The British Empire -- A Noble Effort
D. Spencer Hines
From the Scottish viewpoint of course.
DSH
--------------------------------------------------------
"The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:f5ajv2hdkk3fo1alg...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:44:27 GMT, "a.spencer3"
> <a.spe...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> "The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:abehv2pjgl6pvp7d9...@4ax.com...
>>> > You're just another jealous *nglish wanker who knows
>>> > perfectly well that without us Scots you'd have had no Empire
>>>
>>>
>>Didn't do so well with your unilateral attempt in Central America, did
>>you?
>>
>>Surreyman
>>
> Indeed. The English part in that was as shameful as any stunt that sad
> little country has pulled on the Scots.
>
> The Highlander
The Highlander
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Please tell us the details...
>
>From the Scottish viewpoint of course.
>
>DSH
>--------------------------------------------------------
The idea for the Darien adventure was the brainchild of William
Paterson, the Scottish founder of the Bank of England. Paterson had
heard sailors' tales of the Darien peninsula in what is now Panama, a
fertile land of friendly natives accessible through a sheltered bay.
He recognised the economic benefits of establishing a colony
controlling trade between the Pacific and Atlantic, then hampered by
the long and arduous journey around the tip of South America.
Paterson’s dream of making Scotland independently wealthy proved
popular. In 1695 the Scottish Parliament established the Company of
Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies. Initially, the venture was
also funded by English and Dutch money, but the English Parliament
forced the backers to withdraw. Undaunted, the Scots eventually raised
about £400,000 from a national scheme, equal to half the country's
gross national product. Five vessels with 1,200 people aboard set sail
from Leith on 12 July 1698, reaching Darien on 3 November.
Instead of finding fertile land the area was full of malaria-infested
swamps. The Scots bravely tried to build a settlement, New Edinburgh,
subsisting on just a pound of infested flour a week. By March hundreds
had died. The natives were also unlike the sailors' descriptions of
vain savages and did not want the hundreds of combs and mirrors the
Scots foolishly brought to trade, but did give the dying Scots fruit
and fish. Although the English had colonies nearby, a royal
proclamation barred all trade with Darien and appeals for help were
rejected.
The foolhardy Scots also overlooked the Spanish, who were not pleased
to find new neighbours in the middle of their own American empire. The
Scots built a fort around New Edinburgh, but abandoned the colony when
pressed by the Spanish.
Finally the Scots gave up and four ships packed with the survivors set
out for home, but ran into terrible storms. Two foundered with all
hands; the other two reached English and Spanish ports but again,
appeals for help from the English were refused and both ships were
impounded. Not one ship made it home.
This left the country bankrupt and now that the Darien Scheme had
failed, everyone knew whom to blame: the English.
In late April 1705, an English ship that was rumoured to have sunk one
of the last Darien vessels put into Leith from the Firth of Forth.
Scottish authorities ordered it seized and the captain and crew
arrested for murder and piracy. A trial of sorts took place, in a
lynch-mob atmosphere. The English captain and fourteen crewmen were
found guilty and sentenced to death.
The Crown intervened and pardoned the condemned men. However, the
Scottish Privy Council, terrified by the howls of protest from the
Edinburgh crowd, allowed the captain and two officers to be hanged.
Vengeful Scots celebrated; indignant Englishmen raged; relations
between the two countries sank to a new low.
To wiser observers in Scotland, including many newly sobered former
Darien investors, all this proved one thing: that Scotland could not
succeed in getting into the new Atlantic trading economy without
English help.
Under current arrangements, as two separate sovereignties governed by
a single monarch, that would not happen. Darien proved that if the
king or queen had to choose between English and Scottish interests, he
or she would always gravitate toward the richer, more populous
southern kingdom. Scotland would always come in second, unless some
new, larger interest could be created, which would look to satisfy
both.
Here the solution seemed to be the word more and more on the lips of
the political classes of both nations: union. It had come up before in
parliamentary debates and pamphlets; now, paradoxically, the
bitterness over the Darien debacle turned it into a tangible issue.
English political opinion was largely in favor of it. In fact, the
Aliens Act of 1704 carried a provision calling for the naming of
Scottish and English commissioners to negotiate "concerning the Union
of the Two Kingdoms." Whigs and Tories both saw it as a means of
keeping the reins on any future Scottish enterprise like Darien, and
of making sure Scotland remained in the English economic and political
orbit.
Union with England being offered, the Scottish Parliament finally
agreed, despite rioting by the citizens who wanted no part of England.
And we have been a "equal" partner in that Union to this day.
The Highlander
Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
The views expressed in this post are
not necessarily those of The Highlander.
Robert Peffers.
> The views expressed in this post are
> not necessarily those of The Highlander.
(http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0007127.html)
the English Navigational Acts had been causing problems all over the globe
but Scotland, being England's nearest neighbours, suffered out of all
proportion. In effect these acts caused trouble with every European maritime
nation,( in particular the Netherlands), and eventually were the main cause
of the American War of Independence. However, in James's time, the king
favoured England and these acts were applied to Scotland. As James was also
King of Scots his English Navy were stopping the Scots from trade with
anyone in the British Isles, Europe and the colonies.
--
Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
D. Spencer Hines
> >
> >Surreyman
> >
> More a pun, I would have said. And I believe it was "Peccavi" and the
> speaker was General Charles Napier. At least, that's what my history
> book said at school.
>
> Of course, I'm no historian, merely a bystander sitting at the feet of
> the scholarly members of soc.history.medieval. And what are facts but
> the detritus of battles half-remembered... As the late John Kennedy
> said in his famous (plagiarized, but unattributed to Tacitus) remark,
> "Victory has a thousand fathers, etc."
>
> I leave you the pleasure of explaining all this to your colleagues, as
> a gesture of civility.
> The Highlander
From memory, the Napier version was from a Punch cartoon which was taking
off the genuine Havelock version, but I'd need to check if anyone is going
to become really excited about it.
Pogue Surreyman
--------------------------------------------------
Clearly the Scot knows his British History far better than the Englishman.
The HISTORICAL FACTS -- not the flatulent poofings Pogue Surreyman
substitutes for the FACTS.
Pogue Surreyman is consistently:
DEAD WRONG in matters of this sort concerning British History... a definite
mark of POGUENITUDE.
Pogue Surreyman further compounds his pratfall by not only getting the
attribution wrong, Havelock instead of the correct Napier, but getting the
LATIN wrong as well.
Hilarious!
Peccavimus! -- is literally -- "we have sinned", whereas...
Peccavi! -- is literally "I have sinned". [It's a pun, folks.]
See below for the rest of the story -- after we have all had a Good Laugh
about Pogue Surreyman -- the Ignorant Englishman.
DSH
-------------------------------------------------------------
General Sir Charles James Napier
Wikipedia
General Sir Charles James Napier (August 10, 1782 – August 29, 1853) was a
British general and Commander-in-Chief in India. The city of Napier, New
Zealand, is named after him. He is famous for conquering Sindh province now
in present-day Pakistan.
A quote for which Napier is famous involves a delegation of Hindu locals
approaching him and complaining about prohibition of Sati, often referred to
at the time as suttee, by British authorities. This was the custom of
burning widows alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands. The exact
wording of his response varies somewhat in different reports, but the
following version captures its essence:
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a
custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we
hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a
gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
The Multi-Cultural Approach, with due diligence given to Understanding
Cultural Differences. -- DSH
The most important epoch in Sir Charles Napier's life was yet to come, and
in 1842, at the age of 60, he was appointed as Major-General to the command
of the Indian army within the Bombay presidency. Here Lord Ellenborough's
policy led Napier to Sindh, for the purpose of quelling the Amirs or Muslim
Rulers of the region, who had made various hostile demonstrations against
the British government after the termination of the Afghan war.
His campaign against these chieftains resulted, after the victories of
Meanee and Hyderabad, in the complete subjugation of the province of Sindh,
and its annexation to eastern dominions.
This is when he is said to have despatched back to headquarters a short,
famous message, "Peccavi" – Latin for "I have sinned" - a pun on Sindh.
Later proponents of British rule over the East Indians justified the
conquest thus: "If this was a piece of rascality, it was a noble piece of
rascality!"
Noble Rascality Indeed. -- DSH
He was appointed Bombay Presidency governor by Lord Ellenborough. His
administration did not please the directors of the East India Company, and
he accordingly returned home in disgust, but was sent out again by the
acclamatory voice of the nation, in the spring of 1849, to reduce the Sikhs
to submission. On arriving once more in India, he found that the object of
his mission had already been accomplished by Lord Gough. He remained for a
time as commander-in-chief (C-in-C); quarrelled with Lord Dalhousie, the
governor-general; then throwing up his post, he returned home for the last
time. Broken down with infirmities, the result of his former wounds in the
Peninsular campaign, he expired about two years later at his seat of
Oaklands, near Portsmouth, in August 1853, at the age of 71....
'Nuff Said.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Fortem Posce Animum
D. Spencer Hines
Non...
Renia quite obviously does not understand the differences between RACISM and
NATIONALISM -- in the Modern World.
She also is not sufficiently sensitive to the Emergent and Growing Reaction
to some of the silly-buggers excesses of the so-called "Multi-Cultural
Movement" -- which was, in large part, a major underlying cause of 9/11.
DSH
-------------------------------------
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:etcsb5$ln$1...@mouse.otenet.gr...
>>>It's not so much anti-Scottish sentiment but the sheer racism of the
>>>ultra-Scots which is offending people. There is nothing wrong with being
>>>proud of one's country, but to insult other countries and their peoples
>>>is sheer racism.
>>
>> Can't be racism !
>> We're all Br*t*sh, are we not ?
>
> Indeed we are. Yet you verbose Scots spend most of your time insulting the
> English. That is racism, non?
D. Spencer Hines
I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very quiet --
hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
See Below.
DSH
"Robert Peffers." <pef...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:WfmdnUiNyK8qdWTY...@bt.com...
>
> "The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:8amjv2tvpi7nmstkv...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:28:46 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
>> <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Please tell us the details...
>>>
>>>From the Scottish viewpoint of course.
>>>
>>>DSH
>>>--------------------------------------------------------
>> The idea for the Darien adventure was the brainchild of William
>> Paterson, the Scottish founder of the Bank of England. Paterson had
>> heard sailors' tales of the Darien peninsula in what is now Panama, a
>> fertile land of friendly natives accessible through a sheltered bay.
He was a relative of yours? Not spelled the same, of course.
>> He recognised the economic benefits of establishing a colony
>> controlling trade between the Pacific and Atlantic, then hampered by
>> the long and arduous journey around the tip of South America.
Indeed.
The Panama Canal was not to be a reality until 1914 -- because of the genius
of Theodore Roosevelt -- and a first cousin of mine. <g> -- DSH
>> Paterson's dream of making Scotland independently wealthy proved
>> popular. In 1695 the Scottish Parliament established the Company of
>> Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies. Initially, the venture was
>> also funded by English and Dutch money, but the English Parliament
>> forced the backers to withdraw. Undaunted, the Scots eventually raised
>> about £400,000 from a national scheme, equal to half the country's
>> gross national product. Five vessels with 1,200 people aboard set sail
>> from Leith on 12 July 1698, reaching Darien on 3 November.
That's putting a lot of eggs in one basket.
Sailors often tell tall tales. Vide the mermaid.
>> Instead of finding fertile land the area was full of malaria-infested
>> swamps. The Scots bravely tried to build a settlement, New Edinburgh,
>> subsisting on just a pound of infested flour a week. By March hundreds
>> had died. The natives were also unlike the sailors' descriptions of
>> vain savages and did not want the hundreds of combs and mirrors the
>> Scots foolishly brought to trade, but did give the dying Scots fruit
>> and fish. Although the English had colonies nearby, a royal
>> proclamation barred all trade with Darien and appeals for help were
>> rejected.
Perfidious English! Now if you had named your colony, say JAMESTOWN [but,
1698 was too late for that] so WILLIAMSTOWN or MARYSVILLE -- perhaps it
would not have been allowed to fail? We Americans beat you to WILLIAMSBURG
and another WILLIAMSTOWN.
But then you would have had to grease many palms in London.
>> The foolhardy Scots also overlooked the Spanish, who were not pleased
>> to find new neighbours in the middle of their own American empire. The
>> Scots built a fort around New Edinburgh, but abandoned the colony when
>> pressed by the Spanish.
Any naval and military backup for the Scots?
>> Finally the Scots gave up and four ships packed with the survivors set
>> out for home, but ran into terrible storms. Two foundered with all
>> hands; the other two reached English and Spanish ports but again,
>> appeals for help from the English were refused and both ships were
>> impounded. Not one ship made it home.
Terrible! And Tragic.
Source? Web?
>> Union with England being offered, the Scottish Parliament finally
>> agreed, despite rioting by the citizens who wanted no part of England.
>> And we have been a "equal" partner in that Union to this day.
>>
>> The Highlander
>>
>> Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
>> an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghąidheil.
>> The views expressed in this post are
>> not necessarily those of The Highlander.
> The only thing I could add to that is that since 1381
<http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0007127.html>
D. Spencer Hines
See Below.
DSH
Indeed.
would not have been allowed to fail? We Americans beat you to WILLIAMSBURG.
Terrible! And Tragic.
Source? Web?
>> an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
D. Spencer Hines
news:1174000126.6...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On 15 Mar, 10:51, "a.spencer3" <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> My favourite Empire joke remains Havelock's "Peccavimus"!
>>
>> Surreyman
> Napier would have you shot twice; once for misattribution and once for
> diluting his personal glory by using the plural :-)
Pogue Surreyman is even more senile today than he usually demonstrates.
Watch Pogue Surreyman now post one of his standard little "screw you too"
miniposts.
He's afraid to post anything very long, for fear he will screw the pooch
even more -- and be caught out again.
Pogue Surreyman seems to have once visited Trafalgar Square, seen the
statues of Havelock and Napier -- and gotten them confused and conflated.
Hilarious!
Teaching British History to Englishmen is a full-time job in these
newsgroups -- and Pogue Surreyman is one of the worst and slowest pupils.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Deus Vult
a.spencer3
"D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:A1rKh.73$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
> Recte:
>
> Thank you both, most kindly.
>
> I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very quiet --
> hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
>
Check when all this was written in terms of UK time, moron.
So the organisers of this lunacy:
Tried belatedly to cash in on carving their own little Empire (a policy for
which Highlander hates the English for carrying out, of course).
Mortgaged half their nation's wealth on a single unplanned, unresearched
dash.
Never seemed to consider why every other 'imperialistic' nation had avoided
this area like the plague!
And then wondered why outside finance was lacking!
Effectively slaughtered many of their own hardy souls, virtually bankrupted
their nation ....
