Jim, Did someone invite you to join the DAR? Tell them, no thanks! Rex Jones

shipments of tea became a symbol of taxation tyranny to the colonists, reopening the door to unknown future tax abuses. Colonial resistance culminated in Boston Tea Party In British colonial history, legislative maneuver by the British ministry of Lord to make English tea marketable in America. A previous crisis had been averted in 1770 when all the Townshend Acts duties had been lifted except that on tea, which had been mainly supplied to the Colonies since then by Dutch smugglers. In an effort to help the financially troubled British East India Company sell 17,000,000 pounds of tea stored in England, the Tea Act rearranged excise regulations so that the company could pay the Townshend duty and still undersell its competitors. At the same time, the North administration hoped to reassert Parliament's right to levy direct revenue taxes on the Colonies. The shipments became a symbol of taxation tyranny to the colonists, reopening the door to unknown future tax abuses. Colonial resistance culminated in Boston Tea Party (December 1773), in which was dumped into the ocean, and in a similar action in New York (April 1774). http://www.harlingen.isd.tenet.edu/coakhist/amrev.html#PRE

In a message dated 6/5/2002 6:20:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, aflame@fuse.net writes: << Perhaps you refer to those who lived in New England. One needs a broader perspective. What about those who lived further inland, who established farms or small businesses to support the smaller outlying settlements? >> What about Virginians? The Carolinians? I don't think you can base theories about Revolutionary motives on sheer speculation. Fortunately, you don't have to. The 18th Century abounded in clear prose, and these people used it to explain themselves and their actions. Read what they said. And don't overlook John Locke et al. Anne

I would speculate that the War on Terrorism is based on cultural belief and spurted on, fueled if you will, with $$$ so as to complete whatever needs to be done to rid the world of another belief. I believe that is idealistic and it is also, if the only one left in the world after this terrorism is made up of one set beliefs with no others left to thrive. The Revolution was more of a practice, survival type crusade to free oneself and their family from being bled to death of the necessary resources one could live and developed a future. I believe money is the route of making anything one wants to accomplish materially for the future. Rhonda Houston -----Original Message----- From: JMJJF@aol.com [mailto:JMJJF@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:27 PM To: AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [A-REV] A question In a message dated 6/5/2002 7:58:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jfarris@execpc.com writes: << do you really believe that John Hancock was primarily motivated by a desire for profit >> To carry on this argument, are we to believe that the "War on Terrorism" is idealistic, but our Revolution was not? Or does it follow that the terrorism war and all others must be based on greed too? Anne ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

There is one marvelous opportunity that the DAR so far has missed in furthering accurate historical study of the Rev War. It would be marvelous if it encouraged its members to post transcripts of the Rev War pension files on the various State & County US GENWEB sites. The pension files are a vast, virtually untouched, repository of details about the Revolution. It is a pity that situation continues. Don

In a message dated 6/5/2002 7:58:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jfarris@execpc.com writes: << do you really believe that John Hancock was primarily motivated by a desire for profit >> To carry on this argument, are we to believe that the "War on Terrorism" is idealistic, but our Revolution was not? Or does it follow that the terrorism war and all others must be based on greed too? Anne

