Dr. Benjamin Rush and Multiple Personalities

In book 5, Lyon on the Inside, of my romantic suspense series from Dragonblade Publishing, we have learned of the reasons why Lord Macedonald Duncan and his sons thought they were chasing a man, but . . .

Do you recall this scene from book 4, Lost in the Lyon’s Garden? It will make much more sense than it probably did when you first read it, now that I have brought up the idea of multiple personalities.

******

She picked up her belongings and nodded for him to lead the way. 

“I will lock the door behind you, Miss Whitchurch,” Sustar said as she passed through the recessed hallway. She nodded her farewell and stepped into the close’s dark shadows. The lock on the door shot into the slot behind her, and she heard Mr. Sustar turn back along the short passage to climb the stairs to the level above. The shop would not open for sales for a few more hours. The men who worked in the drapery shop would arrive a bit after seven. 

Before she could prevent it, an odd feeling crept down her spine. “All I must do is reach the opening,” her mind announced, but her feet did not wish to cooperate.

“Who are you?” she called, noting an unusual shadow on the other side of the close. “Is someone there?” She thought there was a movement in the opening, but she continued to study the dark spot against the lighter wood shingles.

Her heart hitched higher when a raspy voice declared, “You have something that belongs to me.” 

Before Victoria could respond, there was a loud crash, sounding as if someone had thrown a stack of metal plates against the wall of the empty shop on the other side of the close, which was followed by what could only be a female voice crying out the word “Help.” 

“Cassandra?” Victoria pleaded.

“Had the voice been that of her sister?”

“Cassandra?” Victoria plunged forward into the surrounding darkness in an attempt to reach the shadow and the sound of her sister’s voice.

Where had that bit of dawn gone?”

“Victoria!” a gravelly voice called out, and this time she was confident it was her sister. Without considering the consequences, Victoria stumbled forward, as one shadowy figure jerked another back towards a now open door in the empty shop. She lifted her skirt to give chase. 

Running steps could be heard, but Victoria’s attention was on the two shadows disappearing into the gaping darkness of the former jewelry shop. She slid in the slime covering the bricked opening and nearly lost her footing. 

What sounded of a bullet being fired whizzed past her head seconds before someone lifted her from harm’ s way. Carrying her towards the street and setting her down solidly beside the first of the shop walls, a tall, solid body pinned her against the frame of the building. 

Though she could not see over her rescuer’s shoulder, she could hear shouts of alarm among those out on London’s streets—those just beginning their day. 

Strong thighs and a muscular chest held her against the side of the shop. “You may release me, my lord,” she said as she pushed against his shoulders. 

Instead of setting her free, he glared down at her. “Do you have the least sense God gave all his creatures?” he accused. 

She attempted to push him away a second time, but to no avail. “You thought me quite bright with my suggestion of a monogram,” she declared in her own defense. 

“He meant to shoot you! Did you not see his gun?” he demanded. “I could . . . could not . . .” He broke off what he wished to say, but she understood immediately, for she, too, felt something was happening between them, though it had not yet found its footing.

Victoria sucked in a steadying breath. “You are still supposed to be abed,” she stated the obvious. Ironically, Lord Thompson still pinned her against the wall, but not so aggressively as he did previously. 

As she had become accustomed to his nature to analyze and hash out all the facts, he continued to speak to her of what had transpired. “Did you recognize the figure?”

“Figures,” she corrected. 

“I only saw one shadow,” he stated with a frown she could not see, but she recognized the tension in his body, which spoke of the uncertainty found in his voice. His lordship was definitely frowning. 

“But I distinctly heard two voices,” she assured.  “One a male and one I believed to be Cassandra.”

*******

Dr. Benjamin Rush (1745–1813) was a Founding Father and pioneer of American psychiatry. He was among the first to document cases of dual personality and dissociation in the early 19th century. He described patients with alternating personalities, including a notable case involving a woman whose “madness” persona held different memories, behaviors, and beliefs than her “normal” state. 

  • Case Description: He observed a young woman (daughter of an officer) who exhibited a “madness” persona that was entirely different from her, which was characterized by speaking French, adopting different religious views, and acting differently than her normal, Methodist persona.
  • Theoretical Understanding: While he did not use the term “multiple personality,” Rush recognized these as profound mental “derangements” or “disorders of the mind”.
  • Documentation: His work on these “double consciousness” cases was foundational in the history of dissociation in the United States.
  • Treatment Approach: Rush approached these conditions with his characteristic, though controversial, methods, which included bloodletting and the use of his “tranquilizer chair”

Despite the limited understanding of the time, Rush’s detailed descriptions of split, alternating personalities were groundbreaking, predating more famous studies of the subject. In fact, he was the doctor who recorded Mary Reynolds’ [see Friday’s post, July 3, for information on Mary Reynolds] alternating personalities.

Posted in American History, book release, books, British history, Dragonblade Publishers, eBooks, Georgian England, Georgian Era, hero, heroines, historical fiction, history, Living in the Regency, medicine, mystery, publishing, real life tales, Regency era, Regency romance, research, science, suspense, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: Elbridge Gerry, Signer of the Declaration of Independence and the Source of the Word “Gerrymandering”

It is the duty of every man, though he may have but one day to live, to devote that day to the good of his country. —Elbridge Gerry

gerryElbridge Gerry was born on July 17, 1744 in Marblehead, Massachusetts, the third of 12 children of Thomas Gerry and Elizabeth Greenleaf.  His mother was the daughter of a Boston merchant; his father, a wealthy and politically active merchant-shipper who had once been a sea captain. Captain Thomas Gerry, was born in 1702 and came to America in 1730 from Newton Abbott, Devonshire, England. Gerry’s great-great-grandfather, Edmond Greenleaf, was born in Malden, England, came to America in 1635 and settled in Newbury. He and his family removed to Boston in 1650. One of his descendants was the famous New England poet, John Greenleaf Whittier.

Little is known of the childhood of Elbridge Gerry. He entered Harvard College at the age of 14 and graduated in 1762, ranking 29th in a class of 52. Elbridge went on to receive a Master’s degree in 1765 at the age of 20. His Master’s dissertation argued that America should resist the recently passed Stamp Act.