And then, inevitably, Highlander wants to blame the English of the time, not
the Scots!
Check the size of the empire lil' ol' Portugal carved out for itself, for
instance, also without English help incidentally, and weep.
Which is all totally irrelevant to why the present-day Highlander seems to
hate present-day English, of course, but there you are.
Hoist your flag, or petard, to this cause if you wish, Hines.
Twit!
Surreyman
a.spencer3
You saw my answer regarding confusion over a later Punch cartoon taking off
the actual event.
Deal with that, moron, rather than regurgitating popularist Wickidpedia
stuff.
I'd be interested in researching further.
You obviously are not.
Twit!
Surreyman
William Black
"a.spencer3" <a.spe...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:WfsKh.6122$NK3....@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>
> "D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:A1rKh.73$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
>> Recte:
>>
>> Thank you both, most kindly.
>>
>> I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very quiet --
>> hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
>>
>
> Check when all this was written in terms of UK time, moron.
>
> So the organisers of this lunacy:
>
> Tried belatedly to cash in on carving their own little Empire (a policy
> for
> which Highlander hates the English for carrying out, of course).
>
> Mortgaged half their nation's wealth on a single unplanned, unresearched
> dash.
>
> Never seemed to consider why every other 'imperialistic' nation had
> avoided
> this area like the plague!
>
> And then wondered why outside finance was lacking!
>
> Effectively slaughtered many of their own hardy souls, virtually
> bankrupted
> their nation ....
>
> And then, inevitably, Highlander wants to blame the English of the time,
> not
> the Scots!
I loved the idea that one bunch of imperialists were evil when they refused
to help another bunch of evil imperialists who had come unstuck.
It's a bit like asking Microsoft to help out poor old IBM...
Look, and this is a bit basic, empires are wrong.
Some empires have unexpected side effects that may have done some good
("What have the Romans ever done for us" and etc) but, on the whole, the
ills outdo the benefits by orders of magnitude.
Mind you, as "Life of Brian" never played in India that particular scene is
a great help when some over-enthusiastic school student with an even more
over-enthusiastic history teacher trots out his (or her) "I hate the
British" routine when sitting around the dinner table in Bombay.
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea
Robert Peffers.
"William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:etdk0q$ala$1...@aioe.org...
and George. I have no time for either you or them.
PLONK!
William Black
> and George. I have no time for either you or them.
> PLONK!
Lack of content noted.
Still, it's nice to see people run away when they get beaten...
D. Spencer Hines
The United States has now fallen heir to that Tradition.
Prime Minister Blair understands that, which is One Major Reason why he has
been a staunch ally of the United States.
Pogue Surreyman, alias Horsellman Rarebit, _au contraire_, is so stupid and
ignorant he even confuses Havelock and Napier in "his favorite joke about
Empire".
Hilarious!
a.spencer3
> The British Empire -- A Noble Effort...
>
> The United States has now fallen heir to that Tradition.
>
> Prime Minister Blair understands that, which is One Major Reason why he
has
> been a staunch ally of the United States.
>
> Pogue Surreyman, alias Horsellman Rarebit, _au contraire_, is so stupid
and
> ignorant he even confuses Havelock and Napier in "his favorite joke about
> Empire".
>
Please simply clarify the 'USA Empire'.
And the Punch Napier cartoon.
Twit!
Surreyman
zzbu...@netscape.net
wrote:
> The British Empire -- A Noble Effort...
>
> The United States has now fallen heir to that Tradition.
The Eastern seaboard of the US has always been in
that tradition. They only briefly come out of stupor
whenever the price of oil jostles.
Just like England has always,
The rest of the country invents
Lasers and Rockets and travels to the moon thoigh.
Since the only thing that has ever grown
in Panama is in fact Columbia.
D. Spencer Hines
> Please simply clarify the 'USA Empire'.
>
> And the Punch Napier cartoon.
>
> Twit!
>
> Surreyman
----------------------------------------
Pogue SURREYMAN needs to clarify his stupid gaffe about the alleged Punch --
Napier cartoon -- HE posted it -- not I.
HE needs to show us the alleged Punch cartoon -- and then explain how he
botched it -- NO ONE ELSE.
HE was the one who stupidly confused Napier and Havelock -- AND the LATIN in
his "favourite joke about Empire".
HE needs to tell us why he stupidly confused Havelock with Napier.
Perhaps he got the statues in Trafalgar square mixed up and was drunk when
he posted.
Confession Is Good For The Soul.
We note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is once again reduced to using
his favorite four-letter word.
The boy has a VERY limited vocabulary.
I didn't say the USA has an Empire -- I said we Americans haven fallen heir
to the TRADITION of the British Empire -- a Noble Effort.
It was a Great Civilizing Mission & eventually led to a betterment of
conditions in many parts of the World where the British flag once flew.
The Highlander's astute reply to Pogue Surreyman is relevant here:
> Well, without wishing to emphasize the yawning gap between your social
> life and mine, I was sitting with the late president of Tunisia, Habib
> Bourguiba, one evening, listening to him talk about the French
> pull-out from Tunisia in 1954 at the time of Tunisian independence.
When and where was that, Highlander?
> He said that the French had blown up all the public buildings,
> destroyed much the infrastructure of the main cities and essentially
> left the country a shambles.
>
> "I have often wished that we had been a British colony," he said.
> "Whatever wrongs they may have committed, they always left behind a
> fully functioning state, with law courts, railways, roads, potable
> water supplies, a working civil service; all the things needed to run
> a modern state." He went on at length about the various matters, but
> you get the general idea.
>
> I think that says a great deal about the British Empire as opposed to
> say, the French, Dutch, Spanish and American Empires.
Indeed it does.
D. Spencer Hines
Pogue Black doesn't WANT to sing _Rule Britannia!".
DSH
William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:etdj7l$8sn$1...@aioe.org...>
> "The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:j6ikv2dos9vvoaggh...@4ax.com...
>
>> Exactly. I always think of Mr. Black as "Cousin William" whenever we
>> get together on Skype for a rousing chorus or two of "Rule Britannia!"
>
> With the best will in the world, you'll get my Skype address when Hell
> freezes over...
The Highlander
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Thank you both, most kindly.
>
>I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very quiet --
>hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
>
>See Below.
>
>DSH
>
>"Robert Peffers." <pef...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:WfmdnUiNyK8qdWTY...@bt.com...
>>
>> "The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>> news:8amjv2tvpi7nmstkv...@4ax.com...
>
>>> On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:28:46 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
>>> <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Please tell us the details...
>>>>
>>>>From the Scottish viewpoint of course.
>>>>
>>>>DSH
>>>>--------------------------------------------------------
>
>>> The idea for the Darien adventure was the brainchild of William
>>> Paterson, the Scottish founder of the Bank of England. Paterson had
>>> heard sailors' tales of the Darien peninsula in what is now Panama, a
>>> fertile land of friendly natives accessible through a sheltered bay.
>
>He was a relative of yours? Not spelled the same, of course.
Yes. Spelled the same. (Don't pay any attention to those English
know-nothings who have trouble spelling Scottish names.)
>
>>> He recognised the economic benefits of establishing a colony
>>> controlling trade between the Pacific and Atlantic, then hampered by
>>> the long and arduous journey around the tip of South America.
>
>Indeed.
>
>The Panama Canal was not to be a reality until 1914 -- because of the genius
>of Theodore Roosevelt -- and a first cousin of mine. <g> -- DSH
>
>>> Paterson's dream of making Scotland independently wealthy proved
>>> popular. In 1695 the Scottish Parliament established the Company of
>>> Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies. Initially, the venture was
>>> also funded by English and Dutch money, but the English Parliament
>>> forced the backers to withdraw. Undaunted, the Scots eventually raised
>>> about £400,000 from a national scheme, equal to half the country's
>>> gross national product. Five vessels with 1,200 people aboard set sail
>>> from Leith on 12 July 1698, reaching Darien on 3 November.
>
>That's putting a lot of eggs in one basket.
It bwas an poor Willie was a dreamer and a salesman, rather than a
straegist, so his research was totally inadequate.
>
>Sailors often tell tall tales. Vide the mermaid.
>
>>> Instead of finding fertile land the area was full of malaria-infested
>>> swamps. The Scots bravely tried to build a settlement, New Edinburgh,
>>> subsisting on just a pound of infested flour a week. By March hundreds
>>> had died. The natives were also unlike the sailors' descriptions of
>>> vain savages and did not want the hundreds of combs and mirrors the
>>> Scots foolishly brought to trade, but did give the dying Scots fruit
>>> and fish. Although the English had colonies nearby, a royal
>>> proclamation barred all trade with Darien and appeals for help were
>>> rejected.
>
>Perfidious English! Now if you had named your colony, say JAMESTOWN [but,
>1698 was too late for that] so WILLIAMSTOWN or MARYSVILLE -- perhaps it
>would not have been allowed to fail? We Americans beat you to WILLIAMSBURG
>and another WILLIAMSTOWN.
>
>But then you would have had to grease many palms in London.
>
>>> The foolhardy Scots also overlooked the Spanish, who were not pleased
>>> to find new neighbours in the middle of their own American empire. The
>>> Scots built a fort around New Edinburgh, but abandoned the colony when
>>> pressed by the Spanish.
>
>Any naval and military backup for the Scots?
None.
Arthur Herman - "How the Scots invented the modern world", although
all the above is common enough knowledge and on the Net.
>
>>> Union with England being offered, the Scottish Parliament finally
>>> agreed, despite rioting by the citizens who wanted no part of England.
>>> And we have been a "equal" partner in that Union to this day.
Willie Paterson founded the Bank of England as a small business which
specialized in buying shares from investors who had financed English
ships trading in Asia, usually attempting to cash in on the Dutch
spice trade in Java, now called Indonesia. Once it becamse clear that
a ship expected home by an approximate date was not going to show up,
the Dutch sank any intruder spotted trying to cash in on their spice
trade without mercy, naturally the investors were only too happy to
unload their shares for pennies in the pound. Willie's ace in the hole
was that if a "lost" ship did turn up, he and his partner would win
the equivalent of a king's ransom, as cargoes of spices were almost
beyond value in those days.
Not one ship whose shares Willie bought ever made it back to England,
so he sold his share of the business to his partner and began hanging
around with lowlife around the bars of London Docks. It was one of
those men, actually a very interesting man, called William Dampier who
can be found on Google, who filled Willie with tales of the richness
of Panama, the furs, the gold, all the usual stories of far places and
fortunes. He even drew Willie a rough map of Panama, which I would
love to say is sitting in front of me as I type, as it would be worth
millions, but in any case, Willie's agile mind dismissed the stories
of gold, etc. and focused on the real pay-off; that whoever controlled
Panama would control world trade; a brilliantly intuitive leap.
It must be remembered that there were only two routes to Europe from
Asia in those days; via Cape Horn or via the Cape of Good Hope.
Attempts to find a northern passage had not been realized at that
time, and Willie understood that if goods could be transported across
Panama from one coast to the other, to be shipped by Atlantic or
Pacific-based vessels, he would control world trade, as Cape Horn's
dangers were only too well known, with ships lying for weeks in some
semi-safe anchorage waiting for storms to lessen so they could round
the Horn.
It is not generally known that the Cape of Good Hope is also a
dangerous passage unless one stands well out to sea, in particular the
passage between Africa and Madagascar, which could cut days and even
weeks off a voyage if run successfully, but which was also a graveyard
of ships because of the fast-running cross-tides and other hazards.
Willie of course had no thought of constructing a canal; that came
centuries later, but he did think that the local natives could
probably be bribed or coerced into carrying goods from one coast to
the other, taking weeks or even months off voyages.
This was the underlying reason behind the Darien Scheme, and had it
succeeded, it would have made Scotland one of the richest countries in
Europe. Needless to say, the English were less than thrilled by
Willie's plan, as it would have struck at the heart of their merchant
marine trade from India and other colonies, and this is why they were
so totally opposed to the whole idea.
There were many who pointed out that the Spanish would be less than
thrilled too, as they regarded Panama as their territoty, but had not
yet understood its commercial and political power; but Willie was a
persuasive man and as someone noted at the time, "Happy was the man
who had a half-hours conversation with him". (My wife dryly remarked
that this proved he was one of my ancestors as I too can write - and
talk - endlessly...)
So the historical point of view, that Willie and his fellow Scots were
hopeless dreamers, is nonsense. The very fact that English investors
almost overwhelmed the Scottish investors in their rush to pledge
investment money; until the English government pushed a law through
their Parliament making it illegal for English citizens to invest in
the Darien Scheme, shows that England understood very well that if the
Scots could bring it off, they would make a fortune.
At around the same time by the way, England also passed a law
preventing Scots from having the right to trade or own property in
England; something which angered the Scots intensely. Combined with
the prohibition against Englishmen putting money into the Darien
scheme, it resulted in almost every penny in Scotland being invested
by those who had initially held back to show the English government
where they got off!
When the scheme failed, it bankrupted Scotland, and Willie, who
managed to get home - how, I do not know - but whose wife was left
behind, buried in the sands of Darien after dying from fever, was
among the Commissioners who negotiated the Union with England, because
he knew it was Scotland's only hope of survival.
The source for all this is any Scottish history book, although the
above is written by me, and some of the details are not universally
known.
In Canada, in 1973, I was approached by a Dr. Sandy Paterson from
Edmonton, Alberta, who asked me, as one of Willie's descendants to
join an expedition to Darien to try to uncover the fort built by our
famous ancestor and his compatriots.
I didn't go because of business and other reasons; (Dr. Paterson
estimated each member's contribution at $15,000 to cover the
expenses!) but the expedition failed to find any trace of the fort.
However, a few years ago, an archeological team from Oxford(?) did
find some of the broken walls and I have no doubt that if it isn't
already listed, it will eventually be granted some form of UN Heritage
site status.
And that's the story of William Paterson; a man who like many Scots
before and after him had a dream and did his best to bring it to life.
>>> The Highlander
>>>
>>> Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
>>> an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
>>> The views expressed in this post are
>>> not necessarily those of The Highlander.
>
>> The only thing I could add to that is that since 1381
>
><http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0007127.html>
>
>> the English Navigational Acts had been causing problems all over the globe
>> but Scotland, being England's nearest neighbours, suffered out of all
>> proportion. In effect these acts caused trouble with every European
>> maritime nation,( in particular the Netherlands), and eventually were the
>> main cause of the American War of Independence. However, in James's time,
>> the king favoured England and these acts were applied to Scotland. As
>> James was also King of Scots his English Navy were stopping the Scots from
>> trade with anyone in the British Isles, Europe and the colonies.
>> --
>>
>> Robert Peffers,
>> Kelty,
>> Fife,
>> Scotland, (UK)
>
The Highlander
Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
The Highlander
<a.spe...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>"D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:A1rKh.73$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
>> Recte:
>>
>> Thank you both, most kindly.
