Traitor Tuesday: Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: Thomas Jefferson, the Signer Who Wrote the Declaration of Independence

Posted on April 21, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

03_thomas_jefferson

Thomas Jefferson was a plantation owner, but also a lawyer and a scientist. He was only 33 years of age when he signed the Declaration of Independence. He was the father of 6 and lived to age 83, not leaving this world until 1826, which means he was alive during the next war with Britain, that of the War of 1812.

Thomas Jefferson, author of the American Declaration of Independence and the third U.S. president, was born on April 13, 1743, at the Shadwell plantation located just outside of Charlottesville, Virginia.

Jefferson was born into one of the most prominent families of Virginia’s planter elite. His mother, Jane Randolph Jefferson, was a member of the proud Randolph clan, a family claiming descent from English and Scottish royalty. His father, Peter Jefferson, was a successful farmer as well as a skilled surveyor and cartographer who produced the first accurate map of the Province of Virginia. The young Jefferson was the third born of ten siblings. His father died when Jefferson was in his teens. Thomas received an estate and slaves. 

He began his formal education at the age of nine, studying Latin and Greek at a local private school run by the Reverend William Douglas. In 1757, at the age of 14, he took up further study of the classical languages as well as literature and mathematics with the Reverend James Maury. 

In 1760, having learned all he could from Maury, Jefferson left home to attend the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia’s capital. Although it was the second oldest college in America (after only Harvard), William and Mary was not at that time an especially rigorous academic institution. Jefferson was dismayed to discover that his classmates expended their energies betting on horse races, playing cards and courting women rather than studying. Nevertheless, the serious and precocious Jefferson fell in with a circle of older scholars that included Professor William Small, Lieutenant Governor Francis Fauquier and lawyer George Wythe, and it was from them that he received his true education.

SC809After three years at William and Mary, Jefferson decided to read law under Wythe, one of the preeminent lawyers of the American colonies. There were no law schools at this time; instead aspiring attorneys “read law” under the supervision of an established lawyer before being examined by the bar. Wythe guided Jefferson through an extraordinarily rigorous five-year course of study (more than double the typical duration); by the time Jefferson won admission to the Virginia bar in 1767, he was already one of the most learned lawyers in America. Jefferson said of Wythe, “No man ever left behind him a character more venerated than George Wythe.” 

In 1768, he began building Monticello. It was not completed until after he was president. Eventually, he also met and fell in love with Martha Wayles Skelton, a recent widow and one of the wealthiest women in Virginia. Needless to say, her dowry added to Jefferson’s already sizable fortune. The pair married on January 1, 1772. Thomas and Martha Jefferson had six children together, but only two survived into adulthood: Martha, their firstborn, and Mary, their fourth. Only Martha survived her father.

monticello_Jefferson was tall and thin, but athletic in build. He had red hair and was known to be shy. He was said to be no “public” speaker, but his ability to compose written works was exemplary. He was a diplomat and an architect. He invented the first swivel chair. Beside designing Monticello, he also designed his own tomb. He played the violin. He cultivated tomatoes in a time when others thought them to be poisonous. He also planted extensive vineyards when many thought the American soil would not tolerate the vines. He enjoyed the study of archaeology and developed a better lock and key system. Jefferson was a student of climates and was constantly making measurements and recording the data. He invented a portal writing desk (which he used to draft the Declaration of Independence).

washingtonjeffersonThomas Jefferson was one of the earliest and most fervent supporters of the cause of American independence from Great Britain. He was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1768 and joined its radical bloc, led by Patrick Henry and George Washington. In 1774, Jefferson penned his first major political work, “A Summary View of the Rights of British America,” which established his reputation as one of the most eloquent advocates of the American cause. A year later, in 1775, Jefferson attended the Second Continental Congress, which created the Continental Army and appointed Jefferson’s fellow Virginian, George Washington, as its commander-in-chief. However, the Congress’s most significant work fell to Jefferson himself.

In June 1776, the Congress appointed a five-man committee (Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston) to draft a Declaration of Independence. The committee then chose Jefferson to author the declaration’s first draft, selecting him for what John Adams called his “happy talent for composition and singular felicity of expression.” In truth, Jefferson had fewer enemies in the Richard Henry Lee, who originally called for independence. Realizing the document would be read aloud to the masses, Jefferson was most attentive of the accented and unaccented syllables of the piece. In one of the surviving drafts of the document, one can view how he marked the cadence. He took his inspiration from the philosopher John Locke. Virginia’s Declaration of Rights, which was written by George Mason (another signer), also was a strong influence. 

Committees edited Jefferson’s work once the vote to pass it was taken. Some 86 changes later, John Hancock and secretary of Congress Charles Thomson signed. Some historians say that Jefferson escorted the document to the printer and proofread each draft as it came off the presses. 

Returning to Virginia, Jefferson served as its governor for two years. When the British invaded Virginia, Jefferson resigned and suggested a man with a strong military background take his place. General Thomas Nelson, Jr., succeeded him. Martha Jefferson died shortly after his resignation. In 1784, Jefferson was sent to France to replace Benjamin Franklin. He was not as gregarious as was Franklin, and although he was well respected for his intelligence, his social skills were lacking according to French standards of the time. 

When he returned to the United States, Washington made him the country’s first Secretary of State, which placed him in contention with his “archrival,” Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson purported the right of men to govern themselves – the ideals of republicanism – while Hamilton took a more federalist stance of a strong central government. The feud continued until Jefferson won the 1800 election on the Democratic-Republican ticket, while Jefferson’s vice-president Aaron Burr shot Hamilton in the gut. 

Jefferson lost the second election for the presidency by 3 electoral votes to John Adams, which made him Adams’s vice president. This connection brought a wedge of disagreement with his former friend. Their political views had diverged. When Jefferson became the country’s third president, Adams undermined Jefferson’s tenure by appointing many of his followers to high positions before he made his exit. Jefferson and Adams refused to speak to each other for over a decade. Jefferson served two terms as president and oversaw the Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark expedition, which greatly increased the size of the new country. 

After his presidency, although he was hurting for money, Jefferson returned to the social life required of his position. He helped to found the University of Virginia. He and Adams reconciled in their old age and wrote letters back and forth for many years. Jefferson died on 4 July 1826, just hours before John Adams also passed. 

Other than the children he sired with Martha, he is thought to have fathered at least one of Sally Hemings six children. Mayhap all six. Hemings was one of Jefferson’s slaves. Although his paternal obligations is debated, these are facts we do know. Jefferson argued for the emancipation of slaves in the Virginia’s House of Burgesses. He did not, however, free the majority of his own slaves. He did free two (both with the last name of Hemings). Three more departed Monticello with his “tacit” permission. (They were also named Hemings.) Five others were freed with the reading of his will…three of those five held the name of Hemings. He never freed Sally, but his daughter Martha released Sally after Jefferson’s death. 100+ slaves were sold at the estate sale following his death. 9dd732b768d0b86789f0eef43a8cb9cd

You might also enjoy these other posts that I have written about Thomas Jefferson: 

The Amazing Wisdom of Thomas Jefferson: The Man. The Myth.

The Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence, a Year Before Thomas Jefferson’s Document

The Inventions of Thomas Jefferson Found in “Mr. Darcy and the Designing Woman”

Resources:

Biography.com 

History.com 

Library of Congress

PBS

Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence 

Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello 

Posted in American History, architecture, British history, buildings and structures, Declaration of Independence, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, political stance | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Scottish Words for Kicking Someone’s Behind + the Upcoming Release of “Lyon on the Inside” from Dragonblade Publishing, Arriving 17 June 2026

Posted on April 20, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

I know some of you will think this odd, but as I was writing “Lyon on the Inside” I needed a Scottish term appropriate for the Regency era for what we might nowadays say “kick someone’s ass.” You see, Dragonblade, like other publishers are sensitive to certain words. For example, you will, generally, see me use “arse” instead of a**. Therefore, I got the bright idea that as two Scottish lords [Duncan and Graham] thought that another Scottish lord [Cunningham] required a good thumping that I should seek out an appropriate Scottish phrase. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending upon how one looks upon it, this is what I discovered.

