, and the child inside adults, dreams of other worlds. Dreams only more exploration can satiate. Dreams that will give way to more dreams and rovers.

Is a Mars colony next? Shouldn't we have already been there by now? Money wasted on wars and cronyism hasn't given Americans, or the rest of the world, what we hunger for: knowledge that lies in the undiscovered country of our universe. 

Let us be who we are. Let us strive. Let us explore.


Source: Space,