>>
>> I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very quiet --
>> hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
As you will see below, your warning came too late to stop our Surrey
hero from opening his mouth and changing feet yet again...
>
>Check when all this was written in terms of UK time, moron.
>
>So the organisers of this lunacy:
>
>Tried belatedly to cash in on carving their own little Empire (a policy for
>which Highlander hates the English for carrying out, of course).
The English never gave a thought to Panama until it was too late for
them to cash in.
>
>Mortgaged half their nation's wealth on a single unplanned, unresearched
>dash.
True, but with a contry on the edge of bankrupcy, people were
desperate and willing to clutch at straws. Nor unlike your Prime
Minister, whose lying appeal to the Scottish people promised financial
ruin if Scotland leaves the Union, was blasted almost immediately by
Scotland's leading banker as pure fantasy.
I posted it late last night in SCS. We're on our way, sweetheart, and
you can come up to Edinburgh any time you want - just don't forget to
bring your begging bowl and your 'wife and three kids to support' sign
with you!
>Never seemed to consider why every other 'imperialistic' nation had avoided
>this area like the plague!
I gather you're unfamiliar with the Spanish conquests of the Americas,
which included Darien? Read my other post where I exopkain why Darien
later became the most important shipping waterway in the world, now
known as the Panama Canal...
I really don't want to discourage you, but my grandchildren know more
about this than you do. Why don't you take a moment to switch
whichever foot is currently in your mouth and then read on...
>And then wondered why outside finance was lacking!
The English givernment had to pass a law to stop the flood of English
investors from investing in the scheme
>Effectively slaughtered many of their own hardy souls, virtually bankrupted
>their nation ....
No, fever did that. The Scots had no idea that fever would be a
problem - why would they have?
>And then, inevitably, Highlander wants to blame the English of the time, not
>the Scots!
Read my other post and learn something for a change, instead of
advertising your abyssmal ignorance to the world.
>
>Check the size of the empire lil' ol' Portugal carved out for itself, for
>instance, also without English help incidentally, and weep.
Panama was still the greatest prize of them all.
>Which is all totally irrelevant to why the present-day Highlander seems to
>hate present-day English, of course, but there you are.
I don't hate the English; I dislike the arrogant, ignorant blowhards
whom you so proudly represent. To date we know nothing about you or
what your family has or hasn't contributed to history, apart from your
probably ability to grow mangelwurzels and herd swine.
>
>Hoist your flag, or petard, to this cause if you wish, Hines.
Going down with the ship, eh?
>
>Twit!
Do stop constantly talking about yourself; you've already been written
off as a parasitic bore.
>Surreyman
The Badge of Shame.
D. Spencer Hines
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 05:35:42 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
> <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Thank you both, most kindly.
>>
>>I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very quiet --
>>hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
>>
>>See Below.
>>
>>DSH
>>
>>"Robert Peffers." <pef...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>>news:WfmdnUiNyK8qdWTY...@bt.com...
>>>
>>> "The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:8amjv2tvpi7nmstkv...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>> On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:28:46 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
>>>> <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Please tell us the details...
>>>>>
>>>>>From the Scottish viewpoint of course.
>>>>>
>>>>>DSH
>>>>>--------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>>> The idea for the Darien adventure was the brainchild of William
>>>> Paterson, the Scottish founder of the Bank of England. Paterson had
>>>> heard sailors' tales of the Darien peninsula in what is now Panama, a
>>>> fertile land of friendly natives accessible through a sheltered bay.
>>
>>He was a relative of yours? Not spelled the same, of course.
>
> Yes. Spelled the same. (Don't pay any attention to those English
> know-nothings who have trouble spelling Scottish names.)
So he is your relative? How close?
>>>> He recognised the economic benefits of establishing a colony
>>>> controlling trade between the Pacific and Atlantic, then hampered by
>>>> the long and arduous journey around the tip of South America.
>>
>>Indeed.
>>
>>The Panama Canal was not to be a reality until 1914 -- because of the
>>genius of Theodore Roosevelt -- and a first cousin of mine. <g> -- DSH
>>
>>>> Paterson's dream of making Scotland independently wealthy proved
>>>> popular. In 1695 the Scottish Parliament established the Company of
>>>> Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies. Initially, the venture was
>>>> also funded by English and Dutch money, but the English Parliament
>>>> forced the backers to withdraw. Undaunted, the Scots eventually raised
>>>> about £400,000 from a national scheme, equal to half the country's
>>>> gross national product. Five vessels with 1,200 people aboard set sail
>>>> from Leith on 12 July 1698, reaching Darien on 3 November.
>>
>>That's putting a lot of eggs in one basket.
>
> It was and poor Willie was a dreamer and a salesman, rather than a
> straegist, so his research was totally inadequate.
That's a shame. Expedition first -- one ship -- would have been a Good
Idea.
>>Sailors often tell tall tales. Vide the mermaid.
>>
>>>> Instead of finding fertile land the area was full of malaria-infested
>>>> swamps. The Scots bravely tried to build a settlement, New Edinburgh,
>>>> subsisting on just a pound of infested flour a week. By March hundreds
>>>> had died. The natives were also unlike the sailors' descriptions of
>>>> vain savages and did not want the hundreds of combs and mirrors the
>>>> Scots foolishly brought to trade, but did give the dying Scots fruit
>>>> and fish. Although the English had colonies nearby, a royal
>>>> proclamation barred all trade with Darien and appeals for help were
>>>> rejected.
>>
>>Perfidious English! Now if you had named your colony, say JAMESTOWN [but,
>>1698 was too late for that] so WILLIAMSTOWN or MARYSVILLE -- perhaps it
>>would not have been allowed to fail? We Americans beat you to
>>WILLIAMSBURG.
>>But then you would have had to grease many palms in London.
>>
>>>> The foolhardy Scots also overlooked the Spanish, who were not pleased
>>>> to find new neighbours in the middle of their own American empire. The
>>>> Scots built a fort around New Edinburgh, but abandoned the colony when
>>>> pressed by the Spanish.
>>
>>Any naval and military backup for the Scots?
>
> None.
Pity...
Yet half the Scottish GDP hanging in the balance? Strange.
Thanks.
Where is the map today?
> It must be remembered that there were only two routes to Europe from
> Asia in those days; via Cape Horn or via the Cape of Good Hope.
True. Sea routes.
He is your what Great-Grandfather -- how many Greats?
> I didn't go because of business and other reasons; (Dr. Paterson
> estimated each member's contribution at $15,000 to cover the
> expenses!) but the expedition failed to find any trace of the fort.
> However, a few years ago, an archeological team from Oxford(?) did
> find some of the broken walls and I have no doubt that if it isn't
> already listed, it will eventually be granted some form of UN Heritage
> site status.
Where is it located in Panama and what is it called?
> And that's the story of William Paterson; a man who like many Scots
> before and after him had a dream and did his best to bring it to life.
Fair Enough.
Quite A Story!
DSH
>>>> The Highlander
>>>>
>>>> Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
>>>> an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghąidheil.
The Highlander
Oh gosh, are we returning to our exploits in Mumbai again?
I used to stay with Parsi friends on Marine Drive, now renamed
Bulabhai Desai. Where did you stay? Dharavi?
The Highlander
So what's your problem - can't get your scooter to start?
D. Spencer Hines
<http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0007127.html>
> the English Navigational Acts had been causing problems all over the globe
> but Scotland, being England's nearest neighbours, suffered out of all
> proportion. In effect these acts caused trouble with every European
> maritime nation,( in particular the Netherlands), and eventually were the
> main cause of the American War of Independence. However, in James's time,
> the king favoured England and these acts were applied to Scotland. As
> James was also King of Scots his English Navy were stopping the Scots from
> trade with anyone in the British Isles, Europe and the colonies.
> --
>
> Robert Peffers,
> Kelty,
> Fife,
> Scotland, (UK)
----------------------------------------------
Very True...
Those Navigational Acts, in subsequent iterations, really got the Good
Citizens of Boston, New Haven, New York, Charleston, et al., upset and led
to our War of Independence, as you say, and the subsequent loss of the 13
American Colonies.
Tony Blair's son reminded him about this and obviously hoped his father
would never make a mistake as bad as Lord North's. <g>
Blair very deftly told our Congress of the United States that story.
Excellent British Humour.
Pogue Surreyman probably feels Blair has already done far worse with
Iraq....
But He Would Be Wrong.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Britannicus Traductus Sum
The Highlander
I hasten to add that Napier is, of course, a Scottish name. Thus
surreyman's haste to attribute the quote to someone else.
BTW, I really think you should submit "POGUENITUDE" to the Oxford
English Dictionary's compilers. I imagine they'd be as delighted with
it as I am! I do have my name listed as a contributor in a dictionary
of the Chinook trading language of the North American West Coast,
produced by the University of Victoria, British Columbia, but that's
peanuts compared to the Oxford English Dictionary...
As the Welsh would say, "There's posh!" (That's real class!)
The Highlander
Face reality Surreyman - you've been slammed - Game, Set and Match!
(Those are tennis terms in case the reference escapes you - I know how
much you South Britons admire French games...)
D. Spencer Hines
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:40:44 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines"
> <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>--------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Clearly the Scot knows his British History far better than the Englishman.
>>
>>The HISTORICAL FACTS -- not the flatulent poofings Pogue Surreyman
>>substitutes for the FACTS.
>>
>>Pogue Surreyman is consistently:
>>
>>DEAD WRONG in matters of this sort concerning British History... a
>>definite mark of POGUENITUDE.
>>
>>Pogue Surreyman further compounds his pratfall by not only getting the
>>attribution wrong, Havelock instead of the correct Napier, but getting the
>>LATIN wrong as well.
>>
>>Hilarious!
>>
>>Peccavimus! -- is literally -- "we have sinned", whereas...
>>
>>Peccavi! -- is literally "I have sinned". [It's a pun, folks.]
> I hasten to add that Napier is, of course, a Scottish name. Thus
> surreyman's haste to attribute the quote to someone else.
>
> BTW, I really think you should submit "POGUENITUDE" to the Oxford
> English Dictionary's compilers. I imagine they'd be as delighted with
> it as I am! I do have my name listed as a contributor in a dictionary
> of the Chinook trading language of the North American West Coast,
> produced by the University of Victoria, British Columbia, but that's
> peanuts compared to the Oxford English Dictionary...
>
> As the Welsh would say, "There's posh!" (That's real class!)
>
> The Highlander
An Excellent Idea! <g>
I have also coined an alternate noun:
POGUEOSITY...
And an adjective:
POGUEOUS.
Robert Peffers.
That leading banker is the one who leads the UK's biggest bank and it is the
6th biggest bank in the World.
Robert Peffers.
the best players suddenly started to be called British rather than English.
I wonder why?
--
Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Renia
For all those interested in such things, which is, no one, I wish to
point out that DSH has bottom-posted.
D. Spencer Hines
Renia, slow to twig these things, has just realized that I bottom-post when
appropriate -- as I've stated on MANY occasions over the past TEN YEARS.
Good Post by Robert Peffers.
Vide infra.
'Nuff Said.
DSH
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:etf9hd$v4m$1...@mouse.otenet.gr...
Renia
Dunno.
Andrew Murray?
Adam Whyte-Settlar
Bob might be a lot of things but he's certainly not one to run away from a
fight, and I don't see any evidence of you 'beating' anyone, let alone Bob.
scally
> "The Highlander" <mich...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:poulv2p4tn4u8re27...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:15:21 GMT, "a.spencer3"
>
> >>"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemid...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:MhrKh.74$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
> >>> <flexf...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
The English have no interest in tennis whatsoever.
Our sports are football, cricket and rugby.
The Highlander
>On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:49:46 GMT, The Highlander <mic...@shaw.ca>
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Do stop constantly talking about yourself; you've already been written
>>off as a parasitic bore.
>>
>Funny you should say that.
You're the expert. I gather you've already been plonked by a couple of
the Scots here. Anorher meaningless nobody among the swarming
millions, and scarcely a real human being among the lot of them. Like
ants, a cannonfodder supply that never runs out yet never actually
seems to achieve anything worth while.
William Black
Been at the Internet again.
The Parsi community moved out of the Marine Drive area years ago, to the
extent that it's mentioned in the book 'Maximum City'.
And please get some better sources of information.
Nobody here calls the city 'Mumbai' except a few politicians and the
newspapers. The people who live here still call it Bombay.
Nobody, ever, uses the new names for the roads or the various terminals,
they even print the old names on the official maps...
Dharavi is being redeveloped, 50,000 people were rehoused last year. It
now has 24 hour running water.
That's why I can tell that you're just a fraud. You know just enough to
fool someone in a pub conversation. The reality is that when you actually
come across someone who knows about what you're spouting about it always
comes horribly unglued...
By the way, I'm in Mahim
The Highlander
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Ten or eleven x great grandfather. Don't really remember. I have a
copy of my mother's family tree - actually its on-line but not my
father's. The reality of course is that I share him with about 15,000
other people living today, so it's hardly exclusive!
God knows. I din't even know what it was written on - paper, leather,
who knows.
We had a big chest of documents and it was like dealing with dried out
cigars; everything you touched flaked into pieces. I remember a museum
curator coming to look at it and he had some success soaking some of
the documents in, of all things, trays of soda water, which apparently
helped stop the disintegration. They were old deeds, long since
expired or whatever. Nobody seemed to care much about such things.
For example, at one of our houses where I was banished to as a
punishment, there were back copies of Punch Magazine, dating from the
1820s to the 1ate 1840s; too late for Napoleon, two early for the
Crimean War! There were dozens of Chinese coins in tins, all one cash
- a fraction of a penny - with characters on them and a big square
hole in the centre. If there had ever been any gold or silver ones,
they were long gone, except for one gold sovereign I found in a
ladies' purse among some woman's clothing. I showed it to my
grandfather who promptly pocketed it and I never saw it again.
>>>>> an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
>>>>> The views expressed in this post are
>>>>> not necessarily those of The Highlander.
>>>
>>>> The only thing I could add to that is that since 1381
>>>
>>><http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0007127.html>
>>>
>>>> the English Navigational Acts had been causing problems all over the
>>>> globe
>>>> but Scotland, being England's nearest neighbours, suffered out of all
>>>> proportion. In effect these acts caused trouble with every European
>>>> maritime nation,( in particular the Netherlands), and eventually were
>>>> the
>>>> main cause of the American War of Independence. However, in James's
>>>> time,
>>>> the king favoured England and these acts were applied to Scotland. As
>>>> James was also King of Scots his English Navy were stopping the Scots
>>>> from
>>>> trade with anyone in the British Isles, Europe and the colonies.
