Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Not Yours to Give
personal archives ^ | Provided as courtesy by Charles Starr for Congress

Posted on 01/23/2002 9:15:27 AM PST by Chapita

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-209 next last
To: RonDog
Re: 9/11--It definitely applies.
101 posted on 01/23/2002 4:47:10 PM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Whether or not the reference is correct, the premise is right on. Congress has NO right to disperse the dollars of taxpayers to causes no matter how seemingly worthy, not sanctioned by the Constitution.

That is why we have deficits and high taxes at present. Congress took upon itself health care for seniors, welfare, and other sundry causes it had NO business involving itself with.

102 posted on 01/23/2002 5:21:08 PM PST by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Thanks for the flag, Ron.
103 posted on 01/23/2002 6:05:56 PM PST by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Chapita
I've read this once before. This is a great find again!!!
104 posted on 01/23/2002 6:24:32 PM PST by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chapita
H.R. Journal--WEDNESDAY, April 2, 1828.

The bill from the Senate, [No. 111] entitled "An act for the relief of Mrs. Brown, widow of the late Major General Brown," was read the third time:

And on the question, "Shall the bill pass?"

The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the members present,

Crockett voted NAY!

105 posted on 01/23/2002 6:36:14 PM PST by jo6pac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonDog;Huck;Chapita;Jeff Head; Appy Pappy
RonDog-- Thanks for the flag!

I like reading these kinds of historical items regarding the early years of the Republic.

Need more hours in the day also!

106 posted on 01/23/2002 7:21:23 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Chapita; RonDog
Wednesday, April 2, 1928

FAMILY OF GENERAL BROWN.

The bill from the Senate for the relief of Mrs. Brown was read for a third time.

Messrs. CHILTON and CROCKETT (who had been absent from the House during the discussion yesterday) delivered their sentiments in opposition to the principle of the bill. The latter offering to subscribe his quota, in his private character, to make up the sum proposed, and the former demanded the yeas and nays upon the passage of the bill.

107 posted on 01/23/2002 7:44:27 PM PST by jo6pac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac
#105 from House Journal

#107 from Gales & Seaton's Register, p. 2086 (typo - date should be April 2, 1828)

108 posted on 01/23/2002 7:51:35 PM PST by jo6pac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac;chapita;rondog;huck
Good find Jo6Pac,
I did a lot of looking around too, but found nothing.
Any comments from the rest of you? It looks to me as if the story is at least based on fact, and that Crockett's actions reflect the sentiment in the story.

washi

109 posted on 01/23/2002 8:19:48 PM PST by Washi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac; michigander
From:
U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1873
WEDNESDAY, April 2, 1828 (page 469)
and (page 470)

GREAT work, guys!

(God, I love this place!)

110 posted on 01/23/2002 8:25:18 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: All
See also:
"Crockett on the Power to Make Charitable Donations"


"Tennessee militia colonel David Crockett,
perhaps best known for his role in the 1836 defense of the Alamo,
also served three terms in the United States Congress between 1827 and 1835.
Nationally known during his lifetime as a political representative of the frontier,
Crockett apparently came by that reputation honestly,
inasmuch as he was not above listening to his constituents.
The following excerpt from an 1884 biography by Edward S. Ellis,
"The Life of Colonel David Crockett,"
reveals how his own rural electorate taught him the importance
of adhering to the Constitution
and the perils of ignoring its restrictions."

...which includes THIS discussion between Steve Greenhow and Jon Roland on the authenticity of the... ...quote:
The following is a email discussion on 07/23/96 on the authenticity of the Crockett story between Steve Greenhow SG), the original poster, and Jon Roland (JR):
=======================================================================

At 07:09 PM 7/23/96 -0700, you wrote:

JR: One thing that caught my attention in your quote on Crockett was the reference to "barbecue".

SG: This caught my attention too.

JR: That term was in use in 1884 when the biography was written, but to the best of my knowledge, had not yet been invented as of 1835 when Crockett left Congress.

SG: I wondered about that as well.

JR: Etymologists generally attribute it to a corruption of "barbacoa", originating with the Taino tribe of Arawaks of the Greater Antilles and Bahamas, although in Texas it is attributed to the -BQ (bar B Q) ranch there, which is said to have anglicized it and claimed to have invented it, promoting it during the cattle drive period following the Civil War as a way to promote the sale of beef.

