Ever think about where the description 'Bigwig' comes from?

John FitzGibbon by Gilbert Stuart 1789-90

The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland, Ohio

This portrait of John FitzGibbon was painted by Stuart during his Dublin period. To refresh your memory our Gibby had been invited to Dublin in 1787 for a commission; he thought this invitation in fact a good idea in order to escape mounting debts in London. However he did not escape this cycle of pernicious debt even after taking partial payments at the first sittings. It was during this time that he was sent to Debtor’s prison where he raised eyebrows by continuing to paint the rich and mighty who visited him there. When he left Dublin in 1793, hoping to finally make his fortune painting Washington, Stuart left a number of canvases unfinished (and dreams dashed?), remarking, "The artists of Dublin will get employed in finishing them."

However, Stuart did manage to paint this portrait of the newly appointed Lord Chancellor of Ireland, “a position of supremacy that FitzGibbon took to mean the deployment of high intelligence, vitriolic arrogance, and a reinvigorated desire to accumulate the lavish trappings of status.” (Barratt & Miles p 79) The very definition of a BIGWIG !


The haughty chancellor, draped in his majestic robes, peers out from beneath his incredibly huge wig.

Note the background accents which Stuart also preserved for his later, more moderate portraits (ie Meeker), the reddish-toned drapery, blue skies with clouds.

~

~

The transcript of Samuel Meeker's letter to Gen James Winchester; Philadelphia 1804

Philadelphia 27 December 1804
Cragfont, Tennessee
Gen James Winchester

Sir,

Enclosed I send you a list of the article of slaves & heading with their value here
I would think they would sell well in Orleans.
They leave for Domingo in stowing depots and to file up where other freight cannot be had and answer to export to most of the ports in Europe as well as the West Indies. If you can deliver them at Orleans at 1/3d less than they are worth here I should consider this always safe. Cotton continues about the same as stated in my former advice

Your obed[ient] Serv[ant]
Samuel Meeker

[Letter pictured at bottom, I have transcribed it here to the best of my ability! Corrections accepted. "List of slaves" is no longer existent.]

NO typewriter, no house address, no envelope, with a Philadelphia hand stamp, the letter is addressed only to “General James Winchester, Cragfont, Tennessee”. While daily mail delivery to the home is taken for granted today, it was a different matter in the early 1800s. During the 1700s and 1800s postal carriers traveled long distances on rough roads to scattered post offices, from Philadelphia a letter took 32 days to reach Kentucky and 44 days to reach Tennessee. Mail runs would normally be made once a week and follow a route of selected towns that were established by bids; Cragfont was not a town but simply the name of Winchester’s house. It can be assumed that everyone in the nearby region knew of James Winchester and his brother George.... “Both moved to the Tennessee country by 1785 and immediately became active in frontier government and military service. George was ambushed and killed by Chickasaw Indians in 1794, but James prospered. He added to his land holdings, built mills, and established trade in tobacco and other products with merchants in New Orleans and several eastern cities. In 1802 he built a spacious home, "Cragfont," which was described by a contemporary as "the most elegant house west of the Appalachians." American National Biography Online http://www.anb.org/

The land of Chickasaw Bluffs in Tn was bought by Andrew Jackson, John Overton and James Winchester and a land company was formed. Thereby was Winchester a co-founder of the City of Memphis.

"Cragfont," described as "the most elegant house west of the Appalachians."
~

~

The question arises, just how deeply was Meeker involved in the slave trade, or was this just one transaction among many, involving a variety of products including cotton, tobacco, lumber, etc smoothed by trade information/funds provided by Meeker to Winchester in this instance?

I will be taking a look at Samuel Meeker’s career.....what provided his start in the world of finance in Philadelphia at this time?

Click on the letter for an incredible, close-up view of this historic document postulating "how well they will sell." How do I feel, that my ancestor should write such words? Sad. It is troubling. But I believe that he was not involved in the trade. The letter is important in that it shows the depth of the rot, how even the most respectable of citizens spoke of these men and women as if they were chattel...

~

~

For those of you who are interested in German, note the form of the double 's' in the word 'less' ["If you can deliver them at Orleans at 1/3d less than they are worth" & in "Tennessee"]. This form of double 's', called Eszett or ß, is still used in the German language, and it is very interesting to see it being used here in English. (ß ...gesprochen Eszett oder scharfes S)

~

~

~

An original letter from Samuel Meeker; Philadelphia, December 27,1804

~~

courtesy Hargrett Library Rare Books and Manuscripts, University of Georgia

~

more details to follow

click on the letter for a lusciously larger view of an historic document

~

~

~

~

Random monthly pick: a Stuart portrait illuminates aristocratic peculiarities of Old England

Portrait of Edward Parker by Gilbert Stuart

England c 1787

from Lawrence Park:
Edward Parker
1730-1794

Of Browsholme, County York, England. He was a student at St. John’s College, Cambridge; Lord of the Manor at Ingleton; bowbearer of the Forest of Bowland. He married Barbara (d. 1873), daughter of Sir William Fleming, third Baronet of Rydal, County Westmoreland, by whom he had one son who only survived him three years.

********

The gentleman portrayed here is of interest not only because he is the spitting image of Washington (lack of teeth, or similar dentures?), but primarily because he is associated with a magnficent ancestral estate ~the ultimate symbol of weath, tradition, and class in old England~ Browsholme Hall, (pronounced 'Brewsom'), built in 1507 in Lancashire, in the North West of England. Edward was a ‘relatively’ recent scion from the Parker family, tracing its origins to the 1300s, when they gained the title of 'park-keeper' to John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster, Duke of Aquitaine (1340 –1399).

