Independent Chronicle Vol. XLVI No. 3470- July 14, 1814

A semi-weekly paper that was published from 1801 to 1817. It was previously called the Independent chronicle and the universal advertiser, and was later the Independent chronicle and Boston patriot (Semiweekly). Publishers were Abijah Adams and Ebenezer Rhoades. Topics of interest in this issue include: Page 1: report of Independence Day celebration including multiple toasts to the military; Page 2: report of South Carolina militia marching home; report of U.S. schooner Alligator being lost to a tornado in Port Royal; report of 10,000 militia and 2,000 regular Army troops to be used in defense of the District of Columbia and vicinity; report U.S. is to try to raise 100,000 militia for defense; news of British deserters providing information to the U.S.; report of skirmishes along the U.S. coast; statement from U.S. Navy Capt. David Porter stating he had taken possession of Sir Henry Martin's Island; report of British troops burning a militia barracks in Lewiston, N.Y.; 4 accounts of the battle of Chippewa and the taking of Fort Erie; statement from Maj. Gen. Brown in praise of his troops in the battle of Chippewa; copy of General Brown's orders to attack at Fort Erie; essay arguing against U.S. citizens boarding enemy ships; report of peace treaty rumours; Page 3: account of Capt. Porter's capture and subsequent escape from the British; list of American prisoners held on the British ship Nymph; report of British cargo ship captured by U.S. war ship; Proclamation from James Madison pardoning military deserters if they return to military service; announcement to officers and soldiers in the military offering reward for the return of military deserters; Page 4: 2 reward advertisements for return of military deserters;

Profile Portrait of Major General Sir Isaac Brock 1769-1812

This work is a copy of a pastel oval portrait of General Brock that is supposedly the only known portrait of Brock to be done in his lifetime. The original was by William Berczy, circa 1808, and is in the possession of Captain M.H.T Mellish, a descendant of one of Brock's sisters. This portrait was completed on canvas.

Daniel D. Tompkins letter to General Dearborn, June 28, 1812.

Transcript [original spelling and grammar retained]: Albany June 28 1812 Sir Your letter of the 23d has been received. I had anticipated your request by ordering the detachment from Washington, Essex, Clinton and Franklin Counties into service and have fixed the days and places of their Rendezvous. Upon application to the quarter master General I find there are but 139 tents & 60 camp kettles at this place & even those I take by a kind of stealth. The Deputy Quarter Master General declines giving an order for their delivery until he shall have a written order from the Quarter Master General, and the latter is willing I Shall take them but will not give the Deputy a written order for that purpose. Under Such circumstances I shall avail myself of the rule of Possession and by virtue of the Eleven Points of Law Send them tomorrow morning without a written order from anyone. You may remember that when you were Secretary of the war department I invited you to forward and deposit in our Frontier Arsenals, arms ammunition and camp equipage free of expense to be ready in case of war and the same invitation to the war department has been repeated some time, Since The United States have now from 5 to 600 regular troops at Plattsburgh, Rome, Canandaigua & c, where those arsenals are, and yet those recruits are now and must be for weeks to come unarmed and unequipped in every respect although within musket Shot of arsenals. The recruits at Plattsburgh are within 50 miles of two tribes of Canadian Indians. In case of an attack upon the Frontiers that portion of the United States army would be as inefficient and unable to defend the inhabitants or themselves even. The Militia Detachments on the Western Frontiers received the news of war with [cherafulness] and determined courage, and I am happy to find they are united late brothers, highly improved in Discipline & ready to devote themselves to any Service or danger which the good of the Country may require. But they are in barracks from which they cannot move a days march for the want of tents and other equipage, and they are in Separate and Independent Detachments without a General Officer to command them or combine their exertions for the accomplishment of any desirable and important object. The only officer of the United States here who can do anything is the Quarter Master General and he has not a tent Camp Kettle or Knapsack in this arsenal except what I have concluded to send off tomorrow morning as above mentioned to furnish men As to Cannon Muskets and Ammunition. I can find now one here who will exercise any authority over them or deliver a Single article upon my requisition. Neither can I find any Officer of the army who feel himself authorized to exercise any authority or do any act which will aid me in the all important object of protecting the Inhabitants of an extended Frontier exposed to the Cruelties of Savages and the depredations of the enemy. If I must rely upon the Militia Solely for Such protection I entreat you to give orders to your Officers to furnish upon my orders, for the use of the Militia Detachments , all needful weapons and articles with which the United States are Supplied and of which we are destitute . You may rely upon all the assistance which my talents, influence or authority can furnish in the active prosecution of the first & necessary way which has been declared by the Constituted Authorities of our beloved Country. I am, Sir, respectfully Your ob. Servt. Daniel D. Tompkins

Grant of Permission for lease of military lands from Sir Robert Prescott to Thomas Clark, 1798-1801.