Yes, all these words could be used in Scotland for an actual “butt kicking” experience. These are specifically often Glaswegian, terms for a physical beating, fight, or severe thrashing. Now, whether they are period appropriate or not, I cannot say with any assurance, but I did find them amusing. I hope you will also. Please note that my first instinct was to use “a doing” or “a gubbing”.

  • A Skelping: A smack, slap, or spanking, often used in the context of chastisement (e.g., “Ah’ll skelp yer bahookie”).
  • A Doing: A beating or being heavily defeated in a fight.
  • A Gubbing: To be severely beaten or defeated.
  • A Tanning: To thrash or soundly beat someone.
  • A Leathering: A severe beating or hiding. 

Additional common Scottish equivalents for a beating include a laldy (or “getting a laldy”), a malky, a hiding, or a belting. 

I was not thinking of using a tawse. For those of you who do not know, the tawse, sometimes formerly spelled taws (the plural of Scots taw, a thong or a whip) is an implement for corporal punishment applied either to the buttocks or the palm of the hand. The tawse is a leather strap that has one end split into one or more prongs. A spanking administered with a tawse is technically known as tawsing, although the terms strapping and belting may be used to describe it. [Unrelated to this meaning, Tawse is also a genealogical branch of the Scottish Clan Farquharson through Clan Mackintosh [as is Craig Ferguson’s character in the Pixar film “Brave.”] The Farquharson clan is also associated with my own MacThomas clan.

The tawse is associated with Scotland, particularly in educational discipline, but it was also used in schools in a few English cities, e.g., Newcastle upon Tyne, Gateshead, Liverpool, Manchester and Walsall. In this British educational context, the official name “tawse” was hardly ever used in conversation by either teachers or pupils, who instead referred to it as either the school strap or the belt.

Posted in book release, British history, Dragonblade Publishers, Georgian England, Georgian Era, hero, heroines, historical fiction, history, lexicon, Living in the Regency, publishing, Regency era, Regency romance, research, Scotland, series, suspense, word origins, word play, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Purchasing Commissions During the Napoleonic Wars

Posted on April 17, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

We often read of a young gentleman purchasing a commission in either the militia or the regulars during the Regency era, but did conditions exist when a commission could not be secured? The answer is “Yes,” but there were rules and exceptions.

Not all regiments were open to purchase of rank!

According to the “History” section of the British Army website, “The Royal Military Academy Sandhurst (RMAS) was formed in 1947. It was descended from two older institutions, the Royal Military Academy (RMA) and the Royal Military College (RMC).

“The RMA had been founded in 1741 at Woolwich to train gentlemen cadets for the Royal Artillery and Royal Engineers, and later for the Royal Corps of Signals and some for the Royal Tank Corps. It remained there until it was closed on mobilisation in 1939.

“The RMC began in 1800 as a school for staff officers which later became the Staff College, Camberley. A Junior Department was formed in 1802, to train gentlemen cadets as officers of the Line. A new college was built at Sandhurst, into which the cadets moved in 1812. After 1860, the RMC succeeded the East India Company’s Military Seminary as the establishment where most officers of the Indian Army were trained. Following the abolition of the purchase system in 1870, attendance at Sandhurst became the usual route to a commission. The college was enlarged in 1912, when New College was built.”

The purchasing of an officer commission in the British Army was a common practice throughout British history. Originally, the commission served as a cash bond guaranteeing the man’s good behavior, and it was forfeited if he acted with cowardice, gross misbehavior, or deserted his position. The practice began as early as the reign of Charles II and continued until it was officially abolished on 1 November 1871 by the Cardwell Reforms. 

Commissions in cavalry and infantry regiments were the only ones available, and officer ranks could only be purchased up to the rank of colonel. Those who graduated from a course at the Royal Military Academy at Woolrich were presented commissions in the Royal Engineers and the Royal Artillery. These men were subsequently promoted by seniority. This was a means for those of the middle class or the trade class to enter the “gentlemen ranks” as officers, but they were still shunned by many as being “not quite gentlemen” by those of the Army of the British East India Company and those of the aristocratic class who purchased their commissions. 

The British Royal Navy never entertained the idea of the sale of commissions. Officers of the Navy advanced by merit and/or seniority. Even so, nepotism was not dead among British officers. A young gentleman could advance quicker if he was fortunate enough to have an admiral or vice admiral in his family, assuming he passed the relevant exams/tests.

According to Wikipedia’s article on the Purchase of Commissions, “There were several key reasons behind the sale of commissions:

  • It preserved the social exclusivity of the officer class.
  • It served as a form of collateral against abuse of authority or gross negligence or incompetence. Disgraced officers could be cashiered by the crown (that is, stripped of their commission without reimbursement).
  • It ensured that the officer class was largely populated by persons having a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, thereby reducing the possibility of Army units taking part in a revolution or coup.
  • It ensured that officers had private means and were less likely to engage in looting or pillaging, or to cheat the soldiers under their command by engaging in profiteering using army supplies.
  • It provided honourably retired officers with an immediate source of capital.

The official values of commissions varied by regiment, usually in line with the differing levels of social prestige of different regiments. 

In 1837 for example, the costs of commissions were:

Rank Life Guards Cavalry Foot Guards Infantry Half pay difference
Cornet (or)

Ensign

 £1,260 £840 £1,200 £450 £150
Lieutenant £1,785 £1,190 £2,050 £700 £365
Captain £3,500 £3,225 £4,800 £1,800 £511
Major £5,350 £4,575 £8,300 £3,200 £949
Lieutenant Colonel £7,250 £6,175 £9,000 £4,500 £1,314

PWAssaulton0theBreechatSanSebastian.jpgThese prices were not incremental. To purchase a promotion, an officer only had to pay the difference in price between his existing rank and the desired rank. [Goldsmith, Jeremy (May 2007), “A gentleman and an officer – Army commissions”, Family Tree Magazine, 23 (7), pp. 10–13.]

If an officer wished to sell out his commission, he could do so, but only for the official value of the commission. He had to offer it to the next highest ranking officer of his regiment. Unfortunately, some of the lower ranks could not afford the commission, for there were also other costs operating among the officers. These were known as the “over-regulation price” or the “regimental value.” Occasionally, the commissions were auctioned off, especially those in the “more fashionable” regiments. As many officers were second or third sons and would have little beyond their “pensions” to live upon once they exited service, they often drove up the price. It was not unknown for officers who incurred or inherited debts to sell their commission to raise funds.

Colonels of fashionable regiments were also known to refuse the sale of commission if the person purchasing it were not of the colonel’s social status or to his liking. “This was especially the case in the Household and Guards regiments, which were dominated by aristocrats. Elsewhere however, it was not unknown for Colonels to lend deserving senior non-commissioned officers or warrant officers the funds necessary to purchase commissions.

19th-LD-RS

20th Light Dragoons at the Battle of Vimeiro on 21st August 1808 in the Peninsular War

“Not all first commissions or promotions were paid for. If an officer was killed in action or was appointed to the Staff (usually through being promoted to Major General), this created a series of “non-purchase vacancies” within his regiment. (These could also arise when new regiments or battalions were created, or when the establishments of existing units were expanded.) However, all vacancies arising from officers dying of disease, retiring (whether on full or half pay) or resigning their commissions were “purchase vacancies”. A period, usually of several years, had to elapse before an officer who succeeded to a non-purchase vacancy could sell his commission e.g. if a Captain were promoted to Major to fill a non-purchase vacancy but decided to leave the Army immediately afterwards, he would receive only the value of his Captain’s commission.” [Purchase of Commissions in the British Army]

Regulations required minimum lengths of service for the various ranks. These restricted officers from selling or exchanging their commissions to avoid active service. This would be in the case of the militia. Exceptions were at the discretion of the Commander in Chief. In 1806, Mary Anne Clarke, the mistress of the Duke of York, the acting Commander in Chief at the time, brought scandal to the York’s door when she was accused of selling commissions to plump up her own purse.

