PRIMARY SOURCES Quarterly Report of Newly Processed Collections
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012
Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012 Jennifer E. Manning Information Research Specialist Colleen J. Shogan Deputy Director and Senior Specialist November 26, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL30261 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012 Summary Ninety-four women currently serve in the 112th Congress: 77 in the House (53 Democrats and 24 Republicans) and 17 in the Senate (12 Democrats and 5 Republicans). Ninety-two women were initially sworn in to the 112th Congress, two women Democratic House Members have since resigned, and four others have been elected. This number (94) is lower than the record number of 95 women who were initially elected to the 111th Congress. The first woman elected to Congress was Representative Jeannette Rankin (R-MT, 1917-1919, 1941-1943). The first woman to serve in the Senate was Rebecca Latimer Felton (D-GA). She was appointed in 1922 and served for only one day. A total of 278 women have served in Congress, 178 Democrats and 100 Republicans. Of these women, 239 (153 Democrats, 86 Republicans) have served only in the House of Representatives; 31 (19 Democrats, 12 Republicans) have served only in the Senate; and 8 (6 Democrats, 2 Republicans) have served in both houses. These figures include one non-voting Delegate each from Guam, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Currently serving Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) holds the record for length of service by a woman in Congress with 35 years (10 of which were spent in the House). -
Nineteenth Century Court Records
Nineteenth Century Court Records Subject Court Year Isaac H. Aldrich vs. Joseph B. Mackin & John Webb Supreme Court 1850 Jacob Smith vs. Jabez Felt et al Supreme Court 1852 Elizabeth Hinckley vs. Robert Porter & Nelson Clark Supreme Court 1852 John Steward Jr. vs Solon Peck et al Supreme Court 1852 Masterton Ure, et al vs. Allen S. Benson Supreme Court 1852 Hooper C. Prouty vs. Albany Schnectady RR Co. Supreme Court 1852 Erastus Crandall vs. John Van Allen et al Supreme Court 1853 Miranda Page vs. Marietta Peck et al Supreme Court 1853 Mary Smith et al vs. Electa Willett et al Supreme Court 1853 George W. Smith vs. William G. Wells Supreme Court 1853 John C. Strong vs. Aaron Lucas &J ohn S. Prouty Supreme Court 1853 Elijah Gregory vs. Alanson & Arnold Watkins Supreme Court 1853 George A. Gardner vs. Leman Garlinghouse Supreme Court 1853 John N. Whiting vs. Gideon D. Baggerly Supreme Court 1854 George Snyder vs. Selah Dickerson Supreme Court 1854 Hazaard A. Potter vs. John D. Stewart & Nelson Tunnicliffe Supreme Court 1854 William J. Lewis vs. Stephen Trickey Supreme Court 1855 Charles Webb vs. Henry Overman & Algernon Baxter Supreme Court 1855 Marvin Power vs. Jacob Ferguson Supreme Court 1855 Daniel Phelps vs. Clark Marlin et al Supreme Court 1855 Phinehas Prouty vs. David Barron et al Supreme Court 1855 John C. Lyon vs. Asahel & Sarah Gooding Supreme Court 1855 Frances Sutherland vs. Elizabeth Bannister Supreme Court 1855 Persis Baker for Jasper G. Baker, deceased Supreme Court 1855 Aaron Parmelee & David Wiggins vs. Selleck Dann Supreme Court 1855 Milo M. -
September 30, 2013
The Library of Virginia Quarterly Report of Newly-Available Archival Accessions July 1, 2013 – September 30, 2013 BIBLE RECORDS Barksdale-Baker Family. 5 leaves. Halifax County and Charlottesville, Virginia; and Alabama, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Texas, 1869–1942. Bible of Sallie Claiborne Barksdale Baker (1840–1916) and James Biscoe Baker (1834–1902). Bible printed in 1854. Other surnames mentioned: Dariotis, Rice, Smith, and Woodruff. Loaned for copying by Frederick W. Twyman III, Virginia Beach. (50900) Barksdale-Baker Family. 6 leaves. Halifax and Loudoun Counties, Virginia; and Alabama, New Jersey, and Texas, 1869–1936. Bible of James Biscoe Baker (1834–1902) and Sallie Claiborne Barksdale Baker (1840–1916). Includes Bible records (5 leaves) and an unidentified photograph of a young boy (1 leaf). Other surnames mentioned: Marceau, Rice, Smith, Twyman, and Woodruff. Loaned for copying by Frederick W. Twyman III, Virginia Beach. (50902) Barksdale-Baker Family. 1 leaf. Charlottesville, Virginia; and Alabama, New Jersey, and Texas, 1893–1936. Bible of Sallie Claiborne Barksdale Baker (1840–1916). Loaned for copying by Frederick W. Twyman III, Virginia Beach. (50903) Catlett Family. 4 leaves. Charlotte, Chesterfield, Fauquier, and Halifax Counties, and Lexington, Petersburg, Staunton, and Williamsburg, Virginia, 1823–1900. Bible of John Robert Catlett (1824–1861). Bible printed in 1848. Other surnames mentioned: Daniel, Henry, Swan, and Tutt. Gift of Anne Le Duc, Moorestown, New Jersey. (50939) Couger Family. 7 leaves, photocopies. Mississippi and Texas, 1873–1964. Bible of James Oscar Couger (d. 1914). Includes Bible records (6 leaves) and transcript (1 leaf) provided by donor. Other surnames mentioned: Caudill, Crabtree, Crawford, Logsdon, Riley, and Rogers. -
SR V15 Cutler.Pdf (1.135Mb)
