Bryan on Tilghman

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Bryan on Tilghman 32 Maryland Historical Magazine “And can you think my faith will alter, By tarring, whipping, or the halter?” From Canto III, John Trumbull, M’Fingal, or, A Tory’s Day of Judgement: A Modern Epic Poem in Four Cantos. (Baltimore: J. Peters, 1816.) 33 “The Horrors of Civil War”: The Tilghman Family in the American Revolution Jennifer A. Bryan n April 28, 1775, James Tilghman wrote to a correspondent in England about the current state of American affairs. A little more than a week Oearlier, colonial militia and British regulars had clashed at Lexington and Concord. James mentioned the upcoming meeting of the Second Continental Congress, expressing his hope that “the horrors of civil War now more clearly seen” would induce the delegates to pursue conciliatory measures. In another letter, he lamented the unwillingness of either Britain or America to make conces- sions, exclaiming, “Strange Perverseness! That a Point of honour should stand in competition with the horrible Effects of Civil War!”1 Like many families caught up in that turbulent era, the Tilghmans of Mary- land found themselves divided over what course to take in the struggle with Brit- ain. Historian Paul Smith has posited that approximately 500,000 Americans, almost twenty per cent of the white population, remained loyal to George III. Of those 500,000, an estimated 80,000 persons emigrated during the course of the war to other parts of the British empire, a figure greater than the number of French emigrés during the French Revolution. About 19,000 colonists took up arms against their countrymen, serving in such units as the Pennsylvania Loyalists, the Queen’s Rangers, and the Loyal American Regiment.2 Whatever the exact number of “To- ries,” there were enough loyal colonists to turn the rebellion into a civil war. In her history of the American Revolution, published in 1805, Mercy Otis Warren wrote, “so intermixed and blended were persons, families, and parties of different political opinions, that it was not easy to distinguish . the royalists from the whigs.”3 James Tilghman would neither actively support the revolution- aries nor oppose them. His brother Matthew served as a delegate to the First and Second Continental Congresses and chaired seven of Maryland’s nine Provincial Conventions. Edward Tilghman, another brother, embraced independence. His son Edward Tilghman Jr. fought against the British at the Battle of Long Island in 1776, but attempted to avoid swearing allegiance to the Patriot cause. His cousin and James’s eldest son Tench was one of George Washington’s aides-de-camp. Washington chose Tench to deliver the news of the victory at Yorktown to Con- The author is Head of Special Collections & Archives at the Nimitz Library, U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis. 34 Maryland Historical Magazine James Tilghman (1716–1793), John Hesselius painted this por- trait in the 1760s, at the pinnacle of James’s career. (Maryland His- torical Society.) gress. Philemon, Tench’s brother, joined the British navy in 1777. Other Tilghmans actively worked in Patriot politics.4 James Tilghman’s correspondence with his sons, relatives, friends, acquaintan- ces, and other connections provides a rare opportunity to study the range of alle- giances within one family during the Revolutionary War. James never disowned his sons Tench or Philemon for taking active roles in the conflict, telling them that he would support them as long as they behaved honorably. As he wrote to Philemon, “I hope and believe you acted upon Principle and therefore I cannot abandon you or withdraw my affection unless I should have the misfortune to hear that you have departed from the principles of virtue and honor.”5 Like their father, James’s other sons chose to remain neutral. Richard left America for good in 1776 and found employment with the East India Company, James Jr. gave up his mercantile career to manage his father’s farms, and William quietly pursued his legal studies. James’s youngest son Thomas Ringgold was just eleven years old in 1776, too young to be actively involved in the war. James’s daughters—Anna Maria, Elizabeth, Mary, and Henrietta Maria—worried about their brothers and father, but refrained from expressing any political opinions. “I shall ever regret his [Tench] differing in senti- ment from you on such an important occasion as the present dispute but as I do not understand the subject I shal[l] conclude,” wrote Anna Maria to her father.6 The Tilghmans provide a contemporary perspective, from several vantage points, on the imperial crisis. Historians have long debated the causes of the American Revolution. In the early twentieth century, Carl Becker put forth the supposition that the colonists were fighting for who should rule at home as well as The Tilghman Family in the American Revolution 35 “home rule.” Numerous scholars have followed Becker’s line of reasoning with