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Robert Peffers,
>>>> Kelty,
>>>> Fife,
>>>> Scotland, (UK)
>
The Highlander
Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
The Highlander
>On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:11:09 GMT, The Highlander <mic...@shaw.ca>
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Union with England being offered, the Scottish Parliament finally
>>agreed, despite rioting by the citizens who wanted no part of England.
>>And we have been a "equal" partner in that Union to this day.
>>
>Such a parcel of rogues in a Nation.
<groan> Is that your best effort at showing us how much you know about
Scotland? I don't know what you dopey fuckmuttons would do without
Google...
The Highlander
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Maybe you'll even collect an honorary degree from Oxford for your
sterling efforts!
It would certainly overshadow surreyman's degree in woodworking or
whatever it was he underachieved in.
The Highlander
<a.spe...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>"D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:tLAKh.84$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
>> The British Empire -- A Noble Effort...
>>
>> The United States has now fallen heir to that Tradition.
>>
>> Prime Minister Blair understands that, which is One Major Reason why he
>has
>> been a staunch ally of the United States.
>>
>> Pogue Surreyman, alias Horsellman Rarebit, _au contraire_, is so stupid
>and
>> ignorant he even confuses Havelock and Napier in "his favorite joke about
>> Empire".
>>
>
>Please simply clarify the 'USA Empire'.
>
>And the Punch Napier cartoon.
We are of course all breathlessly waiting for a citation.
And while so doing, I did a little research myself - and guess what!
Despite slamming Hines for quoting Wikipedia, I noticed that you too
used Wikipedia for your information about Havelock, except you didn't
attribute, did you?
Pot - kettle - Black?
>Twit!
>
>Surreyman
The Highlander
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"a.spencer3" <a.spe...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:EWzKh.4834$2F5....@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>
>> Please simply clarify the 'USA Empire'.
>>
>> And the Punch Napier cartoon.
>>
>> Twit!
>>
>> Surreyman
>----------------------------------------
>
>Pogue SURREYMAN needs to clarify his stupid gaffe about the alleged Punch --
>Napier cartoon -- HE posted it -- not I.
>
>HE needs to show us the alleged Punch cartoon -- and then explain how he
>botched it -- NO ONE ELSE.
>
>HE was the one who stupidly confused Napier and Havelock -- AND the LATIN in
>his "favourite joke about Empire".
>
>HE needs to tell us why he stupidly confused Havelock with Napier.
>
>Perhaps he got the statues in Trafalgar square mixed up and was drunk when
>he posted.
>
>Confession Is Good For The Soul.
>
>We note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is once again reduced to using
>his favorite four-letter word.
>
>The boy has a VERY limited vocabulary.
>
>I didn't say the USA has an Empire -- I said we Americans haven fallen heir
>to the TRADITION of the British Empire -- a Noble Effort.
>
>It was a Great Civilizing Mission & eventually led to a betterment of
>conditions in many parts of the World where the British flag once flew.
>
>The Highlander's astute reply to Pogue Surreyman is relevant here:
>
>> Well, without wishing to emphasize the yawning gap between your social
>> life and mine, I was sitting with the late president of Tunisia, Habib
>> Bourguiba, one evening, listening to him talk about the French
>> pull-out from Tunisia in 1954 at the time of Tunisian independence.
>
>When and where was that, Highlander?
I can pinpoint it exactly as it was the day before the Six Day War
started - the evening of 3 June,1967. I had met the Tunisian Justice
Minister that afternoon in a small village called Sousse on the
Tunisian coast where I was staying and we had sat in his lovely cool
house, eating dates and apricots and drinking Arab coffee, while his
mnother fussed around us with little treats - the sun was blazing down
outside - and had a long chat. I was seriously thinking about buying a
vineyard and settling there - there were hundreds of abandoned French
farms going for a song. I didn't know he was the Justice Minister
until I invited him to drive us to a nearby hotel where I would buy
him a couple of beers (moat men drank alcohol in Tunisia, but his
mother wouldn't have it in the house), but when I saw how obsequious
the hotel staff were to him, I realized he must be an important person
and finally asked him point blank who he was as his name (which I've
forgotten) rang no bells with me.
We had a couple of beers and then he asked me if I'd like to meet the
President, Habib Bourguiba - a nearby town called Monastir was
apparently Bourguiba's home town and he was taking a quick vacation
there at his mother's house for a few days - and of course I said I
would.
Both were very interesting man, having fought for independence for
many years and spending time in French jails, being tortured.
Bourguiba had led the resistance and the justice Minister was his
Number Two.
The Justice Minister pulled his shirt up to show me the scars from
being whipped with wire flex; while Bourguiba told me about having his
head literally punched into a filthy toilet and it being flushed
repeatedly so that he felt his lungs were filling with water. There
were other tortures apparently which they didn't discuss, but the
implication was that the Justice Minister had had his testicles
severely damaged from being contstantly kicked in the crotch.
He told me that Tunisia was a democratic state because he wanted to
westernize it and raise money from the International Monetary Fund to
rebuild and modernize. He explained that he was very interested in
getting European settlers to live in Tunisia as it would reassure the
IMF that he was serious about making Tunisia a western-style democracy
and invited me to consider settling there.
He told ne I could pick up a good vineyard of 4,000 acres for about
$5,000 US. Hee was willing to supply convict labour - he gave me a
chit to visit the local jail and get the prisoners reaction when I
voiced my uneasiness about using what sounded like an Alabama chain
gang - they were on their knees begging me to hire them - and he
offered a seven years tax break, underlining the fact that local wages
were around six cents a day and that I could sell my wine for a
fortune to Bordeaux; a major scandal in later years when it was
discovered that a large part of Bordeaux's output actually came from
North Africa. I dosvvoered that for myself when I bought a bottle of
local wine and tasted it and asked the waiter in amazement if he has
made a mistake with the label as it was a superb Bordeaux.
I should explain that the coastal region of much of North Africa
consists of firstclass farmland - the desert doesn't start until one
is about 20 to 50 miles inland. This is why the Romans took it away
from the Carthaginians (today's Tunisians), because it would relieve
their reliance on Egypt for grain. We discussed Israel and he said
that he refused all attempts to involve Tunisia in the Israeli
question as his aim was to attract tourists who would normally go to
Spain, but could be persuaded to holiday in Tunisia instead.
I was planning to visit the Isle of Djerba the next day; thought by
many to be Homer's Isle of the Lotus Eaters where Ulysses met Circe.
The Minister drove me back to my hotel and the next day I took a dhow
to Djerba; where I planned to spend the night in the local town,called
Houmt Souk (Houmt Market). I spent the morning in a small village
called Gellala with a famous potter called Romdan ben Mahmoud - he had
won a major prize for his pottery at a New York exhibition and
travelled on a diplomatic passport which he showed me, being described
therein as a Cultural Ambassador - as he made amphorae jugs for local
use. They all had pointed bottoms so they could be sunk into sand to
keep the contents cool.
That afternoon I went to a village called Hara Sghira which has been a
Jewish settlement since 600 AD. There was a beautiful synagogue there
and one of the Jewish caretakers told me that they had been praying
continuously there since the building was built. It was a beautiful
building with lots of blue interior facings and men praying
continuously, or chatting, or just sitting thinking.
http://lexicorient.com/tunisia/hara_sghira.htm
As the caretaker was showing me Golda Meir's name in the visitors'
book, a man came rushing in shouting about Isroel, Misr (Egypt) and
Suriyah (Syria) and I gathered that several Arab countries were
attacking Israel. The local Jews were totally panicked and I stayed
with them, showing them where to set up defences, etc. and doing all
the things that get you shot by firing squad when you interfere in
other people's wars - Bourguiba later had a chat with me about that
and reminded me that he had said that Tunisia would not join any
ant-Jewish movement. He wasn't happy with me, but eventually said that
he could understand my reaction as the Jews were convinced they were
going to be slaughtered.
Anyway, all the fuss died down when a Tunisian Army jeep with a big
Tunisian flag fixed to its aerial appeared with three soldiers and an
officer, who used a bullhorn/loudspeaker to assure the Jews that as
citizens of Tunisia, they would be protected by the Army from anyone
trying to interfere with them. At some point my helpfulness was made
known to the officer, who ordered me to accompany him in the jeep to a
police station where I manged to worm and lie my way out of trouble,
mentioning my meeting with the President repeatedly until they got the
message. The little bastard still checked me out though, and that was
how Bourguiba heard about my preparations to slaughter his citizens if
required...
A couple of years ago, the little Synagogue at Hara Sghira was bombed
by Al-Qaeda, which is now active in Tunisia and Algeria. Bourguiba
died April 6, 2000. The Justice Ninister and I never met again as the
British Embassy talked me out of my plan on the grounds that things
could change rapidly and not to my advantage either.
>
>> He said that the French had blown up all the public buildings,
>> destroyed much the infrastructure of the main cities and essentially
>> left the country a shambles.
>>
>> "I have often wished that we had been a British colony," he said.
>> "Whatever wrongs they may have committed, they always left behind a
>> fully functioning state, with law courts, railways, roads, potable
>> water supplies, a working civil service; all the things needed to run
>> a modern state." He went on at length about the various matters, but
>> you get the general idea.
>>
>> I think that says a great deal about the British Empire as opposed to
>> say, the French, Dutch, Spanish and American Empires.
>
>Indeed it does.
>
>DSH
>
>Lux et Veritas et Libertas
>
a.spencer3
Nope. My memory (not any reference to Wickidpedia) was correct.
I've checked out numerous old notes, made from several legitimate sources.
(Yes, ahb & shm sane members, 'Where The Commonwealth Came From' is still in
manuscript stage!).
It seems pretty certain that Napier never sent any such message, but that
Havelock might have sent a similar one (in the plural).
The one certain fact is that Punch (either in cartoon or text) afterwards
produced the pun in the singular.
Hines & Highlander are welcome to refute if they can. Or apologise.
But, frankly, my dears, I couldn't give a damn.
Surreyman
a.spencer3
Well, the fact that you call 1960s Sousse 'a small village' simply suggests
how much rubbish the rest of all that is.
Surreyman
The Highlander
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Sad!
>
>Pogue Black doesn't WANT to sing _Rule Britannia!".
>
>DSH
>
>William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:etdj7l$8sn$1...@aioe.org...>
>
>> "The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>> news:j6ikv2dos9vvoaggh...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> Exactly. I always think of Mr. Black as "Cousin William" whenever we
>>> get together on Skype for a rousing chorus or two of "Rule Britannia!"
>>
>> With the best will in the world, you'll get my Skype address when Hell
>> freezes over...
>
I had no intention of asking for it - apart from anything else we have
nothing in common beyond being carbon-based life forms, although you
seem to be well of me ahead as far as being common goes.
Your little helpmeet, Surreyman, seems to be cut from the same cloth.
A modest man, with much to be modest about. As for Dave, when they
circumcised him, they obviously threw the wrong piece away.
D. Spencer Hines
Yes, The British Empire was, on balance, a GOOD THING.
What I find curious is why so many Brits don't see that and knock off this
silly-buggers Wallowing-In-Guilt, Hand-Wringing, Mea-Culpa Nonsense.
Brits should be PROUD of The British Empire NOT apologetic and guilt-ridden
about it.
Compare it to the Belgian, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese,
Dutch and Italian Empires and it comes off very well indeed.
Is it that too many Brits are socialists and have read too much Lenin, et
alii, on Empire -- and are thereby brain-damaged?
DSH
"The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:o4dnv2pb96vrqj9u2...@4ax.com...
D. Spencer Hines
Yes, The British Empire was, on balance, a GOOD THING.
What I find curious is why so many Brits don't see that and knock off this
silly-buggers Wallowing-In-Guilt, Hand-Wringing, Mea-Culpa Nonsense.
Brits should be PROUD of The British Empire NOT apologetic and guilt-ridden
about it.
Compare it to the Belgian, French, German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian,
Robert Peffers.
"scally" <scall...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1174105374....@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Yes Dear! That is, more or less, what I said.<G>
D. Spencer Hines
DNB.
"For a short time he listened to his political adviser, then he acted for
himself, and in the course of a few months Sind was conquered. His comment
to his brother was "Peccavi" (I have sinned - Sind) The conquered country
had now to be organised. Napier had a great talent for administration."
Still SINGULAR -- PECCAVI not peccavimus.
<http://www.dialspace.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/adw03/peel/people/napier.htm>
DSH
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sir Charles James Napier (1782-1853)
Taken from Sir Lesley Stephen & Sir Sidney Lee (eds.), Dictionary of
National Biography: from the earliest times to 1900 (London, Oxford
University Press, 1949).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Charles Napier. Bronze statue on a granite base. This memorial,
which is located 100 metres from the front entrance of the Athenaeum, Pall
Mall, stands at the left of the staircase down to St. James's Park, which
Napier surveys.
This image has been taken from the Victorian Web and is the copyright of
Prof. George Landow.
Sir Charles Napier was the conqueror of Sind. He was the eldest son of
Colonel the Hon. George Napier and his second wife, Lady Sarah Bunbury.
Napier was born at Whitehall, London, on 10 August 1782. George Thomas
Napier, Henry Edward Napier, and William Francis Patrick Napier were his
brothers. When he was only three, the family moved to Celbridge, on the
Liffey ten miles from Dublin. His father was a very handsome man, with a
fine figure and great strength, both of body and of mind. His mother was,
says Horace Walpole, ‘more beautiful than you can conceive - she shone,
besides, with all the graces of unaffected but animate nature.’ Charles
Napier, owing to an accident, was sickly as a child, and never attained the
fine proportions for which the family were remarkable. He was also
short-sighted; but he had an admirable constitution and a high spirit.
On 31 January 1794 he obtained a commission as ensign in the 33rd regiment,
from which he was promoted to be lieutenant in the 89th regiment on 8 May
the same year. He joined the regiment at Netley Camp, where it formed part
of an army assembling under Lord Moira. His father was assistant
quartermaster-general to the force, and when it sailed for Ostend Napier was
sent back to Ireland, having exchanged into the 4th regiment; but, instead
of joining his regiment, was placed with his brother William as a
day-scholar at a large grammar school in Celbridge. When the rebellion took
place in 1798, Colonel Napier fortified his house, armed his five boys, and
offered an asylum to all who were willing to resist the insurgents. The
elder Napier, with Charles at his side, used to scour the country on
horseback, keeping a sharp look-out. In 1799 Charles became aide-de-camp to
Sir James Duff, commanding the Limerick district. In 1800 he resigned his
staff appointment to join the 95th regiment, or rifle corps, which was being
formed at Blatchington, Sussex, by a selection of men and officers from
other regiments. He was quartered for the next two years at Weymouth, Hythe,
and Shorncliffe. In June 1803 he was appointed aide-de-camp to his cousin,
General Henry Edward Fox, commander-in-chief of the forces in Ireland, and
served against the insurgents. He accompanied General Fox to London when he
was transferred to the command of the home district. While serving on the
London staff he saw much of his cousin, Charles James Fox and the cheerful
society at St. Anne's Hill was a pleasant interlude in his life.
