S. Levett Yeats - "Orrain"

Francis Parkman - "Count Frontenac and New France under Louis XIV"

Charles Louis Fontenay - "Rebels of the Red Planet"

Julian Hawthorne - "David Poindexter's Disappearance and Other Tales"

Annual Bibliography of Commonwealth Literature 2007
This paper argues that discourses of love in Ghanaian market literature for youth offer a view into complex negotiations of agency and empowerment. Drawing on Deborah Durham's notion of youth as "social `shifters'" and Francis Nyamnjoh's conception of the "interconnectedness" of agency, I take Ghanaian market literature as one specific case of how African literature for youth foregrounds questions of continuity and change as African societies enter into increasingly complex global relations. In this literature for youth, received notions of love, often constructed out of impressions from American pop and hip hop music, carry new notions of agency that compete with existing "domesticated" forms. Authors like Ike Tandoh and Evelyn Tay employ discourses of love to offer youth alternative avenues for empowerment in a context of socio-economic disenfranchizement. In a creative process of "straddling", this writing both reveals and reproduces the contradictions that obtain in youth configurations of agency.

Reminiscences of Sixty Years in Public Affairs, Vol. 2

G >> George S. Boutwell >> Reminiscences of Sixty Years in Public Affairs, Vol. 2




I received two appointments from President Lincoln, when, in each case,
I had no knowledge that the place existed.

From General Grant I received the offer of the Interior Department and
then of the Treasury Department, both of which I declined. When
General Grant had taken the responsibility of sending my name to the
Senate, I had no alternative as a member of the Republican Party and
as a friend to General Grant.

Upon the death of Mr. Folger, President Arthur asked me to take the
office of Secretary of the Treasury. I was then concerned with the
affairs of another government and I declined the appointment.

When General Garfield had been nominated at Chicago in 1880 the
nomination of a candidate for the Vice-Presidency was placed in the
hands of the friends of General Grant. That nomination was offered to
me.

In the forty years from 1856 to 1896, I made speeches in behalf of the
Republican Party in Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont, New York,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, North Carolina, Mississippi, Missouri, Illinois,
Ohio and Indiana and in no instance did I receive compensation for my
services. When I spoke in Ohio my expenses were paid on all occasions
but one. That was a volunteer visit. My acquaintance with the
politicians of Ohio was agreeable from first to last.

In my many trips through New York it was understood that my expenses
were to be paid. When General Arthur was at the head of the committee
his checks exceeded the expenses, perhaps by a hundred per cent.

On one occasion the State Committee asked me to make six or eight
speeches upon their appointment. That service I performed; whether my
expenses were paid I cannot say. If they were paid it is the exception
in Massachusetts, unless local expenses may have been met where
addresses were made.

If a mercantile account current could be written, it might appear that
my obligations to the Republican Party are not in excess of the
obligations of the Republican Party to me.

From my experience as a member of the Republican Party I add an incident
to what I have said already.

In the month of July, 1862, and at the request of President Lincoln and
Secretary Chase, I entered upon the work of organizing the Internal
Revenue Office. That work was continued without the interruption of
Sabbaths or evenings, with a few exceptions only, till March, 1863,
when, as was said by Mr. Chase, the office was larger than the entire
Treasury had been at any time previous to 1861. It was the largest
branch of government ever organized in historical times and set in
motion in a single year. The system remains undisturbed. Such changes
only have been made as were required by changes in the laws. In the
thirty-eight years of its existence the Government has received through
its agency the enormous sum of five thousand and five hundred million
dollars being twice the amount of all the revenues of the Government
previous to 1860.

I have thus devoted many minutes of your time to the questions raised by
Mr. Moody.

The nature and the extent of my obligations to the Republican Party
and the question of my consistency in the construction that I have
given to the Constitution of the United States, are not matters of
grave concern for you. They have come into the field of discussion
through the agency of Mr. Moody.

I come now to ask your attention to a view of your relations to passing
events which concerns the county of Essex.

Your county has a distinguished history--distinguished for its men and
for its part in public affairs. Shall the history that you are now
making be consistent with that which you have inherited and which you
cherish? I mention one name only among your great names and I bring
before your minds one event only.