notable permutations and variations, searching for the kinds of internal conflicts and social upheaval that gave rise to the French Revolution. A contrary view- point holds that the Revolution was primarily a constitutional and political struggle, with very little, if any, social impact—a fight to preserve rather than alter the existing social structure. Historians in this camp tend to emphasize the conservative nature of the rebellion, and see it as a struggle over concepts of lib- erty and power, virtue and corruption. Alternatively, there are scholars who view economics as the determining factor, the colonies having reached a point in their development where the British imperial system no longer benefited them. Many recent studies of the period have focused on manners, polite discourse, gentility, sociability, political ritual, and the public sphere, to the point that the war itself often fades into the background. Historian Gordon Wood has argued that the American Revolution “was as radical and social as any revolution in history, but it was radical and social in a very special eighteenth-century sense.” For Wood, the Revolution’s radical nature was not located in class conflict, in poor versus rich, in city versus country, in radicals versus conservatives, but in the transformation of a monarchical society into a democratic one. What the Tilghmans reveal through their correspondence bolsters Wood’s thesis. To them, the principal cause of the rebellion was a political and constitutional crisis, and their writings show how that crisis unleashed forces that transformed a hierar- chical world into a democratic one. 7 The British empire in which James Tilghman, his grandparents, parents, sib- lings, and children had been born was one in which men were either gentlemen or commoners. Gentlemen possessed land, wealth, learning, and leisure; everyone else had to work for their livings. Within this grand division were numerous gra- dations of rank: yeomen, merchants, tradesmen, and artisans as well as peers, bishops, baronets, and “mere” gentlemen all had their appropriate places in the “great chain of being.” In eighteenth-century America, where there was no titled aristocracy, gentle status rested on reputation. All the components of gentility— land, affluence, education, religion, and breeding—had to be present, but a fam- ily was only of the first rank if society accorded it that standing. The Tilghmans belonged to that select group of American clans that included the Washingtons, Lees, Livingstons, and Shippens. They were major landholders in Kent, Queen Anne’s and Talbot counties, held local and provincial offices, sat on parish ves- tries, and engaged in trade—all hallmarks of the Chesapeake gentry. By the fourth generation in Maryland, they had established blood or marriage ties to most of the landed families on the Eastern Shore, including the Lloyds, Goldsboroughs, Earles, Chamberlaines, and Hollydays. Their kinship network extended to Phila- delphia, including the Chews, Francises, Willings, and Mifflins.8 Lineage was an important component of gentility and family identity. The Tilghmans were de- 36 Maryland Historical Magazine scended from a minor gentry family who had lived in Kent in the southeast of England for more than 500 years. Their coat of arms dated to at least 1468, per- haps earlier. James’s grandparents Richard and Mary Foxley Tilghman arrived in Maryland in 1662 with their two children and sixteen indentured servants during the boom period in the tobacco trade. Lord Baltimore had granted Richard a patent to a thousand-acre tract, Canterbury Manor, near present-day Easton, but he settled at “Tilghman’s Hermitage” on the Chester River. Governor Charles Calvert appointed him sheriff of Talbot County in 1669. By his death in 1676, Richard had accumulated 3,350 acres and an estate worth more than £800 ster- ling, placing him in the top rank of Chesapeake society. His son and namesake Richard married Anna Maria Lloyd in 1700, thus allying the Tilghmans to one of Maryland’s wealthiest families. Richard held numerous offices, among them jus- tice of the peace for Talbot and Queen Anne’s counties, vestryman of St. Paul’s parish, sheriff of Queen Anne’s County, member of the Lower House of Assembly for Talbot County, member of the Upper House, Councillor, justice of the Pro- vincial Court, and Chancellor of Maryland. He “dyed in what we call in this Country good circumstances.”9 James Tilghman, born on December 6, 1716, was the eighth of Richard and Anna Maria’s nine children. Twenty-two at the time of his father’s death in 1739, he inherited about 2,500 acres. He studied law with Tench Francis and married Francis’s daughter Anne on September 30, 1743. The couple resided at “Fausley,” Francis’s former plantation in Talbot County. James sat in the Lower House of Assembly for Talbot County in 1762, where he led the anti-proprietary party against the Supply Bill, legisation to raise revenue for the colony’s defense.