Gerry joined his father and two brothers in the family business, exporting dried codfish to Barbados and Spain. He eventually became one of the wealthiest and most enterprising merchants in Marblehead. The Encyclopedia of American Wealth ranks Gerry 11th in wealth among the 56 signers of the Declaration. Gerry’s first venture into politics occurred in 1770 when he served on a local committee to enforce the ban on the sale and consumption of tea.

gerry-sIn December 1771 his father Thomas Gerry moderated a meeting in Marblehead of the new Committee of Correspondence to discuss the resolves put forward by Samuel Adams. Elbridge joined his father there and helped craft the fiery resolves that were adopted. In May 1772 Elbridge was elected representative to the General Court and met Sam Adams, with whom he immediately bonded. When Parliament closed the port of Boston in June 1774, Marblehead became a major port of entry for goods and supplies, which Gerry then transported to Boston. Mercy Otis Warren stated that Gerry coordinated the procurement and distribution of arms and provisions with “punctuality and indefatigable industry.”

Between 1774 and 1776 Gerry attended the first and second provincial congresses. He served with Samuel Adams and John Hancock on the council of safety and, as chairman of the committee of supply (a job for which his merchant background ideally suited him) wherein he raised troops and dealt with military logistics. On the night of April 18, 1775, Gerry attended a meeting of the council of safety at an inn in Menotomy (Arlington), between Cambridge and Lexington, and barely escaped the British troops marching on Lexington and Concord.

In 1776 Gerry entered the Continental Congress, where his congressional specialities were military and financial matters. In Congress and throughout his career his actions often appeared contradictory. He earned the nickname “soldiers’ friend” for his advocacy of better pay and equipment, yet he vacillated on the issue of pensions. Despite his disapproval of standing armies, he recommended long-term enlistments.

Until 1779 Gerry sat on and sometimes presided over the congressional board that regulated Continental finances. After a quarrel over the price schedule for suppliers, Gerry, himself a supplier, walked out of Congress. Although nominally a member, he did not reappear for 3 years. During the interim, he engaged in trade and privateering and served in the lower house of the Massachusetts legislature.

As a representative in Congress in the years 1783-85, Gerry numbered among those who had possessed talent as Revolutionary agitators and wartime leaders but who could not effectually cope with the painstaking task of stabilizing the national government. He was experienced and conscientious but created many enemies with his lack of humor, suspicion of the motives of others, and obsessive fear of political and military tyranny. In 1786, the year after leaving Congress, he retired from business, married Ann Thompson, and took a seat in the state legislature.

Gerry was one of the most vocal delegates at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. He presided as chairman of the committee that produced the Great Compromise but disliked the compromise itself. He antagonized nearly everyone by his inconsistency and, according to a colleague, “objected to everything he did not propose.” At first an advocate of a strong central government, Gerry ultimately rejected and refused to sign the Constitution because it lacked a bill of rights and because he deemed it a threat to republicanism. He led the drive against ratification in Massachusetts and denounced the document as “full of vices.” Among the vices, he listed inadequate representation of the people, dangerously ambiguous legislative powers, the blending of the executive and the legislative, and the danger of an oppressive judiciary. Gerry did see some merit in the Constitution, though, and believed that its flaws could be remedied through amendments. In 1789, after he announced his intention to support the Constitution, he was elected to the First Congress where, to the chagrin of the Antifederalists, he championed Federalist policies.

imagesGerry left Congress for the last time in 1793 and retired for 4 years. During this period he came to mistrust the aims of the Federalists, particularly their attempts to nurture an alliance with Britain, and sided with the pro-French Democratic-Republicans. In 1797 President John Adams appointed him as the only non-Federalist member of a three-man commission charged with negotiating a reconciliation with France, which was on the brink of war with the United States. During the ensuing XYZ affair (1797-98), Gerry tarnished his reputation. Talleyrand, the French foreign minister, led him to believe that his presence in France would prevent war, and Gerry lingered on long after the departure of John Marshall and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, the two other commissioners. Finally, the embarrassed Adams recalled him, and Gerry met severe censure from the Federalists upon his return. An anti-French mob pelted his home with rocks and shouted obscenities at his wife and children. The United States ended up entering a two-years, undeclared war with France. 

In 1800-1803 Gerry, never very popular among the Massachusetts electorate because of his aristocratic haughtiness, met defeat in four bids for the Massachusetts governorship, but finally triumphed in 1810. Near the end of his two terms, scarred by partisan controversy, the Democratic-Republicans passed a redistricting measure to ensure their domination of the state senate. In response, the Federalists heaped ridicule on Gerry and coined the pun “gerrymander” to describe the salamander-like shape of one of the redistricted areas.

Despite his advanced age, frail health, and the threat of poverty brought on by neglect of personal affairs, Gerry served as James Madison’s Vice President in 1813.

Imacon Color Scanner

Imacon Color Scanner

The vice-presidency had been vacant for nearly a year by the time Elbridge Gerry took office as the nation’s fifth vice president on March 4, 1813. His predecessor, George Clinton, an uncompromising “Old Republican” with frustrated presidential ambitions, had died in office on April 20, 1812. Clinton’s constant carping about President James Madison’s foreign policy had put him at odds with the administration. Gerry, who replaced Clinton as the Republican vice-presidential nominee in the 1812 election, was a vice president more to Madison’s liking. An enthusiastic supporter of Jefferson’s embargo and Madison’s foreign policy, he offered a welcome contrast to the independent-minded and cantankerous New Yorker who had proved so troublesome during the president’s first term. But, like Clinton, Gerry would die in office before the end of his term, leaving Madison—and the nation—once again without a vice president. In the autumn of 1814, the 70-years-old politician collapsed on his way to the Senate and died.

 He left his wife, was to live until 1849, the last surviving widow of a signer of the Declaration of Independence, as well as three sons and four daughters. Gerry is buried in Congressional Cemetery at Washington, DC. 