“The worst potential effects of the system were mitigated during intensive conflicts such as the Napoleonic Wars by heavy casualties among senior ranks, which resulted in many non-purchase vacancies, and also discouraged wealthy dilettantes who were not keen on active service, thereby ensuring that many commissions were exchanged for their face value only. There was also the possibility of promotion to brevet army ranks for deserving officers. An officer might be a subaltern or Captain in his regiment, but might hold a higher local rank if attached to other units or allied armies, or might be given a higher Army rank by the Commander-in-Chief or the Monarch in recognition of meritorious service or a notable feat of bravery. Officers bearing dispatches giving news of a victory (such as Waterloo), often received such promotion, and might be specially selected by a General in the field for this purpose.” [Purchase of Commissions in the British Army]

Additional Resources:

Allen, Douglas. “Compatible Incentives and the Purchase of Military Commissions.” 

Goldsmith, Jeremy (May 2007), “A gentleman and an officer – Army commissions”, Family Tree Magazine, 23 (7), pp. 10–13.

Holmes, Richard. “The Soldier’s Trade in a Changing World,” BBC – History.

“Military Officers in the Napoleonic Wars,” Reddit – Ask Historians 

“Purchase of Commissions in the British Army,” Wikipedia

Posted in British history, British Navy, Georgian England, military, Napoleonic Wars, war | Tagged , , , , , , | 15 Comments

RULE AGAINST PERPETUITIES: Could Someone, for example, Disinherit a Second Son?

Posted on April 15, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

A regular reader of this blog asked the question located in the title. So here goes…

I must warn you, anything doing with inheritance and property laws are, generally, double speak, but we will attempt to respond with some degree of “simplicity” and break this concept down logically. First, let us begin with a definition. The rule against perpetuities is a legal principle in property law that prevents a person from controlling the ownership of property for a time longer than is permitted. The common law rule states that a property interest must “vest” (become certain and definite) no later than 21 years after the death of someone alive when the interest was created. The rule’s purpose is to prevent property from being tied up indefinitely and to promote the marketability of land. Many states have modified or abolished this rule, and modern statutory versions often have different timeframes, such as a 90-year period. 

How it works …

“A life in being plus 21 years”: This is the common law standard for the perpetuity period. The “life in being” refers to a person who was alive when the interest in the property was created (e.g., through a will or deed).

Vesting: An interest is considered “vested” when it is no longer contingent and is certain to be possessed by an identified person.

Remote possibilities: The rule considers any “remote possibility” that the interest might vest later than the perpetuity period. If there is any chance, no matter how unlikely, that the interest could vest too late, it is considered void from the start.

Modern statutory rules: Many states have adopted statutory rules that provide more certainty. For example, North Carolina’s [where I currently reside] statutory rule allows for an interest to be valid if it is certain to vest within 21 years after a life in being or if it vests or terminates within 90 years after its creation. 

Why it’s important?

It prevents control by what is called the “dead hand,” meaning it stops people from controlling property from beyond the grave for an excessive period. It ensures that property can be bought, sold, and developed, rather than being perpetually tied up by long-past owners’ wishes. It prevents a situation where property ownership remains uncertain for generations. 

The Rule Against Perpetuities has been held to be so complicated that lawyers cannot be sued for getting it wrong. The premise is that one can control one’s property beyond the grave for 21 years plus lives in being. Lives in being have been held to begin at conception.

Author Ella Quinn once shared this personal anecdote to explain it to a group of authors discussing this topic when writing about the Regency. “I actually have a pretty simple example in my family. My great-great-grandmother, Ella Quinn, made a lot of money and wanted to put it in a trust to be passed down. At the time she died, my great-grandfather was alive ,as was my grandfather, but my mother had not yet been conceived. Therefore, the trust was limited to my great-grandfather and my grandfather and was broken when it went to my mother. Had she been conceived by the time my great-great-grandmother died, the trust would have broken when it came to me as I had not been conceived at the time Ella died.” 

However, the legal question you stated is not the Rule Against Perpetuities (because we’re dealing with people who are already alive), but whether the clause about funds going to Son 2 would violate public policy. Public policy is quite broad, but it basically keeps people from doing something that would violate the law, commonly held morals, accomplish something impossible, and things like that. So, your question really is not whether he can disinherit Son 2 from beyond the grave, he has already done that, but whether he can prohibit Son 1 from disinheriting Son 2. My guess would be that he cannot, but you’ll have to research court cases. 

Nancy Mayer, who, if you do not know her, is my guru when it comes to questions regarding all things Regency. She has previously shared these points … “Every single piece of legislation or court decision in favor of concentrating property in the hands of one person in each generation and of depriving  younger sons, widows and daughters of inheritance, has been met by other practices, laws, decisions opposing it.

“Though the entail was thought sacrosanct and immovable, those of the time came up with a legal fiction called ‘bar the entail,’ meaning a man and his adult son had to agree on this, meaning the law against perpetuities was met by the law of uses which allowed trusts.

The female side of the equation which also discusses the male rules against which they had to operate is shown in Law Land Family:

Aristocratic Inheritance in England 1300-1800 by Eileen Spring. She has other works on the same subject.

Also, the book Married Women’s Separate property in England1660-1833 by Susan Staves gives a good accounting of the various practices.

A Practical Treatise on the Law of Descents, and was authored by Henry Chitty, a prominent 19th-century English lawyer and legal writer, known for several authoritative legal publications. This book deals with the complex historical laws governing how real property was inherited when a person died without a valid will (intestate), which is the definition of the law of descent and distribution. 

A Treatise Of The Law Of Descents (1825) is a comprehensive guide to the legal principles and rules governing the inheritance of property in England. Written by Henry Chitty, a prominent lawyer and legal scholar of the 19th century, this book offers a detailed analysis of the various aspects of the law of descents, including the different types of property that can be inherited, the rules of succession, and the rights and obligations of heirs and executors. The book is divided into several chapters, each of which covers a different aspect of the law of descents. The first chapter provides an introduction to the subject, explaining the basic principles of inheritance and the historical development of the law in this area. Subsequent chapters deal with topics such as the descent of real estate, the descent of personal property, and the rights of widows and children in relation to inheritance. Throughout the book, Chitty provides a wealth of practical advice and guidance for lawyers, judges, and other legal professionals, as well as for individuals who may be involved in inheritance disputes or who are seeking to plan their own estates. He also draws on a wide range of legal sources, including case law, statutes, and legal treatises, to provide a comprehensive and authoritative account of the law of descents in England. Overall, A Treatise Of The Law Of Descents (1825) is an important work of legal scholarship that remains relevant and useful to this day. It offers a valuable resource for anyone seeking to understand the complex and often confusing rules governing inheritance in England.


It is not uncommon for cases concerning property to have to go back several hundred years.

Primogeniture also had to fight against a law that says they could not tie up land more than 3 lives in being and 21 years.

Needless to say, the various dispositions of property were very profitable to judges and barristers and the solicitors who drew up deeds, contracts, and wills.

Then there are the customs of Kent which give property to the youngest son.

Posted in Act of Parliament, British history, estates, Georgian England, Georgian Era, history, interview, laws of the land, legacy, Living in the Regency, Living in the UK, real life tales, Regency era, research, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: Lyman Hall, Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Founder of the University of Georgia

Posted on April 14, 2026 by Regina Jeffers
4268509
Celebration for the signers | The Augusta Chronicle ~ bust of Lyman Hall chronicle.augusta.com

52 years old Lyman Hall was both a physician and a minister. Married twice, he fathered only one child. He was 66 years old when he passed in 1790. Lyman Hall was one of three Georgians to sign the Declaration of Independence. He served as a representative to the Continental Congress and as governor of Georgia (1783-84).