Transcript (original spelling and grammar retained): By His Excellency Robert Prescott Esquire, Captain General and Governor in Chief in and over His Majestys Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, General and Commander in Chief of all His Majesty’s forces in the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and their several Dependencies and in the Island of Newfoundland &ca. &ca. &ca. I do hereby authorise and permit Thomas Clark of Queenstown in the County of Lincoln in the Province of Upper Canada merchant to take possession of all that Lot, piece and parcel of Land (being part of the land reserved by his Majesty for Military purposes) situate, lying and being at Queenstown in the Township of Newark, in the Home District in the said Province of Upper Canada, bounded and abutted as follows, that is to say beginning at the Distance of two Chains and ninety links from the South East End of his Majesty’s Store House, the said distance being measured along the Bank up Stream, thence South thirty nine degrees and an half West one Chain and fifty links thence south fifty degrees and an half East one Chain and thirty links thence North thirty nine degrees and an half East to the Edge of the Bank and from thence along the Bank to the place of beginning, containing thirty one perches and one hundred and twenty five square links and to occupy and hold the said Lot, piece and parcel of Land during pleasure subject nevertheless to the provisoes and Conditions herein after contained, that is to say. First on condition that it shall and may be lawful to and for His Majesty his Heirs and Successors and to and for the Commander in Chief of His Majesty Forces for the time being and to and for the Officer commanding his Majesty’s Forces in Upper Canada for the time being and to and for either of them to determine and make void this present permission to occupy during pleasure the said Lot, Piece or Parcel of Land above described at any time hereafter whenever he or they shall see fit so to do without any compensation or indemnification to the said Thomas Clark or any other Person or Persons whosoever for any Loss Injury or Damage which he the said Thomas Clark or any other Person or Persons whosoever may thereby sustain. Secondly on this further Condition that it shall and may be lawful to and for His Majesty his Heirs and Successors and to and for his and their Officers, Soldiers and Servants at any time hereafter by order of the Commander in Chief of His Majesty’s Forces for the time being or by order of the Officer commanding his Majesty’s forces in Upper Canada for the time being or by order of the Officer of His Majesty’s Corps of Royal Engineers commanding in the said Province of Upper Canada for the time being to enter upon the said Lot Piece and parcel of Land which the said Thomas Clark is hereby permitted to occupy during pleasure or upon any part thereof and to take down and from the said Lot piece and parcel of Land or from any part thereof to remove any dwelling House Store or other Buildings on the said Lot, piece or Parcel of Land or any part thereof erected and to remove any goods or Chattels on the said Lot piece and parcel of Land or on any part thereof or on any such dwelling House Store or other building found or being and that His Majesty his Heirs and Successors or any other Person or Persons whosoever shall not be liable or responsible to the said Thomas Clark or to any other Person or Persons whosoever for any Loss, Injury or Damage which he or they shall or may in such case sustain. Thirdly on this further Condition that the said Thomas Clark shall not erect on the said Lot Piece or Parcel of Land which the said Thomas Clark is hereby permitted to occupy during pleasure or upon any part thereof at any time or times hereafter any dwelling House store or other Building whatsoever of Stone or brick or of any other materials wood only exccepted and that if any dwelling House or Store or other building of Stone or brick or of any other materials except wood shall at any time be erected on the said Lot, piece or parcel of Land or upon any part thereof, then and in such case, this present permission and every Clause and Article thereof shall from thenceforth cease and determine and be absolutely and entirely null and void. And lastly on this further Condition that the said Thomas Clark or any other Person whosoever shall not assign this permission to occupy the said Lot, Piece or Parcel of Land above described to any Person of Persons whosoever, and if any such assignment shall be made by the said Thomas Clark or by any other Person in his right, or on his behalf, that then and in such case such assignment and this permission to occupy during pleasure the said Lot piece and parcel of Land above described, and every Clause and Article thereof shall from thenceforth cease and determine and be absolutely and entirely null and void. Given under my hand at the Castle of St. Lewis in the City of Quebec in the Province of Lower Canada this Ninth day of July in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety eight and in the thirty eighth year of His Majesty’s Reign. [Signed here by Robert Prescott] By Order of the Commander in Chief [Signed here by James Green (Illegible signature)] I the said Thomas Clark above named do hereby accept the above written Permission to occupy during pleasure the said Lot piece and parcel of Land above described upon and subject to the several Provisioes and Conditions above written and each and every of them severally and respectively. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand the Sixteenth day of August in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety eight and in the thirty eighth year of His Majesty’s Reign. [Signed here by Thomas Clark] Signed in the presence of [Illegible signature – looks like J. M Donell Lt. Col.] [Illegible – looks like 2d. Battn R. C. Sm?] [Signed here by C. Anderson] Whereas Inconveniences did arise from the peculiar situation of the Ground contiguous to the above described Lot of Land and the occupation thereof, if estimated by the above Limits would prove highly disadvantageous to Mr. Thomas Clark be it known that in consideration thereof we do permit the above Lot to extend one half Chain more in length up stream so as to comprehend the space allowed for the Road between Lots Two + Three, and we do hereby appropriate the said additional space wholly to the use of the said Thomas Clark. In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed this Thirteenth Day of October in the Year of our Lord one thousand Eight Hundred and one. [Signed here by J. M’Donell Lt. Col] 2d. Battn. R. C. [in?] Com of Fort George + Dependencies Robt. Pilkington Captain Royal Engineers