9282593_1

Declaration of Independence: Elbridge Gerry http://www.icollector.com

Sources: 

American History from Revolution to Reconstruction and Beyond 

Biography

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

Teaching American History 

U. S. History: The Signers of the Declaration of Independence 

U. S. Senate 

Wikipedia 

Posted in American History, British history, Georgian England, history, real life tales | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Question from a Reader: All Things Dealing with Debtor’s Prison During the Regency Era

QUESTION: I am writing about a widow whose husband was reckless with money and left her with nothing when he died. She lives in a small village. If she has incurred debts to tradesmen, etc., and cannot pay, what danger/threat does she face? I figured it would be debtor’s prison in London, but did they have such things in the countryside?  I am trying to figure out the stakes in a new story so am free to go where the research takes me.

Response: Not all debts were chargeable to a widow or heir. What was her husband’s rank or status? What did he own ? Who inherited what?

Yes, there were debtor’s prisons in the many towns. If you have access to the British Newspaper Archive (it’s worth the fees!) you will see that almost every newspaper has lists of bankruptcies,and also sales of goods.

What was the difference between debtors and those declaring bankruptcy? Debtors owed personal debts for services to tradesmen and commercial enterprises. The tradesmen who were not paid, could not pay their wholesalers and suppliers and they went bankrupt. Claiming bankruptcy meant was one who was doing business of some kind and who did not pay for the supplies. That person seldom ended in debtors’ prison for his actions. However, both could have their land and property seized and sold for debts. The number of trades men who went bankrupt because the upper classes didn’t pay their bills was quite high.

Heirs and widows were not automatically responsible for all debts. I am not saying that a tradesman  or anyone might not come threatening a widow about money her husband had owed, but not all situations were legally enforceable.

The legal debts from the tradesman had to be in legal form, and it was the executor of the man’s will who had the duty to deal with them. If the widow was the executor, she would have to deal with the creditors, otherwise, the executor did. Her house could be sold and all her furniture and clothes if the court said the debts were valid and there was enough in the estate to pay them.

I have not read of any widows being sent to debtors’ prison because of her husband’s debts. If someone has, please let me know, as I am interested.  Also, the courts usually thought the widow should have something to live on.

I also found similar laws for 1800’s gaming and up to the Victorian era for a high ranking peer to owe another high ranking peer that the obligation could go beyond one’s death for the settlement. Tradesmen came AFTER honor-bound debts.

“Chits” are debts of honor because they were not enforceable by law. Some would say that the son was obliged to pay his father’s debts, but most believe he should tell the other man he will pay if he ever has money left over from essentials. The son did not incur the debt so he was not bound to pay it.

People looked down on a man who demanded payment for gaming debts when a family depended on on the inheritance to survive. The earl who has his chits is not considered honorable if he demands payment when a family needed to pay more bills.

I found a fantastic resource re prisons – State of the Prisons in England, Scotland and Wales, By James Neild in Google Books (link below). It lists *every* prison, gaol, Bridewell, etc. in the country, including the accommodation available and often other very interesting information about particular prisons. 

Link: https://books.google. com.au/books?id=SwEMAQAAMAAJ& dq=bridewell+yorkshire&source= gbs_navlinks_s

Amazon ~ This book offers a detailed examination of prison conditions in England, Scotland, and Wales. The author provides valuable insights into the realities faced by prisoners during a specific historical period, shedding light on the challenges and inadequacies of the penal system. This work offers a rare glimpse into a crucial aspect of social history, revealing the state of prisons and the conditions endured by inmates. The book’s focus is primarily on the practical realities of prison life, providing a factual account of what was observed, with the apparent aim of suggesting improvements to the system. By presenting a firsthand account of the prisons and their conditions, this book serves as a significant historical document that informs our understanding of the evolution of penal reform and the treatment of prisoners. It offers a unique perspective for readers interested in history, social reform, and the evolution of correctional systems.

Nobles could not be tossed into prison for debts. Courtesy peers could be. Sometimes a father would let his heir–or other son–be tossed into prison for debt as a way to try to  bring him to his senses about those debts. Informal gambling debts (IOUs) did not someone to be tossed into prison, but debts to a money lender when one has signed a regular loan receipt did. Quite often a wastrel would find his tailor in debtors’ prison with him. Many small businesses failed because the aristocrats did not pay their bills.

I am confident many of you have read several stories where the peer has to marry an heiress to avoid debtors’ prison. It is far more likely that he marries her to avoid having property sold out from under him, despite entails and settlements.

Debtors had their goods and property taken and sold for debts. That was unusual for a peer. Usually, he arranged the sale himself.

On another thought, unless a peer had an Irish peerage and was seated in the House of Commons, he could not be sent to jail for debts. Even if he were an Irish peer who sat in Commons, he could not be sent to jail for debt while Parliament was sitting nor for 45 days before or after the session. So basically, though a peer could be in debt, he would not be in debtors’ prison.

Posted in aristocracy, British history, commerce, England, finance, Georgian England, Georgian Era, history, Inheritance, laws of the land, Living in the Regency, real life tales, Regency era, research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mary Reynolds, One of the First Recorded Incidents of Multiple Personalities

Mary Reynolds (1785–1854) was a 19th-century Pennsylvania woman considered the first, and perhaps most famous, American case of multiple personality disorder (now Dissociative Identity Disorder). Beginning in 1811, she experienced profound, alternating shifts between a melancholy, quiet personality and a lively, intelligent, but child-like one for 18 years. 

In my latest mystery/suspense tale, I permit my villain to possess this disorder. In that manner, she may sometimes sound like a woman and sometimes like a man.

Key aspects of Mary Reynolds’ case include:

  • The Transformation: After waking from a long, deep sleep, Reynolds appeared to have lost all her memory, including how to speak, read, and write, yet she possessed no knowledge of her former life.
  • Personality Shift: She switched between two distinct personalities (or “double consciousness”):
    • Personality 1: A reserved, somber, quiet spinster.
    • Personality 2: A cheerful,, curious, socially active, but naive, “child-like” person.
  • Medical Documentation: Her case was documented by Dr. Samuel Latham Mitchell in 1816 and later analyzed by other experts, shaping early understanding of dissociative disorders.
  • Context: While early accounts focused on her “fits” and loss of memory, later interpretations suggest her condition may have been a response to traumatic childhood events, including religious persecution.
  • Significance: Her case was crucial in the history of psychology and psychiatry, as it provided a concrete, documented example of “dual personality” before the formalization of the term. 