Recommended publications
  • Women and the Law in Colonial Maryland, 1648-1715 Monica C
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects "Justice Without Partiality": Women and the Law in Colonial Maryland, 1648-1715 Monica C. Witkowski Marquette University Recommended Citation Witkowski, Monica C., ""Justice Without Partiality": Women and the Law in Colonial Maryland, 1648-1715" (2010). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 27. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/27 “JUSTICE WITHOUT PARTIALITY”: WOMEN AND THE LAW IN COLONIAL MARYLAND, 1648-1715 by Monica C. Witkowski A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2010 ABSTRACT “JUSTICE WITHOUT PARTIALITY”: WOMEN AND THE LAW IN COLONIAL MARYLAND, 1648-1715 Monica C. Witkowski Marquette University, 2010 What was the legal status of women in early colonial Maryland? This is the central question answered by this dissertation. Women, as exemplified through a series of case studies, understood the law and interacted with the nascent Maryland legal system. Each of the cases in the following chapters is slightly different. Each case examined in this dissertation illustrates how much independent legal agency women in the colony demonstrated. Throughout the seventeenth century, Maryland women appeared before the colony’s Provincial and county courts as witnesses, plaintiffs, defendants, and attorneys in criminal and civil trials. Women further entered their personal cattle marks, claimed land, and sued other colonists. This study asserts that they improved their social standing through these interactions with the courts. By exerting this much legal knowledge, they created an important place for themselves in Maryland society. Historians have begun to question the interpretation that Southern women were restricted to the home as housewives and mothers.
    [Show full text]
  • Documenting the University of Pennsylvania's Connection to Slavery
    Documenting the University of Pennsylvania’s Connection to Slavery Clay Scott Graubard The University of Pennsylvania, Class of 2019 April 19, 2018 © 2018 CLAY SCOTT GRAUBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED DOCUMENTING PENN’S CONNECTION TO SLAVERY 1 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 2 OVERVIEW 3 LABOR AND CONSTRUCTION 4 PRIMER ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE COLLEGE AND ACADEMY OF PHILADELPHIA 5 EBENEZER KINNERSLEY (1711 – 1778) 7 ROBERT SMITH (1722 – 1777) 9 THOMAS LEECH (1685 – 1762) 11 BENJAMIN LOXLEY (1720 – 1801) 13 JOHN COATS (FL. 1719) 13 OTHERS 13 LABOR AND CONSTRUCTION CONCLUSION 15 FINANCIAL ASPECTS 17 WEST INDIES FUNDRAISING 18 SOUTH CAROLINA FUNDRAISING 25 TRUSTEES OF THE COLLEGE AND ACADEMY OF PHILADELPHIA 31 WILLIAM ALLEN (1704 – 1780) AND JOSEPH TURNER (1701 – 1783): FOUNDERS AND TRUSTEES 31 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN (1706 – 1790): FOUNDER, PRESIDENT, AND TRUSTEE 32 EDWARD SHIPPEN (1729 – 1806): TREASURER OF THE TRUSTEES AND TRUSTEE 33 BENJAMIN CHEW SR. (1722 – 1810): TRUSTEE 34 WILLIAM SHIPPEN (1712 – 1801): FOUNDER AND TRUSTEE 35 JAMES TILGHMAN (1716 – 1793): TRUSTEE 35 NOTE REGARDING THE TRUSTEES 36 FINANCIAL ASPECTS CONCLUSION 37 CONCLUSION 39 THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA’S CONNECTION TO SLAVERY 40 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 42 BIBLIOGRAPHY 43 DOCUMENTING PENN’S CONNECTION TO SLAVERY 2 INTRODUCTION DOCUMENTING PENN’S CONNECTION TO SLAVERY 3 Overview The goal of this paper is to present the facts regarding the University of Pennsylvania’s (then the College and Academy of Philadelphia) significant connections to slavery and the slave trade. The first section of the paper will cover the construction and operation of the College and Academy in the early years. As slavery was integral to the economy of British North America, to fully understand the University’s connection to slavery the second section will cover the financial aspects of the College and Academy, its Trustees, and its fundraising.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4-5: Study Focus • Essay Format Essential Questions 9