Letter written by Mahlon Taylor to Samuel Clarke commenting on US troops during Fort George occupation, July 26, 1813

Fort George, situated on the west side of the Niagara River in Niagara-on-the-Lake, served as the headquarters for the Centre Division of the British Army during the War of 1812. On May 25, 1813, the Americans launched an artillery attack on the Fort, destroying most of the buildings. Two days later, the Americans invaded the Town of Niagara and occupied Fort George. They remained in the Fort for almost seven months, but suffered defeats at the Battle of Stoney Creek and Beaver Dams. Only a small number of militia remained stationed at the Fort. Fearing an attack by the British, the Americans retreated back across the Niagara River in December, 1813. The Fort remained in British possession for the rest of the War.

Broadside reporting the Fenian Invasion of Canada, June 2, 1866

The Fenians were a group intent on securing Irish independence from England. The movement had its origins in Ireland in1857, under the leadership of James Stephens, with the assistance of John O'Mahony, an American who had raised funds for the cause. The American branch of this movement was especially successful, having raised $500 000 and enlisting about 10 000 American Civil War veterans. The group split into two separate factions, one desiring an invasion of Canada and the other preferring an uprising in Ireland. It soon became apparent that an uprising in Ireland was not imminent, and a decision was made to invade Canada. In April, 1866, a raid was launched against New Brunswick. It proved unsuccessful, and another raid was attempted on June 1, 1866, this time in Ridgeway, near Fort Erie, Ontario. The Canadian militiamen were defeated, but the Fenians subsequently withdrew. A third incident occurred on June 7, this time at Missisquoi Bay in Quebec, when the Fenians crossed the border, remained there for 2 days, and withdrew. A failed uprising in Ireland in 1867 signaled the demise of the movement. The Fenian threat helped to promote a sense of union among Canadians and provided an incentive for Confederation.

Broadside reporting the Fenian Invasion of Canada, June 2, 1866

The Fenians were a group intent on securing Irish independence from England. The movement had its origins in Ireland in1857, under the leadership of James Stephens, with the assistance of John O'Mahony, an American who had raised funds for the cause. The American branch of this movement was especially successful, having raised $500 000 and enlisting about 10 000 American Civil War veterans. The group split into two separate factions, one desiring an invasion of Canada and the other preferring an uprising in Ireland. It soon became apparent that an uprising in Ireland was not imminent, and a decision was made to invade Canada. In April, 1866, a raid was launched against New Brunswick. It proved unsuccessful, and another raid was attempted on June 1, 1866, this time in Ridgeway, near Fort Erie, Ontario. The Canadian militiamen were defeated, but the Fenians subsequently withdrew. A third incident occurred on June 7, this time at Missisquoi Bay in Quebec, when the Fenians crossed the border, remained there for 2 days, and withdrew. A failed uprising in Ireland in 1867 signaled the demise of the movement. The Fenian threat helped to promote a sense of union among Canadians and provided an incentive for Confederation.