Edward Parker’s interest in commissioning Stuart to do his portrait stemmed surely from a wish to add his accurate likeness to the many ancestral portraits already adorning the silk-covered walls of his historic home. The Parker family has lived in this historic house since it was built, and as is typical of these huge, old, magnficent edifices requiring large sums of money for upkeep, the house was opened to the public in 1957, and today the estate’s architecture, fine art collections and furnishings, extensive landscaped gardens and lake, are advertised as an ideal location for film, TV and advertising; ‘an excellent backdrop for a variety of periods.’ “The present day owners Robert and Amanda Parker invite guests into the family home for small conferences, corporate hospitality, musical events, craft fairs and open days throughout the year.... and continue the work of administering and restoring the estate.” [http://www.browsholme.co.uk/]


Unfortunately it seems the family did not have the means to keep Edward’s portrait, for according to Park “The picture was purchased from the family by M. Knoedler & Co., New York, and sold in 1923 to Albert R. Jones, Esq. of Kansas City, Missouri.”

~

Lovely day, lovely house isn't it?

If you are a reader unversed in old English traditions (like me), you might ask what is a ‘bow-bearer of the Forest of Bowland’? from Wiki : The name Bowland of ‘Forest of Bowland’ has nothing to do with archery or with mediaeval cattle farms or dairies (Old Norse, buu-, cow), but derives from the Old Norse boga-/bogi-, meaning a “bend in a river”. It is a tenth-century coinage used to describe the topography of the Hodder basin, with its characteristic meandering river and streams.


map image
[courtesy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_of_Bowland]

Bowbearers of the Forest of Bowland have been appointed since the twelfth century. A Bowbearer was originally a noble who acted as ceremonial attendant to the Lord of Bowland, latterly the King, by bearing (carrying) his hunting bow, but over the centuries the Bowbearer's role underwent many changes. At an early date, the Bowbearer was a “forester in fee” who was the official in overall charge of the Forest ('a royal hunting ground'), normally paying rent for the position and having particular privileges such as cablish (the right to take dead or wind blown wood from the Forest). He was a paid official responsible to the King. [http://apps.buckscc.gov.uk/eforms/medieval_life/pdfs/Forest_Officials.pdf]

Wikipedia states [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_of_Bowland]: "as the last remnants of the ancient forest vanished, the office of Bowbearer was reduced to little more than an honorific. The Parker family of Browsholme Hall today claim to be "hereditary Bowbearers of Bowland" but this claim cannot be supported by the historical evidence. While the Parkers certainly served as Bowbearers over a number of generations up until 1858, they were always subject to grants made by the Lord of Bowland and hold no hereditary right.”

The Arms of the Parkers of Browsholme Hall

"Unmoved by either wave or wind"

"Keepers of the deer in the Royal Forest of Bowland"

more on Browsholme Hall
In 1975 when the current owner, Robert Parker inherited the Hall from a distant cousin, the gardens where very overgrown, the front lawn was grazed by sheep and the ponds and rockeries colonised by trees. Yet underneath lay a landscape and garden that had continually changed in the hands of generations of the family since the house was built in 1507. After the 17thC, the grounds have been managed in the style of Capability Brown perhaps reflecting the difficulty of maintaining a garden in high rainfall (80 inches per annum), 600ft above sea level and the unforgiving bolder clay on which is situated.
With only a single gardener the garden is maintained as time and nature allows: it is a slow and patient process. Many projects take years to come to fruition, but this year they hope to restore and enlarge the ornamental pond next to the ‘box’ garden.
The Yew Walk which was planted over 300 years ago as a hedge now almost forms a tunnel and a sheltered path even during windy weather.
The Chestnut Avenue by comparison is barely 100 years old, but the white ‘candles’ make a superb display in May, a prelude to a crop of conkers later in the year.
The Lake, originally created about 1740 now extends to 3 acres and was one of the first restoration projects undertaken by the family in the 1970s and is stocked with trout. There is a pleasant walk around the lake.The Front Lodge built in the early 17thC with the Arch from Ingleton Hall is the best place to admire the magnificent setting of Browsholme. [http://www.visitlancashire.com/site/things-to-do/search/browsholme-hall-p17787]

~

~

[click here for more info on orthodontics in the 18th century!]

a lovely portrait, claimed to be by Jane Stuart

In December 'Mark' sent me this portrait of his relative, he says it is by Jane Stuart.

(I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the attribution.)

I wrote Mark a couple of months ago, after he left a comment on the blog. "I just noticed your comment on my gilbert stuart blog. You have a portrait (somber) by Jane Stuart? How do you know it is by Jane Stuart (is it signed)? Can you send me a pic, and the story of the painting?"

He wrote back:

Beth,

I took a some pics of the painting, from my iphone, as some thief stole my digital camera last fall :(. It's not hanging now and needs some plaster fixed on frame (as you can see in pic). As I look at the picture and read my comment from your blog, I don't think she looks as somber now as I once thought before. Ms. Stuart was definitely a master painter. The person in the portrait would be my great-great grandmother (Jane Adams), i believe.
Kind regards, Mark

Jane was the youngest of 12 children born to Gilbert Stuart and his wife, Charlotte and was one of her father’s most trusted studio assistants, often mixing paints for him as a child and later helping to finish his paintings. She maintained her own studio in Boston for several years before moving back to Newport in 1858, and continued to paint and entertain up until her death in 1888.

photos of Lily and me in AK (Dec 09)

Pictures of Alaska can be found by clicking here (or simply scroll down to Feb 9 one post down)

Stuart led off in one of his merriest veins, and the time passed pleasantly in jocose and amusing talk (with Horace Binney)

Horace, a very young and up-coming lawyer was painted by Stuart in 1800, and one day some 50 years later, as an older man, he talked to his nephew about the portrait. This nephew wrote down these reminisces with his uncle in a diary, which was then later shared with George Mason, biographer of Stuart “The Life and Works of Gilbert Stuart” 1894 ... and I share them in their entirety with you here. Enjoy the insight into our artist: his particular mode of painting, issues of concern, and ... how happy he was to not be a Tailor!