I applaud your group for your archaeology work and your efforts to discover new information about the American Revolution. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher T. Smithson" <wsmithso@erols.com> To: <AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 9:22 AM Subject: Re: [A-REV] Re: Fw: DAR:Sar > Ladies & Gentlemen - > > I serve as the State Genealogist for the MD Society, SAR. I am only 22 > years old and part of the youngest generation in the SAR. > > I have also served as President of the local SAR Chapter here in Harford > County, MD and currently the Chapter Secretary. > > The chapter that I belong to basically was in a down fall and the charter > was about to be thrown in. So I saved it... We went from 17 members to now > 35 and growing. > > I organized a NEW Children of the American Revolution under the chapters > sponsorship; researching with chapter members in getting an archelogy dig in > a possible Revolutionary War Encampment site; working with prosepctive > members to get them in; working with the local DAR Chapter in taking care of > a local historical builting... > > The one sad thing is that only 1 to 3% of the members of the Children of the > American Revolution join either parent organization... I myself am one of > that 1 to 3%. > > My parents were not really interested, but now I have my father in who is > the current State Secretary for the MD Society... > > The MD Society also stated a Patriots Program in the 5th Grade in the > Elementary schools here in Maryland. The kids had to cite 11 different > patriotic phases; state all names of 50 states/capitals; all US Presidents > on and on... > > Tomorrow I will be presenting an awards to 56 students from ONE school who > completed the PATRIOTS PROGRAM... > > The SAR also has a Citizenship Award, Knight Essay Contest for High School > students; the latter involves prize money... There is also an Eagle Scout > awards and an Oration Contest at the High School level... > > Where some of the youth programs lack is in the middle schools/junior high.. > > QUESTION - Is DAR doing anything for middle school age kids.. > > For someone to say DAR and SAR is a social club.. Wrong.. > > That was in the old days... This is the 21st Century... > > Sincerely, > > Christopher T. Smithson > State Genealogist, MDSSAR > Secretary, Col. Aquila Hall Chapter, MDSSAR > Senior Pres., Bush Declaration Society, NSCAR > http://users.starpower.net/wsmithso/sarindex.html > http://users.starpower.net/wsmithso/bushdecsoc.html > > > > > ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== > > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Ok, its a service organization, I don't see a big difference between the two. My grandmother, neither of them, would have qualified for the DAR, both were the daughters of Irish immigrants. I'm pretty confident that both wouldn't have been involved in the DAR, they both supported FDR and I suspect that when the DAR refused to allow Marion Anderson (a Black singer) to sing in the DAR Hall in Washington both would have been unhappy about it. Its not that my grandmothers were advocates of intergration its just that they were more advanced that the DAR and were supporters of the President and his wife. Does the DAR today do research into Black involvement in the American Revolution or is that left for any Black women who might want to join. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: <PmpGenie@aol.com> To: <AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:52 AM Subject: Re: [A-REV] Fw: Fw: DAR:Sar > Well, Jim -- you are very incorrect in your assessment of the DAR. It is not a social organization -- it is a service organization. The objectives are Education, History and Historic Preservation. They work with Veterans, immigrants, school children, conservation, American history, genealogical research, preservation of genealogical records, proper display of the American Flag, and many other projects to numerous to mention. If you would like to know more, go to the DAR web site at www.dar.org and check out everything. > > This is not your grandmother's DAR -- times have changed and so has the organization. Of course there may be members who do nothing more than attend an occasional meeting, but their dues and contributions go toward many wonderful and worthwhile projects. > > The SAR is very similar. Those guy are out doing programs, cleaning cemeteries, marking historic spots, and many of the same projects that DAR does. > > For all the great work done by these organizations -- SALUTE!!! > > Phyllis > > > ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== > > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Hi Faye, If the DAR were doing anything interesting I'm sure we would have heard about it hear. I saw that someone's SAR post is sponsoring an archaeology dig, that is something that I think is interesting. Holding teas, sponsoring scholariships, putting flags on tombstones, publishing books so more people can join the DAR, not of that raises the DAR above social club status. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "FLD" <fdy@comcast.net> To: "James L. Stokes" <jlstokes@supernet.com>; <AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:11 AM Subject: Re: [A-REV] Fw: Fw: DAR:Sar > Jim I think you need to visit the DAR Web Site. http://www.dar.org > > They are doing more to save our history and keep patriotism high than any > other group in this world. We are not a social organization and you need > to know of what you speak, before you speak. > > Faye > > At 12:31 AM 6/5/02 -0400, you wrote: > >Hi Carol, > > I wasn't trying to single you out, yours was just the last in a long > > line of messages, all seemed focused on joining the DAR. I see the DAR > > as a social organization, I don't think they do anything serious to > > better understand the American Revolution. > > > >Jim > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Scrapcat2@aol.com > > To: jlstokes@supernet.com > > Cc: AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com > > Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 6:02 PM > > Subject: Re: Fw: DAR:Sar > > > > > > In a message dated 6/4/2002 4:14:44 PM Central Daylight Time, > > jlstokes@supernet.com writes: > > > > > > > > Cc: <AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 5:10 PM > > Subject: DAR:Sar > > > > Just a reminder, the American revolution wasn't fought so people > > could join the DAR or SAR. Lets try not to trivialize it. Jim > > > > > > Jim... thank you for your note. Years ago, I would have said that same > > thing. I always pictured the DAR as a "social organization". Some months > > ago, I was invited to attend a DAR meeting as a guest and was amazed at > > the dedication of the women to the history of the American Revolution, > > reverence and respect for what our ancestors did to allow us to live in a > > free country, and a total commitment to what America stands for. In the > > last six months, I've faithfully attended the monthly meetings and have > > learned so much about the history and events of the Revolution and what > > it means to be a patriotic American today. > > > > In addition, I've gone to the DAR in library in Washington and was > > awestruck at the research materials available to the public wanting to to > > research the subject. The DAR Members go out to the schools and present > > programs on the importance of the American Revolution and at what expense > > the Patriots fought for our freedoms. > > > > I certainly did not intend to trivialize what my ancestors did during > > the American Revolution. What I have learned has made me realize their > > great personal sacrifices. My 6th great grandmother saw her husband, all > > 5 sons and many of her grandsons fight and win a war. I can't imagine the > > anguish she went through. My commitment to the DAR is in respect for her > > and those who fought. > > > > This list is certainly not the place to debate an organization's goals, > > but I did want to share my thoughts with you and respond to your message. > > > > Carol Kennedy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== > > > > > > > >============================== > >To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, > >go to: > >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Couldn't that be regarded as the Protestant Ethic. Doing work for work's sake, to reap the profits? That's normal, healthy and capitalistic. Rhonda Houston -----Original Message----- From: holley calmes [mailto:hcalmes@mindspring.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 7:16 PM To: AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [A-REV] One litle voice Hello All: Subversive person here. Although a proud American, I do think I'm clear-minded and cynical enough to make the following statements. Any study of human nature should reveal that those who rebelled against Britain did so MOSTLY through a sense of greed. Please! All those hardy, independent (hard headed, antisocial...just kidding) outlanders from whom I am descended took one good look west and said, "The heck if I'm sharing that with anybody else!" And I'm not saying that was a bad thing, and in fact is pretty natural. Why should we have shared the riches of this continent with anybody else, even if another government had risked capital, manpower-in effect been the entrepeneurs who started the venture? As the previous writer said, after several generations of first-hand working the land, it would be difficult NOT to be independent minded. (Or pig-headed as my father used to say of me.) All of this "Liberty" talk largely meant liberty to move west, work hard, get richer, and not answer to anyone. I'm just being pragmatic. I think a majority of the high minded talk came later when we started trying to justify ourselves. Cheers! Holley ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