In the order of time and in the order of events, the second most
important paper in the annals of America is the "Ordinance for the
Government of the Territory of the United States Northwest of the
River Ohio."

The chief value of that ordinance is in the sixth article which is in
these words: "There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude
in the said Territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crime,
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted."

By repeated decisions the Supreme Court has held that the stipulations
and terms of the ordinance remained in force after the adoption of the
Constitution, unless a conflict should appear, and in such a case the
ordinance would yield to the Constitution. As the article in regard
to slavery was not controlled by the Constitution, the exclusion of
slavery became the supreme and continuing law of the Territories and
States that were organized in the vast region covered by the Ordinance
of 1787, and it may be assumed, fairly, that the character and power of
those States made possible the extermination of the institution of
slavery in all parts of the country. The parties to the ordinance of
1787 may have builded better than they knew, but their work is one of
the four great acts or events in the history of the Republic--The
Declaration of Independence, the Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution,
and the amendment abolishing the institution of slavery.

Nathan Dane of the county of Essex, was the author of the Ordinance of
1787; and he was a delegate in the Continental Congress from 1785 to
1788. Of all the eminent men that you have sent forth into the service
of the State and the country, he must be accounted the chief, when we
consider the value of his contribution, historically, and on the side of
freedom and civilization. His fame is in your hands and I have come to
ask you to consider whether the policy of President McKinley in the
Philippines is in harmony with the Ordinance of 1787 and the amendment
to the Constitution of 1865.

By the Ordinance of 1787, freedom and full right to self-government
were made secure to the coming millions who were to occupy the States
northwest of the River Ohio. By the amendment of 1865 freedom and
equality in government were guaranteed to all and especially to the
negro race in America.

Shall the avoidance of the Amendment in States of this Union be tendered
as a reason for a denial of equality and the right of self-government in
the Philippine Islands? If the negroes in America are entitled to
freedom from a state of subserviency, are not the colored races in the
Philippines entitled to freedom, and that whether they are under the
Constitution or beyond its jurisdiction?

You are called to a choice between the doctrines of Nathan Dane and
Abraham Lincoln on one side and the doctrines and policy of President
McKinley and his supporters on the other side. The point I make is
this: The three propositions cannot stand together. Dane and Lincoln
are in harmony. They guaranteed equality and self-government to all.
President McKinley and his supporters demand subserviency of all who
are not within the lines of the American seas.

They assert supreme authority over their fellow-men for an indefinite
period of time, and they promise therewith good government. Here are
the assertion of power and the promise of goodness that have attended
the origin and movement of every despotism that has risen to curse
mankind.

That you may see, as in one view, the doctrines of Dane, Lincoln and
McKinley, I read again the records that they have made.

"There shall be neither slavery "The Philippines are ours and
nor involuntary servitude in the American authority must be su-
said territory otherwise than in the preme throughout the Archipelago.
punishment of crimes whereof the There will be amnesty, broad and
party shall have been duly liberal, but no abatement of our
convicted."--NATHAN DANE. rights, no abandonment of our
duty. There must be no scuttle
"Neither slavery nor involuntary policy."--WILLIAM McKINLEY.
servitude, except as a punishment
for crime whereof the party shall "The flag of the Republic now
have been duly convicted, shall floats over these islands as an
exist within the United States, or emblem of rightful sovereignty.
any place subject to their Will the Republic stay and
jurisdiction."--ABRAHAM LINCOLN. dispense to their inhabitants the
blessings of liberty, education
and free institutions, or steal
away leaving them to anarchy or
imperialism."--WILLIAM McKINLEY.

"Any slave in the Archipelago of
Jolo shall have the right to pur-
chase freedom by paying to the
master the usual market price.--
Article 10, of the McKinley treaty
with the Sultan of the Sulu Isles.

I leave three questions with you.

Is a vote for President McKinley and his policy in the Philippine
Islands a vote in harmony with the teachings and examples of Nathan
Dane and Abraham Lincoln?

Is the policy of President McKinley consistent with the history of the
county of Essex?

Shall your representative stand for Nathan Dane and Abraham Lincoln
and Freedom, or for William McKinley and Despotism?


THE END


INDEX [omitted]

Copyright (c) 2007. topboookz.com. All rights reserved.