Letter from George S. Papps to Sheriff Woodruff

Letter bearing the letterhead “George S. Papps, Barrister-at-Law, Hamilton”. The letter is written to Sherriff Woodruff. Mr. Papps requests that Sheriff Woodruff return a will which has remained in his possession, to the rightful owner, Nov. 24, 1875.

Indenture stating that Joseph A. Woodruff, sheriff, is paid $100 by S.D. Woodruff

Indenture stating that Joseph A. Woodruff, sheriff, is paid $100 by S.D. Woodruff for half interests in the cottage and its furnishings situated at the club in Long Point, Lake Erie and is now in possession jointly with R. Lucas of Hamilton. This is signed by Joseph A. Woodruff, Jan. 23, 1886.

Letter to S.D. Woodruff from W. Pring at Port Colborne

Letter to S.D. Woodruff from W. Pring at Port Colborne stating that Mr. Turner has had possession of the Welland Canal information and he is requesting that Mr. Turner send you the information. Jan.24, 1862.

Some Incidents and Circumstances

- The first part of the document traces Mr. Haile’s lineage. His father, James Haile was a farmer. His grandfather, Amos Haile was a sailor for the early part of his life. He was placed on a British man-of- war in about 1758. He escaped and settled in Putney. (p.1) - His father’s mother’s maiden name was Parker. His mother’s maiden name was Campbell. Her father was a captain in the Revolutionary Army. (p.2) - His earliest memories revolve around the death of his aunt and the funeral of General Washington (although he did not witness this). At the time, his father was a Lieutenant in a regiment militia of Light Dragoons who wore red coats. (p.3) - In 1804, an addition was added to the Haile house which necessitated that William was to stay home to help with the building. He continued to study and read on his own. He was particularly interested in Napoleon Bonaparte’s victories. In that same year he was sent to Fairfield Academy where Reverend Caleb Alexander was the principal. (p.4) - On June 1, 1812, William was appointed as an Ensign in the Infantry of the Army of the United States. He was put into the recruiting service at Nassau (20 miles east of Albany) where he remained until September. (p.4) - He was assigned to the 11th Regiment of the W.S. Infantry and directed to proceed to Plattsburgh to report to Colonel Isaac Clark. (p.7) - He was assigned to the company commanded by Captain Samuel H. Halley who was not in the best of health and often absent. For a good part of the time William was in charge of the company. (p.8) - The 11th Regiment was encamped beside the 15th Regiment commanded by Col. Zebulon Montgomery Pike [Pike’s Peak was named after him]. Col. Pike generously drilled and disciplined the 11th Regiment since their officers didn’t seem capable of doing so. (p.8) - The first brigade to which William’s regiment was attached to was commanded by Brigadier General Bloomfield of New Jersey. Brigadier Chandler of Maine commanded the second brigade. (p.9) - At the beginning of November, Major General Dearborn took command of the army. He had been a good officer in his time, but William refers to him as “old and inefficient” earning him the nickname “Granny Dearborn” (p.9) - On November 17th, 1812, General Dearborn moved north with his army. The troops ended up in Champlain. There was no fighting, only a skirmish between a party of men under Colonel Pike and a few British troops who he succeeded in capturing. (p.10) - The troops were moved to barracks for the winter. Colonel Pike’s troops were put into suitable barracks and kept healthy but another part of the army (including the 11th Regiment) were sent to a barracks of green lumber north of Burlington. Disease soon broke out in the damp barracks and the hundreds of deaths soon followed. One morning, William counted 22 bodies who had died the previous night. He puts a lot of this down to an inexperienced commanding officer, General Chandler. (p.11) - At the beginning of 1813, William was stationed as a recruiter on the shore of Shoreham across from Fort Ticonderoga. In February, he returned to Burlington with his recruits. In March he received an order from General Chandler to proceed to Whitehall and take charge of the stores and provisions. In April and May it was decided that his half of the regiment (the First Battalion) should march to Sackett’s Harbour, Lake Ontario. They arrived at Sackett’s Harbour about the 10th of June, a few days after the Battle of Sackett’s Harbour. (p.12) - He was camped near the site of Fort Oswego and got word to head back to Sackett’s Harbour. A storm overtook the schooner that he was on. (p.14) - William was involved in the Battle of Williamsburg (or Chrysler’s Farm) which he calls a “stupid and bungling affair on the part of our generals”.(p. 18) - General Covington was wounded and died a few days after the battle. (p.19) - William speaks of being ill. The troops were ordered to march to Buffalo, but he is able to go to his father’s house in Fairfield where his mother nursed him back to health (p.23) - Upon arrival at Buffalo, the “old fogy Generals” were replaced with younger, more efficient men. (p.25) - On page 27 he sums up a few facts: In 1812, the army was assembled on Lake Champlain with the intention of capturing Montreal, and then Quebec. That year, under General Dearborn the army marched as far as Champlain, then turned back and went into winter quarters. In 1813, the army was assembled at Sackett’s Harbour and that year the campaign ended at French Mills which was 70 or 80 miles from Montreal. In 1814, the army at Buffalo were some 400 miles from Montreal with still the same object in view. - He says that these facts make “a riddle – difficult to explain”. (p.27) - On the evening of July 2nd they embarked on the boats with the objective of capturing Fort Erie. The enemy were all made prisoners of war (p.27) - On July 4th they went to Street’s Creek, 2 miles above the Chippewa [Chippawa] River (p.28) - Page 29 is titled The Battle of Chippewa [Chippawa] - He speaks of 2 drummers who were fighting over the possession of a drum when a cannonball came along and took of both of their heads (p.29) - He proclaims that this was one of the “most brilliant battles of the war”. The battle was fought and won in less than an hour after they left their tents. He credits General Scott with this success and states that was due to his rapid orders and movements. (p.30) - The dead of the battle remained on the field during the night. He describes this as quite gloomy seeing friend and foe lying side by side. At daybreak they set to work digging trenches to bury the dead. (p.31) - Colonel Campbell was wounded and advised to have his leg amputated. He refused, and subsequently died. (p.32) - It is said that the British threw several of their dead into the river and they went over the Falls. (p.32) - His troops repaired the bridge over Chippawa which the enemy had partially destroyed and then pursued the British as far as Queenston Heights. (p.32) - On pages 33 and 34 he speaks about meeting an old friend of his, Philip Harter. - The account ends at Queenston Heights