WHISKEY, SOLDIERS, AND VOTING: WESTERN VIRGINIA ELECTIONS IN THE 1790s Appendix A 1789 Montgomery County Congressional Poll List The following poll list for the 1789 congressional election in Montgomery County appears in Book 8 of Montgomery County Deeds and Wills, page 139. Original spellings, which are often erroneous, are preserved. The list has been reordered alphabetically. Alternative spellings from the tax records appear in parentheses. Other alternative spellings appear in brackets. Asterisks indicate individuals for whom no tax record was found. 113 Votes from February 2, 1789: Andrew Moore Voters Daniel Colins* Thomas Copenefer (Copenheefer) Duncan Gullion (Gullian) Henry Helvie (Helvey) James McGavock John McNilt* Francis Preston* 114 John Preston George Hancock Voters George Adams John Adams Thomas Alfred (Alford) Philip Arambester (Armbrister) Chales (Charles) Baker Daniel Bangrer* William Bartlet (Berlet) William Brabston Andrew Brown John Brown Robert Buckhanan William Calfee (Calfey) William Calfee Jr. (Calfey) James Campbell George Carter Robert Carter* Stophel Catring (Stophell Kettering) Thadeus (Thaddeas) Cooley Ruebin Cooley* Robert Cowden John Craig Andrew Crocket (Crockett) James Crockett Joseph Crocket (Crockett) Richard Christia! (Crystal) William Christal (Crystal) Michel Cutney* [Courtney; Cotney] James Davies Robert Davies (Davis) George Davis Jr. George Davis Sr. John Davis* Joseph Davison (Davidson) Francis Day John Draper Jr. Charles Dyer (Dier) Joseph Eaton George Ewing Jr. John Ewing Samuel Ewing Joseph -
William Preston and the Revolutionary Settlement
Journal of Backcountry Studies EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the third and last installment of the author’s 1990 University of Maryland dissertation, directed by Professor Emory Evans, to be republished in JBS. Dr. Osborn is President of Pacific Union College. William Preston and the Revolutionary Settlement BY RICHARD OSBORN Patriot (1775-1778) Revolutions ultimately conclude with a large scale resolution in the major political, social, and economic issues raised by the upheaval. During the final two years of the American Revolution, William Preston struggled to anticipate and participate in the emerging American regime. For Preston, the American Revolution involved two challenges--Indians and Loyalists. The outcome of his struggles with both groups would help determine the results of the Revolution in Virginia. If Preston could keep the various Indian tribes subdued with minimal help from the rest of Virginia, then more Virginians would be free to join the American armies fighting the English. But if he was unsuccessful, Virginia would have to divert resources and manpower away from the broader colonial effort to its own protection. The other challenge represented an internal one. A large number of Loyalist neighbors continually tested Preston's abilities to forge a unified government on the frontier which could, in turn, challenge the Indians effectivel y and the British, if they brought the war to Virginia. In these struggles, he even had to prove he was a Patriot. Preston clearly placed his allegiance with the revolutionary movement when he joined with other freeholders from Fincastle County on January 20, 1775 to organize their local county committee in response to requests by the Continental Congress that such committees be established. -
Patrick Henry
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY PATRICK HENRY: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF HARMONIZED RELIGIOUS TENSIONS A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE HISTORY DEPARTMENT IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN HISTORY BY KATIE MARGUERITE KITCHENS LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA APRIL 1, 2010 Patrick Henry: The Significance of Harmonized Religious Tensions By Katie Marguerite Kitchens, MA Liberty University, 2010 SUPERVISOR: Samuel Smith This study explores the complex religious influences shaping Patrick Henry’s belief system. It is common knowledge that he was an Anglican, yet friendly and cooperative with Virginia Presbyterians. However, historians have yet to go beyond those general categories to the specific strains of Presbyterianism and Anglicanism which Henry uniquely harmonized into a unified belief system. Henry displayed a moderate, Latitudinarian, type of Anglicanism. Unlike many other Founders, his experiences with a specific strain of Presbyterianism confirmed and cooperated with these Anglican commitments. His Presbyterian influences could also be described as moderate, and latitudinarian in a more general sense. These religious strains worked to build a distinct religious outlook characterized by a respect for legitimate authority, whether civil, social, or religious. This study goes further to show the relevance of this distinct religious outlook for understanding Henry’s political stances. Henry’s sometimes seemingly erratic political principles cannot be understood in isolation from the wider context of his religious background. Uniquely harmonized -
Litigating the Lash: Quaker Emancipator Robert Pleasants, the Law