Mary Reynolds’ case is often cited as a pivotal moment in understanding the development of the human mind and its capacity for fracturing under immense emotional or psychological stress. 

This transcript comes from Mary Reynolds: A Case of Double Consciousness by S. Weir Mitchell, M.D., Philadelphia, Wm. J. Doran, Printer, 1889. “Mary Reynolds was born in England in 1793, and, when four years old, with her father and mother and their family, they left their home in Birmingham to settle in Pennsylvania. Leaving in New York the remainder of the family, the father and son started out into the wilderness and chose a spot on the banks of Oil Creek in Venango County. The whole surrounding country was an unbroken forest. Twelve miles southward were the few inhabitants of Franklin, while six miles to the north lived Jonathan Titus, the proprietor of the land on which Titusville now stands. In this remote spot, William Reynolds and his young son built a log-cabin, in which the father left the lad while he returned to New York to bring the remainder of the family to their new home.

“For four months the boy remained alone in the cabin, rarely seeing the face of a white man, but being
frequently visited by Indians. In due time, the Reynolds family arrived, and with them the daughter Mary. Her childhood and youth appear to have been marked by no extraordinary incidents. She is said to have “possessed an excellent capacity, and to have enjoyed fair opportunities to acquire knowledge. Besides the domestic arts and social attainments, she had improved her mind by reading and conversation. Her memory was capacious and well stocked with ideas.” Though in no respect brilliant, she was thoughtful, and seems to have been endowed with an uncommonly good physical organization.
Her natural disposition tended to melancholy.

“Her spirits were low. She never gave herself to mirth, but was sedate and reserved ; she had no relish for company, but avoided it was very fond of reading what few books were to be had. She loved to retire to some secluded place where, free from interruption, she read and meditated upon her Bible, and
where she was apt to give herself up to prayer and devotional exercises.

“When about eighteen years of age she is said to have become subject to occasional attacks of “fits;” these were certainly hysterical, but of their precise characteristics no account is given. However, on a Sunday in the spring of 1811, she had an attack of unusual severity. It occurred while she was in a
secluded place reading and engaged in her devotions. Owing to her protracted absence, her friends became alarmed, and after a long search found her in a state of insensibility and in convulsions. The restoratives applied were not very successful. When she recovered consciousness (probably on this same
day) she was found to be both blind and deaf, and continued in this state for five or six weeks. “

From “Historical Conceptions of Dissociative and Psychotic Disorders” Wiley Online Library: “The most influential early case of dual personality or multiple personality disorder (MPD) was that of Mary Reynolds, first published by Samuel Latham Mitchell in 1816. The growth of interest in hypnosis, which eventually followed Mesmer’s animal magnetism, marked a systematic secularization of interest in phenomena previously ascribed to the Devil and his minions. The first use of the term ‘dissociation’ in the medical literature was by Benjamin Rush (1818), who used the term to capture the alterations in mood states and their seemingly disconnected appearance in what is now called bipolar disorder.”

Posted in American History, book release, books, British history, Dragonblade Publishers, eBooks, Georgian England, Georgian Era, hero, heroines, historical fiction, medieval, mystery, publishing, reading, real life tales, Regency era, Regency romance, research, science, series, suspense, terminology, word origins, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rochester, England, Part of the Plot Line for “Lyon on the Inside” from Dragonblade Publishing

I have set the latter part of my latest Dragonblade novel in and around Rochester, England. One of the characters introduced in the novel “Lyon on the Inside” is a Scottish “gentleman,” who is familiar to both Lord Macdonald Duncan and Lord Aaran Graham. His name is Mr. Donegal MacAlasdair, who was at one time a friend of Lord Duncan. He is reportedly a renown religious scholar and is presenting a series of lectures at Rochester Cathedral. He also happens to be the long-time lover of Lord Aaran Graham’s stepmother, Lady Eímear Rayland, née Eímear Boyde, as well as formerly known as Lady Graham and Lady Roland. Ironically, Mr. MacAlasdair is staying at Rayland Hall while he lecturing at Rochester. If you smell something rotten in Kent . . .

For those of you who know me more as a Jane Austen fan fiction writer than as a Regency era writer, though they overlap, I set Lady Catherine de Bourgh’s estate, Rosings Park, outside of Rochester in all the novels in which she appears.

Rochester, England, is a historic town in the Medway unitary authority of Kent, England, situated on the River Medway, approximately 30 miles southeast of London. Renowned for its rich Roman, Saxon, and Norman history, it features the impressive 12th-century Rochester Castle (with one of England’s tallest keeps) and the historic Rochester Cathedral. Known for its strong connections to author Charles Dickens, the town retains a charming, historic atmosphere with a High Street filled with independent shops and medieval to Victorian architecture. 

Key Aspects of Rochester, England:

  • History & Heritage: Founded by the Romans as Durobrivae in 43 AD, the city was a strategic crossing point over the River Medway. It served as a major bishopric starting in the 7th century. The History of Rochester site tells us, “It wasn’t until 1088 after the Norman invasion that Rochester had its first stone castle built on the remains of the old Roman Fort. The then King, Rufus asked his Bishop Gundulf, an architect, to build him a stone castle and later a magnificent Cathedral, which is the second oldest in the country. Bishop Gundolf also built a leper hospital namely St. Bartholomew’s which was the oldest hospital in the country, albeit the original hospital has since disappeared.
  • Rochester Cathedral: The second oldest cathedral in England, founded in 604 AD.
  • High Street: Known for its cobbled streets, Tudor, Georgian, and Victorian buildings.
  • Charles Dickens Connection: The famous author lived nearby at Gad’s Hill Place and frequently featured Rochester in his novels, including The Pickwick Papers and Great Expectations.
  • City Status Misconception: While often referred to as a city due to its cathedral, Rochester technically lost its official city status in 1998 during local government reorganization, making it a “lost city” in terms of administrative definition.
  • Location: Part of the “Medway Towns” (along with Chatham and Gillingham), it is easily accessible from London. 
Posted in Anglo-Normans, Anglo-Saxons, architecture, book release, British history, buildings and structures, Church of England, Dragonblade Publishers, England, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, hero, heroines, historical fiction, history, Jane Austen, Living in the Regency, Living in the UK, mystery, Pride and Prejudice, publishing, real life tales, Regency era, Regency romance, religion, research, series, suspense, writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: William Williams: “I have signed the Declaration of Independence. I shall be hung.”