On 22 December 1803 he was promoted captain in the staff corps, a newly
organised body of artificers to assist the royal engineers and the
quartermaster-general. In 1804 he was quartered at Chelmsford and Chatham.
In October his father died; the family were left in straitened
circumstances, but Pitt bestowed pensions on the widow and daughters. In the
middle of 1805 Napier went with his corps to Hythe, where he was employed in
the construction of the Military Canal, and came under the personal
supervision of Sir John Moore, who was at that time training the 43rd, 52nd,
and rifle regiments, to fit them for the distinguished part they were to
play as the light division in the Peninsula. Napier's brothers William (in
the 43rd) and George (in the 52nd) were thus in the same command.
On 29 May 1806, on the accession of Fox to power, Napier was promoted to a
majority in a Cape Colonial corps, from which he exchanged into the 50th
regiment, then quartered at Bognor, Sussex. During the next two years and a
half he was moved about with the regiment to Guernsey, Deal, Hythe, and
Ashford, and was frequently in command of the battalion. After the battle of
Vimiera (August 1808) Napier was ordered to join the first battalion of the
50th at Lisbon, and, as the colonel had obtained leave of absence, Napier
found himself on arrival at Lisbon in command of the battalion. Sir John
Moore at once incorporated the regiment in the army going to Spain. Napier's
battalion was in Lord William Bentinck's brigade, and distinguished itself
throughout the famous retreat. On 16 January 1809, at Coruña, it behaved
splendidly, with Napier leading it. Napier was five times wounded: his leg
was broken by a musket shot, he received a sabre cut on the head, a bayonet
wound in the back, severe contusions from the butt end of a musket, and his
ribs were broken by a gunshot. Eventually he was taken prisoner; his name
was returned among the killed, but his life was saved by a French drummer.
He was taken to Marshal Soult's quarters, where he received every attention.
Marshal Ney, who succeeded Soult in command at Coruña, was particularly
kind, and on 20 March set him at liberty, on parole not to serve again until
exchanged, it having been represented to Ney that Napier's mother was a
widow, old and blind. It was not until January 1810 that an exchange was
effected, and Napier was able to rejoin his regiment.
Finding it in quarters in Portugal, he obtained leave of absence and
permission to join, as a volunteer, the light brigade in which his brothers
were serving. He acted as aide-de camp to Robert Craufurd at the battle on
the Coa (24 July 1810), and had two horses killed under him. On the fall of
Almeida the army retreated, and Napier was attached to Lord Wellington's
staff; at the battle of Busaco (27 September 1810) he was shot through the
face, his jaw broken, and his eye injured. He was sent to Lisbon, where he
was laid up for some months. On 6 March 1811 he started to rejoin the army,
his wound still bandaged. On the 13th he rode ninety miles on one horse and
in one course, including a three hours' halt, and reached the army between
Redinha and Condeixa. The light division was in advance, and in constant
contact with Massena's rear guard under Ney. On the 14th, advancing with his
regiment, Napier met his brothers William (of the 43rd regiment) and George
being carried to the rear; both were wounded, the former, it was supposed,
mortally. He was engaged at the battle of Fuentes d'Onoro (5 May 1811). At
the second siege of Badajos he was employed on particular service near
Medellin.
On 27 June 1811 he was promoted to the lieutenant-colonelcy of the 102nd
regiment, which had just arrived at Guernsey from Botany Bay. He embarked
for England on 25 August, and spent some months with his mother before
joining his regiment in Guernsey. Lord Liverpool conferred on Napier the
small non-resident and sinecure government of the Virgin Isles, in
consideration of his wounds and services, and he held it for a year or two;
but when pensions for wounds were granted he resigned it. Napier went to
Guernsey in January 1812. In July he embarked with his regiment for Bermuda,
where he arrived in September. In May 1813 he was appointed to command a
brigade, composed of his own regiment, a body of royal marines, and a corps
of Frenchmen enlisted from the war prisoners, to take part in the expedition
under General Sir Thomas Sydney Beckwith, which engaged in desultory
operations against the United States of America. The expedition went with
the fleet to Hampton Roads, when Craney Island, at the mouth of the
Elizabeth river, was seized, and the town of Little Hampton, at the attack
on which Napier was in command, taken and plundered. In August Napier was
detached, with Admiral Sir George Cockburn, to the coast of Carolina, where
various minor operations took place. Thence he proceeded with the regiment
to Halifax, Nova Scotia. Anxious to serve again in the Peninsula, he
exchanged back into the 50th regiment, and on leaving the 102nd regiment the
officers presented him with a sword of honour. He sailed for England in
September 1813, and arrived to find the war with France concluded. He served
with the 50th regiment until December 1814, when he was placed by reduction
on half-pay. Napier at once entered the military college at Farnham, where
he was joined by his brother William. When in March 1815 Napoleon escaped
from Elba, Napier went as a volunteer to Ghent. He took part in the storming
of Cambrai, and marched into Paris with the allied armies. He was mentioned
in despatches from the Peninsula and North America. For his services in the
Peninsula he received the gold medal for Coruña, where he commanded a
regiment, and the silver war medal with two clasps for Busaco and Fuentes
d'Onoro. When the order of the Bath was reconstituted he was made a C.B.
While on his way home from Ostend in 1815 the ship sank at the mouth of the
harbour, and Napier was nearly drowned. He rejoined the military college at
Farnham, and remained until the end of 1817, reading diligently, not only
military and political history, but also general literature, and studying
agriculture, building construction, and political economy. In May 1819 he
was appointed an inspecting field officer in the Ionian Islands, and in 1820
he was sent on a confidential mission to Ali Pasha at Joannina. In 1821 he
went on leave of absence to Greece, to study the military advantages of the
position of the Isthmus of Corinth, as he had thoughts of throwing in his
lot with the Greeks, and hoped to lead their army. He returned to Corfu in
the beginning of 1822, and in March was appointed resident of Cephalonia.
This office, created by Sir Thomas Maitland, the high commissioner,
conferred almost absolute power on the holder, and was designed to protect
the people against feudal oppression. This was probably the happiest period
of Napier's life.
He threw himself with all his determination and energy into the reform of
abuses of all kinds, and into the development of everything that could
conduce to the welfare of the Cephalonians. He carried out a number of
public works and covered the island with a network of good roads. He was
ably seconded by Captain (afterwards Major) John Pitt Kennedy, who remained
through life his attached friend. He did not lose sight of the Greek
question, and received constant demands for advice from Prince Mavrocordato.
Napier sent the Greek government a masterly memorandum on the military
situation, including a plan of operations and a strong recommendation to
appoint Mavrocordato dictator. In the summer and autumn of 1823 he saw a
good deal of Byron, who in January 1824, when Napier was going to England on
leave, gave him a letter to the Greek committee in London, recommending him
as ‘our man to lead a regular force or to organise a national one for the
Greeks.’ He made a deep impression on Byron, who spoke of him on his
deathbed.
Napier returned to England in the beginning of 1824, and put himself in
communication with the Greek committee. His services were, however,
declined. He wrote a pamphlet on the Greek question, and a memoir on the
roads of Cephalonia. In May 1825 he was back again in Cephalonia. Maitland
was dead, and Sir Frederick Adam had taken his place as high commissioner.
Napier was promoted colonel in the army on 27 May 1825. He made the
acquaintance of the missionary Joseph Wolff, who was wrecked off Cephalonia;
for Wolff he had a great admiration. In September 1825 Ibrahim Pasha was
ravaging the Morea, and the Greeks turned to Napier for help. Napier sent
his conditions; but the Greek government were persuaded by the London
committee to spend on ships of war the money which would have furnished
Napier with an army. They still desired to secure his services, and offered
a larger remuneration than he had asked for; but he was not inclined to be
dependent on the mismanagement and intrigues of the Greek government, and,
failing to obtain complete power, he declined the offer, and tried to forget
his disappointment in renewed efforts for the prosperity of his government.
In 1826 he was suddenly called to England by the death of his mother. In
April 1827 he married, and in July returned to Cephalonia. He could not
brook the interference of the new high commissioner, and a coldness arose
between them, which soon grew into hostility. The roads and public works in
which he delighted were taken out of Napier's hands; and the feudal
proprietors, from whom Napier had exacted the duties of their position while
curtailing some of their privileges, aggravated the ill-feeling by laying
many complaints before the high commissioner.
Early in 1830 Napier was obliged to take his wife to England on account of
her health. Some months after his departure Adam sent home charges against
Napier, seized his official papers, and publicly declared he would not allow
him to return. Lord Goderich, who thought there were, no doubt, faults on
both sides, offered Napier the residency of Zante, a higher post than that
of Cephalonia. But Napier declined the offer; he considered his character
was not vindicated unless he returned to Cephalonia. He lived with his
family at one time in Berkshire, and at another in Hampshire, and then
settled at Bath. During this interval of retirement he took an interest in
politics, and occupied himself in writing a book on his government of
Cephalonia. In 1833 he had a severe attack of cholera, and on 31 July of
that year was completely prostrated by the death of his wife. He removed to
Caen in Normandy, and devoted himself to the education of his daughters.
In August 1834 a company received a charter to settle in South Australia,
and the colonists petitioned for the appointment of Napier as governor. Many
months of suspense ensued, during which Napier wrote a work on colonisation.
In May 1835 he was informed that the terms which he proposed on behalf of
the colonists were not acceptable to the company, and he declined the
appointment at the end of 1836. He married a second time in 1835, and again
settled at Bath, where he entered eagerly into politics. He had a bitter
controversy with O'Connell, which led to his publishing a dialogue on the
poor laws. He also published a book on military law, and edited Lights and
Shadows of Military Life, from the French of Count Alfred de Vigny and
Elzèar Blase. But his principal literary work at this time was an historical
romance entitled Harold, the manuscript of which strangely disappeared. On
10 January 1837 he was promoted major-general. In March 1838 he moved to
Pater, Milford Haven. In July he was made a K.C.B. He applied for the
command and lieutenant-governorship of Jersey, and, after considerable
suspense, was refused. He then made a short tour in Ireland, visiting his
old friend Kennedy, and the model farm at Glasnevin. A pamphlet on the state
of Ireland was the result of his visit.
In April 1839 Lord Hill appointed Napier to the command of the troops in the
northern district, comprising the eleven northern counties of England.
Chartism was rife at the time; outrages were not infrequent, and Napier's
political opinions were on the side of the people. He felt the
responsibility, and, while sympathising with the distress that prevailed,
determined to uphold law and order with a firm hand. He had excellent
subordinates in Hew Ross, afterwards field-marshal, and Colin Campbell,
afterwards Lord Clyde. Napier's well-organised measures judiciously
maintained the law in a time of considerable disaffection, and the crisis
passed.
In April 1841 he accepted an Indian command offered to him by Lord Hill, and
in October left for India. He assumed command at Poona at the end of
December. On the arrival in India of Lord Ellenborough as governor-general
in 1842, he applied to Napier for a statement of his view on the military
situation. Napier sent him a memorandum on 4 March, recommending as the
first step the prompt relief of Sale, who was holding Jalalabad, and the
formation of two strong columns to move on Kabul - one from Peshawar, the
other from Kandahar by Ghazni.
In August he was ordered to take command in Upper and Lower Sind. He sailed
from Bombay on 3 September. Cholera broke out on the voyage, and fifty-four
lives were lost before Karachi was reached. A few days after landing, at a
review of the troops, he was severely injured in the leg by the bursting of
a rocket. On his recovery he sailed up the Indus to Hyderabad and Sakhar.
Here he found himself chief agent in Sind of the governor-general, as well
as general officer commanding the troops. Sind was divided under three
distinct sets of rulers - the amirs of Khairpur or Upper Sind, the amirs of
Hyderabad or Lower Sind, and the amir of Mirpur. The British occupied
Shikarpur, Bakhar, and Karachi by treaty. The amirs were in a state of
excitement, due to the recent British reverses in Afghanistan, while the
return to India of General England's force through the Bolan pass, when both
advanced on Kandahar, was interpreted as a retreat. The situation was
critical. The governor-general had instructed Captain (afterwards General
Sir) James Outram, who was chief political officer before the arrival of
Napier, in case any of the amirs proved faithless, to confiscate their
dominions; and Napier, after reading Lord Ellenborough's instructions, and
receiving reports from Outram and others of the disaffection of the amirs,
made up his mind that the practical annexation of Sind was inevitable, and
could not be long delayed. The chief complaint against the amirs was the
continued levying of tolls in violation of the treaty, notwithstanding
frequent protests. Then came the discovery that negotiations were going on
with neighbouring tribes for an offensive alliance against the British.
Napier was impressed with the natural wealth of the country, and the
oppression of the Pindis and Hindus by the governing class. ‘They’ (the poor
people), he says, ‘live in a larder and yet starve - The ameers rob by
taxes, the hill-tribes by matchlocks.’
Napier moved at the end of November to Shikarpur. A fresh treaty, based on
Napier's reports, was ordered by the governor-general to be offered as an
ultimatum. The proposal produced strong remonstrances from both Khairpur and
Hyderabad. On 15 December the British troops commenced the passage of the
Indus, in order to occupy the territories mentioned in the treaty. Napier
fixed his headquarters at Rohri, where, with his right resting on the river
and his left on the desert, he barred the amirs from Szbzalkot and
Bhang-Bara, which were taken possession of by Bengal troops. On 31 December
1842 Napier determined to seize the fortress of Imamghar, the impregnable
refuge of the amirs, in the midst of the great desert in the east of Sind.
He mounted 350 men of the Queen's 22nd regiment on camels, two soldiers on
each, and, taking two 24-pound howitzers and two hundred Sind horse, started
on 5 January 1843. On arriving on 12 January at Imamghar, it was found to
have been evacuated only a few hours by a garrison of two thousand men.
After three days' rest the fortress was blown up, and Napier made for the
Indus at Pir Abu Bakar, where he halted on 21 January for the main body of
his troops, and whence he could fall, if necessary, either upon the amirs of
Hyderabad or those of Khairpur. The masterly stroke by which Napier seized
Imamghar before hostilities had actually commenced, and deprived the amirs
of their last retreat in case of danger, elicited the warm praise of the
Duke of Wellington.