    Chapter 4-5: Study Focus • Essay Format Essential Questions 9. What were The Coercive Acts of 19. What were the central 1774 (the Intolerable Acts) and why ideas and grievances expressed Content Standard 1: The student were they implemented? will analyze the foundations of in the Declaration of Indepen- dence? the United States by examining 10. Why was the First Continental the causes, events, and ideolo- Congress formed? gies which led to the American 20. How did John Locke‛s the- Revolution. ory of natural rights infl uence 11. What happened at the Battles of the Declaration of Indepen- Lexington and Concord and what was dence? 1. What were the political and eco- the impact on colonial resistance? nomic consequences of the French and Indian War on the 13 colo- 21. What is the concept of the 12. What was the purpose of Patrick social contract? nies? Henry‛s Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death speech? 2. What were the British imperial 22. What are the main ideals policies of requiring the colonies to 13. What was the purpose of and established in the Declaration pay a share of the costs of defend- main arguments made by Thomas of Independence? ing the British Empire? Paine‛s pamphlet Common Sense? 23. What were the contribu- 3. What the Albany Plan of Union? 14. What were the points of views tions of Thomas Jefferson of the Patriots and the Loyalists and the Committee of Five in 4. What was the signifi cance of the about independence? drafting the Declaration of Proclamation of 1763? Independence.
    [Show full text]
  • Howard County
    A. Raul Delerme, Director Howard County [email protected] RECREATION & PARKS Phone: 410-313-4640 Fax: 410-313-1699 7120 Oakland Mills Road, Columbia, Maryland 21046 www.howardcountymd.gov/rapVoicefRelay: 410-31 3 -7275 August 25, 2020 Ms. Margaret Lashar ProgramOpen SpaceAdministrator Departmentof Natural Resources 580 Taylor Avenue, E-4 Annapolis, MD 21401 RE: Howard County FY2021 Annual Program for Program Open Space Assistance Dear Ms. Lashar: Enclosed is the FY2021 Howard County Annual Program for Program Open Space funding. This Annual Program is in accordance with our 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan and the Plan Howard 2030 General Plan. A narrativeis attachedto addressour projectselection process, as well asthe compatibility of our projects to the Eight Visions, the Plan Howard 2030 General Plan, the 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan, and the Smart Growth initiatives. We have listed projects to fully encumber all available funds. Should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, au Chief lg and Construction A. Raul Delerme Director Enclosure CC: Calvin Ball, County Executive Delegate Warren E. Miller DelegateTrent M. Kittleman DelegateCourtney Watson DelegateEric D. Ebersole DelegateTerri L. Hill DelegateJessica Feldmark Delegate Vanessa E. Atterbeary DelegateShane E. Pendergrass DelegateJen Tenasa SenatorKatie Fry Hester SenatorClarence K. Lam Senator Guy J. Guzzone Margaret Lashar,Maryland Department of Natural Resources Debbie Herr Cornwell, Maryland Department of Planning Howard County Executive Calvin Ball w\vw.howardcountymd.gov A. Raul Delerme, Director Howard County rdelerme@how ardcountymd.gov RECREATION & PARKS Phone: 410-313-4640 Fax: 410-313-1699 7120 Oakland Mills Road, Columbia, Maryland 21046 www.howardcountymd.gov/rapVoice/Relay: 410-31 3 -7275 August 25, 2020 Debbie Herr Cornwell, PLA, ASLA Maryland Department of Planning 301 West Preston Street, Suite 1101 Baltimore, MD 21201 RE: Howard County FY2021 Annual Program for Program Open Space Assistance Dear Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Ratification of the Constitution in Maryland
    Introduction to the Ratification of the Constitution in Maryland Founding the Proprietary Colony The founding and establishment of the propriety government of Maryland was the product of competing factors—political, commercial, social, and religious. It was intertwined with the history of one family, the Calverts, who were well established among the Yorkshire gentry and whose Catholic sympathies were widely known. George Calvert had been a favorite of the Stuart king, James I. In 1625, following a noteworthy career in politics, including periods as clerk of the Privy Council, member of Parliament, special emissary abroad of the king, and a principal secretary of state, Calvert openly declared his Catholicism. This declaration closed any future possibility of public office for him. Shortly thereafter, James elevated Calvert to the Irish peerage as the baron of Baltimore. Calvert’s absence from public office afforded him an opportunity to pursue his interests in overseas colonization. Calvert appealed to Charles I, son of James, for a land grant.1 Calvert’s appeal was