Binney, Horace

From the diary of the late Horace Binney Wallace, a nephew of Mr. Binney, I am permitted to make the following extract:

“Wednesday, June 31st, 1852. I called today upon Mr. Binney, before leaving town for the summer. The conversation turned upon Stuart’s portrait of him, which hangs in our back parlor. He said that it was painted in the autumn of 1800, when he was not twenty-one years old. Some one had brought out from Canton some Chinese copies of Stuart’s Washington, and Stuart prosecuted an injunction in the Circuit Court of the United States against the sale of them. ‘I was sedulous,’ said Mr. Binney, ‘in my attendance on the courts, and here I became acquainted with Stuart. He came frequently to my office,’ continued Mr. Binney, ‘which was in Front street. I was always entertained by his conversation. I endeavored to enter into his peculiar vein, and show him that I relished his wit and character. So he took snuff, jested, punned and satirized to the full freedom of his bent.’ “Binney’ he said to one of my friends, ‘has the length of my foot better than any one I know of,’ meaning, I suppose, that I knew how to humor him, and give him play.
“ ‘When your mother requested me to give her the portrait that is in your house, I made an appointment with Stuart, and called to give my first sitting. He had his panel ready (for the picture is painted on a board), and I said: ‘Now, how do you wish me to sit? Must I be grave? Must I look at you?’ ‘No,’ said Stuart; ‘sit just as you like, look whichever way you choose; talk, laugh, move about, walk around the room, if you please.’ So, without more thought of the picutre on my part, Stuart led off in one of his merriest veins, and the time passed pleasantly in jocose and amusing talk. At the end of an hour I rose to go, and, looking at the portrait, I saw that the head was as perfectly done as it is at this moment, with the exception of the eyes, which were blank, I gave one more sitting of an hour, and in the course of it Stuart said: ‘Now, look at me one moment,’ I did so. Stuart put in the eyes by a couple of touches of the pencil, and the head was perfect. I gave no more sittings.
“ ‘When the picture was sent home,’ continued Mr. Binney, ‘it was much admired; but Mr. T***** M***** observed that the painter had put the buttons of the coat on the wrong side. Sometime after this, Stuart sent for the picture, to do some little matter of finish which had been left, and, to put an end to a foolish cavil, I determined to tell him of M.’s criticism; but how to do it without offending him was the question. The conversation took a turn upon the excessive attention which some minds pay to the minutie of costume, etc. This gave the opportunity desired. ‘By the way, said I, ‘do you know that somebody has remarked that you have put the buttons on the wrong side of that coat?’ ‘Have I?’ said Stuart. ‘Well, thank God, I am no tailor.’ He immediately took his pencil and with a stroke drew the lapelle to the collar of the coat, which is seen there at present. ‘Now,’ said Stuart, ‘it is a double-breasted coat, and all is right, only the buttons on the other side not being seen.’ ‘Ha!’ said I, ‘you are the prince of tailors, worthy to be master of the merchant tailors’ guild.’
“ ‘Stuart,’ said Mr. Binney ‘had all forms in his mind, and he painted hands, and other details, from an image in his thoughts, not requiring an original model before him. There was no sitting for that big law-book that, in the picutre, I am holding. The coat was entirely Stuart’s device. I never wore one of that color [a near approach to a claret color]. He thought it would suit the complexion.’
“ ‘On the day when I was sitting to him the second time,’ said Mr. Binney, ‘I said to Stuart, ‘What do you consider the most characteristic feature of the face? You have already shown me that the eyes are not; and we know from sculpture, in which the eyes are wanting, the same thing.’ Stuart just pressed the end of his pencil against the tip of his nose, distorting it oddly. ‘Ah, I see, I see,’ cried Mr. Binney.
“Mr. Binney agreed with me in thinking that the Washington was one of Stuart’s least inspired heads. Stuart used to call that head, you know, his ‘hundred-dollar bill.’ One day, when he had his family at Germantown, and his painting room in the city, learning from Mrs. Stuart that the domestic treasure was empty, he set off to come to town, to his bank, for one hundred dollars. At a tavern, half-way, got out of the stage to get something to drink, and in searching his pocket-book found a fifty-dollar note, which he had forgotten that he had. When the coachman called upon him to get into the coach again, he replied, ‘You may go on; I mean to wait for the return coach.’
“ ‘Stuart,’ Mr. Binney caid, ‘thought highly of his portrait of John Adams. Showing it one day to Mr. Binney, ‘Look at him,’ said he. ‘It is very like him, is it not? Do you know what he is going to do? He is just going to sneeze.’
“ ‘Stuart had an anecdote illustrative of physiognomy—its truth or falsehood. There was a person in Newport celebrated for his powers of calculation, but in other respects almost an idiot. One day, Stuart, being in the British Museum, came upon a bust, and immediately exclaimed to his companion, who was also a Rhode Island man: ‘Why, here is a head of Calculating Jemmy.’ He called the curator and said: ‘I see you have the head of Calculating Jemmy here.’ “Calculating Jemmy!’ said the curator; ‘that is the head of Sir Isaac Newton.’ "

The portrait of Mr. Binney above described, Mr. John William Wallace gave back to his uncle in his old age. It is a picture of a youth of twenty years, having a high complexion, bright chestnut-colored hair and splendid blue eyes. Hon. Horace Binney died in 1875, aged 96 years.

8

*

Professional Career:
Founding member of the Hasty Pudding Club
Founding member of the Law Library Company of the City of Philadelphia;Director, 1805-1819; 1821-1827
Assembly of Pennsylvania, member, 1806-1807
1st U.S. Bank, Director, 1808
City of Philadelphia, Common Council, president, 1810-1812
City of Philadelphia, Select Council, member 1816-1819
Founded the Apprentices' Library 1821
Associated Members of the Bar of Philadelphia, Vice Chancellor, 1821
Law Association of Philadelphia, Vice Chancellor, 1827-1836; Chancellor, 1852-54
Law Academy, President,1832 Member of the U.S. Congress 1833-1835

*

*

Horace Binney by Gilbert Stuart

National Gallery of Art DC

from Lawrence Park:

Honorable Horace Binney

1780-1875 A son of Dr. Barnabas and Mary (Woodrow) Binney of Philadelphia. He was graduated from Harvard College in 1797, admitted to the Philadelphia bar in 1800 and became one of the most prominent lawyers of the country. He obtained his LL.D. Harvard, in 1827. He was a member of the American Philosophical Society; of the Massachusetts Historical Society, and a Fellow of the American Academy.