SG: I suppose this word "barbacoa" was borrowed from the Arawaks by the Spanish and it spread through their empire, because around here (Austin, TX) Mexican restaurants commonly offer barbacoa on the menu. It's not quite the same as American barbecue, but does involve meat roasted over a fire. My Webster's 10th Collegiate also mentions the probable Arawak origin and gives the first recorded use of "barbecue" in English as 1709; so it very possibly could have been in use in rural Tennessee between 1827 and 1835, the years during which Crockett served in Congress. I had not heard the bar B Q ranch story, and had not heard of the bar B Q ranch, but it sounds plausible and is quite interesting. This state was literally resurrected by the cattle industry during Reconstruction.

JR: Ellis may have played loosely with Crockett's quotes. Does he explain how he got them? Are there indications of a political agenda that would cause him to invent them? If so, then "Crockett" is "Socrates" for Ellis' "Plato".

SG: "Barbecue" aside, I must assume Ellis was either working from memory, or from extremely comprehensive notes he had made as a very young man, or, as you suggest, playing the role of Plato. Crockett died at the Alamo roughly 48 years before the book was published--a long time for even the best memory to recall dialogue verbatim. Therefore I suspect Ellis may have filled in a few holes here and there with some skillful oratory of his own and was to some degree or another, Plato to Crockett's Socrates. It is no matter to me. The story makes a wonderful, heart-felt point and I am convinced, given the nature of the oral tradition in his time and culture, Crockett would heartily approve. After all, this is the man who claimed to be half-man, half-alligator and to have waged a fist fight with fellow frontier legend Mike Fink that lasted two days running. I once worked for a man who claimed, "there is no bad publicity in show business." Somehow that adage seems to apply here.

SG: As for a Ellis' political agenda, I haven't a clue. I only came across the excerpt ten days ago and do not have the book, but I am looking. My feeling is that it is out of print and a well-stocked library or book-and-paper show may be the only place to find it. Until I do find it and read it, or learn more about the author, I can't speculate on Ellis' agenda beyond what can be deduced from the excerpt. It might be interesting to find outside corroboration, in the Congressional record for example, of Crockett making the speech(es), or a newspaper account of the Georgetown fire Crockett helped to put out, etc., but I will leave that to more aggressive historians. I am grateful to Ellis for putting such a great story down on paper. It's message is still timely today.

regards,

\ /
\ Steve Greenhow /
\ Austin, Texas USA /
\ email: magbo@ix.netcom.com /

\ /
\ "And gentlemen in England now-a-bed /
\ Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here, /
\ And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks /
\ That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day." /
\ --Henry V (iv, iii) /
\________________________________________________________/


111 posted on 01/23/2002 9:09:50 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Crockett was a charlatan.

And just why do you say that?

112 posted on 01/23/2002 9:18:32 PM PST by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
Ellis may have played loosely with Crockett's quotes.
From Senate's original bill, at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsb&fileName=009/llsb009.db&recNum=348:

If Mrs. Brown is the right widow, how is this "Major General Brown" - commanding the U.S. ARMY - a "distinguished NAVAL officer?"

113 posted on 01/23/2002 9:41:26 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Excellent work. It appears the relief for the widow PASSED, even though in the story it says:

"The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, not doubt, it would but for that speech, it received but few votes, and of course was lost.

Unless that's a different widow. Are there Major General's in the Navy?

114 posted on 01/24/2002 2:26:11 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Woops. Just saw your #113. This is great fun. Excellent job RonDog!
115 posted on 01/24/2002 2:27:56 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Great story!

Whether the speech was made by Crockett or not, it should have been made by someone.

Thanks for the ping, RonDog.

116 posted on 01/24/2002 4:17:03 AM PST by RottiBiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Urban legend or true story, the central argument of Colonel Crockett's "Not Yours to Give" speech certainly applies to the current discussion about the allocation of federal tax dollars to the victims of 9/11, does it not?

Even if Crockett did not give the speech, it should be given for bailouts, and any charitable appropriation. Of course, with the passage of the sixteenth amendment, we basically gave away our freedom from tyranny through the Income Tax.

I do believe that through our current system, such as FEMA, the 9/ll disaster would qualify for relief to the victims, but I was not aware that the government had appropriated funds to do so. Isn't this being done under the auspices of the WTC Fund?

117 posted on 01/24/2002 4:34:20 AM PST by Angelique
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Valin
Crockett was a charlatan. And just why do you say that?

Upon reflection, I am not prepared to defend that statement. I withdraw it. Thank you for asking.

118 posted on 01/24/2002 4:54:13 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: RonDog;jo6pac;ALL
So, it seems we have made great headway regarding paragraphs 2 and 3. We have learned that the bill didn't fail, it passed. And we learned that it was an Army officer's wife, not a Naval Officer's wife.

