Quotes4study

EBER, PAUL (1511-1569), German theologian, was born at Kitzingen in Franconia, and was educated at Nuremberg and Wittenberg, where he became the close friend of Philip Melanchthon. In 1541 he was appointed professor of Latin grammar at Wittenberg, and in 1557 professor of the Old Testament. His range of learning was wide, and he published a handbook of Jewish history, a historical calendar intended to supersede the Roman Saints' Calendar, and a revision of the Latin Old Testament. In the theological conflict of the time he played a large part, doing what he could to mediate between the extremists. From 1559 to the close of his life he was superintendent-general of the electorate of Saxony. He attained some fame as a hymn-writer, his best-known composition being "Wenn wir in höchsten Nöthen sein." He died at Wittenberg on the 10th of December 1569. Entry: EBER

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 8, Slice 9 "Dyer" to "Echidna"     1910-1911

Ricasoli now became prime minister, Cavour having advised the king to that effect. The financial situation was far from brilliant, for the expenses of the administration of Italy were far larger than the total of those of all the separate states, and everything had to be created or rebuilt. The budget of 1861 showed a deficit of 344,000,000 lire, while the service of the debt was 110,000,000; deficits were met by new loans issued on unfavourable terms (that of July 1861 for 500,000,000 lire cost the government 714,833,000), and government stock fell as low as 36. It was now that the period of reckless finance began which, save for a lucid interval under Sella, was to last until nearly the end of the century. Considering the state of the country and the coming war for Venice, heavy expenditure was inevitable, but good management might have rendered the situation less dangerous. Ricasoli, honest and capable as he was, failed to win popularity; his attitude on the Roman question, which became more uncompromising after the failure of his attempt at conciliation, and his desire to emancipate Italy from French predominance, brought down on him the hostility of Napoleon. He fell in March 1862, and was succeeded by Rattazzi, who being more pliable and intriguing managed at first to please everybody, including Garibaldi. At this time the extremists and even the moderates were full of schemes for liberating Venice and Rome. Garibaldi had a plan, with which the premier was connected, for attacking Austria by raising a revolt in the Balkans and Hungary, and later he contemplated a raid into the Trentino; but the government, seeing the danger of such an attempt, arrested several Garibaldians at Sarnico (near Brescia), and in the _émeute_ which followed several persons were shot. Garibaldi now became an opponent of the ministry, and in June went to Sicily, where, after taking counsel with his former followers, he decided on an immediate raid on Rome. He summoned his legionaries, and in August crossed over to Calabria with 1000 men. His intentions in the main were still loyal, for he desired to capture Rome for the kingdom; and he did his best to avoid the regulars tardily sent against him. On the 29th of August 1862, however, he encountered a force under Pallavicini at Aspromonte, and, although Garibaldi ordered his men not to fire, some of the raw Sicilian volunteers discharged a few volleys which were returned by the regulars. Garibaldi himself was seriously wounded and taken prisoner. He was shut up in the fortress of Varignano, and after endless discussions as to whether he should be tried or not, the question was settled by an amnesty. The affair made the ministry so unpopular that it was forced to resign. Farini, who succeeded, retired almost at once on account of ill-health, and Minghetti became premier, with Visconti-Venosta as minister for foreign affairs. The financial situation continued to be seriously embarrassing; deficit was piled on deficit, loan upon loan, and the service of the debt rose from 90,000,000 lire in 1860 to 220,000,000 in 1864. Entry: E

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 15, Slice 1 "Italy" to "Jacobite Church"     1910-1911

CELESTINE V. (St Peter Celestine), pope in 1294, was born of poor parents at Isernia about 1215, and early entered the Benedictine order. Living as a hermit on Monte Morrone near Sulmone in the Abruzzi, he attracted other ascetics about him and organized them into a congregation of the Benedictines which was later called the Celestines (q.v.). The assistance of a vicar enabled him to escape from the growing administrative cares and devote himself solely to asceticism, apparently the only field of human activity in which he excelled. His _Opuscula_, published by Telera at Naples in 1640, are probably not genuine; he was _indoctus libris_. A fight between the Colonna and the Orsini, as well as hopeless dissensions among the cardinals, prevented a papal election for two years and three months after the death of Nicholas IV. Charles II. of Naples, needing a pope in order that he might regain Sicily, brought about a conclave. As the election of any cardinal seemed impossible, on the 5th of July 1294 the Sacred College united on Pietro di Morrone; the cardinals expected to rule in the name of the celebrated but incapable ascetic. Apocalyptic notions then current doubtless aided his election, for Joachim of Floris and his school looked to monasticism to furnish deliverance to the church and to the world. Multitudes came to Celestine's coronation at Aquila, and he began his reign the idol of visionaries, of extremists and of the populace. But the pope was in the power of Charles II. of Naples, and became his tool against Aragon. The king's son Louis, a layman of twenty-one, was made archbishop of Lyons. The cardinals, scarcely consulted at all, were discontented. The pope, who wanted more time for his devotions, offered to leave three cardinals in charge of affairs; but his proposition was rejected. He then wished to abdicate, and at length Benedetto Gaetano, destined to succeed him as Boniface VIII., removed all scruples against this unheard-of procedure by finding a precedent in the case of Clement I. Celestine abdicated on the 13th of December 1294. There is no sufficient ground for finding an allusion to this act in the noted line of Dante, "Che fece per viltate il gran rifiuto" ("who made from cowardice the great refusal," _Inferno_, 3, 60). Boniface at length put him in prison for safe keeping; he died in a monastic cell in the castle of Fumone near Anagni on the 19th of May 1296. He was canonized by Clement V. in 1313. Entry: CELESTINE

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 5, Slice 5 "Cat" to "Celt"     1910-1911

This procrastinating policy played into the hands of the extremists; for supplies had not been voted, and the question of the credits for the expenditure incurred in connexion with the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, increasingly urgent, placed a powerful weapon in the hands of the Magyars, and made it certain that in the autumn the crisis would assume an even more acute form. By the middle of September affairs had again reached an _impasse_. On the 14th Dr Wekerle, at the ministerial conference assembled at Vienna for the purpose of discussing the estimates to be laid before the delegations, announced that the dissensions among his colleagues made the continuance of the Coalition government impossible. The burning points of controversy were the magyarization of the Hungarian regiments and the question of the separate state bank. On the first of these Wekerle, Andrássy and Apponyi were prepared to accept moderate concessions; as to the second, they were opposed to the question being raised at all. Kossuth and Justh, on the other hand, competitors for the leadership of the Independence party, declared themselves not prepared to accept anything short of the full rights of the Magyars in those matters. The matter was urgent; for parliament was to meet on the 28th, and it was important that a new cabinet, acceptable to it, should be appointed before that date, or that the Houses should be prorogued pending such appointment; otherwise the delegations would be postponed and no credits would be voted for the cost of the new Austro-Hungarian "Dreadnoughts" and of the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina. In the event, neither of these courses proved possible, and on the 28th Dr Wekerle once more announced his resignation to the parliament. Entry: A

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 13, Slice 8 "Hudson River" to "Hurstmonceaux"     1910-1911

Taking the Thirteen Colonies as a whole, loyalism drew its strength largely from the following classes: (1) the official class--men holding positions in the civil, military and naval services, and their immediate families and social connexions, as, for example, Lieutenant-Governor Bull in South Carolina, Governor Dunmore in Virginia and Governor Tryon in New York; (2) the professional classes--lawyers, physicians, teachers and ministers, such as Benjamin Kissam, Peter Van Schaack and Dr Azor Betts of New York and Dr Myles Cooper, president of King's College (now Columbia University); (3) large landed proprietors and their tenants, e.g. William Wragg in South Carolina and the De Lanceys, De Peysters and Van Cortlandts in New York; (4) the wealthy commercial classes in New York, Albany, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Charleston, whose business interests would be affected by war; (5) natural conservatives of the type of Joseph Galloway of Pennsylvania, and numerous political trimmers and opportunists. Before 1776 the Loyalists may be divided into two groups. There was a minority of extremists led by the Anglican ministers and teachers, who favoured an unquestioning obedience to all British legislation. The moderate majority disapproved of the mother country's unwise colonial policy and advocated opposition to it through legally organized bodies. Many even sanctioned non-importation and non-exportation agreements, and took part in the election of delegates to the First Continental Congress. The aggressive attitude of Congress, the subsequent adoption of the Declaration of Independence, and the refusal to consider Lord Howe's conciliatory propositions finally forced them into armed opposition. Very few really sanctioned the British policy as a whole, but all felt that it was their first duty to fight for the preservation of the empire and to leave constitutional questions for a later settlement. John Adams's estimate that one-third of all the people in the thirteen states in 1776 were Loyalists was perhaps approximately correct. In New England the number was small, perhaps largest in Connecticut and in the district which afterwards became the state of Vermont. New York was the chief stronghold. The "De Lancey party" or the "Episcopalian party" included the majority of the wealthy farmers, merchants and bankers, and practically all communicants of the Anglican church. New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia contained large and influential Loyalist minorities; North Carolina was about equally divided; South Carolina probably, and Georgia certainly, had Loyalist majorities. Some of the Loyalists joined the regular British army, others organized guerilla bands and with their Indian allies inaugurated a reign of terror on the frontier from New York to Georgia. New York alone furnished about 15,000 Loyalists to the British army and navy, and about 8500 militia, making in all 23,500 Loyalist troops. This was more than any other colony supplied, perhaps more than all the others combined. Johnson's "Loyal Greens" and Butler's "Tory Rangers" served under General St Leger in the Burgoyne campaign of 1777, and the latter took part in the Wyoming and Cherry Valley massacres of 1778. The strength of these Loyalists in arms was weakened in New York by General Sullivan's success at Newtown (now Elmira) on the 29th of August 1779, and broken in the north-west by George Rogers Clark's victories at Kaskaskia and Vincennes in 1778 and 1779, and in the south by the battles of King's Mountain and Cowpens in 1780. Severe laws were passed against the Loyalists in all the states. They were in general disfranchised and forbidden to hold office or to practise law. Eight of the states formally banished certain prominent Tories either conditionally or unconditionally, and the remaining five, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia, did practically the same indirectly. Social and commercial ostracism forced many others to flee. Their property was usually confiscated for the support of the American cause. They went to England, to the West Indies, to the Bahamas, to Canada and to New York, Newport, Charleston and other cities under British control. According to a trustworthy estimate 60,000 persons went into exile during the years from 1775 to 1787. The great majority settled in Nova Scotia and in Upper and Lower Canada, where they and their descendants became known as "United Empire Loyalists." Those who remained in the United States suffered for many years, and all the laws against them were not finally repealed until after the War of 1812. The British government, however, endeavoured to look after the interests of its loyal colonists. During the war a number of the prominent Loyalists (e.g. Joseph Galloway) were appointed to lucrative positions, and rations were issued to many Loyalists in the cities, such as New York, which were held by the British. During the peace negotiations at Paris the treatment of the Loyalists presented a difficult problem, Great Britain at first insisting that the United States should agree to remove their disabilities and to act toward them in a spirit of conciliation. The American commissioners, knowing that a treaty with such provisions would not be accepted at home, and that the general government had, moreover, no power to bind the various states in such a matter, refused to accede; but in the treaty, as finally ratified, the United States agreed (by Article V.) to recommend to the legislatures of the various states that Loyalists should "have free liberty to go to any part or parts of any of the thirteen United States, and therein to remain twelve months, unmolested in their endeavours to obtain the restitution of such of their estates, rights and properties as may have been confiscated," that acts and laws in the premises be reconsidered and revised, and that restitution of estates, &c., should be made. The sixth article provided "that there shall be no future confiscations made, nor any prosecutions commenced against any person" for having taken part in the war; and that those in confinement on such charges should be liberated. In Great Britain opponents of the government asserted that the Loyalists had virtually been betrayed; in America the treaty aroused opposition as making too great concessions to them. Congress made the promised recommendations, but they were unheeded by the various states, in spite of the advocacy by Alexander Hamilton and others of a conciliatory treatment of the Loyalists; and Great Britain, in retaliation, refused until 1796 to evacuate the western posts as the treaty prescribed. Immediately after the war parliament appointed a commission of five to examine the claims of the Loyalists for compensation for services and losses; and to satisfy these claims and to establish Loyalists in Nova Scotia and Canada the British government expended fully £6,000,000. Entry: LOYALISTS

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 17, Slice 1 "Lord Chamberlain" to "Luqman"     1910-1911

W.E. Forster gradually began to take an active part in public affairs by speaking and lecturing. In 1858 he gave a lecture before the Leeds Philosophical Institution on "How we Tax India." In 1859 he stood as Liberal candidate for Leeds, but was beaten. But he was highly esteemed in the West Riding, and in 1861 he was returned unopposed for Bradford. In 1865 (unopposed) and in 1868 (at the head of the poll) he was again returned. He took a prominent part in parliament in the debates on the American Civil War, and in 1868 was made under-secretary for the colonies in Earl Russell's ministry. It was then that he first became a prominent advocate of imperial federation. In 1866 his attitude on parliamentary reform attracted a good deal of attention. His speeches were full of knowledge of the real condition of the people, and contained something like an original programme of Radical legislation. "We have other things to do," he said, "besides extending the franchise. We want to make Ireland loyal and contented; we want to get rid of pauperism in this country; we want to fight against a class which is more to be dreaded than the holders of a £7 franchise--I mean the dangerous class in our large towns. We want to see whether we cannot make for the agricultural labourer some better hope than the workhouse in his old age. We want to have Old England as well taught as New England." In these words he heralded the education campaign which occupied the country for so many years afterwards. Directly the Reform Bill had passed, the necessity of "inducing our masters to learn their letters" (in Robert Lowe's phrase) became pressing. Mr Forster and Mr Cardwell, as private members in opposition, brought in Education Bills in 1867 and 1868; and in 1868, when the Liberal party returned to office, Mr Forster was appointed vice-president of the council, with the duty of preparing a government measure for national education. The Elementary Education Bill (see EDUCATION) was introduced on the 17th of February 1870. The religious difficulty at once came to the front. The Manchester Education Union and the Birmingham Education League had already formulated in the provinces the two opposing theories, the former standing for the preservation of denominational interests, the latter advocating secular rate-aided education as the only means of protecting Nonconformity against the Church. The Dissenters were by no means satisfied with Forster's "conscience clause" as contained in the bill, and they regarded him, the ex-Quaker, as a deserter from their own side; while they resented the "25th clause," permitting school boards to pay the fees of needy children at denominational schools out of the rates, as an insidious attack upon themselves. By the 14th of March, when the second reading came on, the controversy had assumed threatening proportions; and Mr Dixon, the Liberal member for Birmingham and chairman of the Education League, moved an amendment, the effect of which was to prohibit all religious education in board schools. The government made its rejection a question of confidence, and the amendment was withdrawn; but the result was the insertion of the Cowper-Temple clause as a compromise before the bill passed. Extremists on both sides abused Forster, but the government had a difficult set of circumstances to deal with, and he acted like a prudent statesman in contenting himself with what he could get. An ideal bill was impracticable; it is to Forster's enduring credit that the bill of 1870, imperfect as it was, established at last some approach to a system of national education in England without running absolutely counter to the most cherished English ideas and without ignoring the principal agencies already in existence. Entry: W

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 10, Slice 6 "Foraminifera" to "Fox, Edward"     1910-1911

Just at this time (1861) the Yedo statesmen, in order to reconcile the divergent views of the two courts, negotiated a marriage between the emperor's sister and the shogun. But in order to bring the union about, they had to placate the Kioto Conservatives by a promise to expel foreigners from the country within ten years. When this became known, it strengthened the hands of the reactionaries, and furnished a new weapon to Yedo's enemies, who interpreted the marriage as the beginning of a plot to dethrone the mikado. Murderous attacks upon foreigners became more frequent. Two of these assaults had momentous consequences. Three British subjects attempted to force their way through the _cortège_ of the Satsuma feudal chief on the highway between Yokohama and Yedo. One of them was killed and the other two wounded. This outrage was not inspired by the "barbarian-expelling" sentiment: to any Japanese subject violating the rules of etiquette as these Englishmen had violated them, the same fate would have been meted out. Nevertheless, as the Satsuma daimyo refused to surrender his implicated vassals, and as the shogun's arm was not long enough to reach the most powerful feudatory in Japan, the British government sent a squadron to bombard his capital, Kagoshima. It was not a brilliant exploit in any sense, but its results were invaluable; for the operations of the British ships finally convinced the Satsuma men of their impotence in the face of Western armaments, and converted them into advocates of liberal progress. Three months previously to this bombardment of Kagoshima another puissant feudatory had thrown down the gauntlet. The Choshu chief, whose batteries commanded the entrance to the inland sea at Shimonoseki, opened fire upon ships flying the flags of the United States, of France and of Holland. In thus acting he obeyed an edict obtained by the extremists from the mikado without the knowledge of the shogun, which edict fixed the 11th of May 1863 as the date for practically inaugurating the foreigners-expulsion policy. Again the shogun's administrative competence proved inadequate to exact reparation, and a squadron, composed chiefly of British men-of-war, proceeding to Shimonoseki, demolished Choshu's forts, destroyed his ships and scattered his samurai. In the face of the Kagoshima bombardment and the Shimonoseki expedition, no Japanese subject could retain any faith in his country's ability to oppose Occidentals by force. Thus the year 1863 was memorable in Japan's history. It saw the "barbarian-expelling" agitation deprived of the emperor's sanction; it saw the two principal clans, Satsuma and Choshu, convinced of their country's impotence to defy the Occident; it saw the nation almost fully roused to the disintegrating and weakening effects of the feudal system; and it saw the traditional antipathy to foreigners beginning to be exchanged for a desire to study their civilization and to adopt its best features. Entry: A

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 15, Slice 2 "Jacobites" to "Japan" (part)     1910-1911

LEVELLERS, the name given to an important political party in England during the period of the Civil War and the Commonwealth. The germ of the Levelling movement must be sought for among the Agitators (q.v.), men of strong republican views, and the name Leveller first appears in a letter of the 1st of November 1647, although it was undoubtedly in existence as a nickname before this date (Gardiner, _Great Civil War_, iii. 380). This letter refers to these extremists thus: "They have given themselves a new name, viz. Levellers, for they intend to sett all things straight, and rayse a parity and community in the kingdom." Entry: LEVELLERS

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 16, Slice 5 "Letter" to "Lightfoot, John"     1910-1911

As to the acceptance of the constitution (Sept. 1791), "tissue of absurdities" though the queen thought it, and much as she would have preferred a bolder course, she considered that in the circumstances the king was bound to accept it in order to inspire confidence.[6] Mercy was also in correspondence with the Constitutionals, and in letter after letter to him and the emperor, the queen, strongly supported by Fersen, insisted that the congress should be formed as soon as possible, her appeals increasing in urgency as she saw that Barnave's party would soon be powerless against the extremists. But owing to the lengthy negotiations of the powers the congress was continually postponed. On the 1st of March 1792 Leopold II. died, and was succeeded by the young Francis II. Marie Antoinette's actions were now directed entirely by Fersen, for she suspected Mercy and the emperor of sacrificing her to the interests of Austria (_Fersen_, i. 251; Arneth, pp. 254, 256, &c.). The declaration of war which the king was forced to make (April 20) threw her definitely into opposition to the Revolution, and she betrayed to Mercy and Fersen the plans of the French generals (Arneth, p. 259; _Fersen_, ii. 220, 289, 308, 325, 327). She was now certain that the life of the king was threatened, and the events of the 20th of June added to her terrors. She considered their only hope to lie in the intervention of the powers and in the appeal to force, and endorsed the suggestion of a threatening manifesto[6] which should hold the National Assembly and Paris responsible for the safety of the king and royal family. Immediately after Brunswick's manifesto followed the storming of the Tuileries and the removal of the royal family to the Temple (Aug. 10). During all these events and the captivity in the Temple Marie Antoinette showed an unvarying courage and dignity, in spite of her failing health and the illness of her son. After the execution of the king (Jan. 17, 1793) several unsuccessful attempts were made by her friends to rescue her and her children, among others by Jarjayes, Toulan and Lepître, and the "baron de Batz," and negotiations for her release or exchange were even opened with Danton; but as the allied armies approached her trial and condemnation became a certainty. She had already been separated from her son, the sight of whose ill-treatment added terribly to her sufferings; she was now parted from her daughter and Madame Elizabeth, and removed on the 1st of August 1793 to the Conciergerie. Even here, where she was under the closest guard and subjected to the most offensive espionnage, attempts were made to rescue her, among others Michonis' "Conspiration de l'oeillet." Entry: MARIE

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 17, Slice 6 "Map" to "Mars"     1910-1911