John Adams by Stuart

National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C

about to sneeze?☺

♥

ALASKA

Kasilof, on the Kenai Peninsula. Becky's house. Me, doggie Aleutia.

Becky is a childhood friend, her parents and my parents were friends in Ukiah, Ca. in the late 1950s. Her father was in the lumber business in northern California.

Noah (Becky's youngest son) and my daughter Lily

A view from the guest house where we stayed the first night, had Reindeer sausage for breakfast.
A happy moose.


"Veronica's" in Ninilchik. We planned a big party there, it was closed.

Alaskan toys.

happy kids

Aleutia

doggie to my rescue

Homer, at Dean's house (winner of Iditarod 1984)

Ninilchik

Ninilchik

approaching Homer

Joseph *Story*...next...Edward *Stow*... and evidence of my early confusion about who the artist could be of SAMUEL MEEKER

... Edward Stow by Gilbert Stuart 1802/3

When telling the tale of Joseph Story and his wife in the posts previous to this one, the next portrait described in Park was Edward Stow, which, although a typical Stuart portrait, has special meaning for me because it was when I first stumbled across this portrait, just by sheer luck on the internet, that I noted the striking similarities between this portrait and my own of Samuel Meeker, and I thought then: "My portrait is not by Peale, but by Stuart!"
So I have decided to show this portrait again, and the 'cheat sheet' printout I made with notes, which so clearly show my confusion of a few years ago. Because I thought my portrait was of Major Meeker (click here for more on the Major), the generational year was completely off as Major Meeker was the 1st cousin of Captain Samuel Meeker, father of the sitter (click here for more on the father of Samuel). And the family thought it was by Peale! But Peale's style, although the artist fit the right time frame for Major Meeker, was just not ....right..... So then I thought the artist was Trumbull. I knew about Stuart, but not knowing the style of his painting, I had ruled him out because at the time that Major Meeker would have been painted, Stuart was AWAY in England!

But yet I thought, look at that same arrangement, the same color schemes, the pose, the clothing, the curtain and sky, the chair, showing a hand and some papers...HOW was Major Meeker painted by Stuart? How to FIT that timeline! But in the end, I finally pieced together that my gt grandmother had made a mistake in her family tree book, that the sitter in the portrait was NOT Major Meeker (who was also a SAMUEL) but in fact an entirely different Meeker, Samuel Meeker, merchant of Philadelphia. (A major clue was finding out about the Stuart portrait of William Meeker which is listed in Park. William had been a business partner in Philadelphia of a "Samuel Meeker", hmmmm I thought.) So in the end it was not the Major, a local militia man who had to sell his farm in Sussex New Jersey because of debt, although famed for having fought in the Battle of the Minisink, but a young man stemming from the same family, who made his fortune in the shipping, banking, and insurance business in early Philadelphia! A generation later!

Even armed with my digital print out of Edward S. by Gilbert Stuart (see 2/27/09 "I knew...then..."), my confusion continued to reign on the identity of the artist who painted Samuel Meeker. After the editor of the Peale papers stated my portrait was not by CW Peale (see 3/4/09 "Misattribution"), I was still not convinced that the portrait was by Stuart, for there was the Problem of the Timeline. At left one can see on my worksheet the doodle "gone from America went to England" -that refers to Stuart. & "timing is off!"

And now that I have the Lawrence Park volumes (listing a large number of Stuart portraits), I see that the portrait was done in 1802/3... So the fit is super/unquestionable, as I have determined that the portrait of Samuel Meeker was done in 1803. (More on why/how I figured this date, later.)

~

From Lawrence Park:

~

Edward Stow 1768-1847
A son of Edward and Mary (Belcher) Stow of Boston, but was born in New York City. He married, in 1793, Anna Brewer Peck, and lived for some years in Philadelphia. It was there that he met Gilbert Stuart and his wife and a great friendship ensued. In 1804 he returned to Boston, and from 1813 until shortly before his death, he was clerk or secretary of the new England Mississippi Land Company.

~

~

Sarah, wife of Joseph Story by Gilbert Stuart

Mrs. Joseph Story by Gilbert Stuart 1819

In the post before this the social, cultural impact of Sarah's husband Joseph (a justice on the United States Supreme Court) on the development of our Republic was described. Not as much is known about his second wife Sarah, who most likely fulfilled her appropriate duties as a wife and mother. In the portrait above she would be age 35. As Joseph's portrait was also done in 1819, it can be presumed they were commissioned at the same time by Joseph, who was then about 40.

~

From Lawrence Park:

Mrs. Joseph Story

1784-1855

Sarah Waldo Wetmore was a daughter of Judge William Wetmore and Sarah (Waldo) Wetmore, both of Salem, Massachusetts. In 1808 she married, in the North Church, Boston, Joseph Story as his second wife.


Boston, 1819. Panel, 32 ¾ x 25 ¾ inches. She is shown at half-length, seated, turned half-way to the right, with her light brown eyes directed to the spectator. Her chestnut hair in curls over brow and temples is in a knot held by a jeweled comb. She has a lovely brow, a long nose, lips almost verging on a smile, a calm dignity and much charm. Her low-necked dress is of a sheer material trimmed with a lace collar and a narrow belt of turquoise-blue ribbon. A red camel’s hair shawl is draped in such a manner as to cover her left arm and shoulder and, passing at the back, is seen partially covering her right arm with a part of the border hanging over the arm of the chair. Her right hand is in her lap. The plain background is lighter at the right.



Story's first wife, Mary Oliver, died in June 1805, shortly after their marriage. Sarah and Joseph had seven children, though only two, Mary and William Wetmore Story, survived to adulthood. Their son became a noted poet and sculptor, his bust of his father is in the entrance to the Harvard Law School Library.