Hall was born April 12, 1724, in Wallingford, Connecticut, the fourth of eight children born to the Hon. John Hall (1692-1773) and his wife, Mary Street (1698 – 1778). He graduated from Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1747, in a class of twenty-eight members.  Lyman Hall then studied theology under the guidance of his uncle, the Rev. Samuel Hall and became an ordained Congressional minister.
imgres-1“In 1749 he began to preach in Bridgeport, and was ordained by the Fairfield West Consociation. In 1751, however, he was dismissed by the Consociation following a hearing on charges of immoral conduct. Those charges were proven, and confessed by him; but the Consociation, confident in his sincere repentance, voted to restore him to good standing in the ministry. He continued to preach for two years, filling vacant pulpits.
“Hall then gave up his ministry, studied medicine, and received the degree of Doctor of Medicine. He had married Abigail Burr in 1752, but she died a year later, without children. Later in 1753, he married Mary Osborn of Fairfield, daughter of Samuel and Hannah Osborn, and they had one son, John, who died without issue in 1791. Hall settled in his native town of Wallingford, and began his practice of medicine.” (The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)
By 1753 Hall had abandoned the ministry for medicine. About 1754-5, he and a group of fellow adventurers moved their families and possessions and joined the Dorchester Puritan dwellers near the Ashley River in Charleston, South Carolina. He was cordially welcomed, and appears at once to have secured the confidence of the community, a happy move and professionally successful.
“It was also about the time that certain leaders of the Dorchester settlers, worried about land sufficiency for their longer term future there after 50 plus years of growth and development, cast an eye south to the lands in Georgia, the youngest Colony, largely unsettled until James Ogelthorpe arrived in 1733 with 114 settlers in Savannah. There were still problems with the Indians, and the Spanish were a menace in nearby Florida, but the growth potential was exciting and undeveloped land was available. A grant was obtained for 22,400 acres of rich land and swamps in the Midway District of St. John’s Parish, what is now Liberty County. The emigration from Dorchester began in the 1750’s, and there were 350 whites and 1500 Negro slaves in Midway District by 1756. Dr. Hall, following the fortunes of his newly formed friends, accompanied them to the Midway settlement.”(DSDI) He was granted land in Georgia near the Midway Meeting House in St. John’s Parish in 1760. Dr. Hall bought two of the nicest lots and built a summer residence in Sunbury (on the Midway River), as did many members of the Midway congregation.
“In Georgia, more so than in sister colonies, there was great division in sentiment on the political questions within the community. Parliament had awarded great sums of money and other generous bounties in the colony’s recent settlement years, the royal party was active and strong, and the Governor was energetic in upholding the fortunes of his royal master. He was able to delay Georgia representation in the Continental Congress, so there were no Georgia delegates appointed to the1774 session in Philadelphia. This chafed particularly the Puritan citizens of St. John’s Parish, who had moral, social and political ties to the distressed Bostonians. Lyman Hall, as the leader and spokesman for them, attended meetings of the “Friends of Liberty” in Savannah where he soon became good personal friends, and closely allied with Button Gwinnett, a resident of nearby St. Catherine’s Island, in the movement for independence and the need for urgency of representation to the Continental Congress. When the colonial assembly voted for more delays and negotiations with the King and failed to get Georgia moving toward joining the other colonies, Hall and others from St. John’s next sought to contract with a group in South Carolina, whereby they could deal and trade and bypass Savannah’s officialdom control and increase the political pressure on the royalists. This was rejected by the Carolinians, and the people of St. John’s Parish then voted to send Dr. Hall as their independent delegate to the Continental Congress.” (DSDI)
imgresAn active and early leader in the Revolutionary movement,  he was elected to represent St. John’s Parish in the Second Continental Congress in 1775. He participated in debates in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, that year but did not vote, as he did not represent the entire colony. A year later, as an official representative of Georgia, Hall signed the Declaration (along with Button Gwinnett and George Walton  of Georgia). He left Philadelphia in February 1777, though he continued to be elected to Congress until 1780.
“He continued in Congress until 1780, when the British troops occupied Savannah and overran Sunbury and Liberty County. On the advice of General Washington, he then took his wife and son and fled the state to Connecticut, not to return until the last British troops had withdrawn from Georgia. For nearly two years he remained absent, and suffered great financial loss from the British confiscation of his home, plantation and slaves. He quietly resumed the practice of medicine in Savannah upon his return in 1782.” (DSDI)
m-1046
Lyman Hall

After the Revolution (1775-83), Hall resumed his medical practice in Savannah In January 1783 he was elected governor. During his administration he had to deal with a number of difficult issues, including confiscated estates, frontier problems with Loyalists and Indians, and a bankrupt and depleted treasury. One highlight, however, was the role he played in helping to establish the University of Georgia in 1785. That same year he sold his plantation, Hall’s Knoll, and in 1790 he moved to Burke County,  where he purchased Shell Bluff Plantation. He died there on October 19, 1790, at the age of sixty-six. Hall County is named for him.

From The History Junkie, we learn, “Charles Goodrich in his book, Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, said this about Lyman Hall:

Doctor Hall in his person, was tall and well proportioned. In his manners he was easy, and in his deportment dignified and courteous. He was by nature characterized for a warm and enthusiastic disposition, which, however, was under the guidance of a sound discretion. His mind was active and discriminating. Ardent in his own feelings, he possessed the power of exciting others to action; and though in congress he acted not so conspicuous a part as many others, yet his example and his exertions, especially in connection with those of the inhabitants of the circumscribed parish of St. John, powerfully contributed to the final accession of the whole colony of Georgia to the confederacy; thus presenting in array against the mother country the whole number of her American colonies.

Resources:
 “Lyman Hall”  New Georgia Encyclopedia 
“Lyman Hall” The History Junkie
Posted in American History, British history, Declaration of Independence, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, history, Living in the Regency, Living in the UK, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Freemasonry in the Regency Era

Posted on April 13, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

The oldest document that makes reference to Masons is the Regius Poem, printed about 1390, which was a copy of an earlier work. In 1717, four lodges in London formed the first Grand Lodge of England, and records from that point on are more complete.

The Regius Poem, also known as the Halliwell Manuscript, is the earliest surviving Masonic document, dating to approximately 1390. Written in Middle English rhyming couplets, the poem details the history of masonry, how Euclid introduced geometry, and its arrival in England under King Athelstan. It then outlines 15 articles and 15 points for masters and craftsmen, providing moral guidelines, conduct on construction sites, and regulations for apprenticeships.

The Regius Poem is the earliest of the “Old Charges,” which are a collection of historical and regulatory documents for masons. It was discovered in the British Museum by James Orchard Halliwell in 1838. The manuscript is written on 64 vellum pages in rhyming couplets, a distinct feature compared to later prose-based charges. 

The poem begins by describing Euclid’s invention of geometry and how the craft of masonry was brought to England during the reign of King Athelstan. The fifteen articles were the instructions, focusing on the conduct of master masons, including paying wages, attending assemblies, proper handling of apprentices, and the importance of moral behavior. The fifteen points provided similar rules and guidlines for the craftsmen themselves, covering their duties and behavior both on and off the job.

https://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/regius.html#:~:text=This%20work%20was%20first%20published,and%20consists%20of%20794%20lines.
https://www.countrylife.co.uk/architecture/grand-lodge-the-freemasons-hall-london-a-temple-to-peace-236315

The Regius Poem is considered the foundational text for the Old Charges, setting a standard for the moral and vocational guidance of masons. It offers invaluable insights into the customs, practices, and ethical standards of the operative stonemason guilds of the Middle Ages. 

They were a rather secretive organization. Over the centuries, people have described them as anything from a benevolent organizations like the Elks to a powerful secret group like malevolent Gnomes of Zurich and blamed them for everything from the French Revolution to the Spanish Civil War.