"there are few men or women willing to risk a noose for profit alone." Yes, if they felt they had nothing to loose. That they could create a better situation for themselves and their families. Yes, also to the concept when it meant that they had everything to loose eventually. Money and both monetary survival of and for one's family is everything and worth the risk...very often when one risks something, there is a hope for an eventual gain of something; more than they would loose. Nothing Ventured, Nothing Gained in the big skeem of things. And isn't $$$$ what makes and keeps the individual's world moving? A noose for any reason, the stakes have to be large and taking action sometimes makes everything worthwhile (this is risk-taking) to create something better or a different situation than one already is experiencing and is supposed to totally accept for him/herself and their family....Rhonda Houston -----Original Message----- From: Trueman Farris [mailto:jfarris@execpc.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 6:57 PM To: AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [A-REV] A question I really don't want to get into this pointless argument, but do you really believe that John Hancock was primarily motivated by a desire for profit, as this insinuates? Do you really believe that the "Indians" tossed the tea overboard only because of a desire for profit for smugglers? To argue so seems to fall into--nay, exceed-- the mistakes of those who argue the other side. My experience is that there are few men or women willing to risk a noose for profit alone. . ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

With access to a printer and the Adobe Acrobat Reader software available below, you may download and print a copy of the Standard Form 180 - Request Pertaining to Military Records. The front and back of the form are separate files which must be downloaded separately. NOTE: Please download both sides of the form as the back of the form contains important mailing addresses and instructions. http://www.archives.gov/facilities/mo/st_louis/military_personnel_records/stan dard_form_180.html <A HREF="http://www.archives.gov/facilities/mo/st_louis/military_personnel_record s/standard_form_180.html">NARA | Facilities | </A>

John, I think you have forgotten another Colony where the Rev War was a border-to-border event, New York. The British also established "island posts" there, Long, Manhattan, and Staten. Also, it is thought that "the militia won't fight" in New York too. Well, they did, at White Plains, Fort Anne, and Saratoga, among other battles. We know how that turned out too. Of course the British moved the border in 1776 to Westchester County in 1776 after occupying half of the State. So, it was a little more cramped. Don John Robertson wrote: > At 06:53 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, you wrote: > >Out of curiousity what state do you live in? > > I live in NC, but very near SC. The comments are based primarily on SC, > but also partially on NC. > > SC is probably the one colony in which the Rev War was a border-to-border > event, since it was the only colony in which the Brits established inland > posts and sought (with considerable success) to provoke a civil war. SC > had more battle/skirmish sites than any other colony (I'll arm-wrestle on > this *privately*, if anyone is so inclined) and had more war debt than the > other 12 colonies combined (it was then "total war", it was civil war, it > was late in the war when the other colonies felt they had "done their > share" and the Carolinas were essentially on their own, and all that was at > stake was the outcome of the war). The war could have been won or lost > there. The Continental forces in the > South had been decimated. All that stood in the way of defeat was the > backcountry militia, and there was a very viable British army still in the > field. And the watchword was that "the militia won't fight". > > We know how it turned out. > > I study the Rev War all over, wherever it happened. But there are few > places it gets more exciting, or more unpredictable (or unbelievable) than > in SC. > > John Robertson > > ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