Napier at this time had the governor-general's authority to compel the amirs
to accept the new treaty. Outram thought that its acceptance could be
obtained by negotiations, while Napier knew that every day's delay would
bring him nearer to the hot weather, when operations in the field would be
difficult. He nevertheless was so far influenced by Outram that he decided
to try what peaceable measures would do, and sent Outram to Khairpur as his
commissioner to issue a proclamation calling on the amirs of both provinces
to appear on 20 January to complete the treaty. The time was extended to 25
January and then to 1 February, and again to 6 February Meanwhile Napier
sent Outram, at his own request, to Hyderabad, and himself moved with his
army slowly southward. He reached Nowshera on 30 January Outram was still
sanguine of a peaceful issue, and, reporting that not a man in arms was at
Hyderabad, suggested that the only thing wanting was that Napier should
leave his army and go in person to Hyderabad. But Napier had intelligence
that some twenty-five thousand men were collected within six miles of
Hyderabad, that ten thousand of the Khandesh tribe were coming down the left
bank of the Indus, that seven thousand men under Rustam were in rear of his
left flank at Khunhera, that ten thousand under Shir Muhammad were marching
from Mirpur, while in the mountains on the right bank of the Indus thousands
were ready at a signal to pour down upon the plains. He therefore ridiculed
Outram's proposal. On 12 February 1843 Outram met the amirs, who, with the
exception of Nasir Khan, signed the draft treaties; but the excitement in
the city was so great that Outram and his staff were threatened and insulted
on their way back to their quarters. Next day the amirs represented that
they could not restrain their followers, and on the 15th the residency was
attacked, and Outram and his gallant band, after some hours' siege, fought
their way to the steamers, which carried them off to rejoin the main force.
Napier had waited at Nowshera until 6 February He then marched to Sakarand,
where he halted on 11 February. After three days he reached Sindabad, and on
16 February he was at Matari. Towards evening he heard that the enemy were
ten miles off, entrenched in the bed of the Falaili river near Miani
(Meanee). The lowest estimate of the enemy's strength was twenty-two
thousand. Napier's force was less than 2,800, and this number was further
reduced by six hundred men, of whom two hundred were sent with Outram to
fire the forests on the enemy's flank, while four hundred men were in charge
of baggage. Of the 2,200 men remaining, fewer than five hundred were
Europeans.
The enemy was discovered at daybreak of the 17th, and at nine o'clock in the
morning the British line of battle was formed. The baggage, the animals, and
the large body of camp followers were formed up in the British rear, and
surrounded with a ring of camels facing inwards, with bales between them for
the armed followers to fire over. This improvised defence was guarded by 250
Poona horse and four companies of infantry. Napier's order of battle was -
artillery with twelve guns and fifty sappers on the right, 22nd Queen's
regiment next, and on the left the 25th, 12th, and 1st grenadier native
regiments in succession, the whole in echelon; on the left of the line were
the 9th Bengal cavalry and the Sind or Jacob's horse. The enemy had eighteen
guns, and were strongly posted on a curve of the river, convex to the
British, with a skikargah on each side flanking their front. The skikargah,
or woody enclosure, on the left was covered towards the plain by a stone
wall; behind the wall six thousand Baluchis were posted.
Giving the order to advance, Napier rode forward, and noting an opening in
the wall on his right flank, with an inspiration of genius thrust a company
of the 22nd regiment and a gun into the space, telling Captain Tew to block
the gap, and if necessary die there, thus paralysing the six thousand
Baluchis within with a force of eighty men. Tew died at his post, but his
diminished company held the gap to the end. The main body of the British,
advancing in columns of regiments in echelon under heavy fire, formed into
line successively as each regiment approached the river Falaili, and charged
up the bank, but staggered back on seeing the sea of turbans and of waving
swords that filled all the broad, deep bed of the river, now dry. For over
two hours the British line remained a few yards from the top of the bank,
advancing to deliver their fire into the masses of the enemy in the
river-bed, and returning to load. The Baluchis, driven desperate by the
increasing volleys of the British, pressed upon from behind, and unable to
retreat, made frequent charges; but, as these were not executed in concert
along their line, the British troops were able to overlap round their flanks
and push them back over the edge. The Baluchis fought stubbornly. No fire of
musketry, discharge of grape, or push of bayonet could drive them back.
Leaping at the guns, they were blown away by scores at a time, their gaps
being continually filled from the rear. Napier could not leave this
desperate conflict. He saw the struggle could not last much longer, and,
judging that the supreme moment had come, he sent orders to his cavalry on
the left to charge on the enemy's right. He himself rode up and down his
infantry line, holding, as it seemed, a charmed life, while urging his men
to sustain the increasing fury of the enemy. The British cavalry swept down
on the enemy's right, dashed through their guns, rode over the high bank of
the river, crossed its bed, gained the plain beyond, and charged into the
enemy's rear with irresistible fury. Then the Baluchis in front looked
behind, and the British infantry, seizing the opportunity, charged with a
shout, pushed the Baluchis into the ravine, and closed in hand-to-hand
fight. The battle was won. The Baluchis slowly moved off, as if half
inclined to renew the conflict. With a British loss of twenty officers and
250 men out of 2,200, no less than 6,000 Baluchis were killed or wounded,
and more than three times as many were in retreat. Napier was content.
Quarter was neither asked nor given, but there was no desire to follow up
the beaten foe. Hyderabad surrendered, and six amirs gave up their swords.
Shir Muhammad, the Lion of Mirpur, confident in the defeat of the British,
and unwilling to swell the triumph of his rivals, was a few miles off, with
ten thousand men. He now retreated on Mirpur, where he soon found himself at
the head of twenty-five thousand men. The position was one that called forth
all Napier's powers. His force was greatly reduced, the thermometer was 110°
in the shade, he had no transport, and Hyderabad, in which he was obliged to
place a garrison of five hundred men, was too far from the Indus to serve as
a base or depôt. Knowing that Shir Muhammad was a good soldier, but
deficient in wealth, he resolved to give him time, hoping that a large army
and no money would compel him to attack. Napier sent to Sakhar for all
available troops to join him by river. These reinforcements, consisting of a
regiment of Bengal cavalry, a regiment of native infantry, and a troop of
horse artillery, duly arrived; while Major Stack's brigade of fifteen
hundred men and five guns joined him from the north on 22 March. Napier had
entrenched a camp close to the Indus, with a strong work on the other side
of the river to protect his steamers. In the camp he placed his stores and
hospital, with every appearance of the greatest caution, in February, and
sat down to wait. During this time of suspense he, in the words of his hero,
the Duke of Wellington, ‘manifested all the discretion and ability of an
officer familiar with the most difficult operations of war.’ On 23 March
reinforcements reached him from Bombay and from Sakhar. The Lion was slowly
approaching, and sent envoys to summon Napier to surrender. On the morning
of the 24th Napier marched to attack the enemy. He crossed diagonally the
front of Hyderabad towards Dubba, eight miles to the north-west of the city.
He found the Lion posted at Dubba with fifteen guns and twenty-six thousand
men. Two lines of infantry were entrenched. The right rested on a curve of
the river Falaili and could not be turned by reason of soft mud in the bed
of the river, while the bank was covered with dense wood; in front of the
position was a scarped nullah, behind which the first line of infantry
extended for two miles to another wood, and then bent back behind a second
nullah. The cavalry were massed in advance of the left, under cover of the
wood. Behind the right, where it rested in the Falaili, was the village of
Dubba, filled with men.
Napier's force numbered five thousand men, of which eleven hundred were
cavalry, with nineteen guns, of which five were horse artillery. The battle
began about 9 a.m. Napier brought his horse artillery to his left flank and
advanced by echelon of battalions from the left, the horse artillery
leading, with two cavalry regiments in support resting on the Falaili. The
22nd Queen's regiment formed the left of the infantry, then came four native
regiments, and on the right were the 3rd cavalry and Sind horse. The horse
artillery opened a raking fire, and the infantry pushed on for the village.
The Baluchis closed at a run to their right. It was soon discovered that
neither the village nor the nullah in front had been neglected. The 22nd,
who led the way, were met by a destructive fire, and the existence of the
enemy's second line became known. Napier had undervalued the skill of the
Lion, and there was nothing for it but to make up for the mistake by
persistent courage. He himself led the charge, and, by dint of hard fighting
and indomitable resolution, Dubba was at length carried. The Baluchis
lounged off, as at Miani, slowly, and with apparent indifference to the
volleys of musketry which, at only a few yards' range, continually rolled
them in the dust. Five thousand of the enemy were killed, while Napier's
loss amounted to 270, of whom 147 were of the 22nd regiment. Napier's escape
was marvellous, considering that he led the regiment in person. His
orderly's horse was struck and his own sword-hilt. Towards the end of the
battle a field magazine of the enemy, close to Napier, blew up and killed
all around him; but, although his sword was broken in his hand, he was not
hurt. Sending his wounded to Hyderabad, Napier pursued Shir Muhammad with
forced marches in spite of the heat. He reached Mirpur on 27 March, to find
that the Lion had abandoned his capital and fled, with his family and
treasure, to Omerkot. Napier remained at Mirpur, and sent the Sind horse and
a camel battery to follow up the Lion. On 4 April the troops entered
Omerkot, a hundred miles from Dubba, and in the heart of the desert. The
Lion had fled northwards with a few followers. On 8 April Napier was back at
Hyderabad. So long as the Lion was at large in the country Napier felt that
the settlement of Sind could not be effected, and all through the hot
weather his troops were on his track. Napier surrounded him gradually by
forces under Colonel Roberts and Major John Jacob. Many men were lost, and
Napier was himself knocked over with sunstroke, when Jacob, on 14 June at
Shah-dal-pur, finally defeated Shir Muhammad, who escaped to his family
across the Indus into the Kachi hills.
The war was now at an end, and the task of annexing and settling the country
was to begin. A great controversy took place as to the necessity for the
conquest of Sind, in which Outram and Napier took opposite sides. On the one
side it was alleged that Lord Ellenborough and Napier had made up their
minds that Sind should be annexed, but that the amirs might have been safely
left to rule their country; and that, had they been differently treated,
there need have been no war. On the other side it was stated that the
disaffection of Sind could not be allayed by pacific measures; that it was
‘the tail of the Afghan storm,’ to use Napier's expression, and that it was
necessary to act with promptitude, decision, and firmness. Napier found a
state of things bordering on war. For a short time he listened to his
political adviser, then he acted for himself, and in the course of a few
months Sind was conquered. His comment to his brother was "Peccavi" (I have
sinned - Sind)The conquered country had now to be organised. Napier had a
great talent for administration. His administrative staff was composed
principally of military men, who were naturally unfavourably criticised by
their civilian brethren; but Napier knew he had the support of the
governor-general, and he energetically pushed forward the work of
settlement. He lost no time in receiving the submission of the chiefs, and
he conciliated more than four hundred of them. He organised the military
occupation of the country. He established a civil government in all its
branches, social, financial, and judicial, and organised an effective police
force. He examined in person the principal mouths of the Indus, with a view
to commerce, and entered enthusiastically into a scheme to make Karachi the
second port of the Indian empire. He was a prolific writer, and, though
twice struck down with disease, he maintained a large private
correspondence, carried on a considerable public one, and entered into all
the schemes for the government of the new state with an energy that never
sank under labour. On 24 May 1844 he celebrated the queen's birthday by
holding a durbar at Hyderabad, and summoned all the Sindian Baluchi chiefs
to do homage. Some three thousand chiefs, with twenty thousand men,
attended, and expressed their contentment with the new order of things.
The hot contention on the question of the annexation of Sind had delayed the
vote of the thanks of parliament for the success of the military operation,
and the vote was not taken until February 1844. The Duke of Wellington had
already written to Napier, congratulating him warmly on ‘the two glorious
battles of Meanee and Hyderabad;’ and in his place in the House of Lords he
stated that he had ‘never known any instance of an officer who had shown in
a higher degree that he possesses all the qualities and qualifications
necessary to enable him to conduct great operations. He has maintained the
utmost discretion and prudence in the formation of his plans, the utmost
activity in all the preparations to insure his success, and, finally, the
utmost zeal and gallantry and science in carrying them into execution.’ Sir
Robert Peel was enthusiastic in his admiration not only for Napier's
character and military achievements, but for the matter and form of his
despatches. ‘No one,’ he said, ‘ever doubted Sir Charles Napier's military
powers; but in his other character he does surprise me - he is possessed of
extraordinary talent for civil administration.’ To Edward Coleridge, Peel
said that as a writer he was much inclined to rank Charles Napier above his
brother William; that not only he, but all the members of the government who
had read his letters and despatches from Sind, had been immensely struck by
their masterly clearness of mind and vigour of expression. Napier was made a
G.C.B., and on 21 November 1843 was given the colonelcy of the 22nd
regiment. He was quite content, and, speaking of Wellington's praise of him,
said: ‘The hundred-gun ship has taken the little cock-boat in tow, and it
will follow for ever over the ocean of time.’
At the end of 1844 Napier began his campaign against the hill tribes on the
northern frontier, who had been raiding into Sind. He reached Sakhar the
week before Christmas 1844. He made Sakhar his base for his operations
against Beja Khan Dumki, the leading hill chief, and his eight thousand
followers. Napier's men were attacked by fever, and the greater part of the
78th highlanders perished. Beja heard of the sickness, and, presuming that
it would stop Napier's operations, the hillmen remained with their flocks
and herds on the level and comparatively fertile land at the foot of the
Kachi hills. Napier then suddenly sallied forth in three columns, moved by
forced marches, surprised the tribes, captured thousands of cattle, most of
their grain supply, forced the enemy into the hills, and waited at the
entrances to the passes for his guns and commissariat. It was early in
January 1845 when the advance began. His energetic operations and the
indefatigable exertions of Jacob and Fitzgerald with the irregular horse
soon put him in possession of Pulaji, Shahpur, and Ooch, with small loss.
But Beja Khan was not easily caught, and it was not until after many weary
marches, with little water to be had, and many sharp fights, that Beja and
his men were driven into Traki, a curious fastness, of a basin-like form,
with sides of perpendicular rock six hundred feet high all round it with
only two openings, north and south. Beja and his followers were captured on
9 March 1845. Lord Ellenborough had been recalled, much to Napier's grief;
but Sir Henry Hardinge, the new governor-general, was lavish with his
praise. No word of recognition of his arduous campaign reached him, however,
from home. By the end of March Napier had returned to his administrative
duties in Sind.
The first Sikh war broke out on 13 December 1845, and on 24 December Napier
received orders to assemble with all speed an army of fifteen thousand men,
with a siege train, at Rohri. By 6 February 1846 he was at Rohri with
fifteen thousand men, many of whom had been brought from Bombay, eighty-six
pieces of cannon, and three hundred yards of bridge, ‘the whole ready to
march, carriage and everything complete, and such a spirit in the troops as
cannot be surpassed.’ While he was in the midst of his preparations the
battle of Ferozeshah was fought. Hardinge ordered Napier to direct his
forces upon Bhawalpur, and to come himself to headquarters. Leaving his army
on 10 February, he reached Lahore on 3 March, to find Sobraon had been
fought and the war was over. Early in April Napier was back at Karachi.
Cholera broke out, and seven thousand persons died in Karachi, of whom eight
hundred were soldiers. He lost his favourite nephew, John Napier (an able
soldier), and also a favourite little grandniece. This affliction, with the
harassing work and great responsibility, began to tell on his health, and as
time went on he had many worries with the court of directors of the East
India Company, for whom he had no affection, and who treated him with little
consideration. On 9 November 1846 he was promoted lieutenant-general. In
July 1847 he resigned the government of Sind, and on 1 October left India
for Europe, staying some time at Nice with his brother George. On his way to
England, in May 1848, he paid a visit to Marshal Soult in Paris, and
recalled Coruña. The marshal paid him the highest compliment, telling him he
had studied all his operations in China (!) and entirely approved them. He
met with a cordial reception, on arriving in London, from Wellington and
Peel, and Lord Ellenborough, whom, strange to say, he had never before met,
though they had worked so loyally together in India.
After a short visit to Ireland, where he received an enthusiastic welcome,
he settled down at Cheltenham, and occupied himself in writing a pamphlet
advocating the organisation of a baggage corps for the Indian army. Early in
1849 the Sikh troubles produced a general demand in England for a change in
the command. The court of directors applied to the Duke of Wellington to
recommend to them a general for the crisis, and he named Napier. The
suggestion was ill received, and the duke was asked to name some one else;
he then named Sir George Napier, who declined. Sir William Maynard Gomm was
eventually selected, and sailed from Mauritius. Late in February came the
news of the battle of Chillianwallah. A most unjust outcry arose against
Lord Gough, and there was a popular call for Charles Napier. The directors
yielded, but tried to arrange that he should not have a seat in the supreme
council. Napier declined to go unless he were given the seat, and this was
at last conceded. After the usual banquet at the India House, Napier left
England on 24 March, reached Calcutta on 6 May, and assumed the command; the
war was, however, over, and Napier unstintedly praised Lord Gough's conduct
of it.
In November 1849 a mutinous spirit exhibited itself in the native army,
which Napier was determined to put down. The 66th regiment, on its way from
Lucknow into the Punjab in January 1850, halted at Gorindghur, where they
refused their pay, and tried to shut the gates of the fortress, and were
only prevented by the accidental presence of a cavalry regiment on its way
back from the Punjab. Napier ordered that the native officers,
non-commissioned officers, and private sepoys of the 66th regiment should be
marched to Ambala, and there struck off the rolls, and that the colours
should be delivered to the loyal men of the Nasiri Ghurkha battalion, who
should in future be called the 66th or Ghurka regiment. About the same time
the regulation by which an allowance was made to the sepoys for purchasing
their food was called in question. Hearsey, the brigadier-general in command
at Wazirabad, where the regulation was unknown, deemed it unsafe to enforce
it until it had been carefully explained to the sepoys on parade. Hearsey's
opinion was endorsed by the divisional commander, Sir Walter Raleigh
Gilbert, and was laid before Napier by the adjutant-general of the Indian
army, with a recommendation that the regulation should not be enforced. Lord
Dalhousie, the governor-general, was on a sea voyage, and the members of the
supreme council separated from the scene by journeys of weeks. Napier
therefore took upon himself the responsibility of suspending the regulation
pending a reference to the supreme council. Greatly to his surprise, three
months later he received a severe reprimand from the governor-general for
exercising powers which belonged to the supreme council. Napier resigned. He
left Simla on 16 November 1850, and went down the Indus. At Hyderabad the
sirdars collected for many miles round, and presented him with a sword of
honour. At Bombay a public banquet was given to him.
In March 1851 he was back in England. He took a small property at Oaklands
on the Hampshire Downs, a few miles from Portsmouth. The disease which had
settled on his liver ever since his ride to Lahore in 1846 was making rapid
strides; but he was not a man to remain idle, and he commenced a work
entitled Defects, Civil and Military, of the Indian Government, which he did
not live to complete, but which was eventually edited and published by his
brother William. In February 1852 he published a Letter on the Defence of
England by Corps of Volunteers and Militia, which did something to prepare
the way for the great volunteer movement of 1859. In spite of illness, he
took his place as one of the pall-bearers at the Duke of Wellington's
funeral, where he caught a severe cold, which could not be shaken off. He
never recovered his health, and died on 29 August 1853. He was buried in the
small churchyard of the garrison chapel at Portsmouth. His funeral was a
private one, but Lords Ellenborough and Hardinge and many distinguished
officers attended it, and the whole garrison crowded to the grave.
On the north side of the entrance to the north transept of St. Paul's
Cathedral is a marble statue of Napier by G. G. Adams, with the simple
inscription of his name and the words: ‘A prescient general, a beneficent
governor, a just man.’ In Trafalgar Square, London, is a colossal statue of
Napier in bronze, by the same sculptor, which was erected by public
subscription. By far the larger number of subscribers were private soldiers.
A portrait of Napier, painted in 1853 by E. Williams, is in the possession
of Lady McMurdo; another, sketched in oils by George Jones, R.A., is in the
National Portrait Gallery, London, having been presented by Napier's widow.
Napier was essentially a hero. With his keen, hawklike eye, aquiline nose,
and impressive features, his appearance exercised a powerful fascination;
while his disregard of luxury, simplicity of manner, careful attention to
the wants of the soldiers under his command, and enthusiasm for duty and
right won him the love and admiration of his men. His journals testify to
his religious convictions, while his life was one long protest against
oppression, injustice, and wrongdoing. Generous to a fault, a radical in
politics yet an autocrat in government, hot-tempered and impetuous, he was a
man to inspire strong affection or the reverse, and his enemies were as
numerous as his friends.
Napier was twice married: first, in 1827, to Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas
Oakeley, and widow of Francis John Kelly; she died on 31 July 1833.
Secondly, in 1835, to Frances, daughter of William Philips, esq., of Court
Henry, Carmarthenshire, and widow of Richard Alcock, esq., royal navy. She
survived him, and died on 22 June 1872.
Robert Peffers.
"scally" <scall...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1174105374....@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Do you wish to revise that list in the light of today's results?
Robert Peffers.
D. Spencer Hines
We still have PECCAVI in the singular NOT PECCAVIMUS...
And NAPIER -- NOT HAVELOCK -- as Pogue Surreyman would have it.
<http://www.dawn.com/2004/01/02/letted.htm#4>
DSH
-------------------------------------------------------
'Peccavi' myth
This is with reference to the letter "Jewel in the crown show" (December 31)
by Dr S. M. Ismail. Dr Ismail has made reference to Sir Charles Napier's
legendary but apocryphal one-word message, "Peccavi" which he has supposed
to have sent after the battle of Miani on Feb 17, 1843.
It seems this account has been accepted as an established historical fact,
with different versions floating around. The most popular version is that
Sir Charles Napier sent a one-word telegram to London, saying "peccavi". Dr
Ismail has introduced us to yet another version.
Several versions simply say he "dispatched a message". No mention of a
telegram. -- DSH
The fact is that this never happened. Sir Charles Napier never sent any
message to anyone in any form. Punch, a satirical magazine from London,
published a cartoon, showing Sir Charles Napier riding stride the carnage of
the battlefield of Miani, with "peccavi" coming out of his mouth, alluding
to his personal greed and disapproval of the war at home.
Hmmmmmm... Napier, NOT Havelock and PECCAVI not peccavimus. -- DSH
This was a pun. However, it has metamorphozed into a legend and the myth has
been perpetuated by dinner table conversations. For the record's sake, India
did not have telegraph lines until 1870s.
So what? Several versions simply say he "dispatched a message". No mention
of a telegram. Perhaps it was a remark Napier made to his brother, as the
DNB has it. Still funny -- and a good dinner table anecdote. -- DSH
In fact, discernible telegraphic communication started in 1844 in the US,
after Samuel Morse transmitted his first message in May of that year,
between Baltimore and Washington.
Fine. [Samuel Finley Breese Morse was a Yale Graduate, Class of 1810]
Relevance to Napier? -- DSH
Also, the seat of the Company Bahadur's rule was Bombay, not Delhi at the
time of the fall of Sindh. The Mughal emperor still ruled Delhi at that
time. Delhi became the seat of colonial British government after moving from
Kolkata in 1912. It was only after the unsuccessful 1857 war of liberation
and exile of Bahadur Shah that the company occupied Delhi.
SAIFULLAH NIZAMANI
Pakistani? -- DSH
Worcester, MA, USA
Vaughan Sanders
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:08:22 GMT, "a.spencer3"
> <a.spe...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>news:A1rKh.73$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
>>> Recte:
>>>
>>>
>>> I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very
>>> quiet --
>>> hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
>
> hero from opening his mouth and changing feet yet again...
>
>>
>>
>>So the organisers of this lunacy:
>>
>>Tried belatedly to cash in on carving their own little Empire (a policy
>>for
>>which Highlander hates the English for carrying out, of course).
>
> them to cash in.
>>
>>dash.
>
> desperate and willing to clutch at straws. Nor unlike your Prime
> Minister, whose lying appeal to the Scottish people promised financial
> ruin if Scotland leaves the Union, was blasted almost immediately by
>
> I posted it late last night in SCS. We're on our way, sweetheart, and
> you can come up to Edinburgh any time you want - just don't forget to
> bring your begging bowl and your 'wife and three kids to support' sign
> with you!
>
>>avoided
>>this area like the plague!
>
> which included Darien? Read my other post where I exopkain why Darien
> later became the most important shipping waterway in the world, now
> known as the Panama Canal...
>
> I really don't want to discourage you, but my grandchildren know more
> about this than you do. Why don't you take a moment to switch
> whichever foot is currently in your mouth and then read on...
>
>
> investors from investing in the scheme
>
>>bankrupted
>>their nation ....
>
> problem - why would they have?
>
>>not
>>the Scots!
>
> advertising your abyssmal ignorance to the world.
>>
>>Check the size of the empire lil' ol' Portugal carved out for itself, for
>>instance, also without English help incidentally, and weep.
>
> Panama was still the greatest prize of them all.
>
>>Which is all totally irrelevant to why the present-day Highlander seems to
>>hate present-day English, of course, but there you are.
>
> I don't hate the English; I dislike the arrogant, ignorant blowhards
> whom you so proudly represent. To date we know nothing about you or
> what your family has or hasn't contributed to history, apart from your
> probably ability to grow mangelwurzels and herd swine.
>>
>>Hoist your flag, or petard, to this cause if you wish, Hines.
>
> Going down with the ship, eh?
>>
>>Twit!
>
> off as a parasitic bore.
>
> The Badge of Shame.
>
>
> Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
> an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
> The views expressed in this post are
> not necessarily those of The Highlander.
Haggis, "want to buy a nice bridge"?
I'll throw in the swamp for free :-))
Jamie
The Highlander
wrote:
Hush yo mouf - I don't want him to realize that I have been polishing
and pushing him in the correct direction as I plan to unloose him as
our secret weapon against soc.culture.irish!
Where's your Amadinejad now!
Renia
> Thanks.
>
> Yes, The British Empire was, on balance, a GOOD THING.
>
> What I find curious is why so many Brits don't see that and knock off this
> silly-buggers Wallowing-In-Guilt, Hand-Wringing, Mea-Culpa Nonsense.
>
> Brits should be PROUD of The British Empire NOT apologetic and guilt-ridden
> about it.
>
> Compare it to the Belgian, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese,
> Dutch and Italian Empires and it comes off very well indeed.
Dahling, I agree utterly.
(Utterly is my current buzzword.)
Renia
D. Spencer Hines
But WHY do so many of your fellow countrymen and women take the opposite
POV?
DSH
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:eti7da$3ee$6...@mouse.otenet.gr...
> D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Yes, The British Empire was, on balance, a GOOD THING.
>>
>> What I find curious is why so many Brits don't see that and knock off
>> this silly-buggers Wallowing-In-Guilt, Hand-Wringing, Mea-Culpa Nonsense.
>>
>> Brits should be PROUD of The British Empire NOT apologetic and
>> guilt-ridden about it.
>>
>> Compare it to the Belgian, French, German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian,
Andrew Swallow
> Thanks.
>
> Yes, The British Empire was, on balance, a GOOD THING.
>
> What I find curious is why so many Brits don't see that and knock off this
> silly-buggers Wallowing-In-Guilt, Hand-Wringing, Mea-Culpa Nonsense.
>
> Brits should be PROUD of The British Empire NOT apologetic and guilt-ridden
> about it.
In my unusual opinion the problem generating the guilt is not obtaining
and ruling of the Empire but the betrayal built into its break up. The
colonies were not given independence but were cashiered.
White colonies like Canada and Australia tended to became dominions with
the Queen as Head of State. Black colonies were given presidents and
were not invited to join NATO. After the third ex-colony got a dictator
most people in Britain knew that independence did not mean freedom for
the blacks.
Andrew Swallow
D. Spencer Hines
Socialist Government had so much reduced the size and funding of your Armed
Forces in the immediate Post-War Period?
What force could many of the newly independent colonies have added to NATO?
The colonies were now INDEPENDENT -- are you suggesting Britain should have
intervened in their internal affairs and insisted on only DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNMENTS ---- in accordance with British Laws, Rules and Procedures?
Little birds must eventually fly on their own.
DSH
"Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:XeednbcncYatIWHY...@bt.com...
Andrew Swallow
> How much control do you think Britain had over that process as the Attlee
> Socialist Government had so much reduced the size and funding of your Armed
> Forces in the immediate Post-War Period?
Indian independence was decided whilst we were still at war with Japan.
It was the terms that had to be agreed.
>
> What force could many of the newly independent colonies have added to NATO?
Other way round. On independence NATO and Britain were no longer
defending the ex-colonies. Betrayal and guilt.
>
> The colonies were now INDEPENDENT -- are you suggesting Britain should have
> intervened in their internal affairs and insisted on only DEMOCRATIC
> GOVERNMENTS ---- in accordance with British Laws, Rules and Procedures?
Many of the African countries did not gain independence until the 1960s.
Plenty of dictators around by then.
Billzz
In 1980 I attended a seminar, at the National War College, in Washington,
D.C. One of the subjects was U.S. relations with Africa. Brent Scowcroft
and Colin Powell were, along with me, in the audience. The seminar was
"not for attribution" and so I can not tell who said what, but the words of
one assistant/under/something Secretary of State were, "...all of Africa is
a basket case."
Colonial powers were cited as the problem, although as one person said, the
emerging countries should invite back the colonial powers to show them how
to run a country. They were all ( I spare the list of countries) "going
down the tubes."
The United States, not ever having any colonial interest, should not have
anything to do with Africa, as any interest would be interpreted as a
colonial interest.
That's my observation, and I probably won't have anything more to say. Just
info.
Defendario
The post-colonial period has been disastrous for Africa. The houses
were build upon the sand of colonial foundations. The white man's
foundations...
> Colonial powers were cited as the problem, although as one person said, the
> emerging countries should invite back the colonial powers to show them how
> to run a country. They were all ( I spare the list of countries) "going
> down the tubes."
>
Africa ought to have a central Administration. The Middle East might
manage loans and financing, in the hope of reaping long term
productivity and lifestyle benefits for the people. All trades need to
be learned by the people, and education will be the key to success.
> The United States, not ever having any colonial interest,
Liberia ring a bell?
> should not have
> anything to do with Africa, as any interest would be interpreted as a
> colonial interest.
>
We could be patrons of third world development. A few billions and
project management for reliable power and electification, along with
flood control and agricultural mechanization would do Africa a world of
good. Since they are our neighbors, and a potential market, it would
behoove us to help.
> That's my observation, and I probably won't have anything more to say. Just
> info.
>
Your opinions are just opinions. Not info at all, IOW
;D
>
>
>
D. Spencer Hines
> anything to do with Africa, as any interest would be interpreted as a
> colonial interest.
SHOULD and WILL are quite different issues.
Our Domestic African-American Lobbies and other "Liberals" INSIST we have a
Great Deal to do with Africa.
Consider Darfur...
And the African AIDS Epidemic.
There WAS the South African Question -- and boycotts and disinvestment
policies -- combined with sanctions.
Domestic Politics impinge on Foreign Policy.
DSH
"Billzz" <billzz...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:96df3$45fcc8f7$9440b19b$4...@STARBAND.NET...
a.spencer3
"D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M5ZKh.142$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
>> The fact is that this never happened. Sir Charles Napier never sent any
> message to anyone in any form. Punch, a satirical magazine from London,
> published a cartoon, showing Sir Charles Napier riding stride the carnage
of
> the battlefield of Miani, with "peccavi" coming out of his mouth, alluding
> to his personal greed and disapproval of the war at home.
>
> Hmmmmmm... Napier, NOT Havelock and PECCAVI not peccavimus. -- DSH
>
Read again, moron.
This is just what I've been telling you throughout these posts!
Havelock may have sent the plural.
Napier probably didn't send anything.
Punch probably invented the singular version.
Illiterate twit!
Surreyman
Andrew Chaplin
Canada (1867), Australia (1901), New Zealand (1907) and Newfoundland (1907)
established themselves as self-governing dominions before the events that led
to the end of empire (the Great War, Versailles, Statute of Westminster,
statement of intent to give India autonomy, Bretton Woods). NATO was an
agreement to "keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down,"
so it would be unusual to make African ex-colonies party to that -- keep in
mind that Spain was not involved then (and Ireland still isn't).
This only undermines your second paragraph; it does not contradict your
central assertion that the process for the handover of government was
unseemly. Handover was generally to elites or strongmen believed to be
sympathetic or least threatening to British interests -- IOW, the U.K. was
acting like any other state.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
D. Spencer Hines
down shop in a former British African colony?
DSH
D. Spencer Hines
Renia, you are lying.
Don't lie, Renia....
It's not nice or becoming, darling.
"I'm not a native Polish speaker, simply repeating what I was taught by my
father, who was. I'm sure that Rafal Prinke will be better able to explain
the Polish way than I. I don't know whether the owna/owa as [sic] a
historical thing, or whether it is still used."
"As Renia Lamborowna, I was recognised as a single woman (Miss Lambor), the
daughter of Mr Lambor. My mother, was Margaret Lamborowa (Mrs Lambor), or
the wife of Mr Lambor, who was simply Mr Lambor, or Pan Lambor."
"Similarly, my grandmother was Zofia Bogucka, while her father was Jan
Bogucki (feminine and masculine endings), but I don't know if only some name
types have the owna/owa."
Renia Lamborowna Simmonds -- 23 July 1999
'Nuff Said.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Bringing Light & Truth To English, Poles, et alii., & Liberating Them From
Crippling Ignorance Daily
---------------------------------------------------
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:etkakl$uom$1...@mouse.otenet.gr...
> D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>
>> Renia Lamborowna Simmonds
>
> That is not my name.
Renia
> Nonsense.
>
> Renia, you are lying.
>
> Don't lie, Renia....
>
> It's not nice or becoming, darling.
>
>
> "As Renia Lamborowna, I was recognised as a single woman (Miss Lambor), the
> daughter of Mr Lambor. My mother, was Margaret Lamborowa (Mrs Lambor), or
> the wife of Mr Lambor, who was simply Mr Lambor, or Pan Lambor."
Exactly. "owna" means Miss. Therefore Lamborowna means Miss Lambor. You
are confusing my unmarried STATE with my married NAME.
Please don't pretend you understand Eastern European customs. You don't.
D. Spencer Hines
She can be Renia Lambor Simmonds if she prefers.
Permission granted.
DSH
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:etkcm0$vgs$1...@mouse.otenet.gr...
Renia
> Hilarious!
>
> She can be Renia Lambor Simmonds if she prefers.
>
> Permission granted.
At least you understand now. However, unlike in the USA, British married
women don't generally tag along their maiden names with their married names.
D. Spencer Hines
She can be Renia Lambor Simmonds if she prefers.
Permission granted.
DSH
Andrew Swallow
> "Andrew Swallow" <am.sw...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:XeednbcncYatIWHY...@bt.com...
>> D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Yes, The British Empire was, on balance, a GOOD THING.
>>>
>>> What I find curious is why so many Brits don't see that and knock off this
>>> silly-buggers Wallowing-In-Guilt, Hand-Wringing, Mea-Culpa Nonsense.
>>>
>>> Brits should be PROUD of The British Empire NOT apologetic and guilt-ridden
>>> about it.
>> In my unusual opinion the problem generating the guilt is not obtaining
>> and ruling of the Empire but the betrayal built into its break up. The
>> colonies were not given independence but were cashiered.
>>
>> White colonies like Canada and Australia tended to became dominions with the
>> Queen as Head of State. Black colonies were given presidents and
>> were not invited to join NATO. After the third ex-colony got a dictator
>> most people in Britain knew that independence did not mean freedom for
>> the blacks.
>
> Canada (1867), Australia (1901), New Zealand (1907) and Newfoundland (1907)
> established themselves as self-governing dominions before the events that led
> to the end of empire (the Great War, Versailles, Statute of Westminster,
> statement of intent to give India autonomy, Bretton Woods). NATO was an
> agreement to "keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down,"
Have you never hear the white South Africans talk about fighting communism?
D. Spencer Hines
But we always make these gracious exceptions for you, darling.
DSH
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:etkehr$ij$1...@mouse.otenet.gr...
scally
> "scally" <scally1...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:1174105374....@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On 16 Mar, 23:24, "Robert Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "The Highlander" <mich...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>
> >news:poulv2p4tn4u8re27...@4ax.com...
>
> > > On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:15:21 GMT, "a.spencer3"
> > > <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > >>"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemid...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > >>news:MhrKh.74$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
> > >>> <flexf...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > >>>news:1174000126.6...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >>> > On 15 Mar, 10:51, "a.spencer3" <a.spenc...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> >> My favourite Empire joke remains Havelock's "Peccavimus"!
>
> > >>> >> Surreyman
>
> > >>> > Napier would have you shot twice; once for misattribution and once
> > >>> > for
> > >>> > diluting his personal glory by using the plural :-)
>
> > >>> Pogue Surreyman is even more senile today than he usually
> > >>> demonstrates.
>
> > >>> Watch Pogue Surreyman now post one of his standard little "screw you
> > >>> too"
> > >>> miniposts.
>
> > >>> He's afraid to post anything very long, for fear he will screw the
> > >>> pooch
> > >>> even more -- and be caught out again.
>
> > >>> Pogue Surreyman seems to have once visited Trafalgar Square, seen the
> > >>> statues of Havelock and Napier -- and gotten them confused and
> > >>> conflated.
>
> > >>> Hilarious!
>
> > >>> Teaching British History to Englishmen is a full-time job in these
> > >>> newsgroups -- and Pogue Surreyman is one of the worst and slowest
> > >>> pupils.
>
> > >>You saw my answer regarding confusion over a later Punch cartoon taking
> > >>off
> > >>the actual event.
>
> > >>Deal with that, moron, rather than regurgitating popularist Wickidpedia
> > >>stuff.
>
> > >>I'd be interested in researching further.
>
> > >>You obviously are not.
>
> > >>Twit!
>
> > >>Surreyman
>
> > > Face reality Surreyman - you've been slammed - Game, Set and Match!
>
> > > (Those are tennis terms in case the reference escapes you - I know how
> > > much you South Britons admire French games...)
>
> > > The Highlander
>
> > > Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
> > > an post seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
> > > The views expressed in this post are
> > > not necessarily those of The Highlander.
>
> > the best players suddenly started to be called British rather than
> > English.
> > I wonder why?
> > --
>
> > Robert Peffers,
> > Kelty,
> > Fife,
> > Scotland, (UK).- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The English have no interest in tennis whatsoever.
> Our sports are football, cricket and rugby.
>
> Do you wish to revise that list in the light of today's results?
> --
>
> Robert Peffers,
> Kelty,
> Fife,
> Scotland, (UK).- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nope, you win some you lose some, otherwise sport would be as boring
as the Barnett Formula. As they say it's all fun and games until
someone loses an eye and then it's sport!
D. Spencer Hines
_Guns At Batasi_?
Accurate picture of _The End of Empire_ in one former British colony?
On any score?
Based on the novel _The Siege of Battersea_ by Robert Holles.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,,313452,00.html
Film:
Classic Regimental Sergeant Major -- Richard Attenborough:
--------------------------------------
Lt. Boniface: You will appreciate that it is I who give the orders and you
who will obey! For the first time in the history of my country, Sergeant
Major, it is the African who is putting the shell into the breech and giving
the order to fire!
RSM Lauderdale: Really, Mr. Boniface? I don't think I've ever come across a
misfit of your size and quality before. You've missed your vocation. You
ought to be in Hyde Park! If you do happen to go putting a shell into the
breech, sir, I sincerely hope that you'll remember to put the sharp end to
the front.
---------------------------------------
<G>
Sounds Like A Great, Classic British Film.
Richard Attenborough won the BAFTA Best British Actor Award [1964]
Mia Farrow's true film debut.
But which colony?
DSH
"D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:...
D. Spencer Hines
DSH
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:etkpnn$4tm$4...@mouse.otenet.gr...
> Josiah Jenkins wrote:
>
>> Whilst perusing Usenet on Sun, 18 Mar 2007 23:36:08 +0200, I read
>> these words from Renia <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> :
>>
>>
>>>D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>>
>>>>Renia Lamborowna Simmonds
>>>
>>>That's not my name.
>>
>> TRIM THE HEADERS !!!
>>
>
> Bugger off.
a.spencer3
Supposdly East Africa, so take your choice.
But it's a story, Hines, a story, not history.
Twit!
Surreyman
The Highlander
<willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>news:r7tlv2h060jb07sds...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:50:42 +0530, "William Black"
>> <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"a.spencer3" <a.spe...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>>>news:WfsKh.6122$NK3....@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>>>>
>>>> "D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:A1rKh.73$aY1...@eagle.america.net...
>>>>> Recte:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you both, most kindly.
>>>>>
>>>>> I note with amusement that Pogue Surreyman is keeping very, very
>>>>> quiet --
>>>>> hoping he will not be proven an ignorant fool once again.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Check when all this was written in terms of UK time, moron.
>>>>
>>>> So the organisers of this lunacy:
>>>>
>>>> Tried belatedly to cash in on carving their own little Empire (a policy
>>>> for
>>>> which Highlander hates the English for carrying out, of course).
>>>>
>>>> Mortgaged half their nation's wealth on a single unplanned, unresearched
>>>> dash.
>>>>
>>>> Never seemed to consider why every other 'imperialistic' nation had
>>>> avoided
>>>> this area like the plague!
>>>>
>>>> And then wondered why outside finance was lacking!
>>>>
>>>> Effectively slaughtered many of their own hardy souls, virtually
>>>> bankrupted
>>>> their nation ....
>>>>
>>>> And then, inevitably, Highlander wants to blame the English of the time,
>>>> not
>>>> the Scots!
>>>
>>>I loved the idea that one bunch of imperialists were evil when they
>>>refused
>>>to help another bunch of evil imperialists who had come unstuck.
>>>
>>>It's a bit like asking Microsoft to help out poor old IBM...
>>>
>>>Look, and this is a bit basic, empires are wrong.
>>>
>>>Some empires have unexpected side effects that may have done some good
>>>("What have the Romans ever done for us" and etc) but, on the whole, the
>>>ills outdo the benefits by orders of magnitude.
>>>
>>>Mind you, as "Life of Brian" never played in India that particular scene
>>>is
>>>a great help when some over-enthusiastic school student with an even more
>>>over-enthusiastic history teacher trots out his (or her) "I hate the
>>>British" routine when sitting around the dinner table in Bombay.
>>
>> Oh gosh, are we returning to our exploits in Mumbai again?
>>
>> I used to stay with Parsi friends on Marine Drive, now renamed
>> Bulabhai Desai. Where did you stay? Dharavi?
>
>Been at the Internet again.
Please - don't confuse me with your own pathetic attempts to come
across as Mr. Global Traveller.
>
>The Parsi community moved out of the Marine Drive area years ago, to the
>extent that it's mentioned in the book 'Maximum City'.
So what? They hadn't when I stayed there.
>
>And please get some better sources of information.
>
>Nobody here calls the city 'Mumbai' except a few politicians and the
>newspapers. The people who live here still call it Bombay.
>
>Nobody, ever, uses the new names for the roads or the various terminals,
>they even print the old names on the official maps...
>
>Dharavi is being redeveloped, 50,000 people were rehoused last year. It
>now has 24 hour running water.
>
>That's why I can tell that you're just a fraud. You know just enough to
>fool someone in a pub conversation. The reality is that when you actually
>come across someone who knows about what you're spouting about it always
>comes horribly unglued...
>
>By the way, I'm in Mahim
Bully for you! Your knowledge of Bombay seems a great deal more
fragile than mine.
William Black
> Bully for you! Your knowledge of Bombay seems a great deal more
> fragile than mine.
I see you've stopped calling it Mumbai already.
Always glad to educate you.
No charge...
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe
Barbeques on fire by chalets past the headland
I've watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off Newborough
All this will pass like ice-cream on the beach
Time for tea