One other thing about those paragraphs though. He says "Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress" in reference to the Georgetown fire. He goes on to say that "The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off."

Here's the problem. The bill above was passed in 1828. Crockett's first term in Congress was the 20th Congress, which served from 27-29. Not only that, as I recall, in the old days there was a lame duck session of Congress months after the election. Anyway, if this vote happened early in '28, and if he said there was a fire several years prior, and that a year after that he was up for re-election, well, the numbers just don't add up. There were factual errors on almost every point in paragraphs two and three. Post #107 seems to confirm one point though, that Crockett offered to pay out of pocket. One wonders if the other House members found that amusing.

A Challenge for more research:

But the REAL challenge, it seems to me, is the whole Horatio Bunce story. If you look at my chronology above, it seems the numbers don't add up, but there may be some truth mixed with fiction. In fact, isn't that the Crockett MO? Anyway, really enjoying your research on this. I would love to see what you can find about a Horatio Bunce. What was Crockett's district? Is there a geneological history? IS there a Crockett Historical Society that might know? I am filled with curiosity.

119 posted on 01/24/2002 5:06:08 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac
Regarding #107: Do you have a link to the source on the web? I am not questioning the authenticity; I would like to add it to my directory of online references. Thanks. And GREAT JOB! I really enjoyed your research on this.
120 posted on 01/24/2002 5:11:46 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Hobey Baker; Chapita
Fine sentiments, but no one can prove that Crockett said any of this.

If he didn't, he ought to've.

121 posted on 01/24/2002 5:51:01 AM PST by packrat01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: packrat01; Taxreform
My thoughts exactly!

Of more importance though, is that we need to elect Representatives and Senators who believe that Crockett's view is correct. If the Constitution does not specifically authorize an expenditure, it ought not be made.

It fairly boggles the mind to imagine how small in numbers of employees and bureaucracies and how few "programs" would exist if the U.S. (and local and state) government(s) followed the Constitution.

Now, my fellow FReepers, that is a vision truly worth fighting for!

122 posted on 01/24/2002 6:29:09 AM PST by Taxman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Chapita; STARFAN,
Starfan, this is the e-mail I sent you!
123 posted on 01/24/2002 9:31:05 AM PST by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck
"Here's the problem. The bill above was passed in 1828. Crockett's first term in Congress was the 20th Congress, which served from 27-29. Not only that, as I recall, in the old days there was a lame duck session of Congress months after the election. Anyway, if this vote happened early in '28, and if he said there was a fire several years prior, and that a year after that he was up for re-election, well, the numbers just don't add up.

There were factual errors on almost every point in paragraphs two and three..." - Huck

I think that you are correct, Huck. The author of this famous passage from Crockett's biography seems to have taken considerable liberties - i.e., "artistic license" - in his attempt to communcate the "big picture" of Crockett's political philosophy, and cut quite a few corners with the actual FACTS.
(This approach is perhaps understandable, given the embellishments propagated by Crockett himself. LOL!!!)
From The Texas State Historical Association's "Handbook of Texas Online" :

"...In his 1831 campaign for a third term, Crockett openly and vehemently attacked Jackson's policies and was defeated in a close election by William Fitzgerald.

By this time Crockett's reputation as a sharpshooter, hunter, and yarn-spinner had brought him into national prominence. He was the model for Nimrod Wildfire, the hero of James Kirke Paulding's play The Lion of the West, which opened in New York City on April 25, 1831. Life and Adventures of Colonel David Crockett of West Tennessee was published in 1833 and reprinted the same year under the more accurate title of Sketches and Eccentricities of Colonel David Crockett of West Tennessee. Much of the same material spilled over into the first few issues of a series of comic almanacs published under Crockett's name from 1835 to 1856 that, as a whole, constituted a body of outrageous tall tales about the adventures of the legendary Davy rather than the historical David Crockett.

Building in part upon his growing notoriety, Crockett defeated the incumbent Fitzgerald in 1833 to return to Congress. The following year he published his autobiography, written with the help of Thomas Chilton, A Narrative of the Life of David Crockett of the State of Tennessee, the only work that he actually authored. It was intended to correct the portrayal given by Mathew St. Clair Clarke in Sketches and Eccentricities and to deny Crockett's authorship of that account, which did not bear Clarke's name..."


124 posted on 01/24/2002 11:48:28 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Tokhtamish

All of this is beside the point. The major issue before us is this....

What exactly is a sockdolager ?