John: Thanks for your sense of balance re: the Tea Party. I totally agree with you. I also do not disagree with you a bit about South Carolina's importance during the Rev! Totally agree. However, I have an aside to one thing you said about the Brits "provoking" a civil war. If memory serves, Cornwallis was PERSONALLY iinstructed by George III ( before he came back to America with his "grand Southern Campaign plan") to put forth every effort to turn rebels back into loyalists. This is one reason why prisoners were made to take, in most cases, an oath of loyalty instead of being summarily sent to prison ships in Charleston. It's another reason why the Patriot movie was so dumbly inaccurate in having the Brits execute wounded prisoners. Ridiculous! Can you expound a bit on some evidence re the Brits inciting a civil war? Not arguing-just curious. Holley

Hello All: Subversive person here. Although a proud American, I do think I'm clear-minded and cynical enough to make the following statements. Any study of human nature should reveal that those who rebelled against Britain did so MOSTLY through a sense of greed. Please! All those hardy, independent (hard headed, antisocial...just kidding) outlanders from whom I am descended took one good look west and said, "The heck if I'm sharing that with anybody else!" And I'm not saying that was a bad thing, and in fact is pretty natural. Why should we have shared the riches of this continent with anybody else, even if another government had risked capital, manpower-in effect been the entrepeneurs who started the venture? As the previous writer said, after several generations of first-hand working the land, it would be difficult NOT to be independent minded. (Or pig-headed as my father used to say of me.) All of this "Liberty" talk largely meant liberty to move west, work hard, get richer, and not answer to anyone. I'm just being pragmatic. I think a majority of the high minded talk came later when we started trying to justify ourselves. Cheers! Holley

At 06:56 PM 6/5/2002 -0500, you wrote: >... but do you really >believe that John Hancock was primarily motivated by a desire for profit, as >this insinuates? Yes, I truly believe that. >Do you really believe that the "Indians" tossed the tea >overboard only because of a desire for profit for smugglers? Not at all. Samuel Adams had finally found something at which he could succeed (after numerous failures at other endeavors), propagandist. Those tossing the tea would have been led to see matters as a matter of pride or honor. Sam was very, very good, at something for the first time in his entire life. John Robertson

At 06:53 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Out of curiousity what state do you live in? I live in NC, but very near SC. The comments are based primarily on SC, but also partially on NC. SC is probably the one colony in which the Rev War was a border-to-border event, since it was the only colony in which the Brits established inland posts and sought (with considerable success) to provoke a civil war. SC had more battle/skirmish sites than any other colony (I'll arm-wrestle on this *privately*, if anyone is so inclined) and had more war debt than the other 12 colonies combined (it was then "total war", it was civil war, it was late in the war when the other colonies felt they had "done their share" and the Carolinas were essentially on their own, and all that was at stake was the outcome of the war). The war could have been won or lost there. The Continental forces in the South had been decimated. All that stood in the way of defeat was the backcountry militia, and there was a very viable British army still in the field. And the watchword was that "the militia won't fight". We know how it turned out. I study the Rev War all over, wherever it happened. But there are few places it gets more exciting, or more unpredictable (or unbelievable) than in SC. John Robertson

At 06:46 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, you wrote: > Are you aware that the tea thrown over the side at the Boston Tea party >was really thrown over because it was afraid its cheap price would break the >tea embargo ? Once the price came down they were afraid that people would >resume their old tea drinking habits. The trading company had changed its >policies so the new tea would be cheaper than the smuggled tea. John >Hancock, who was a tea smuggler, had his own reason for protesting the cheap >tea. Few seem to note that the standoff in Boston had a lot to do with the right of some Bostonians to smuggle. Later the motivations in the war became much more illustrious, but in the beginning, it had a lot to do with profit. John Robertson

I really don't want to get into this pointless argument, but do you really believe that John Hancock was primarily motivated by a desire for profit, as this insinuates? Do you really believe that the "Indians" tossed the tea overboard only because of a desire for profit for smugglers? To argue so seems to fall into--nay, exceed-- the mistakes of those who argue the other side. My experience is that there are few men or women willing to risk a noose for profit alone. .

Out of curiousity what state do you live in?