The random monthly pick: Mr. Joseph Story, following his best principles, sets the country more firmly on a tragic path

Joseph Story by Gilbert Stuart, Boston 1819

From Lawrence Park:

Joseph Story 1779-1845

Joseph Story was a son of Doctor Elisha and Mehitabel (Pedrick) Story of Marblehead, Massachusetts. He graduated from Harvard University in 1798 and in 1821 received the degree of L.L.D. From 1818 to 1825 he was an overseer of Harvard, and from 1829 to 1845 was Dane Professor of Law. He was a member of the American Philosophical Society, the Massachusetts Historical Society and a Fellow of the American Academy. In 1808 he was a member of the Congress, and from 1811 to his death a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He married in 1808 Sarah Waldo Wetmore of Salem, Massachusetts, and their son, William Wetmore Story (1819-1895), was the well-known sculptor.

This month’s random pick is a particularly interesting one as it ties in well to the post on Captain Samuel Meeker (father of the sitter click here) who placed an add in the Weekly Advertiser (Philadelphia), for a runaway slave in the year 1763.
Then again, what small percentage of people in those times did this issue not touch?

Paid slavecatchers crossed state borders, used force and violence to capture runaway slaves, sometimes nabbing freed slaves as well. Federal law sanctioned the capturing & return of fugitives by the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793, and later in 1850 these laws were reinforced. Increasingly the free states enacted laws to counter these federal laws; “personal-liberty laws” entitled slaves to a jury trial and the ‘underground railroad’ grew in opposition. By the 1840s slavery had become a national issue with passions raging hot on both sides, pitting slave states/owners against the non-slave states/abolitionists. It was only a matter of time before the consitutional laws, providing legal status to the capturing of slaves, ran head-on into state laws with the aim of protecting freed slaves.

On April 1 1837, Edward Prigg led an assault and abduction of a black woman named Margaret Morgan and her children. She had moved in 1832 from Maryland to Pennsylvania, in Maryland she had lived in freedom but had not been formally emancipated. The heirs of her former owner John Ashmore decided to claim her as a slave, and hired slavecatcher Prigg. But Pennsylvania had laws stating No negro or mulatto slave ...shall be removed out of this state, with the design and intention that the place of abode or residence of such slave or servant shall be thereby altered or changed and Prigg was arrested under kidnapping charges. Prigg pleaded not guilty, and argued that he had been duly appointed by John Ashmore to arrest and return Morgan to her owners in Maryland. However, in a ruling on May 22 1839, the Court of Quarter Sessions of York County convicted him. Prigg appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on the grounds that the Pennsylvania law was not able to supersede federal law.

In 1842, US Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote and issued the majority opinion in the case of Prigg v. Pennsylvania. It was a landmark decision in which the court upheld fugitive slave recaption as an historically necessary constitutional provision that had to be protected at all costs, even in the face of contradictive state law (ie reversed Prigg's conviction). Story was opposed to slavery on moral as well as policy grounds (in The Amistad 1841, he freed the Africans who had been sold into slavery by a narrow reading of the treaty with Spain), but tragically he was also firmly convinced of the primacy and importance of upholding the Constitution, the Law of the Land. The decision was crucial because it announced that slavery was a national issue that could not be challenged by state action, and that slavery was woven into the Constitution. The decision caused a powder-keg explosion and rippled across the country, eventually cascading along with other motivating forces... into civil war. Story was the Court's most aggressive champion of federal jurisdiction, and was most successful in expanding federal jurisdiction in the areas of maritime and commercial law. But this controversial case led to personal attacks and a professional bruising, ultimately tarnishing his legacy. Story served on the Supreme Court for thirty-three years. He died on September 10, 1845, at the age of sixty-five.

Portrait of Joseph Story by George P. A. Healy

from the Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court History Profile:

JOSEPH STORY was born on September 18, 1779, in Marblehead, Massachusetts. He was graduated from Harvard College in 1798. Story read law in the offices of two Marblehead attorneys and was admitted to the bar in 1801. He established a law practice in Salem, Massachusetts. In 1805, Story served one term in the Massachusetts Legislature, and in 1808 he was elected to the United States House of Representatives. After one term, he returned to the Massachusetts Lower House, and in 1811 he was elected Speaker. On November 15, 1811, President James Madison nominated Story to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Senate confirmed the appointment on November 18, 1811. At the age of thirty-two, Story was the youngest person ever appointed to the Supreme Court. While on the Supreme Court, Story served as a delegate to the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention of 1820 and was a Professor of Law at Harvard, where he wrote a series of nine commentaries on the law, each of which was published in several editions. http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history/supremecourthistory_history_assoc_014story.htm

~

~

The truely sad ending to this tale of misplaced notions of best principles, Morgan and her children were subsequently sold to slave traders and disappeared from the historical record.

~

Update on Lily, me at about the same age... (descendants)

A 'double date' last week. The photo is taken in Capitola (town next to Santa Cruz).
The occasion was a dance at the highschool in Aptos.

I just received this card a couple of days ago. :-))

Me at about the same age.

I have to admire what the young girls wear these days.

Early 70ies. wow.

In the red jacket is my friend Jamie, his parents and my parents were friends in Japan. Only my mom is still alive. Jamie is a retired geologist, we don't have much contact, although we saw each other at a Canadian Academy (this school is in Kobe, Japan) reunion held near Salt Lake City a few years ago.

The other fellow (I thought quite cute at the time) was a friend of Jamie's. If I had ever worn a dress akin to Lily's (in the photo at the top of the post), methinks my peers would have thought I went bonkers!

***

***

Line of descendants from Phebe Meeker to Lily

Lily<--Beth<--Carolyn Cory Ahrens<--Benjamin Hyde Cory<--Carrie Martin Cory<--Thomas Mulford Martin<--Mary Brookfield Martin<--Phebe Meeker Brookfield (twin sister of Samuel Meeker, the sitter.)

~

~

Captain Samuel Meeker, father of the sitter (con.)

Captain Samuel Meeker (c.1738/9-c.1800+)

son of Samuel Meeker (1716-1757) & Rachel

4 children with wife Mary Clark---> Mary (1761) never married, William (1762-1831) m. Sarah Hays, Samuel (1763-1831) and Phebe (1763-1814), the twins.

A prominent citizen of the West Fields, Captain Samuel Meeker, father of the sitter Samuel Meeker in the Stuart portrait, was a timber trader and cabinetmaker; the family resided at Short Hills on the edge of Springfield, NJ. Captain Samuel was married in the Westfield Presbyterian Church on December 14th, 1760 to Mary Clark. At least one of his sons, William was baptized in the Westfield Presbyterian Church in 1762.