The first Grand Lodge of Freemasons in London, now known as the Premier Grand Lodge of England, was formed on 24 June 1717, when four local Masonic lodges met at the Goose and Girdiron alehouse in St. Paul’s Churchyard, London, to create a collective governing body. This organization was initially called the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster and was the first of its kind. Anthony Sayer was elected as the first Grand Master at the formation meeting. The organization soon attracted attention, and there was a long period that saw the publication of exposures of Masonic rituals. Even so, the Grand Lodge continued to grow with its first noble Grand Master, Jonh Montague, 2nd Duke of Montague, secured in 1721.

Other sources for more information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/inside-the-secret-world-of-the-freemasons/

Posted in British history, buildings and structures, Georgian England, Georgian Era, history, Industrial Revolution, Living in the Regency, real life tales, Regency era, research, tradtions, Victorian era | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Anna Larpent, 18th Century Diarist and Lover of Plays

Posted on April 10, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

+-+78749600_140

The production of a female pen : Anna Larpent’s account of the Duchess of Kingston’s bigamy trial of 1776 by Anna Margaretta Larpent; Matthew J Kinservik; Lewis Walpole Library. University Press of New England, ©2004.

An 18th Century diarist, Anna Larpent’s diary gives a look into Georgian life. She was the daughter of a diplomat. She served as the de facto assistant Examiner of Plays during her time. At age 18, Larpent pulished a 32-page account of the bigamy trial of Elizabeth Pierrepont, Duchess of Kingston-upon-Hull at Westminster Hall, an event well-attended by those of both the middling and the aristocracy. The manuscript is one of the first of those written by a woman for other women. 

On 25 April 1782 she married a widower who she hoped would care for her and her younger sister Clara, who she had adopted. Her husband, John Larpent,  was the Inspector of Plays serving as the single approver of plays that were to be performed in Britain. Anna was the de facto assistant to him. When the plays were written in French or Italian then she had the skills to be able comprehend them. Larpent was interested in her work and she was a fan of Elizabeth Inchbald, an English novelist, actress, and dramatist. Inchbald’s play Lovers’ Vows (1798) was featured as a focus of moral controversy by Jane Austen in her novel Mansfield Park.

36327440_967536830073896_4455728823832412160_n

Fiona Ritchie of McGill University in her piece entitled “Anna Larpent and Shakespeare,”  tells us, “Anna Margaretta Larpent, née Porter (1758-1832) is a crucial figure in theater history and the reception of Shakespeare since drama was a central part of her life. Larpent was the daughter of Sir James Porter, the British ambassador at Constantinople, and his wife Clarissa Catherine, the eldest daughter of the Dutch ambassador there. After spending her early childhood in Turkey, Larpent returned to England with her family in 1765. Her mother died soon after but Larpent and her siblings enjoyed a cultured upbringing, ‘socializing with politicians and intellectuals, attending the theatre, and visiting historic landmarks.’ In 1782 she married John Larpent, who held the post of Examiner of Plays in the Office of the Lord Chamberlain from 1778 to 1824. Larpent “served as a sort of co-censor” with her husband and thus influenced the licensing of drama for the London stage.1 She was a meticulous diarist: the Huntington Library holds sixteen volumes of her journal, covering the period 1790 to 1830, plus a further retrospective volume for the years 1773 to 1786.2 These diaries shed significant light on the part Shakespeare played in her life and contain her detailed opinions of his works as she experienced them both on the page and on the stage in late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century London.” 

According to Alan Taylor at Bristish History Georgian Lives, Larpent’s diary “entries show the activities and thoughts of an intelligent woman of the ‘middling’ class living in London. Daughter of a diplomat she had a very full active and family life – for instance on the 9th April 1792 her diary records that after rising at 7.30am that morning she read two chapters of Paine’s ‘Rights of Man’, tutored her sons in literature and Latin, accompanied them to see a Kangaroo on exhibit from Botany Bay (which she described in detail) and then went on to look at a number of mechanical reproductions of portrait paintings at Schomberg House. Having sat down with her husband for dinner at 3 o’clock they both then went to see two comedies at Convent Garden Theatre which lasted into the evening. Anna would be perhaps described today as ‘having to all’ as she even had a job as an Examiner of Plays, a powerful position as they recommended to the Lord Chamberlain whether plays could be licensed or not and in her diaries she makes frequent comments, both good and bad, about the many plays she saw. Her interests even extended to philosophical matters especially as to what was meant by ‘taste’ -she had many conversations with her friends as to conflict between lifestyles in which the main aim was ‘pleasure’ as opposed to cultivating a sensibility especially in the appreciation of the arts.

“Anna was not alone -in the late 18th Century critics recognised the increasing contribution of women to English culture. There were many female writers, painters, actors and musicians – for instance between 1750 and 1770 six of the twenty most popular novelists were women and in 1777 the painter Richard Samuel engraved a group portrait of ‘the Nine Living Muses of Great Britain’ which included Angelika Kauffmann, Anna Baubauld, Catharine Macaulay and the leader of the London Bluestockings, Elizabet Montagu. Of course not all agreed with this type of woman criticising them for seeking fame and fortune rather than being a good wife and mother!”

Huntington6.75x10b  L. W. Conolly published an article entitled “The Censor’s Wife at the Theatre,” which he discusses the role Anna Larpent played in her husband’s success. 

download

Larpent recorded such mundane facts as the time she went to bed, arose in the morning, what she had to eat, her daily prayers, names and comments on the books she read, something of her family, and her husband’s job in theatre licensing. The diary reads very much like a Facebook page these days, plus or minus the political rhetoric. 

Brodie Waddell shared this excerpt and this image on The Many Headed Monster. Afterwards, he sent me this statement, “Thanks for the link to the post on the Monster, and for pulling together all that other information about Larpent! But I can’t take any credit for it: it was entirely researched and written by Emily Vine (https://twitter.com/emilymayvine). I was just the blog editor.”

In the first week of February 1792, she recorded the following:

Anna Larpent Vol 1 p.36

1792    In Newman Street London

February 1st Wednesday    Rose at 8. Breakfasted. Settled much family business above to London for the Winter, came there to dinner. Our Waggon followed us. We dined near 5. Evening I wrote to Farquhar concerning my sister … to miss Garmeaux on the business of her his Lord Neice coming to town &c.  Tea rest of the Evning worked &c. Tired.

February 2nd Thursday   Rose at 8. Breakfasted. Very busy in family matters and teaching myself. Received the Miss Fanshawes dressed. Evening made a White Silk petticoat then tea. I then red through the Critical Review &c. prayed went to bed after.

February 3rd Friday  Rose at 8. Red part of one of Christie’s Letters on the French Revolution. Breakfasted. Taught George to read, spell, write, learn Latin &c. then drove out saw old Mrs Larpent. Mrs & Mis. Crofter. I called at Shops. Dined. Wrote the Journal of the preceding day. Red Christie. Worked. Prayed to bed at 11.

February 4th Saturday    Rose at 8. Prayed. Red part of Christie’s letters. Breakfasted. Taught George to spell, read & Latin. Drove to mrs Jeffrey’s saw her then to Mrs Larpent Kennington Green. Only returned to dinner. Eveng worked part of a flounce for my sister. Then wrote to Mrs Pickering about getting a Servant. Rest of ye Eveng Chatted prayed to bed at 11.

February 5th Sunday     Rose at 8. Prayed. Breakfasted. Attended divine service at St Anns. Mr Eten preached on Providence, on the Gospel System as proving that providence. That dispensation was finely traced – returned home. Recd. Mr and Mrs Planta, Mr S. Sargent. Mrs Belson & her family. We then went out. Saw Miss Fanshawe, Miss Buchanan and Mrs Beaver. Returned home to dinner. Dined. Eveng till tea red the Bible. Psalms. Corinthians. & 2d – through & two Chapters of Matthew. Then copied the journal of a fortnight past in this book. Prayers. To bed at 11.

