"An attentive Ear, a watchful Eye, and a Calm judicious Pen": William Samuel Johnson, the Colonial Agents, and the Transformation of the British Atlantic World

By looking at Great Britain and the American colonies in conjunction with the larger British Atlantic Empire, historians can better understand the political, social, and cultural transformations that occurred when transatlantic actors met. William Samuel Johnson is an example of an "ordinary" agent who nonetheless had extensive contacts with numerous British and American thinkers. While acting on Connecticut's behalf in London between 1767 and 1771, he sent reports back to Connecticut governors Jonathan Trumbull and William Pitkin on parliamentary proceedings while corresponding with the people who traveled around the Atlantic world during this critical period-merchants, seafarers, emigrants, soldiers, missionaries, radicals and conservatives, reformers, and politicians. He is also representative of the late eighteenth-century empire writ large. Agents, who had once been a source of stability in the far-flung colonies, became a destabilizing force as confusion and conflict grew over conceptual ideas of what constituted "the empire" and who was included in it. Johnson was a sane observer in the midst of the ideological and administrative upheaval of the 1760's and 1770's. His subsequent loyalism and political obscurity during the war years was in many ways a result of his attempts to reconcile various factional interests during his tenure as an agent. Although he did his best to resolve these divisions and provide an accurate account of the powerful nationalistic forces gathering on both sides of the Atlantic on the eve of the American Revolution, the agents' collective failures as transatlantic mediators helped bring about the collapse of an imperial community. This disintegration had dramatic effects on the whole of the Atlantic world.

The Perceived AIDS Preventative Utility of Knowing One's Partner Well

The public health advice to "either know your partner well, or use condoms" may have led to higher levels of risky sexual behaviour between well-acquainted individuals whose HIV status is unknown. This study assessed the extent to which college students believe that knowing their partner well eliminates the need to practice safer sex, and measured the relationship between such beliefs and the performance of necessary safer sexual practices, such as using condoms during sexual intercourse. Endorsement of beliefs that partner knowledge made safer sex unnecessary was common, and agreement with these beliefs correlated significantly and negatively with levels of AIDS preventive behaviours and behavioural intentions, especially among women. In conclusion, the public health dictum to "know your partner" has been widely internalized, and may be contributing to risky sexual behaviour. Consideration should be given to rejecting explicitly the "know your partner" advice, and to re-educating the public regarding the necessity of consistently practising safer sex with any individual whose HIV status is unknown.