William_Williams-202x300

William Williams was 45 years of age when he signed the Declaration of Independence. He was the father of three children and a merchant by trade. He died at the age of 80 in the year 1811.

William Williams was born in Lebanon, Connecticut, on April 18, 1731, the son of Pastor Solomon Williams, D.D., and Mary Porter Williams. William enrolled at Harvard College at age 16, graduated at 20 with honorable distinction, and commenced theological studies with his father. “The family of William Williams is said to have been originally from Wales. A branch of it came to America in the year 1630, and settled in Roxbury, Massachusetts. His grandfather, who bore the same name, was the minister of Hatfield, Massachusetts; and his father, Solomon Williams, D. D. was the minister of a parish in Lebanon, where he was settled fifty-four years. Solomon Williams, the father, married a daughter of Colonel Porter, of Hadley, by whom he had five sons and three daughters. The sons were all liberally educated. Of these, Eliphalet was settled, as a minister of the gospel, in East-Hartford, where be continued to officiate for about half a century. Ezekiel was sheriff of the county of Hartford for more than thirty years; he died a few years since at Wethersfield, leaving behind him a character distinguished for energy and enterprise, liberality and benevolence.” (Colonial Hall)

“William was a man of medium build, erect and well proportioned. He had dark brown eyes and black hair. Normally he was a man self-controlled and discrete; but it is said, upon occasion, his strong feelings led him to ‘violence of language.’ His plan for life was to follow his father in Christian ministry. The French and Indian Wars (1754-1763) interrupted this when he enlisted in the Continental Army. He joined his uncle, Colonel Ephraim Williams, and accompanied a British military expedition to Lake George in northeastern New York. On September 8, 1755, at Rocky Brook, four miles from Lake George, British Major General William Johnson, leading 1,200 provincial troops, engaged Monsieur le Baron de Dieskau in a fierce battle. Colonel Ephraim Williams commanded a regiment of provincial troops, and at the first volley was shot through the head.” (The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)

historicsigning3 (Mary Williams’ brother, John Trumbull, became famous as a painter of the Revolution. His works include the portrait above of William Williams, and the four large paintings of the Revolution now hanging in the Rotunda of the U. S. Capitol. http://www.dsdi1776.com/signers-by-state/william-williams/) Williams married Mary Trumbull, the daughter of the Royal Governor Jonathan Trumbull. Mary’s family included connections to John Adams, Oliver Wolcott, and William Ellery. Williams was forty at the time, and Mary was 25. They married on 14 February 1771. The couple had three children: Solomon, Faith, and William.

“William became an ardent supporter of the proposition for Independence, and gave his support financially through his own purse as well as through many effective writings. Williams presented the claims of the colonists in the press, and helped compose many of the Revolutionary state papers of the Royal Governor Jonathon Trumbull. During the 1760s he served on committees that considered the Stamp Act, the Connecticut claims to the Susquehanna lands, the case of the Mohegan Indians, and settlement of the boundary disputes between Connecticut and Massachusetts.

“Williams served as a Colonel in the Connecticut Militia (1773-75), but he was also the son-in-law of the Royal Governor! Governor Trumbull was the only royal governor to support the revolution. In 1775 William went from house to house soliciting private donations to defray the cost of sending Connecticut troops to aid in the capture of Ticonderoga.

“The Connecticut Assembly appointed Williams a delegate to the 2d Continental Congress in June, 1776, to take the place of Oliver Wolcott, who had become ill and had to return to Connecticut. Williams’ letter to Wolcott dated August 12, 1776, said that he did not arrive in Philadelphia until near the last of July, after the most Sultry & fatiqueing journey I ever performed, by much. The City has been since I came & yet is the most uncomfortable Place that I ever saw …, his language confirming the extreme heat and humidity attributed to Philadelphia at the time of the Declaration deliberations. Williams did not arrive in time to take part in the debates for Independence in Congress, nor was he present to cast a vote for the Declaration. His timing did permit him to sign that parchment in August when most of the other delegates did so.” (The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)

“In 1779 Williams accepted worthless paper money in exchange for $2,000 in coin for military supplies. He was said to have remarked that if independence were established he would get his money back; if not, the loss would be of no account to him.

“Some had criticized Williams for resigning his colonelcy of the 12th Militia Regiment at the outbreak of the Revolution in order to accept the election to the Continental Congress. His courage, however, was evidenced in 1781, when word arrived in Lebanon of the traitor Benedict Arnold’s raid upon New London. He immediately mounted his horse and rode twenty-three miles in three hours to offer his services as a volunteer. On arrival the town was already in flames.

“In the winter of 1781, while a French regiment was stationed in Lebanon, Williams moved out of his home and turned it over to French officers.

williams“Williams was a delegate to the convention which adopted the Articles of Confederation, and then again in 1788 he was a delegate to the ratifying convention at Hartford to consider the adoption by Connecticut of the Constitution of the United States. He voted for it, but objected to the clause forbidding religious tests.

“His later years were spent as a county judge. In 1810 his eldest son, Solomon, died, and he never seemed to be able to get over the loss. With rapidly declining health, the old patriarch died at 81 on August 2, 1811. Interment was in the Trumbull Cemetery, about a mile east of the town of Lebanon.