honored, but he did not live to see a charter issued. In 1632, Charles granted a proprietary charter to Cecil Calvert, George’s son and the second baron of Baltimore, making him Maryland’s first proprietor. Maryland’s charter was the first long-lasting one of its kind to be issued among the thirteen mainland British American colonies. Proprietorships represented a real share in the king’s authority. They extended unusual power. Maryland’s charter, which constituted Calvert and his heirs as “the true and absolute Lords and Proprietaries of the Region,” might have been “the best example of a sweeping grant of power to a proprietor.” Proprietors could award land grants, confer titles, and establish courts, which included the prerogative of hearing appeals.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 7-1: the Revolution Begins
    Name: Date: Chapter 7 Study Guide Section 7-1: The Revolution Begins Fill in the blanks: 1. The First Continental Congress was a meeting of delegates from various colonies in September of 1774 to discuss the ongoing crisis with Britain. 2. The Minutemen were members of the Massachusetts militia that were considered ready to fight at a moment’s notice. 3. General Thomas Gage was the British military governor of Massachusetts, and ordered the seizure of the militia’s weapons, ammunition, and supplies at Concord. 4. The towns of Lexington and Concord saw the first fighting of the American Revolution. 5. The “Shot heard ‘round the world” was the nickname given to the first shot of the American Revolution. 6. Americans (and others) referred to British soldiers as Redcoats because of their brightly colored uniforms. 7. At the Second Continental Congress, colonial delegates voted to send the Olive Branch Petition to King George III and created an army led by George Washington. 8. The Continental Congress created the Continental Army to defend the colonies against British aggression. 9. George Washington took command of this army at the request of the Continental Congress. 10. The Continental Congress chose to send the Olive Branch Petition to King George III and Parliament, reiterating their desire for a peaceful resolution to the crisis. 11. Siege is a military term that means to surround a city or fortress with the goal of forcing the inhabitants to surrender due to a lack of supplies. 12. Benedict Arnold and Ethan Allan captured Fort Ticonderoga in New York, allowing George Washington to obtain much needed supplies and weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • John Adams, Political Moderation, and the 1820 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention: a Reappraisal.”
    The Historical Journal of Massachusetts “John Adams, Political Moderation, and the 1820 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention: A Reappraisal.” Author: Arthur Scherr Source: Historical Journal of Massachusetts, Volume 46, No. 1, Winter 2018, pp. 114-159. Published by: Institute for Massachusetts Studies and Westfield State University You may use content in this archive for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the Historical Journal of Massachusetts regarding any further use of this work: [email protected] Funding for digitization of issues was provided through a generous grant from MassHumanities. Some digitized versions of the articles have been reformatted from their original, published appearance. When citing, please give the original print source (volume/number/date) but add "retrieved from HJM's online archive at http://www.westfield.ma.edu/historical-journal/. 114 Historical Journal of Massachusetts • Winter 2018 John Adams Portrait by Gilbert Stuart, c. 1815 115 John Adams, Political Moderation, and the 1820 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention: A Reappraisal ARTHUR SCHERR Editor's Introduction: The history of religious freedom in Massachusetts is long and contentious. In 1833, Massachusetts was the last state in the nation to “disestablish” taxation and state support for churches.1 What, if any, impact did John Adams have on this process of liberalization? What were Adams’ views on religious freedom and how did they change over time? In this intriguing article Dr. Arthur Scherr traces the evolution, or lack thereof, in Adams’ views on religious freedom from the writing of the original 1780 Massachusetts Constitution to its revision in 1820. He carefully examines contradictory primary and secondary sources and seeks to set the record straight, arguing that there are many unsupported myths and misconceptions about Adams’ role at the 1820 convention.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Revolution