Posted in British history, drama, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Jane Austen, playwrights, reading habits, real life tales, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Traveling by Coach During the Regency, an Overview

Posted on April 7, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

When writing a scene where my characters travel by coach, many issues must be taken into consideration before the scene is complete. Type of coach? Miles between point A and point B? Time of the year? Country roads or turnpikes? Number of hours/days required? How often to change horses? Weather conditions? 

Stage and mail coaches traveled much faster than a private coach would do. There was no reason for them to wait for changes, nor did they spend the night anywhere. Moreover, they had relief drivers. 

Stage coaches also used their own horses, or horses under contract purely to them.  They had their own drivers, not postilions, so they did not have to adhere to the speed limits put on private hires. Stage coaches did stop at night unless they were express routes, which operated only between a few large towns.  There were night coach routes, too, that operated only at night, but theses used the worst vehicles, worst horses, and worst drivers so passengers typically avoided them. They carried mostly packages between towns without going through London. Stage coaches averaged about 7 miles per hour on the turnpikes, much slower on secondary roads, which they traversed often since they were the only real public transportation connecting smaller towns or that operated across the country instead of always radiating from London like the mail coaches did. They pushed their horses hard and carried a LOT of passengers, so the horses rarely lasted even three years in service, being sold to farmers as plow horses afterwards. Stage coaches did have to stop at tollgates, but their horses were ready at each stop so changes were fast. They used a shorter stage for changes than private job horses did — 10-15 miles. 

Mail coaches were the fastest form of transportation, averaging 9 miles per hour. But they only operated on the turnpikes and only on turnpikes in good condition. They did not stop for anything except changes of horses, which happened very quickly and very often, usually every 2 hours. Again, the horses were under contract strictly to the post office, so were unavailable to travelers. Mail coaches carried, at most, 7 passengers—4 inside, three outside. Their coaches were smaller and lighter than the stage coaches, which added to their speed.

Mail coaches averaged 5 miles per hour on the turnpikes, less on secondary roads. One needed to hire horses every 15-20 miles if one wanted to make any time. They generally averaged 7 miles per hour. They were often slowed, for they had to stop at all toll gates, slow for the numerous villages, and give way whenever another coach came up behind them. Also, traveling after dark was not a good idea unless a huge emergency necessitated it. By the 1830s, that speed was doubled due to macadamization of the roads, but that had not even started in 1814.

The men who changed the horses for the mail or stage coaches were as fast as the team that changes tires  at a NASCAR race. Reportedly, they could do the job in under 5 minutes.

From Jane Austen’s World we have a different perspective of the mail coach. “They say a picture is worth a thousand words, and how true it is in this instance. George Scharf the elder, a popular genre painter of the early 19th century, was also a prolific drawer of ordinary scenes in his adopted city of London. One can study his drawing of the Mail Coach Bound for the West County, 1829, endlessly, imagining many tales while thinking back on the history of coach travel. This mail coach is being readied at the Gloucester Coffee House on Piccadilly, where so many mail coaches left at night. The horses are waiting to pull this heavily laden wagon. They will pull it for 15 miles before they will need to be changed. Even with improved roads, the coach will not be going much faster than 7-8 miles per hour. Scharf drew this scene in 1829, a year before the first passenger train would be introduced. By the mid-18th century this scene in Piccadilly would have changed dramatically.

“I count 9 people on top the wagon, one passenger sitting next to the coachman, seven on top of the wagon (one is definitely a porter), and two passengers inside.  I imagine there are two more people seated inside that we cannot see, for the interior holds four passengers, and that the gentleman putting on the great coat is waiting for the porters to finish loading the packages before he takes his seat on top of the coach. The woman and child standing next to him must be waiting to see him off, for, if the rest of the mail bags, packages, and luggage are to be loaded, there won’t be room for them as well. If they are waiting to board, then I pity the four horses who will be pulling 13 people along with the mail.

“Travel was quite costly back then.

Costs of travel:  [estimates for 1800]

  • Stage Coach:  2-3 pence / mile = 1.25 pounds from London to Bath / half-price if up top / outside [but remember the average income was about £30 / year
  • Hired post-chaise =  estimate about £1 / mile [i.e @1 shilling / horse / mile, to include the postillion] – Jane Austen in Vermont

“For a family living on  £25 – £30 per year, such costs were prohibitive. The cheapest seats were on top and on the outside. One can see a woman holding her child wedged between straw baskets. Should the coach take a turn too fast or be involved in an accident, she and her babe could be flung off the vehicle or trapped underneath should it overturn. At best, they felt the wind and rain and arrived at their destination disheveled and covered in road dust if the weather was dry, or soaking wet with rain. One shudders at the thought of what it felt like to be an outdoor passenger in the winter.”

Some Stage Coaches timed the change of horses to a meal time and gave the passengers twenty minutes to eat, stretch their legs, and tend to personal needs.

Some stage coaches and mail coaches ran 365. Some never ran on Sunday. Whether there was more than one stage or mail going out a day depended on the route. Then there were various stages owned by private companies. These ran on their own schedules and were more or less dependable, and also often more crowded. They, too, were not supposed to run on Sundays or religious holidays, but some did–it was about a profit. Times to change horses might be a touch more relaxed in that some stops were worked into their schedules, including changes of horses. Some of these coaches might have a team of six, and so a change would take longer (more horses = more time). They would also generally run only once a day in one direction–or possibly even less. But it all depends on the route and traffic.

Travel was delayed and the coaches stopped during blizzards and when the snow blocked the roads. In a couple of cases, outside passengers froze to death because of the cold. Torrential rain did not necessarily stop the coach from completing its route, but more than one road had been known to wash away or the ditches to overflow and the paving stones to become loose or misplaced. Do you recall the scene in “Becoming Jane” where James McAvoy’s character of Tom Lefroy must carry “Jane Austen” across the muddy road and assist the other gentlemen in removing the carriage from the muck. It is a pivotal scene that broke many Austenites’ hearts. 

The destination determined whether the next coach would be in two hours or the next day. Cary printed a schedule.

There is the Royal Mail. This ran over specific routes, usually only once a day in either direction. They did not travel on Sundays or religious holidays, so no Christmas Day travel. Their schedules were very tight, and horses were changed in about 15 to 20 minutes, or less–a person barely had time to use the facilities or get some tea. Their purpose was to deliver the mail and passengers were secondary, and the coachman very strict on times.

Frequency of coaches was daily, at best. There were never several coaches going all the same way with the same exact destination. The needs of the populous determined the  the frequency. We are talking about a much less populous world than the one we live in. Between large cities, more need would be obvious, and less need the further one was removed from London. One might see several coaches all using the same road, for example, they are all using the London to Bristol road, but they split off for various end destinations.

To purchase a seat on a coach could be quite difficult, for most tended to be packed and sold out, so not easy to “catch” a ride. One purchased his ticket at the origin point for the mail or stage. One might be able to bribe a coachman on a stage to fit you inside or on an outside seat, but it was not always possible. Horses can only pull so much weight.

What a writer of Regencies requires is to research the route the characters are taking. I recommend Cary’s Itinerary or Patterson’s. Look up your route and you will discover what coaches go through the setting of the story (from Point A to Point B). These travel guides are possible to find online, and as used books, and are not that expensive.

Another trick I use is to calculate the distance using Google maps, and then I determine how long it would take a modern day person to bike from Point A to Point B. That provides me a rough idea of how many hours my characters would spend in a coach. Google also provides the “bike” information with a few simple clicks.