“In Washington, D.C, on the north side of the mall near the George Washington monument, there is a small park and lagoon celebrating the signers of the Declaration of Independence. One of the 56 granite blocks there is engraved with the name of William Williams. In the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol hangs the famous Trumbull painting “The Declaration of Independence. William Williams is shown standing on the right at the back of the room in a group of two, with a brown coat. Next to him, on the right in a red coat, is Oliver Wolcott.” (The Society of the Descendants of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)

Posted in America, American History, British history, commerce, Declaration of Independence, Georgian Era, Great Britain, history, political stance, real life tales | 2 Comments

Question from a Reader: Is “Debutant” the Correct Word for a Girl Making Her Society “Debut” in the Regency Era?

Okay, to the best of my knowledge the term “debutant” was later than the Regency Era.
The word “debutante” is of later vintage than the Regency. She would be referred to as “coming out”, per Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park, where the discussion is whether Fanny Price is “out” or not.

The reference often quoted to determine this issue comes from a letter written in 1817, which calls young ladies “debutants” was written by a young man. From the tone of the parts I read, he was not being kind by using that word. Another reference can be found in a newspaper in Scotland sometime between 1830-1840.

The usual use of the word “debut” and “debutant” was in regard to actors and actresses. If a man said girls were “debutantes'” I fear he might have been comparing them to actresses who often went overboard when making an acting debut.

Debutante balls were later. During the Regency one might or might not have a ball for a young lady. The Queen did not hold drawing rooms regularly from 1811 to her death. It was not necessary to make one’s curtsey to the Queen or to hold a ball for a girl to enter society.

Girls wore white or pastels because they were the fashionable colors. It was not, as many assume, a sign of her virginity. The girls wore fashionable evening gowns. They wore their hair as was fashionable. They did not do group introductions.

Prior to about 1817 debutant refers to an actress debuting on stage – http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=debutante

What you might want to look into is court presentation:

https://susanaellisauthor.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/presentation-at-court-in-the-regency-period/

http://historicalhussies.blogspot.com/2009/06/being-presented-to-queen.html

You have no idea how much research I did on court presentations for my REALM series, for there is a scene in both A Touch of Scandal and A Touch of Velvet on the necessary dresses, hair style, how to walk into the room and exit the room backwards, etc.

Daughters of peers made their curtsey to the queen when their  parents thought them old enough. Lady Sarah Spencer mentioned her presentation in a letter to her grandmother. Then when the young lady married a peer or a man who might attend court, she was presented again. A lady did not need to be presented to be out in Society. During much of the Regency period, drawing rooms and presentations were less common than before the time George III became ill.

 One had to be presented to attend court functions, but not to be considered out or to marry.

1860 Presentation at Court ~ Public Domain

A family might or might not also host a ball for the daughter. It could be held at the family’s townhouse or elsewhere, depending on the size of the house and those invited. All of this depends on what the family could afford (how rich are they and how much do they want to impress others?). The ball also might be arranged by the girl’s godmother (such events were generally arranged by women), especially if the family did not have deep pockets.

This is a piece from Jane Austen’s World on the cost of living in Regency England, if you are interested in that information.

https://janeaustensworld.wordpress.com/tag/cost-of-living-in-regency-england/

In many eras, the court was the arbiter of fashion and, thus, vital to the ton.  This was not true during the Regency.  So presentation only really mattered for those who expected to participate in court functions.  Society had other arbiters of fashion.

Posted in aristocracy, British history, customs and tradiitons, England, Georgian England, Georgian Era, historical fiction, history, Living in the Regency, reading, Regency era, Regency romance, research, terminology, tradtions, Victorian era, word choices | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dance Sets at a Ball or a Country Assembly in the Regency Era?

Though I thought I had covered the idea of dance sets in last Fridays piece on “Dance Cards,” evidently there was still some confusion, so I will try this again.

QUESTION FROM A READER: My understanding is that in balls, dances were planned and completed in sets of two. If that is 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, perhaps even taking requests from those in attendance, but that is not a proven idea, so do not quote me on that part.

Either the Master of Ceremony in the local assemblies or the ranking woman at a ball decided which kind of dance it would be.

Throughout much of the Georgian era, formal balls and court balls still opened with the minuet. Court balls in England officially stopped opening with the minuet in 1802, when the Lord Chamberlain, the Earl of Salisbury (James Cecil), dropped it from the official program. The decision came after the dance had been in decline and subject to some ridicule in fashionable society. 

Key details about the minuet’s decline:

Up until the late 18th Century, the minuet was the formal, ceremonial opening dance at royal birthday balls and other formal events, performed one couple at a time in order of social precedence. However a growing sense of dislike soon make the dance unpopular among the aristocracy. The dance was considered difficult to learn and required exacting performance, which many younger gentlemen found a social burden, preferring livelier country dances or the waltz.

Satirical depictions, such as Henry Bunbury’s popular 1787 caricature “A Long Minuet As Danced At Bath,” mocked the dance and its often awkward performers and contributed to its loss of prestige. The official court ball, traditionally held at St. James’s Palace, was discontinued after 1802 due to the declining years of King George III and Queen Charlotte, among other factors. When King George IV began hosting grand entertainments years later, the minuet was not part of the repertoire, though some dancing masters continued to teach it privately for its perceived benefits in posture and grace. 

A Long Minute as Danced at Bath ~ A strip design of ten couples in different stages of the minuet, All dance in silence; the expressions of the male dancers denote anxiety, determination, or complacency. All are intended to be ugly, or awkward, or both, but the figures have charm, and even in some cases a certain grace. Above the design is engraved: ‘Bos’, ‘Fur’, ‘Sus’, ‘atque Sacerdos’. None of the men suggests a parson, most are lean and none corpulent by eighteenth-century standards. Beneath the title is engraved: ‘Longa Tysonum Minuit Quid Velit et possit rerum concordia discors. Horace.’ 25 June 1787
Stipple printed on four plates joined together ~ The British Museum

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 la boulanger, jig, etc. Local assemblies could be more informal. All I have seen suggests that single dances were included between sets, and they were a change of tempo.

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

Additional Question: Have you ever seen a primary source mention a pair of dances which were not both country dances?  (If so, I’d love to have that cite!)  And FWIW, do you mean “reel” when you say “jig”?