Despite the recent ravages of the American Revolutionary War, that Captain Samuel Meeker was well-to-do is indicated by the rateables of 1779 which describe him as “owning one hundred and thirty–six acres, three horses, seven head of cattle, and a riding chair.” In addition, Samuel’s son William (1762-1831), was shown to own (by the rateables in the years 1778 and1780), 140 acres and one-third of a sawmill in the Mendham Township. It seems likely that Captain Samuel had bought timber land in that area which was just opening up as well as a third interest in the sawmill, under William’s name. William may have been sent there to look after the family interest, but was back in Springfield in June of 1780, taking part in the Battle of Springfield. On March 31, 1782 he married Sarah Hays of Westfield in the Westfield Presbyterian Church.

Captain Meeker also served in the Revolutionary War as a first lieutenant and as vice-captain in the Essex County Troop of Light Horse. When the British retreated in the Battle of Springfield in 1780, burning and looting, Samuel’s house also went up in flames.

The “New York Gazette” on July 5, 1779, reported: "Last Tuesday night a detachment from his Majesty's 37th Regiment with a party of Col. Barton's and some refugees, went over from Staten-Island to a place called Woodbridge Raway, where they surprised a party of rebels in a tavern, killed their commanding officer Captain Skinner of a Troop of Light Horse, and another man and took the following prisoners, viz: Capt. Samuel Meeker...” …… “but by the timely exertions of a few militia, who collected immediately, they were released...”

***

Slavery had obtained legal sanction in New Jersey under the proprietary regimes of Berkeley and Carteret (c. 1665.) Captain Meeker and Thomas Jefferson had something in common

from 221. The Pennsylvania Journal, and the Weekly Advertiser (Philadelphia), #1066,
May 12, 1763 ---"Run away from Samuel Meeker, a Negro Man, Sampson, about 6 feet 4 inches, aged 24 Years, speaks good English: Had on when he went away two dark colour’d homespun Jackets, Leather Breeches, brown Stockings. Whoever takes up and secures said Negro so that his Master may have him again, shall receive Twenty Shillings Reward and all reasonable charges paid by Samuel Meeker."
"Pretends to be free": runaway slave advertisements from colonial and revolutionary New York and New Jersey By Graham Russell Hodges, Alan Edward Brown 1994

"Quite a number of slaves were held in this community [Westfield]. It was the custom, and few questioned the right for years .... Slaves were kept in many of the best Westfield families. They were well treated and happy. Many of them became members of the Presbyterian church. In the old session book of the Presbyterian church of Westfield the pastor, Benjamin Woodruff, writes as follows: “August 12 1759. Baptized my negro child......... and “November 8, 1778. Baptized a negro woman belonging to Samuel Meeker, N. Dorcas.”
History of Union County, New Jersey, Volumes 1-2 By Frederick William Ricord East Jersey History Co. Newark, NJ 1897 p.523

Horses, Taxes, & Captain Samuel Meeker

Goethe zu Pferde

(Goethe astride his horse)

taken from “Frauen der Goethezeit in ihren Briefen"; Verlag der Nation Berlin 1966

The last post was about the possible misidentification of (the Stuart portrait of) John Ricketts as the Circus Rider; but what I would like to highlight here is the fact that before Ricketts actually opened his circus in the way we understand a ‘circus’ to be today, it was an eqestrian show. People were interested in horsemanship at the time, and at least initially, Ricketts gave riding and dressage lessons in the morning to the high society of Philadelphia.

Not only did the military depend on good horsemanship, but also at this time horses were part of daily life and riding skills were highly prized and admired.

Samuel Meeker came to Philadelphia from a well known & well-to-do family in the Westfields of New Jersey, and it can be certain he grew up with horses, and later activities provide the evidence that he was an excellent and energetic rider himself. Looking back at his family history, tax tables show that Samuel’s father, also named Samuel (he can be differentiated by the ‘Captain’ before his name, as he had been actively involved in the local militia) was relatively wealthy. Ownership of horses was reason for taxes to be levied.

Taxation from the Rateables in the Township of Elizabeth of Westfield Ward in County of Essex in the State of New Jersey show the residents "...shall be assessed, levied and raised on the several inhabitants of this state, their lands, and tenements, goods and chattles..."

Ownership of horses was noted more than once in these tax tables (I also show other items of interest which are assessed).

1. Acres of Land

2. Value of Land (in pounds)

3. Horses

4. Horned Cattle

5. Hogs
....
15. Single men w/ horse ("every single man, whether he lives with his parents or otherwise, who keeps a horse...")

16. Single men ("Every single man, whether he lives with his parents or otherwise,who does not keep a horse...")

17. Slaves

18. Servants
19. R Chairs, kittereens & Sulkies (R Chair - Riding Chair; kittereen - "A two wheeled one-horse carriage with a moveable top" [Webster's Unabridged])
......

The Tables from 1779 describe Captain Samuel Meeker as “owning one hundred and thirty–six acres, three horses, seven head of cattle, and a riding chair.” Capt. Samuel’s first son William (1762-1831), was shown to own (by the rateables in the years 1778 and 1780), 140 acres and one-third of a sawmill in the Mendham Township NJ.

A thoroughly DAZZLING art-historical mystery; was The Circus Rider John Bill Ricketts or Jean Baptist Breschard? Read on, if interested!

My last two posts have described the painting by Stuart named The Circus Rider, and current art historians are (at least officially) unanimous that the sitter is no other than John Ricketts. Yet, in an indeed surprising development, Peter Breschard objects to this designation with much indignation, and in fact his evidence that the circus rider is NOT Ricketts, if not incontrovertibly solid as of yet, is just as COMPELLING, to my mind. Keep in mind that Mason (1894), identified the portrait as "Breschard, the circus-rider".