LITIGATING THE LASH: QUAKER EMANCIPATOR ROBERT PLEASANTS, THE LAW OF SLAVERY, AND THE MEANING OF MANUMISSION IN REVOLUTIONARY AND EARLY NATIONAL VIRGINIA By William Fernandez Hardin Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Vanderbilt University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in History May, 2013 Nashville, Tennessee Approved: Richard J.M. Blackett David L. Carlton Daniel J. Sharfstein Daniel H. Usner Copyright © by William Fernandez Hardin All Rights Reserved To Jessica, for loving a grumpy man, and to Ainsley, for making him less grumpy. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the Virginia Historical Society and the John D. Rockefeller Jr. Library at Colonial Williamsburg for their support in the research of this dissertation—both collections proved invaluable and the staff helped a fledging graduate student navigate unfamiliar terrain. I would also like to thank the Folger Institute’s Center for the History of British Political Thought in Washington D.C. and my fellow participants in the “Changing Conceptions of Property” seminar for the opportunity to spend a summer discussing the relationship between English property law and colonial governance. I would also like to thank the Vanderbilt history department for its generous support. It has been a pleasure to learn the craft from such a distinguished group of historians. Professors Michael Bess, Bill Caferro, Katie Crawford, Dennis Dickerson, and Elizabeth Lunbeck, each—in vastly different ways—helped me discover new ways of considering the past and the people who lived there and I thank them for it. I would also like to thank the Vanderbilt Americanist Works-in-Progress Seminar for graciously allowing me to present my work and the invaluable comments and critiques provided. -
G:\Trimble Families, July 22, 1997.Wpd
Trimble Families a Partial Listing of the Descendants of Some Colonial Families Revised Eugene Earl Trimble July 22, 1997 1 PREFACE This Trimble record deals primarily with the ancestral line of the writer and covers the period from the time of arrival of James Trimble (or Turnbull; born ca. 1705; died 1767) in America which may have been prior to March 11, 1734, until in most instances about 1850. Some few lines are, however, brought up to the present. The main purpose of this account is to present the earliest generations. With the census records from 1850 on, enumerating each individual, it is much easier to trace ancestors and descendants. Any one who has researched a family during the l700's knows how limited the available data are and how exceeding difficult the task is. One inevitably reaches the point where the search becomes more conjecture than fact, but man is an inquisitive creature and the lure of the unknown is irresistible. No attempt has been made to give all possible references. For this Trimble line and other Trimble lines the reader is referred to the 62 page manuscript on the Trimble Family by James Augustus LeConte (born Adairsville, Ga., July 19, 1870; died Atlanta, Ga., July 18, 1941) whose papers are at the University of Georgia at Athens; the Trimble Family research located in the Manuscript Department of The University of Virginia, by Kelley Walker Trimble (born Feb. 21, 1884; died Route l, Staunton, Va., after Feb. 12, 1955); the Trimble and related research and writings of Mrs. Jerome A. -
The Present Authors Gave a Sketch of Letitia Preston Floyd
Letitia Preston Floyd's "My Dear Rush" Letter Jim Glanville and Ryan Mays Copyright 2016 Introduction The present authors gave a sketch of Letitia Preston Floyd (1779- 1852) in the previous volume of the SmithfieldReview.! As background for the reader of this article, it may be brieflyreiterated that Letitia Preston Floyd was born on the Virginia frontier in the newly created Montgomery County. Her parents were the Scotch-Irish immigrant William Preston of Augusta County and Susanna Smith of Hanover County. In 1804 she married John Floyd in Kentucky and went on to become a plantation owner, the mother of twelve children (seven of whom survived to adulthood and marriage), and the First Lady of Virginia. The "My Dear Rush" letter is a 32-page manuscript writtenby Mrs. Floyd dated February 22, 1843. The authors of this article discovered the original copy of this document in January 2014 (after its being closely held within the Preston family for 161 years and ten furtheryears in a Smithfield closet) in a storage box at the Smithfield Plantation.2 The manuscript is in the form of a letter to her son Benjamin Rush Floyd and because of its opening salutation is referred to as the "My Dear Rush" letter. The letter was written at her home on the Cavan estate in Burke's Garden in Tazewell County, Virginia, at the instigation of the historian Lyman Draper. 3 The letter is in Mrs. Floyd's own hand and records many things that can be found nowhere else in the historical record. It is also a crucial document for understanding the European settling of southwest Virginia that was spearheaded by her great-uncle James Patton and her father William Preston. -
Antislavery Violence and Secession, October 1859