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.”  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. The same if you are writing about an impromptu dancing after a dinner party (again, with the idea the gathering if is small and the people all pretty much know each other.)

However, it you are looking for a period source that shows that “paired dances” existed outside public dances then look to this passage in 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 is clear that the entire time that no one is dancing anything but country dances. So my other suspicion, that the “paired dances” only applied to country dances, is still in effect. 

Oh, and if anyone’s 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.)

Posted in aristocracy, British history, customs and tradiitons, dancing, Georgian England, Georgian Era, JASNA, Living in the Regency, reading, Regency era | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

What is Benefit of Clergy in Court Cases?

After Monday’s post on expunging a criminal court record, I had several question on what I meant at the end of the piece, where I mentioned “the benefit of clergy.”

Premit me to first give a brief overview of the situation.

The benefit of clergy was a historical legal practice that allowed clergymen, and later first-time offenders, to escape severe secular punishment by being tried in a church court under more lenient canon law. The primary benefit was avoiding the death penalty, as ecclesiastical courts were less likely to impose it. Over time, it evolved into a way to offer a reduced sentence or a lesser punishment for specific crimes. 

Britannica defines Benefit of Clery as benefit of clergy, formerly a useful device for avoiding the death penalty in English and American criminal law. In England, in the late 12th century, the church succeeded in compelling Henry II and the royal courts to grant every clericus, or “clerk” (i.e., a member of the clergy below a priest), accused of a capital offense immunity from trial or punishment in the secular courts. On producing letters of ordination, the accused clerk was turned over to the local bishop for trial in the bishop’s court, which never inflicted the death penalty and frequently moved for acquittal. Later, anyone having the remotest relationship to the church could also claim benefit of clergy. In the 14th century, the royal judges turned this clerical immunity into a discretionary device for mitigating the harsh criminal law by holding that a layman, convicted of a capital offense, might be deemed a clerk and obtain clerical immunity if he could show that he could read, usually the 51st Psalm. Later, a layman was allowed to claim benefit of clergy only once.

The historical context of Psalm 51 is King David’s deep repentance after committing adultery with Bathsheba and orchestrating the murder of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. The psalm is his personal confession to God, written after the prophet Nathan confronted him with his sins, which are detailed in the books of 2 Samuel chapters 11 and 12.  

Psalm 51 is a prayer of repentance. The most well-known verses include the opening line, “Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness,” and the famous request, “Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me”. The full text is a prayer of confession and a plea for cleansing and restoration from sin. 

Initially, the benefit of clergy was an immunity for church officials accused of a crime, allowing them to be tried in an ecclesiastical court instead of a secular one.

Church courts were generally more lenient and would not sentence an individual to death.

The privilege expanded to any man who could read, and he would read a passage from the Bible, such as Psalm 51, to claim the benefit.

The process eventually evolved into a legal fiction, allowing a first-time offender convicted of a “clergyable” crime to receive a lesser sentence, such as branding or imprisonment, instead of execution.

The privilege was not absolute. It had its limitations. Certain heinous crimes, such as arson, burglary, and later, horse stealing, were specifically made “unclergyable” through acts of Parliament.

The practice was gradually limited and finally abolished in the United Kingdom in 1827. However, it continued to be used in some American states even after its abolition in England. 

If you wish to know more, you might try The Evolving Meaning of Benefit of Clergy by James Biser Whisker and John R. Coe.

Initially, the concept of benefit of clergy was created to allow the Christian Church to judge, and, if necessary, punish its own transgressors. Throughout its European history various rulers have insisted upon trying all persons for secular crimes in the normal courts. The great clash came between English King Henry II and his Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket. The subsequent murder of Becket set back the secular cause until Henry VIII, as part of his campaign to become absolute ruler, began to make major changes in the app0lication of benefit of clergy. As it was transferred to North America, it became applicable to virtually all capital crimes unless the law made an offense unclergyable. It continued in use through the colonial period, and even after independence it was recognized in some states. It became virtually the only appeal of capital crimes for slaves in the South. Benefit was available only once per individual and commonly those granted clergy were branded on the hand.
Posted in American History, British history, Church of England, England, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, history, laws of the land, Living in the Regency, real life tales, Regency era, religion | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What is Benefit of Clergy in Court Cases?

Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: George Wythe, a Signer of the Declaration of Independence Who Was Poisoned by His Heir

georgewythe_sm

I am quite accustomed to traveling through Wytheville, Virginia, so named after George Wythe, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and a mentor to Thomas Jefferson. Interstate Highways 77 and 81 were constructed to intersect at the town. I pass through it often when headed north out of North Carolina to my home state of West Virginia. The opening scenes of my novel, The Road to Understanding, is set there, for travelers from the north often crossed from Virginia into the wilderness, that would later become states, during those early years of exploration and the “spreading out” of the United States. In fact, there was once a state called “Franklin,” and named after Benjamin Franklin in the western part of North Carolina, which is the setting for my tale, but that does not speak to the subject at hand: George Wythe. He was a lawyer of some 50 years of age when he signed the Declaration of Independence. He died in 1806 at the age of 80.

George Wythe (pronounced “with”) was born in 1726 (the second son of three children) at Chesterville in what is now Hampton, Virginia. His father was Thomas Wythe, a planter who died soon after George’s birth. Wythe was reared by his mother, Margaret Walker Wythe, and probably received his early education from her. She taught him Latin and Greek, as well as reading, writing, and his numbers. Margaret Wythe instilled in her son a love of learning that served him all his life. He probably attended for a time a grammar school operated by the College of William and Mary. Even as an old man, Wythe took up new subjects, teaching himself Hebrew, for example.

Both parents died when Wythe was young, and he grew up under the guardianship of his older brother, Thomas. Thomas Wythe later sent George to Prince George County to read law under an uncle, Stephen Dewey, who lived near Petersburg. In 1746, at age 20, he joined the bar, moved to Spotsylvania County, and became associated with a lawyer there. Admitted to the colony’s General Court bar, Wythe first practiced in Elizabeth City County and later with the prominent lawyer Zachary Lewis. In 1747 he married his partner’s sister, Ann Lewis. Wythe was admitted to the York County bar January 16, 1748; his wife Ann died August 8 the same year. The young widower was appointed clerk to the Committee of Privileges and Elections of the House of Burgesses in October.