La propriété des créances : approche comparative

"Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures de l'Université de Montréal en vue de l'obtention du grade de Docteur en Droit (L.L.D.) et à l'Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3"

Essais sur la conception de mécanismes et les enchères

Cette thèse est composée de trois essais liés à la conception de mécanisme et aux enchères. Dans le premier essai j'étudie la conception de mécanismes bayésiens efficaces dans des environnements où les fonctions d'utilité des agents dépendent de l'alternative choisie même lorsque ceux-ci ne participent pas au mécanisme. En plus d'une règle d'attribution et d'une règle de paiement le planificateur peut proférer des menaces afin d'inciter les agents à participer au mécanisme et de maximiser son propre surplus; Le planificateur peut présumer du type d'un agent qui ne participe pas. Je prouve que la solution du problème de conception peut être trouvée par un choix max-min des types présumés et des menaces. J'applique ceci à la conception d'une enchère multiple efficace lorsque la possession du bien par un acheteur a des externalités négatives sur les autres acheteurs. Le deuxième essai considère la règle du juste retour employée par l'agence spatiale européenne (ESA). Elle assure à chaque état membre un retour proportionnel à sa contribution, sous forme de contrats attribués à des sociétés venant de cet état. La règle du juste retour est en conflit avec le principe de la libre concurrence puisque des contrats ne sont pas nécessairement attribués aux sociétés qui font les offres les plus basses. Ceci a soulevé des discussions sur l'utilisation de cette règle: les grands états ayant des programmes spatiaux nationaux forts, voient sa stricte utilisation comme un obstacle à la compétitivité et à la rentabilité. Apriori cette règle semble plus coûteuse à l'agence que les enchères traditionnelles. Nous prouvons au contraire qu'une implémentation appropriée de la règle du juste retour peut la rendre moins coûteuse que des enchères traditionnelles de libre concurrence. Nous considérons le cas de l'information complète où les niveaux de technologie des firmes sont de notoriété publique, et le cas de l'information incomplète où les sociétés observent en privée leurs coûts de production. Enfin, dans le troisième essai je dérive un mécanisme optimal d'appel d'offre dans un environnement où un acheteur d'articles hétérogènes fait face a de potentiels fournisseurs de différents groupes, et est contraint de choisir une liste de gagnants qui est compatible avec des quotas assignés aux différents groupes. La règle optimale d'attribution consiste à assigner des niveaux de priorité aux fournisseurs sur la base des coûts individuels qu'ils rapportent au décideur. La manière dont ces niveaux de priorité sont déterminés est subjective mais connue de tous avant le déroulement de l'appel d'offre. Les différents coûts rapportés induisent des scores pour chaque liste potentielle de gagnant. Les articles sont alors achetés à la liste ayant les meilleurs scores, s'il n'est pas plus grand que la valeur de l'acheteur. Je montre également qu'en général il n'est pas optimal d'acheter les articles par des enchères séparées.