For instance, John Wilkes Boothe knew to time his assasination of Lincoln to the line in Our American Cousin....
"You sockdolagizing old mantrap !"
at which burst of pure hilarity the house would be rolling in the aisles, completely distracted.

This issue must be addressed.

80 posted on 1/23/02 3:35 PM Pacific by Tokhtamish

Here is ONE opinion, from http://www.living-history.com/americanleaders/sockdolager.html:
Sockdolager - A Tale Of Davy Crockett

A "sockdolager" is a knock-down blow. This is a newspaper reporter's captivating story of his unforgettable encounter with the old "Bear Hunter" from Tennessee. From The Life of Colonel David Crockett, by Edward S. Ellis (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)


CROCKETT was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.

I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support -- rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:

"Mr. Speaker

-- snip --

...As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: "Don't be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted."

He replied: "I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say." I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and --" "'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'

This was a sockdolager... I begged him to tell me what was the matter. "Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me..."

-- snip --

Note that the date of this popular story is 1884 - almost FIFTY YEARS after Crockett's death. - Ron
From the same website:
"March 6, 1836 - Col Crockett dies along with about 149 others as The Alamo falls
in a predawn assault..."

125 posted on 01/24/2002 12:11:42 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Unless that's a different widow. Are there Major General's in the Navy?
Still not sure if Mrs. Brown is the right widow, but HERE is the right "Major General Brown," from
"SWORD OF THE BORDER:
Major General Jacob Jennings Brown, 1775-1828"
by John D. Morris
:


Jacob Jennings Brown may well be the most successful—yet forgotten—general of his time.  Born into a Pennsylvania Quaker family on the eve of the American Revolution, Brown worked as a Quaker schoolteacher and surveyor and was a pioneer settler of northern New York before serving in the U.S. Army during the War of 1812, eventually rising to the highest command.

Early in the war he commanded the militia defending 200 miles of the New York—Canadian border.  His successful defense of the Lake Ontario naval base at Sackets Harbor in 1813 was rewarded with a regular army commission as brigadier general.  He won more battles against British regular troops than any general in American history, and he was respected by his superiors, his subordinates, and the enemy.  In 1821 Brown became commanding general of the army and advised secretaries of war and presidents on military policy.

Brown helped create a professional army.  As division commander, and later as commanding general, he was instrumental in establishing the staff and command structure that was operational until the 20th century..."


126 posted on 01/24/2002 3:26:15 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
Awesome stuff, RonDog. Thanks. Be sure to flag me if you find anything else on this subject, on Ellis, or on Horatio Bunce. Best regards to you.
127 posted on 01/24/2002 3:31:55 PM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Here are some EXACT dates, from http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=C000918:

CROCKETT, David, (father of John Wesley Crockett), a Representative from Tennessee; born at the confluence of Limestone Creek and Noli-Chuckey River in the State of Franklin, which a few years later became Greene County, Tenn., August 17, 1786; attended the common schools for a short time; moved to Lincoln County about 1808 and to what is now Gibson County in 1822; commanded a battalion of mounted riflemen under General Jackson in the Creek campaign in 1813 and 1814; member of the State house of representatives 1821-1823; unsuccessful candidate for election in 1825 to the Nineteenth Congress; elected to the Twentieth and Twenty-first Congresses (March 4, 1827-March 3, 1831); unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1830 to the Twenty-second Congress; elected as an Anti-Jacksonian to the Twenty-third Congress (March 4, 1833-March 3, 1835); unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1834 to the Twenty-fourth Congress; went to Texas to aid the Texans in their struggle for independence in 1836; joined a band of 186 men in the defense of the Alamo, San Antonio de Bexar, and was among those killed in that battle which terminated on March 6, 1836; his body destroyed by pyre at the Alamo.


128 posted on 01/24/2002 7:42:06 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Perhaps the ENTIRE SPEECH that we have been discussing is in error. There is a transcript of a speech allegedly by Crockett posted at:
Colonel Davy Crockett Delivering His Celebrated Speech to Congress on the State of Finances, State Officers, and State Affairs in General

So far, this website from English professor from Towson University Edwin Duncan is the ONLY place that I have found this "broken English" version of Crockett's words.

"The broken fenced state o' the nation, the broken banks, broken hearts, and broken pledges o' my brother Congressman here around me, has riz the boiler o' my indignation clar up to the high pressure pinte, an' therefore I have riz to let off the steam of my hull hog patriotism, without round-about- ation, and without the trimmins. The truth wants no trimmins for in her clar naked state o' natur she's as graceful as a suckin colt i' the sunshine. Mr. Speaker! What in the name o' kill-sheep-dog rascality is the country a- comin' to? Whar's all the honor? no whar! an thar it'll stick! Whar's the state revenue? Every whar but whar it ought to be!