In 1754 Lt. Gov. Robert Dinwiddie appointed him as acting colonial attorney general, a position that he held for only a few months. The next year, Wythe’s brother died and he inherited the family estate. He chose, however, to live in Williamsburg in the house that his new father-in-law, an architect, designed and built for him and his wife, Elizabeth Taliaferro. They married in 1755, and their only child died in infancy.

 Wythe was admitted to the York County bar January 16, 1748; his wife Ann died August 8 the same year. The young widower was appointed clerk to the Committee of Privileges and Elections of the House of Burgesses in October.

At Williamsburg, Wythe immersed himself in further study of the classics and the law and achieved accreditation by the colonial supreme court. He served in the House of Burgesses from the mid-1750s until 1775, first as delegate and after 1769 as clerk. In 1768 he became mayor of Williamsburg, and the next year he sat on the board of visitors of the College of William and Mary. During these years he also directed the legal studies of young scholars, notably Thomas Jefferson. Wythe and Jefferson maintained a lifelong friendship, first as mentor and pupil and later as political allies.

“No man ever left behind him a character more venerated than George Wythe,” Thomas Jefferson wrote. “His virtue was of the purest tint; his integrity inflexible, and his justice exact; of warm patriotism, and, devoted as he was to liberty, and the natural and equal rights of man, he might truly be called the Cato of his country.” (Biography of George Wyatt)

Jefferson learned the law from Wythe, and, in a manner of speaking, Wythe’s signature on the Declaration was a teacher’s endorsement of his pupil’s finest brief. Among Wythe’s other law pupils were John Marshall, perhaps the greatest chief justice of the United States, and St. George Tucker. When Wythe was Virginia’s chancellor, Henry Clay was his assistant.

imgresWythe first exhibited revolutionary leanings in 1764 when Parliament hinted to the colonies that it might impose a stamp tax. By then an experienced legislator, he drafted for the House of Burgesses a remonstrance to Parliament so strident that his fellow delegates modified it before adoption. Wythe was one of the first to express the concept of separate nationhood for the colonies within the British empire.

An early opponent of the Stamp Act, Wythe was appointed to the Committee of Petition and Remonstrance in 1764 and drafted the remonstrance to the House of Commons that protested against the tax. Nevertheless, Wythe, like Peyton Randolph and others, opposed freshman burgess Patrick Henry’s stormy resolves against the act the next year, regarding the resolves as redundant and ill timed.

wytheDespite Virginia’s deepening disputes with the Crown, Wythe maintained close friendships with governors Francis Fauquier and Norborne Berkeley, baron de Botetourt.

When war broke out, Wythe volunteered for the army but was sent to the Continental Congress. Although present from 1775 through 1776, Wythe exerted little influence and signed the Declaration of Independence after the formal signing in August 1776. That same year, Wythe, Jefferson, and Edmund Pendleton undertook a 3-year project to revise Virginia’s legal code. In 1777 Wythe also presided as speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates.

Wythe’s real love was teaching. In 1779 Jefferson and other officials of the College of William and Mary created the first chair of law in a U.S. institution of higher learning and appointed Wythe to fill it. In that position, he educated America’s earliest college-trained lawyers, among them John Marshall and James Monroe. In 1787 he attended the Constitutional Convention but played an insignificant role. He left the proceedings early and did not sign the Constitution. The following year, however, he was one of the Federalist leaders at the Virginia ratifying convention. There he presided over the Committee of the Whole and offered the resolution for ratification.

gwythe_will

George Wythe’s will of 1806 leaving law books to Thomas Jefferson https://www.history. org/almanack/people/bios/ biowythe.cfm

In 1806, in his eightieth year, Wythe died at Richmond under mysterious circumstances, probably of poison administered by his grandnephew and heir, George Wythe Sweeney. Reflecting a lifelong aversion to slavery, Wythe emancipated his slaves in his will. Elizabeth Taliaferro Wythe died in 1787. Long a foe of slavery, George Wythe freed several slaves, including Lydia Broadnax, who chose to remain in Wythe’s service. He conveyed other slaves to Elizabeth’s Taliaferro relatives. Near the end of his life, Wythe wrote his will in favor of a grandnephew, George Wythe Sweeney, but also gave generous bequests to his former slaves Michael Brown and Lydia Broadnax. A ne’er-do-well, Sweeney forged checks against Wythe’s accounts to cover pressing debts. Hoping to avoid detection and inherit his great uncle’s entire estate, he resorted to murder. Strawberries or coffee seem to have been the vehicle by which Sweeney poisoned both his great uncle and Michael Brown, who died within days. Wythe endured two weeks of agony, but as he lay dying, Sweeney’s forgeries were discovered, and Wythe revised his will.

400px-WytheMonument

THIS TABLET IS DEDICATED TO MARK THE SITE WHERE LIE THE MORTAL REMAINS OF GEORGE WYTHE. BORN 1726—DIED 1806. JURIST AND STATESMAN, TEACHER OF RANDOLPH, JEFFERSON AND MARSHALL, FIRST PROFESSOR OF LAW IN THE UNITED STATES, FIRST VIRGINIA SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. ERECTED BY PATRIOTIC CITIZENS OF VIRGINIA, A. D. 1922.

His grave is in the yard of St. John’s Episcopal Church in Richmond.

Sources: 

America’s Founding Fathers 

American History from Revolution to Reconstruction and Beyond 

Colonial Williamsburg 

Monticello 

Signers of the Declaration of Independence 

Wythepedia: W&M Law Library

Posted in American History, British history, Declaration of Independence, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Great Britain, history, Living in the Regency, Regency era | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Traitor Tuesday ~ Celebrating 250 Years of the United States as a Separate Nation: George Wythe, a Signer of the Declaration of Independence Who Was Poisoned by His Heir