    The American Revolution The American Revolution Theme One: When hostilities began in 1775, the colonists were still fighting for their rights as English citizens within the empire, but in 1776 they declared their independence, based on a proclamation of universal, “self-evident” truths. Review! Long-Term Causes • French & Indian War; British replacement of Salutary Neglect with Parliamentary Sovereignty • Taxation policies (Grenville & Townshend Acts); • Conflicts (Boston Massacre & Tea Party, Intolerable Acts, Lexington & Concord) • Spark: Common Sense & Declaration of Independence Second Continental Congress (May, 1775) All 13 colonies were present -- Sought the redress of their grievances, NOT independence Philadelphia State House (Independence Hall) Most significant acts: 1. Agreed to wage war against Britain 2. Appointed George Washington as leader of the Continental Army Declaration of the Causes & Necessity of Taking up Arms, 1775 1. Drafted a 2nd set of grievances to the King & British People 2. Made measures to raise money and create an army & navy Olive Branch Petition -- Moderates in Congress, (e.g. John Dickinson) sought to prevent a full- scale war by pledging loyalty to the King but directly appealing to him to repeal the “Intolerable Acts.” Early American Victories A. Ticonderoga and Crown Point (May 1775) (Ethan Allen-Vt, Benedict Arnold-Ct B. Bunker Hill (June 1775) -- Seen as American victory; bloodiest battle of the war -- Britain abandoned Boston and focused on New York In response, King George declared the colonies in rebellion (in effect, a declaration of war) 1.18,000 Hessians were hired to support British forces in the war against the colonies. 2. Colonials were horrified Americans failed in their invasion of Canada (a successful failure-postponed British offensive) The Declaration of Independence A.
    [Show full text]
  • George Washington Papers, Series 3, Subseries 3A, Varick Transcripts, Letterbook 6
    George Washington Papers, Series 3, Subseries 3A, Varick Transcripts, Letterbook 6 To THE PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS Head Quarters, New Windsor, March 1, 1781. Sir: The inclosed memorial of Colo. Hazen was this day put into my hands. Many of the matters mentioned in it are better known to Congress than to myself. The whole are so fully stated, as to speak for themselves, and require only the determination of Congress. The case of the Canadian Officers and Soldiers I know to be peculiarly distressing and truly entitled to redress, if the means are to be obtained. The Regiment, not being appropriated to any State, must soon dwindle into nothing, unless some effectual mode can be devised for recruiting it. Colo. Hazens pretensions to promotion seems to me to have weight, but how far they ought to be admitted, the general principles which Congress mean to adopt for the regulation of this important point will best decide. In justice to Colo. Hazen, I must testify, that he has always appeared to me a sensible, 83 spirited and attentive Officer. I have the honor etc. To THE PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS Head Quarters, New Windsor, March 1, 1781. Sir: On opening the inclosed, I found it intended for 83. In the writing of Tench Tilghman. The letter was read in Congress on March 23 and referred to Artemas Ward, John Sullivan, and Isaac Motte. your Excellency, though addressed to me. I intend setting out in the morning for Newport to confer with the French General and Admiral upon the operations of the ensuing Campaign.
    [Show full text]
  • May 8–11, 2017
    EDUCATION INSPIRATION CELEBRATION May 8–11, 2017 GRAND RAPIDS, educationRALL•inspiration •celebrYation MICHIGAN AGENDA WELCOME TO RIVER RALLY 2017! MONDAY, MAY 8TH 6:00pm–8:00pm River Rally 2017 Welcome & Opening Reception Ambassador Ballroom Welcome to River Rally 2017 in fabulous Grand Rapids, Michigan! Your job is to get as much from this event as possible—new knowledge, new friends, new ideas, and new TH TUESDAY, MAY 9 energy to bring back to your work to safeguard the health of our nation’s rivers and the 7:30am–9:00am Breakfast & Keynote Speaker Ambassador Ballroom promise of affordable clean water for all. 9:30am–11:00am Workshops River Rally 2017 arrives at a time when the social and political context of water is 11:30am–12:45pm Lunch & Plenary Panel Ambassador Ballroom changing. We have seen clearly that not only are the benefits of water not shared 1:00pm–2:30pm Workshops equitably, but the harm caused by floods, droughts, water contamination, and climate 3:00pm–4:30pm Workshops change are disproportionately experienced by low income communities, people of color, NICOLE SILK 6:30pm–8:00pm Dinner On-Your-Own and indigenous and tribal communities. 8:00pm–10:30pm Talent Show & Open Mic Pantlind Ballroom Rather than turning a blind eye to this reality, we are intentionally bringing full focus to this changing context through our program this year. We believe that a different path forward is possible by working together across WEDNESDAY, MAY 10TH political, economic, social, and other divisions, though only if we fully understand where we stand today.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland's Lower Choptank River Cultural Resource Inventory
    Maryland’s Lower Choptank River Cultural Resource Inventory by Ralph E. Eshelman and Carl W. Scheffel, Jr. “So long as the tides shall ebb and flow in Choptank River.” From Philemon Downes will, Hillsboro, circa 1796 U.S. Geological Survey Quadrangle 7.5 Minute Topographic maps covering the Lower Choptank River (below Caroline County) include: Cambridge (1988), Church Creek (1982), East New Market (1988), Oxford (1988), Preston (1988), Sharp Island (1974R), Tilghman (1988), and Trappe (1988). Introduction The Choptank River is Maryland’s longest river of the Eastern Shore. The Choptank River was ranked as one of four Category One rivers (rivers and related corridors which possess a composite resource value with greater than State signific ance) by the Maryland Rivers Study Wild and Scenic Rivers Program in 1985. It has been stated that “no river in the Chesapeake region has done more to shape the character and society of the Eastern Shore than the Choptank.” It has been called “the noblest watercourse on the Eastern Shore.” Name origin: “Chaptanck” is probably a composition of Algonquian words meaning “it flows back strongly,” referring to the river’s tidal changes1 Geological Change and Flooded Valleys The Choptank River is the largest tributary of the Chesapeake Bay on the eastern shore and is therefore part of the largest estuary in North America. This Bay and all its tributaries were once non-tidal fresh water rivers and streams during the last ice age (15,000 years ago) when sea level was over 300 feet below present. As climate warmed and glaciers melted northward sea level rose, and the Choptank valley and Susquehanna valley became flooded.
    [Show full text]
  • Family Surnames of Value in Genealogical Research Are Printed in CAPITALS; Names of Places in Italics
    INDEX (Family surnames of value in genealogical research are printed in CAPITALS; names of places in italics) Abercrombie, Reverend James, Assis- Baltimore, agreement of merchants tant Rector of Christ Church (fac- of, to suspend trade with England, ing), 312 366 Adams, Charles Francis, 356 Barbados Gazette, published by Adams, Captain James, of the ship Samuel Keimer, 283-287 Elliot, 81 Barber, Edwin Atlee, 119 Adams, John, 356 Barclay, E. E., publisher, 149, 150 Adams, John Quincy, 320 Barnhart Family, query regarding, by Adams, Samuel, opposed to adoption Nat G. Barnhart. 384 of the Constitution by Massachu- Barnum, Mr. , dinner for setts, 201 Washington Celebration, Second Addison* Judge Alexander, 335 Troop, Philadelphia City Cavalry, Ainsworth, William Harrison, 134 67 Alcott, A. Bronson, 132, 136 Barrett, Gyles, 216 Alexander, Major , 168 Bartram, Alexander, potter, Philadel- ALLEN, MARY, 43 phia, 100, 112, 113; advertise- ALLEN, NATHANIEL, 43 ments of, 112; property of, 112, Allen, Sergeant Samuel, 62, 72, 73, 113 ; estate of, 1779, 113 77. 78, 178, 375, 376 BARTRAM, ALZIRA, 82 America, The, arrives, 1683, 98. 100 BARTRAM, ANN, 82 American Courier, The, 151 BARTRAM, ANNA MARIA, 82 Ames, Herman V., Franklin, The BARTRAM, CATHARINE, 82 Apostle of Modern Times, by Ber- BARTRAM, ELIZABETH, 81 nard Fay, notice of, by, 188-190 Bartram, Col. George, 74, 75 Andros, Governor Edmund, 214. 243 BARTRAM, GEORGE WASHING- Anthony, Joseph, silversmith, Phila- TON, 81, 82 delphia, 110 Bartram, George Washington, bio- Arnold, General Benedict, 195 ; with graphical note, 81, 82 forces blocked up in James River, BARTRAM, GEORGIANA MARIA, Virginia, 164 82 Arskin, Jonas, 216 BARTRAM, HENRY.
    [Show full text]