Other Sources:

Carriages and Coaches in Regency England

Regency Posting Inns and Post Coaches

Transport – Stage Coaches and Mail Coaches

Here’s the online link to Cary’s (second edition, 1802). I keep it bookmarked. Cary’s New Itinerary…  https://books.google.com/books?id=cg4QAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=carys&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ozn1VIaWHcWMNon8gogC&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=carys&f=false

Posted in British history, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Jane Austen, Living in the Regency, real life tales, Regency era, travel | Tagged , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 of the United States as a Separate Nation: Samuel Chase, The Only U. S. Supreme Court Judge to Face Impeachment Charges and Signer of the Declaration of Independence

Posted on April 7, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

005088

Samuel Chase. Oil on wood, 1811, by John Wesley Jarvis. National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution. http://www.anb.org/ articles/02/02-00055.html

Samuel Chase was a 35 years old lawyer when he signed the Declaration of Independence. He married twice and was the father of four children. He died in June 1811 at the age of 70.

Samuel Chase was born in Somerset County, Maryland, 11 April 1741. His father Thomas Chase graduated from both Eton and Cambridge. At Eton, he earned honors in both Latin and Hebrew; later, at Cambridge, he studied medicine and earned a Bachelor of Physics degree. He returned to Eton and taught Latin and Hebrew. Apparently tiring of the academic life, he took passage to the West Indies island of St. Thomas to practice medicine. The sparse life on a small island didn’t agree, so he returned to England where he read for the Anglican priesthood. He was ordained in February 1739. Shortly thereafter he emigrated to Somerset County, Maryland, and became Rector of the Somerset Parish. (The Society for the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence) Thomas and Matilda Walker were married in 1740, and they moved in with her parents, as Thomas’ stipend as a rector could not maintain a separate household. “On 11 April 1741, the Reverend Chase lost his wife and gained a son. Matilda Chase died in childbirth, her husband’s medical training being of no avail.

In February 1744, Thomas Chase was made rector of St. Paul’s Parish, which included Baltimore Town. He lived beyond his meager means and was often in financial difficulty. Samuel learned this dissipation from his father. Thomas Chase tutored Samuel and his grand-nephew Jeremiah Townley Chase in Latin, Greek, literature and history. Samuel moved to Annapolis in 1759 to be trained in law. He apprenticed at Holland and Hall for four years. In Annapolis, Samuel had an active social life. He developed a life long friendship with William Paca, also a signer of the Declaration of Independence. In 1762, Samuel married Ann Baldwin, with whom he sired seven children. 

Samuel was admitted to the Bar in March 1763. He built a clientele that others would shun, but which served him well in his political aspirations. Those lower-class citizens remained loyal to him. In a highly contested contest, Samuel was elected to the Maryland lower house of the General Assembly. 

The Stamp Act and Sugar Act were looked upon with unkindness by the citizens of Maryland for the 1932 charter granted to Lord Baltimore stated that Maryland was exempt from taxes put in place by the Crown. Chase led an angry crowd to remove the man who distributed the stamped paper throughout Maryland. 

“The mob in Annapolis reassembled on 2 September and tore down the building Hood was going to use as a storehouse for the paper. This episode frightened Hood into fleeing to New York for sanctuary. The Maryland Governor, Horatio Sharpe, arranged for a British warship to keep the stamped paper on board, safe from the Annapolis mobs. Chase and his followers had ensured that no paper could be sold throughout the Colony; therefore, the Stamp Act could not be enforced when it became law.

“The Stamp Act went into effect on 1 November. General confusion ensued. Legally, courts could not function without the stamped paper, seaports could not load or unload cargo, and newspapers were shut down. The Colonists ignored the Act, and proceeded with unstamped paper in defiance of the Crown. The Frederick County Court was the first in Maryland to reopen. Chase was present for this event and certainly influenced this decision. Chase immediately resumed his law practice in Frederick County, using unstamped paper.” (The Society for the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)

From 1767 to 1773, Samuel Chase, the “carthorse,” became a major force in Maryland politics. He was known for his stance in favor of the rights of the middling class. With the passage of the “Intolerable Acts,” Chase, Paca, and many others were set against the Crown. As time progressed, Chase advocated armed resistance and, eventually, open rebellion, which set him for a time in opposition to Maryland’s wishes for an alliance with Britain. Chase and Charles Carroll rode throughout Maryland’s many counties to enflame the residents to abandon ties with Britain. When Maryland’s provincial government agreed to separation, Chase rode the 150 miles (in 2 days) to Philadelphia to deliver the news to the Maryland delegation. Ironically, Chase missed the initial vote for independence and the agreement to the Declaration of Independence for his wife was seriously ill. 

“For several years following his signing of the Declaration, Chase spent most of his time on his law practice and helping write Maryland’s Constitution as well as the new nation’s Articles of Confederation. He began accepting students into his law office, including William Pickney who later became Attorney General of the United States.

“During the creation of the Articles of Confederation, Chase was involved with several provisions: Of these, the original colonial grants of the “landed” States beyond the Appalachian mountain range were the most important to him. Certain states, such as Virginia and South Carolina had parallel Northern and Southern borders reaching across the continent, all the way to the “South Sea,” i.e., the Pacific Ocean. As early as April 1776, Chase had recommended the Continental Congress appropriate these lands to help pay for the existing war effort. Now, Chase wanted the newly formed national government to have ownership and to control the lands beyond the Appalachians so that they could be used to increase revenue. Chase was overruled, and the “landed” States retained their colonial boundaries.” (DSDI)

“Prior to the Revolution, Maryland’s proprietary government had purchased stock in the Bank of England, using funds the government had obtained in taxes. Now, the face value of Maryland’s stock in the Bank stood at around £43,000 sterling; however, since the stock was being traded at a premium, the actual value, with accrued interest, stood at around £120,000 sterling. In April 1783, Maryland’s legislature authorized appointment of a state agent who was to request the London trustees to sell the stock and to transfer the proceeds and accumulated dividends to the State’s agent. All proceeds would be used to reduce Maryland’s outstanding war debts.

“William Paca, now Governor of Maryland, selected Samuel Chase to be the State’s agent. Chase sailed for England in August 1783. Chase contacted the Maryland trustees, all London merchants with long-standing relationships with Maryland’s former proprietary government. The trustees refused to comply. After months of wrangling over ownership, the Court of Chancery took action in June 1784 to have the stock and accrued dividends transferred to the Court’s accountant general pending a political solution of the ownership. Chase sailed for Maryland on August 1784 without having accomplished his mission.” (DSDI) He did succeed in one thing. He met and married the twenty-five year old Hannah Giles by whom he sired two daughters.” 

George Washington appointed Samuel Chase to the U. S. Supreme Court. “In 1796, Samuel Chase’s first Supreme Court session resulted in an opinion that has stood the test of time. In Ware v. Hylton, the issue was whether a state law could override the provisions of a national treaty. Chase argued that since the Treaty of Paris had been ratified, the provisions within the Treaty became, de jure, the supreme law of the land. Chase wrote

that a treaty could not be the supreme law of the land if a State legislature could override its provisions, thereby declaring the treaty provisions null and void. Since the Treaty of Paris had been ratified, its provisions could not be challenged. Chase’s opinion on the supremacy of national treaties over state laws remains valid.

“In the 1779 Court session, Samuel Chase wrote an opinion in Calder v.Bull that defined ex post facto laws under the Constitution. This definition has lasted, and is the one accepted today.

225px-samuel_chase_medium

https://www.geni.com/ people/Samuel-Chase -signer-of-the-Declaration -of-Independence/ 6000000013164515492

“Samuel Chase’s thoughts on the supremacy of the Judiciary to declare a law as unconstitutional began to coalesce. In 1800, this role of the Supreme Court was in question, and Chase put fuel on the fire by beginning to espouse these thoughts.” (DSDI)

From Geni, we learn something of the impeachment proceedings. “President Thomas Jefferson, alarmed at the seizure of power by the judiciary through the claim of exclusive judicial review, led his party’s efforts to remove the Federalists from the bench. His allies in Congress had shortly after his inauguration repealed the Judiciary Act of 1801, abolishing the lower courts created by the legislation and terminating their Federalist judges despite lifetime appointments; Chase, two years after the repeal in May 1803, had denounced it in his charge to a Baltimore grand jury, saying that it would “take away all security for property and personal liberty, and our Republican constitution will sink into a mobocracy[.]” Jefferson saw the attack as indubitable bad behavior and an opportunity to reduce the Federalist influence on the judiciary by impeaching Chase, launching the process from the White House when he wrote to Congressman Joseph Hopper Nicholson of Maryland asking: “Ought the seditious and official attack [by Chase] on the principles of our Constitution . . .to go unpunished?”