"Why, Mr. Speaker, don't squint with horror, when I tell you that last Saturday mornin' Uncle Sam hadn't the first fip to give to the barbet! The banks suspend payment, and the starving people suspend themselves by ropes! Old Currency is flat on his back, the bankers have sunk all funds in the safe arth o' speculation, and some o' these chaps grinnin' around me are as deep in the mud as a heifer in a horse-pond!

"Whar's the political honesty o' my feller congressmen? why, in bank bills and five acre speeches! Whar's all thar patriotism? in slantendicular slurs, challenges, and hair trigger pistols! Whar's all thar promises? every whar! Whar's all thar perfomances on 'em? no whar, and the poor people bellering arter 'em everywhere like a drove o' buffaloes arter their lazy keepers that, like the officers here, care for no one's stomach, but their own etarnal intarnals!

"What in the nation have you done this year? why, waste paper enough to calculate all your political sins upon, and that would take a sheet for each one o' you as long as the Mississippi. and as broad as all Kentucky. You've gone ahead in doin' nothin' backwards, till the hull nation's done up. You've spouted out a Mount Etny o' gas, chawed a hull Allegheny o' tobacco, spit a Niagary o' juice, told a hail storm o' lies, drunk a Lake Superior o' liquor, and all, as you say, for the good o' the nation; but I say, I swar, for her etarnal bankruptification!

"Tharfore, I move that the ony way to save the country is for the hull nest o' your political weasels to cut stick home instanterly, and leave me to work Uncle Sam's farm, till I restore it to its natural state o' cultivation, and shake off these state caterpillars o' corruption. Let black Dan Webster sittin there at the tother end o' the desk turn Methodist preacher; let Jack Calhoun settin' right afore him with his hair brushed back in front like a huckleberry bush in a hurrycane, after Old Hickory's topknot, turn horse- jockey. Let Harry Clay sittin' thar in the corner with his arms folded about his middle like grape vines around a black oak, go back to our old Kentuck an' improve o' lawyers an' other black sheep. Let old Daddy Quincy Adams sittin' right behind him thar, go home to Massachusetts, an' write political primers for the suckin' politicians; let Jim Buchanan go home to Pennsylvania an' smoke long nine, with the Dutchmen. Let Tom Benton, bent like a hickory saplin with ull rollin', take a roll home an' make candy "mint drops" for the babies:--for they've worked Uncle Sam's farm with the all-scratchin' harrow o' rascality, 'till it's as gray as a stone fence, as barren as barked clay, and as poor as as turkey fed on gravel stones!

"And, to conclude, Mr. Speaker, the nation can no more go ahead under such a state o'things, than a fried eel can swim upon the steam o' a tea kettle; if it can, then take these yar legs for yar hall pillars."

These are certainly NOT the words used by the "David Crockett" in OUR version of "Not Yours to Give." What gives?
129 posted on 01/25/2002 12:02:38 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
I ordered three Crockett books from the library last night. I am trying to get a copy of the Ellis book, too.
130 posted on 01/25/2002 12:21:51 PM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Good idea!
I found the "broken English" speech quoted again from a source called THE LIFE OF A FRONTIERSMAN. Not sure if that is the title of a Crockett biography, or not.
"...After Polly Crockett's death in 1815 he married Elizabeth Patton, a widow and helped her raise her three children. He was commander of a battalion in the Creek Indian War in 1813-1814. In describing his fellow frontiersmen fighting the Indians, he said, "...the enemy fought with savage fury, and met death with all its horrours, without shrinking or complaining: not one asked to be spared, but fought as long as they could stand or sit. " He became a local magistrate. He was proud to say his decisions"…were never appealed from, and if they had been they would have stuck like wax, as I gave my decisions on the principles of common justice and honesty between man and man, and relied on natural born sense, and not on law, learning to guide me; for I had never read a page in a law book in all my life." Then he stood for the state legislature of Tennessee and went on to run for Congress where his motto was "Be always sure you are right, then go ahead." His most celebrated speech was on the national "State of Affairs:"
"The broken fenced state o' the nation, the broken banks, broken hearts, and broken pledges o' my brother Congressman here around me, has riz the boiler o' my indignation clar up to the high pressure pinte, an' therefore I have riz to let off the steam of my hull hog patriotism, without round-about- ation, and without the trimmins. The truth wants no trimmins for in her clar naked state o' natur she's as graceful as a suckin colt i' the sunshine. Mr. Speaker! What in the name o' kill-sheep-dog rascality is the country a- comin' to?" ...