Adding to this high level of confusion are two inscriptions on the painting, generally agreed to have been added at a later date: (lower left) "Portrait of / Mr. Rickarts / Horse Eqestraine / Friend of the Artist / Gilbert Stuart" & (lower right) "Portrait of Rickarts / Horse Eqestrian / An Intimate Friend of / Gilbert Stuart." These interpretations are taken from "American Paintings of the 18 century" by Ellen G. Miles, National Gallery of Art, Washington. However, perhaps, these inscriptions themselves can be subject to another interpretation? In fact consider the French name Breschard: with a French hard pronunciation of the first letter B as P, and the last letter d as t, the name Breschard is pronounced and could be spelled as Preschart, and Lo and Behold to my mind, that left inscription looks incredibly like "Preschart", and NOT "Rickarts". The second insription to my eye also looks as if the name of the sitter begins with a "B" and ends with one t. Lawrence Park shows the spelling to be "Portrait of / Mr. Rechart /..." Which of course also sounds like the French pronunciation of Breschard. Mason, as well as Park, listing the sitter to be Breschard?

The story in short; John Bill Ricketts in his brief flash of fortune in America (he was from England) lasting less than 10 years, achieved fame and fortune by his magical ability to peform fantastical acts of daring on his well trained horses - using outlandish tricks, and later featuring other circus performers such as tightrope walkers and clowns. "Long before circuses took on the odor of a crude and common entertainment, Ricketts ... had an air of snob appeal; embraced by all classes, his circus became an especially prestigious venue for the right people to be seen at. After all, Washington, an unabashed fan, attended from time to time through his tenure in office. And the President and Ricketts regularly accompanied each other on rides through the city out into the countryside. Ricketts became such a prominent celebrity that Gilbert Stuart, Washington's portraitist, painted Ricketts, too. Washington even allowed Ricketts to put Jack - the famed white steed he rode through the American Revolution - on display in the amphitheater. Hence, a certain patriotic panache and status boost came with every seat. ......In 1797, Ricketts marked Washington's retirement with a special performance, and later that year, he performed for his friend's presidential successor, John Adams." http://explorepahistory.com/hmarker.php?markerId=815

Thus Ricketts meets that special quality which characterizes the majority of Stuart's sitters, a man of action and accomplishment who hobnobbed with the right people, those in the elite and elegant, well-funded social circles. He was in the right place (Philadelphia), and the right time period to cross paths with Stuart. He was multi-talented; besides performing, he built his own circus structures. Just the type of man who might appeal to our artist, who knew so much about everything. And more compelling, the most powerful evidence: The Provenance lists the brother of John Ricketts, Francis Ricketts, as being the first owner (Brown 1861, 320.) The following has been speculated by Ellen Miles: "Stuart undoubtedly painted Ricketts' portrait in Philadelphia, where the circus was based. The portrait remained there, unfinished, after Ricketts left for the West Indies." ("American Paintings of the 18 century" p 210). Is it possible that Stuart didn't complete the portrait, and so whimsically painted the horses' head created from the background, due less to anger than nostalgia that a good friend was gone? Did the portrait remain unfinished because the talented John Ricketts incurred catastrophic financial loss when his circus rotunda building burned to the ground in 1799? His brother was last recorded in the United States in 1810, when he was with the Boston Circus ("American Paintings of the 18 century" p 210), and thus the portrait would have passed to him when John met his death on the oceans in 1803.

But, is it possible the painting was done at a later time, that it was stopped out of frustration with the sitter (Breschard), and that by this time Stuart had become increasingly more willful and temperamental with his sitters corresponding to the extent of his fame? “...the artist, becoming angry at the equestrian, who gave him a good deal of trouble by his want of promptitude and the delays which occurred, is said to have dashed his paintbrush into the face of the portrait, declaring that he would have nothing more to do with him.” J. Thomas Scharf and T. Westcott, History of Philadelphia, 1609-1884 (Philadelphia: L.H.Everts and Co. 1884), Vol II, p 1044

The Circus of Pépin and Breschard

Pépin and Breschard were the premiere performers in the U.S. from 1808 until 1815. At left is a playbill for this circus. Our Jean Breschard clearly is a prominent performer, if not the owner alongside Mr. Pepin.

In the Provenance for the Circus Rider shown above, a Peter Grain is listed as the next owner after Francis Ricketts, "Purchased at auction around 1853 by Peter Grain." Peter Grain was an artist, known for his "panorama paintings, landscapes, portraits, theatrical designs, as well as also being a playwright and architect; he was the author of at least one stage play. His family was involved in theatrical design in New York, Philadelphia and other major American cities for at least two generations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Grain

"American Paintings of the 18 century", in 'Notes' on Peter Grain..."A painter, was born in France around 1786... and came to the US sometime before 1815. After living in various American cities, including New York and Charleston, he settled in Philadelphia around 1850 with his family..."
The playbill above shows that Grain could have crossed paths with Breschard in "Charlestown".

In the playbill below, found and kindly provided to me by Peter Breschard, is incontrovertible evidence that in fact Peter Grain knew Breschard in c 1809! Grain was an actor in the play "Billy" performed on this summer eve. Is it not likely that Peter Grain was the one who identified, or at a minimum WOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY the sitter as Jean Breschard, as he knew and even worked with this circus artist? Thus we have reasonable, logical evidence as to HOW the portrait was identified as Breschard. On the basis of this knowledge,...which possibly may not be known by the (current) experts?... might a new look at the identifcation of THE CIRCUS RIDER be in order? Afterall, Someone identified the portrait, because there are the inscriptions, which to my eye look like a French pronunciation of Breschard. How solid, in fact, IS the Brown attribution that Francis Ricketts was the first owner? How credible is this source? Is he known for accuracy? (Thomas Allston Brown, "A Complete History of the Amphitheatre and Circus, from its earliest date, with sketches of some of the principal performers," New York Clipper 8 (19 January 1861).

For more information on Peter Breschard, who has used original sources in his in-depth investigation on the identification of the sitter in this portrait, he can be found at http://brasseriebreschard.blogspot.com/. He plans on writing a book on this topic and hopes to interest a publisher. He would enjoy any input on the subject!

And thus, I have exhausted all effort here, and leave it to the experts & other researchers to thrash this out, and perhaps take a second look at this re-identification from Breschard to Ricketts.
And in the meantime I have the following suggestion. Perhaps there are more descendents out there, from both the Ricketts and Breschard families. In my own case, I was suddenly astonished to notice that there were remarkable similarities between Meeker and some members of my family; below is an example and more will follow. Check the nose! the chin! can you look at younger pictures of your ancestors and find remarkable/notable similarites to the portrait of Ricketts/Breschard? Send them to me! Lets fly with this mystery, and not be stuck with one mind-set.....

Never forget Stuart's ability to nail an almost photographic image to the canvas.................

Below Benjamin Hyde Cory (1896-1983) my grandfather, gg-grandson of Phebe Meeker (twin sister of Samuel Meeker.)

the dimple in the bottom lip... the slightly upraised peak of the right side of the upper lip...rounded chin

~

~

~

~

John Bill Ricketts or Jean Breschard? Has John Bill Ricketts had his 15 min.....er....40 years ... of fame by being associated with a Stuart portrait?

There clearly exists some question as to the identity of this particular John, or Jean, as the case may be. John Bill Ricketts? or Jean Baptist Breschard? also a circus owner and equestrian performer, in the Circus of Pepin and Breschard....

This information has been provided to me; "Peter Grain, cited in the “Circus Rider” NGA provenance as owning the painting in the mid-1800s, and as selling the portrait to George W. Riggs, was a member of the Circus of Pépin and Breschard, and would have been capable of identifying the sitter in Stuart’s portrait as Breschard."

and this information has been provided:"....but I had done the provenance research and discussion of the inscriptions, and especially cited an important 1861 source that listed Ricketts' brother Francis as the first owner of the painting. Once you have read that entry, which I think explains more about the inscriptions and the provenance of the painting and thus the ID.... Ellen Miles"

So sooner hopefully rather than later I will read up on the inscriptions (found on the bottom of portrait), and check out the 1861 source. But one must question why Mason, in 1894, listed the painting as "Breschard, the Circus-Rider". And Park claims the inscription on the portrait says "Portrait of Mr. Rechart..." and one could think that the R could actually be a "B", and is the French pronunciation of Breschard.

So.... and, well, Ricketts would have had to have his portrait done by Stuart in the mid to later 1790s (before 1799 when his circus burned to the ground) right about when Stuart would have been obsessively busy with the portraits of George Washington... Ricketts would have been more well known (in this day and age), since Washington sold him his white horse Jack, nice story!

So the Jury is still out...I will work on this, for a misidentification Should be Corrected, should it not? If there is a Peter Grain in the provenance, then I would think that this portrait is not of Ricketts, but is of Jean Breschard. But was Ricketts' brother the first owner of the painting?

I have accidentally fallen into a BOILERPLATE MYSTERY!

*

The random monthly pick: Mr. John Bill Ricketts, equestrian extraordinaire and favorite of George Washington

Mr. Ricketts lately from London respectfully acquaints the public that he has erected at considerable expense a circus, situated at the corner of Market and Twelfth Streets where he proposes instructing Ladies and Gentlemen in the elegant accomplishments of riding. -The Circus will be opened on Thursday Next, the 25th October 1792. (Federal Gazette and Philadelphia Daily Advertiser, 23 October 1792)

Sensing opportunity in the young American Republic, John Bill Ricketts left England and opened first an equestrian academy, later turning it into a circus shortly after his arrival in Philadelphia in 1792. By spring 1793 he had trained enough horses to promote the kind of equestrian entertainment he had headlined in London, and for the first month performed alone in the ring “to the delight of the city's amusement-hungry crowds, which included, on April 24, the nation's most distinguished horseman, President George Washington.” http://explorepahistory.com

John Bill Ricketts by Gilbert Stuart ca 1795-99

Courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington, Gift of Mrs. Robert B. Noyes in memory of Elisha Riggs. 1942.14.1

This unfinished portrait is of John Bill Ricketts, magical equestrian who rode his talent and riding ability into fame and fortune in the young American Republic, if only for a short period of time. In a spectacular fire in 1799 his circus burned to the ground, he set sail for the West Indies in search of new adventure, was captured by pirates, escaped, regained some of his lost fortune, but upon sailing back to England about 1803, perished forever during the crossing of the seas.

The Stuart portrait was not completed as “...the artist, becoming angry at the equestrian, who gave him a good deal of trouble by his want of promptitude and the delays which occurred, is said to have dashed his paintbrush into the face of the portrait, declaring that he would have nothing more to do with him.” J. Thomas Scharf and T. Westcott, History of Philadelphia, 1609-1884 (Philadelphia: L.H.Everts and Co. 1884), Vol II, p 1044

Only the head of Ricketts was completed, but to at least provide some innovation to the picture, Gibby, with a few strokes of the brush, added a few details of a horse’s head to the dark background.

Credit: Courtesy of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania

Etching of Mr. Bill Ricketts, "the Equestrian Hero," circa 1796.

“A trained horse, named for the old Seneca chief, “Cornplanter,” which would jump over another horse 14 hands (56 inches) high, was also introduced, and several pantomines were brought out successfully. Among Mr. Ricketts’ various feats at this time were his throwing a somersault over 30 men’s heads and over five horses with their mounted riders; her would also ride two horses at full gallop and leap over a garter or ribbon 12 feet high, or ride the same horses, each foot on a quart-mug standing loose on the saddles, and at times would mount on the shoulders of two riders, each standing on a separate horse, “forming a Pyramid 15 feet hight,” a feat never before attempted by any equestrian. Young Ricketts, emulating his father, would leap over a spiked bar or ride around the ring, his head balanced on a pint-mug resting on the saddle; he would also dismount blind-folded, pick up a watch and remount...”
The circus; its origin and growth prior to 1835, Copyright 1909 by Isaac J. Greenwood New York. pps 86-7

and finally, to mark the end of 2009... ein Goethe-Gedicht zum Jahreswechsel:

~

Das neue Jahr sieht mich freundlich an,

und ich lasse das alte mit seinem Sonnenschein und Wolken

ruhig hinter mir.

*

*

*