“Virginia Congressman John Randolph of Roanoke took up the challenge and took charge of the impeachment. The House of Representatives served Chase with eight articles of impeachment in late 1804, one of which involved Chase’s handling of the trial of John Fries. Two more focused on his conduct in the political libel trial of James Callender. Four articles focused on procedural errors made during Chase’s adjudication of various matters, and an eighth was directed at his “intemperate and inflammatory … peculiarly indecent and unbecoming … highly unwarrantable … highly indecent” remarks while “charging” or authorizing a Baltimore grand jury. The Jeffersonian Republicans-controlled United States Senate began the impeachment trial of Chase in early 1805, with Vice President Aaron Burr presiding and Randolph leading the prosecution.

“All the counts involved Chase’s work as a trial judge in lower circuit courts. (In that era, Supreme Court justices had the added duty of serving as individuals on circuit courts, a practice that was ended in the late 19th century.) The heart of the allegations was that political bias had led Chase to treat defendants and their counsel in a blatantly unfair manner. Chase’s defense lawyers called the prosecution a political effort by his Republican enemies. In answer to the articles of impeachment, Chase argued that all of his actions had been motivated by adherence to precedent, judicial duty to restrain advocates from improper statements of law, and considerations of judicial efficiency.

“The Senate voted to acquit Chase of all charges on March 1, 1805. He is the only U.S. Supreme Court justice to have been impeached.

“The impeachment raised constitutional questions over the nature of the judiciary and was the end of a series of efforts to define the appropriate extent of judicial independence under the Constitution. It set the limits of the impeachment power, fixed the concept that the judiciary was prohibited from engaging in partisan politics, defined the role of the judge in a criminal jury trial, and clarified judicial independence. The construction was largely attitudinal as it modified political norms without codifying new legal doctrines.

“The acquittal of Chase — by lopsided margins on several counts — set an unofficial precedent that many historians say helped ensure the independence of the judiciary. As Chief Justice William Rehnquist noted in his book Grand Inquests, some senators declined to convict Chase despite their partisan hostility to him, apparently because they doubted that the mere quality of his judging was grounds for removal. Furthermore, federal judges became much more cautious by avoiding the appearance of political partisanship. All impeachments of federal judges since Chase have been based on allegations of legal or ethical misconduct, not on judicial performance.

Death and legacy: “Samuel Chase died of a heart attack in 1811 and was interred in St. Paul’s Cemetery, which today is the name of a large, semi-rural cemetery southeast of the Baltimore Inner Harbor. However, in Chase’s lifetime, “St. Paul’s Cemetery” referred to a downtown churchyard on West Lombard Street. Notwithstanding, the cemetery entrance—open only on Saturday mornings—is on Redwood Street.

“The DAR’s “Lineage Book of the Charter Members” by Mary S Lockwood and published 1895 states Samuel Chase “assisted in establishing American Independence”

Posted in America, American History, British history, Declaration of Independence, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Question from a Reader Regarding Dance Sets in the Regency Era

Posted on April 6, 2026 by Regina Jeffers

Question: I think I understand the idea of the dance set, but could you elaborate on the subject. My understanding is that in balls, dances were done in sets of two different style dances. If that’s true, were they the same kind of dance, or two different kinds of dances, such a country dance and then a quadrille? Also, did people follow that same format in less formal settings such as a country ball or dancing after a dinner party or during a house party? 

The general custom was to have dances in sets of two. They were usually the same type of dances. After every two sets there would be a fast single dance like a boulanger, jig, etc. Local assemblies could be more informal.

Either the Master of Ceremony in the local assemblies or one of the women decided which kind of dances would be included.

Formal balls and court balls still opened with the minuet, but that was otherwise forgotten by the end of the Regency.

I think dancing at a house party would be noticeably more informal than anything held in a public assembly room, even a very small assembly room like that in Jane Austen’s “The Watsons.”  One must consider how large is the house party?  If it is small enough, and the folks all know each other, I think you can do anything you want there;  ditto with impromptu dancing after a dinner party (again, if it is small and the people all pretty much know each other.)

Here is an excerpt from a period source showing that the “paired dances” thing existed outside public dances. It is a passage from Jane Austen’s “Emma,” in which Frank Churchill tells Emma that the small dance party he has been planning (which is to be hosted by his father, Mr Weston) has been moved to an inn because of its larger rooms:

     Before the middle of the next day, he [Frank Churchill] was at Hartfield; and he entered the room with such an agreeable smile as certified the continuance of the scheme.  It soon appeared that he came to announce an improvement.

    “Well, Miss Woodhouse,” he almost immediately began, “your inclination for dancing has not been quite frightened away, I hope, by the terrors of my father’s little rooms.  I bring a new proposal on the subject: — a thought of my father’s, which waits only your approbation to be acted upon.  May I hope for the honour of your hand for the two first dances of this little projected ball, to be given, not at Randalls, but at the Crown Inn?”

So there it is — a pair of dances, at a private ball! 

I will note, though, that it’s clear that the entire time that no one is dancing anything but country dances. So my other suspicion, that the “paired dances” thing only applies to country dances, is still in effect. 

Oh, and if anyone is interested, chapters 28-29 of Emma have quite a nice lot of details about planning a small private ball (particularly in regard to the dancing).

Regency Dance, the Late 18th and Early Nineteenth Century tells us, “British social dancing of the 1770s had been greatly influenced by France. The Allemande and Cotillion dances were introduced to England from the late 1760s, the French Cotillion proved particularly popular, especially amongst visitors to the spa town of Bath. The Cotillion was arranged in a square format for four couples to dance a sequence of choreographed figures. A new Cotillion dancing vocabulary was absorbed into English Country Dancing from around this date; figure names such as the “Allemande”, “Pousette” and “Promenade” became common in English dances of the mid to late 1770s. A renewed interest in steps and timing accompanied this shift, dancing masters of the 1810s wrote of the perfection of the “science” of country dancing as though it was a recent phenomenon. The 1790s saw the rise of the Reel as a dance form in London, and the 1800s saw the introduction of the Waltz, especially at the Royal party town of Brighton.

“The Regency was a period of diverse dancing experiences. Strict etiquette rules were used to coordinate the dancing at the elite Assembly Rooms patronised by the rich, but riotous dancing parties might be enjoyed by a different class of dancer at a Tavern next door. Controversial dances such as the Waltz might be danced in a very different style at one such venue compared to the other.

“Cotillion dancing fell out of fashion in the early 19th century, but returned in the form of the Quadrille from the mid 1810s. The Quadrille was typically danced by four couples to a memorised sequence of figures; a great variety of choreographed routines were published from the late 1810s, but only a few major sequences survived beyond the mid 1820s: namely the First Set, the Lancers and the Caledonians.

“English Country Dancing fell out of favour with Britain’s elite social dancers towards the end of the 1810s, it was the Waltz and the Quadrille that became the preferred dances into the 1820s and beyond. A medley of minor dance formats were also invented and promoted, including Waltz Country Dances, Circular dances (Sicillian, Chivonian, etc.), Sixdrilles, and the like. The next major dancing trend to sweep the British ballrooms arrived from around the year 1830 in the form of the Gallopade and Mazurka dances; the Polka then arrived in the 1840s, a dance closely associated with the reign of Queen Victoria.”

Posted in aristocracy, British history, dancing, Emma, England, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Living in the Regency, Regency era | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Question from a Reader Regarding Dance Sets in the Regency Era