131 posted on 01/25/2002 1:57:31 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Washi
It looks to me as if the story is at least based on fact, and that Crockett's actions reflect the sentiment in the story.

That's my thought, too.

132 posted on 01/25/2002 6:57:00 PM PST by jo6pac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
You've done some excellent research.

I appreciate it - this Crockett story has long been a favorite of mine.

133 posted on 01/25/2002 6:57:43 PM PST by jo6pac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Do you have a link to the source on the web?

Bottom right corner.


134 posted on 01/25/2002 7:00:43 PM PST by jo6pac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Huck;RonDog
It appears the relief for the widow PASSED, even though in the story it says:

"The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, not doubt, it would but for that speech, it received but few votes, and of course was lost.

Unless that's a different widow. Are there Major General's in the Navy?

I think we've got the wrong widow in Mrs. Brown. He also voted against Stephen Decatur's widow. Feb 11,1831 debate)

The author seems to be combining the two incidents.

135 posted on 01/25/2002 8:45:45 PM PST by jo6pac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac; RonDog
Cool. I was just looking into the Decatur debate, and I ran across this entry in the record, which, while unrelated, I imagine you fellers would appreciate:

Saturday, Feb. 12th
Soon after the House met, the eclipse of the sun created considerable gloom within the hall, (although far from being dark enough to require candles), an adjournment was moved by Mr. Dwight, and was carried--yeas 86, nays 77.

--Register of Debates, House of Representatives, 21th Congress, 2nd Session


136 posted on 01/26/2002 1:20:13 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac
More on Susan decatur here:

http://www.decaturhouse.org/pressroom/timeline.htm

137 posted on 01/26/2002 1:24:55 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac; RonDog
Stephen Decatur here:

http://www.zweb.com/parpro/Decatur.html

138 posted on 01/26/2002 1:26:27 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac
He voted against relief for James Monroe on the 1st of Feb, too.
139 posted on 01/26/2002 1:45:40 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: RonDog; jo6pac
Check out the debate on Fuel for the poor of the city. It is not directly related, but is philosohically related. See the argument of Tucker from S Carolina. Note that Crockett voted for the resolution:

This stuff is so interesting. It paints such a vivid picture. There is a snowstorm in the Capital. A resolution is made to give some spare wood from the Capital to the poor, who are burning any wood they can find. The S. Carolinian rises in opposition, on strict constructionist grounds. Then, word is passed that the impeachment of a judge is underway. Short discussion on what to do. Run right over or vote on the resolution? How about we lay the resolution on the table (procedural speak for officially puting it aside without consideration). That is rejected, a vote is taken, the resoltution passes. They poor get the wood, and they move on to Judge Peck's impeachment. I could read this stuff all day (hell, it's 6am on Saturday as I write!)

140 posted on 01/26/2002 2:01:44 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Huck; jo6pac
More on Susan decatur here:

http://www.decaturhouse.org/pressroom/timeline.htm
137 posted on 1/26/02 2:24 AM Pacific by Huck

Stephen Decatur here:

http://www.zweb.com/parpro/Decatur.html
138 posted on 1/26/02 2:26 AM Pacific by Huck

GREAT work, Huck!

Here are those links, activated by HTML, fo those who do not like to "cut and paste":

http://www.decaturhouse.org/pressroom/timeline.htm

http://www.zweb.com/parpro/Decatur.html


141 posted on 01/26/2002 9:13:56 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: RonDog; Huck
Please forgive the size of this reply.

This appears to be the a description of Senate debate reguarding the fire that Horatio Bunce makes reference to (?... This is the only reference I could find that fits the description of the event Bunce describes) :

The House debate:

In the end $20,000 was voted for relief. But, the name David Crockett does not appear in the listing of the yeas and nays.

Upon further review, David Crockett wasn't a member of the 19th. Congress.
But, was a member of the 20th. Congress.

A list of members of the 19th Congress:

A list of members of the 20th Congress:

So, unless further evidence comes to light, the events as described in "Not Yours to Give", appears (IMHO) to be an urban legend (a very old one).

142 posted on 01/26/2002 2:04:28 PM PST by michigander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: jo6pac
Do you have a link to the source on the web?

Bottom right corner.