ANTISLAVERY VIOLENCE AND SECESSION, OCTOBER 1859 – APRIL 1861 by DAVID JONATHAN WHITE GEORGE C. RABLE, COMMITTEE CHAIR LAWRENCE F. KOHL KARI FREDERICKSON HAROLD SELESKY DIANNE BRAGG A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2017 Copyright David Jonathan White 2017 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the collapse of southern Unionism between October 1859 and April 1861. This study argues that a series of events of violent antislavery and southern perceptions of northern support for them caused white southerners to rethink the value of the Union and their place in it. John Brown’s raid at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, and northern expressions of personal support for Brown brought the Union into question in white southern eyes. White southerners were shocked when Republican governors in northern states acted to protect members of John Brown’s organization from prosecution in Virginia. Southern states invested large sums of money in their militia forces, and explored laws to control potentially dangerous populations such as northern travelling salesmen, whites “tampering” with slaves, and free African-Americans. Many Republicans endorsed a book by Hinton Rowan Helper which southerners believed encouraged antislavery violence and a Senate committee investigated whether an antislavery conspiracy had existed before Harpers Ferry. In the summer of 1860, a series of unexplained fires in Texas exacerbated white southern fear. As the presidential election approached in 1860, white southerners hoped for northern voters to repudiate the Republicans. When northern voters did not, white southerners generally rejected the Union. -
To Live and Die in Dixie: Robert E. Lee and Confederate Nationalism Jacob A
Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR® Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Honors College at WKU Projects 2010 To Live and Die in Dixie: Robert E. Lee and Confederate Nationalism Jacob A. Glover Western Kentucky University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Glover, Jacob A., "To Live and Die in Dixie: Robert E. Lee and Confederate Nationalism" (2010). Honors College Capstone Experience/ Thesis Projects. Paper 267. http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/267 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors College Capstone Experience/ Thesis Projects by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Copyright by Jacob A. Glover 2010 ABSTRACT Robert E. Lee is undeniably one of the most revered figures in American history, and yet despite the adoration awarded to the man over the years, surprisingly little scholarly research has dedicated itself to an inquiry into his nationalistic leanings during the four most important years of his life—the Civil War. In fact, Lee was a dedicated Confederate nationalist during his time in service to the Confederacy, and he remained so for the rest of his life, even after his surrender at Appomattox and the taking of an oath to regain his United States citizenship. Lee identified strongly with a Southern view of antebellum events, and his time in the Confederate army hardened him to the notion that the only practical reason for waging the Civil War was the establishment of an independent Southern nation. -
Albemarle County in Virginia
^^m ITD ^ ^/-^7^ Digitized by tine Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.arGhive.org/details/albemarlecountyiOOwood ALBEMARLE COUNTY IN VIIIGIMIA Giving some account of wHat it -was by nature, of \srHat it was made by man, and of some of tbe men wHo made it. By Rev. Edgar Woods " It is a solemn and to\acKing reflection, perpetually recurring. oy tHe -weaKness and insignificance of man, tHat -wKile His generations pass a-way into oblivion, -with all tKeir toils and ambitions, nature Holds on Her unvarying course, and pours out Her streams and rene-ws Her forests -witH undecaying activity, regardless of tHe fate of Her proud and perisHable Sovereign.**—^e/frey. E.NEW YORK .Lie LIBRARY rs526390 Copyright 1901 by Edgar Woods. • -• THE MicHiE Company, Printers, Charlottesville, Va. 1901. PREFACE. An examination of the records of the county for some in- formation, awakened curiosity in regard to its early settle- ment, and gradually led to a more extensive search. The fruits of this labor, it was thought, might be worthy of notice, and productive of pleasure, on a wider scale. There is a strong desire in most men to know who were their forefathers, whence they came, where they lived, and how they were occupied during their earthly sojourn. This desire is natural, apart from the requirements of business, or the promptings of vanity. The same inquisitiveness is felt in regard to places. Who first entered the farms that checker the surrounding landscape, cut down the forests that once covered it, and built the habitations scattered over its bosom? With the young, who are absorbed in the engagements of the present and the hopes of the future, this feeling may not act with much energy ; but as they advance in life, their thoughts turn back with growing persistency to the past, and they begin to start questions which perhaps there is no means of answering.