Aspects de l'identité narrative chez Witold Gombrowicz et Virginia Woolf

À la lumière de la théorie de l’identité narrative élaborée par Paul Ricœur, ce mémoire évoque la configuration identitaire des personnages dans les œuvres Cosmos et Les envoûtés de W. Gombrowicz, ainsi que To the Lighthouse et The Waves de V. Woolf. D’une part, nous analyserons l’obsession d’une mise en série aliénante dans le cas de Witold (Cosmos), suivi par un cas de dédoublement et de perte dans l’Autre chez Walczak (Les envoûtés). D’autre part, nous évoquerons le rapport à la famille (James Ramsay) en plus de l’inscription et de l’ancrage par le biais d’éléments prépondérants (The Waves). Il en résulte chez ces personnages, la conception d’une identité par l’entremise d’histoires et d’événements qui la façonnent en un parcours narratif singulier.

Les effets de la cyberintimidation chez les filles qui en sont la cible

La présente étude s’est appuyée sur le modèle transactionnel de stress de Lazarus dans le but de s’intéresser aux mauvais impacts de la cyberintimidation sur les victimes de tels actes, ainsi qu’aux différents facteurs susceptibles de diminuer ou d’amplifier cet effet,comme les représentations cognitives, les aspects contextuels de la situation, ses propriétés stressantes et les stratégies d’adaptation adoptées par les victimes. Les analyses ont été réalisées à partir d’un échantillon de 844 victimes de cyberintimidation âgées de 14 à 21 ans, dont 700 filles. Ces participants ont été recrutés dans des groupes d’intérêt sur le site de réseautage social Facebook et ils ont complété un questionnaire en ligne portant sur la situation de cyberintimidation qu’ils ont vécue. Les résultats indiquent d’abord que les victimes de sexe féminin seraient prédisposées psychologiquement à être affectées plus négativement par des situations de cyberintimidation, qu’elles auraient tendance à subir des situations de cyberintimidation d’une plus grande gravité intrinsèque que celles des garçons et qu’elles choisiraient des stratégies d’adaptation d’une moins grande efficacité. Il est donc peu étonnant alors qu’elles subissent des conséquences d’une plus grande gravité à la suite de leur situation de cyberintimidation. Il appert également que les situations de cyberintimidation qui comprennent aussi de l’intimidation hors ligne auraient tendance à être d’une plus grande gravité intrinsèque que les situations de cyberintimidation qui se déroulent en ligne seulement. Enfin, les résultats d’analyses de pistes causales semblent montrer que le modèle transactionnel de stress de Lazarus permet d’analyser efficacement comment les situations de cyberintimidation peuvent avoir ou ne pas avoir d’impact sur les jeunes filles qui les subissent. Le plus important facteur de risque de la gravité des conséquences subies est l’adoption de la fuite en résultat de la situation, suivie de l’occurrence d’intimidation hors ligne, de l’adoption du contrôle de soi, de la variété de gestes, du sentiment de responsabilité, de la perception de durée de la situation et de la fréquence de victimisation par intimidation hors ligne dans le passé. La possession d’optimisme et d’estime de soi constituerait toutefois un facteur de protection important contre l’impact de la cyberintimidation sur les filles.