Here are links to the image that you posted, and a little transcription:
U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1873
Register of Debates, House of Representatives, 20th Congress, 1st Session
Pages 2085 & 2086 of 2840

and
Pages 2087 & 2088 of 2840 :
Wednesday, April 2, 1828
FAMILY OF GENERAL BROWN
". . . .The bill from the Senate for the relief of Mrs. Brown,
was read a third time.
. . . . .Messrs. CHILTON and CROCKETT (who had been
absent from the House during the discussion yesterday)
delivered their sentiments in opposition to the principle
of the bill. The latter offering to subscribe his quota,
in his private character, to make up the sum proposed...

143 posted on 01/26/2002 3:19:13 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: michigander
Thank you, michigander!

First, thank you for sharing THIS marvelous website that you found for us:

A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation - (from the Law Library of Congress)

Second, thank you for the wonderful images that you posted about the fire in Alexandria!
Here are some HTML-activated links to those images, for those who wish to explore further:

Register of Debates, Senate, 19th Congress, 2nd Session,
Pages 67 through 70, Relief of the Sufferers at Alexandria

U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1873
Bills and Resolutions, House of Representatives, 19th Congress, 2nd Session
Bill 383

Register of Debates, House of Representatives, 19th Congress, 2nd Session,
Pages 747 through 748, Sufferers by Fire at Alexandria-Duties on Wool and Woollens

And, third...
Thank you for teaching me (and MANY other FReepers) how to use HTML!!!
(FWIW, though, I am not yet prepared to call the "Not Yours to Give" story an "urban legend!")

144 posted on 01/26/2002 6:15:05 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: michigander; Huck; jo6pac
From Expedia maps:
It appears that ALEXANDRIA (at the bottom of this map) is rather far from the Capitol building, while GEORGETOWN (at the top, on the left) is much closer. Could there have been TWO fires that Congress voted on?
145 posted on 01/26/2002 7:23:48 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: RonDog;huck;jo6pac;michigander;chapita
Thank you all for a most interesting read. This story has long been a favorite, though I've never seen an investigation of its history. As to whether it is a story representing historical events, or a composite based on philosophical accuracy, perhaps you fellers will be the ones to discover. The "Broken English" version may be that author's attempt to duplicate, in written form, Crockett's Tennessee dialect and accent. If so, it may suffer from that author's lack of skill, as well as his own embellishments.
146 posted on 01/26/2002 11:46:32 PM PST by lonevoice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: All
From http://oha.ci.alexandria.va.us/archaeology/decades/ar-decades-1820.html:

Discovering the Decades: 1820s

Alexandria Archaeology Looks Back at 250 Years of Alexandria History

"...And then, a disaster occurred which probably affected Alexandria more adversely than any other single event-the tragic fire of January 1827.

The fire originated, by accident in the workshop of Mr. James Green, cabinet maker, which stood in the interior of the square bounded by Fairfax, Prince, Royal, and King Streets and near the intersection of the two last.... The back buildings of several houses on Royal Street were consumed, as was also a frame dwelling fronting on the alley, and immediately south of Mr. Green's work shop. The fire soon reached Fairfax Street where it was checked on the North by the three story fire proof, occupied by Messrs. Edward Stabler and Sons as a drug store, but every other house on the West side of Fairfax Street south to Prince Street was simultaneously wrapped in flames and speedily consumed. From Fairfax and Prince Streets the fire jumped to the corner of Water [Lee] and Prince. In a few minutes, both sides of Prince-Street, between Water and Union, together with a warehouse on the east side of Water Street-four others on the West side of Union Street south of Prince, and three others on the same side of Union, north of Prince-were all in flames, and every house except two was destroyed-many of them with their whole contents.... For five hours the flames were rushing from house to house with increasing fury-furniture and goods, were scattered in every direction, women and children were flying for safety, and houses that were not burnt, were often on fire, sometimes dozens at once. [Alexandria Gazette 1/23/1827]

A town committee calculated the destruction at "53 buildings consisting of dwellings, ware and storehouses, exclusive of a number of stables and other outbuildings; all of which are valued at sixty thousand nine hundred and twenty dollars; and personal property which we have estimated at forty-six thousand, three hundred and fifty-seven dollars; making an aggregate sum of one hundred seven thousand, two hundred and seventy-seven dollars." Other damage estimates ranged as high as $150,000.

Alexandria was so prostrated by this conflagration that the U.S. Congress appropriated funds for disaster relief. Several representatives, however, questioned the constitutionality of providing such aid to a private corporation..."

And from http://dcpages.com/Tourism/History_and_Culture/041500dcname.shtml:

Origins of the Name District of Columbia

"...The initial plot of land authorized by the Constitution for the seat of the US government was a 100-square mile area. The first commissioners appointed to acquire the property for the new capital and construct the first government buildings made the obvious choice and named the city Washington. At the same time, they decided to call the entire 100 square-mile area the District of Columbia. Congress later went along with this decision through legislative references to the area.

The city of Washington as designed by L'Enfant did not, of course, fill the 100 square-mile area authorized by the Constitution for the seat of government. The area also included the cities of Georgetown (1751) and Alexandria (1749), which were already in existence. Congress designated the rest of the 10-mile by 10-mile portion outside the corporate limits of these three cities as the County of Alexandria, in the section given by Virginia, and the County of Washington, in the Maryland-ceded portion.

In 1846 Congress voted to give back to Virginia all the land that state had given to the government in 1790 for creation of the District of Columbia. This move returned about 32 square miles of territory to Virginia. Residents of Alexandria and what is now Arlington County, Virginia, thus lost District of Columbia residency and again became Virginia citizens..."


147 posted on 01/28/2002 5:45:27 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: All
From http://politicalgraveyard.com/bio/bully-bunker.html:

"I ...limit The Political Graveyard primarily to those who have participated in politics at the state and federal levels. Among local officials, all that I have chosen to include are mayors of cities above a certain size..."


148 posted on 01/28/2002 6:22:36 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Huck; jo6pac; michigander
From http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=C000918:

CROCKETT, David, (father of John Wesley Crockett), a Representative from Tennessee; born at the confluence of Limestone Creek and Noli-Chuckey River in the State of Franklin, which a few years later became Greene County, Tenn., August 17, 1786; attended the common schools for a short time; moved to Lincoln County about 1808 and to what is now Gibson County in 1822; commanded a battalion of mounted riflemen under General Jackson in the Creek campaign in 1813 and 1814; member of the State house of representatives 1821-1823; unsuccessful candidate for election in 1825 to the Nineteenth Congress; elected to the Twentieth and Twenty-first Congresses (March 4, 1827-March 3, 1831); unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1830 to the Twenty-second Congress; elected as an Anti-Jacksonian to the Twenty-third Congress (March 4, 1833-March 3, 1835); unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1834 to the Twenty-fourth Congress; went to Texas to aid the Texans in their struggle for independence in 1836; joined a band of 186 men in the defense of the Alamo, San Antonio de Bexar, and was among those killed in that battle which terminated on March 6, 1836; his body destroyed by pyre at the Alamo.

And from http://www.famousamericans.net/samuelbunch/:

Samuel Bunch

BUNCH, Samuel, soldier, born in Granger County, Tennessee, 4 December, 1786; died in Rutledge, Tennessee, 5 September, 1849. He commanded a regiment of mounted yeomen from Tennessee during the Creek war, serving under General Andrew Jackson, and distinguished himself in the attack on Hillibeetown on 18 November, 1813. In the charge of the battle at Horseshoe Bend, on 27 March, 1814, he was among the first to pass over the breastworks of the enemy. For many years he was sheriff of Granger county. He was elected from Tennessee to the 23d congress as a Whig, and was re-elected to the 24th, serving from 2 December, 1833, till 3 March, 1837.

Perphaps this SAMUEL BUNCH is the "Horatio Bunce" of our story.

If the author mistook "Georgetown" for ALEXANDRIA, and "naval officer" for ARMY officer, it is not too much of a stretch to think that Crockett listened to and respected the political advice from a man that he served with during the war, particularly since Col. Samuel Bunch went on to be elected to Congress himself, eh?

Plus, the only references that I can find in a Google search for "Horatio Bunce" - 194 references - seem to refer to the story from the Ellis biography, i.e. Google search for "distinguished naval officer" crockett - 177 references.
(There are few OTHER references to "Horatio Bunce.")

In other news, I can find NO other references to a fire in "Georgetown" for which the Congress appropriated money.

149 posted on 01/28/2002 7:03:07 PM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Can you find this?

From the Senate of the United States: “While we devoutly join you in offering our thanks to Almighty God for the return to health of our cities, and for the general prosperity of our county; we cannot refrain from lamenting that the arts and calumnies of factious and designing men, have excited open rebellion a second time in Pennsylvania, and thereby compelled the employment of a military force to aid the civil authority in the execution of the laws. We rejoice that your vigilance, energy and well timed exertions, have crushed so daring an opposition, and prevented the spreading of such treasonable combinations.”

If you can, I would say that your search capabilities vis-à-vis the congressional record are commendable and noteworthy and I would accept your inability to find Crockett’s speech as refutation of the old axiom “absence of proof is not proof of absence.”

150 posted on 01/28/2002 7:38:51 PM PST by Positive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-209 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson