Manuscript of James Cummings- August 28, 1860

Transcript (spelling and grammar retained): Chippawa [Chippewa] 28th August 1860 My Dear Sir I duly received your very kind letter of the 24th [June] asking me to communicate such facts of general interest connected with my career during the War with the United States. I have no objection to afford you such information as came under my own observation; nevertheless I do so, with the understanding, I have no desire to be my own trumpeter. With respect to your circular wherein you state you have been for several years collecting materials for a History of the late War between the United States & Great Britain, for which you are now gathering further materials to add to your collection, concerning the Second War for Independence. I am rather at a loss to know, what is meant by the second war; If you allude to the petty Rebellion, it could not be called a War, Those that caused the outbreak were very soon put down, by the Loyal people of the Province without the aid of Regular Troops being satisfied with the Independence they enjoyed. With respect to the several questions names in your circular: To the 1st I would say, this locality is made memorable by the battle of Chippawa [Chippewa] which took place about a mile above the village on the ground I pointed out to you, when I had the pleasure of seeing you a few days ago, with Mr Porter of the Niagara Falls, of which I believe you took sketches at the time. 2nd I have no historical documents of any value; so many years having gone past, the most of my old papers have either been lost or destroyed, I however came across two letters, one dated Queenston 9th July 1812 from Lt. Col. Nicholl Quarter Master General of Militia, the other from Lt. Col Myers Deputy Quarter Master General of the Regular Army date Fort George 23rd same month, directed to me in the hand writing of each of those officers as Deputy Quarter Master General of Militia, which letters I shall be obliged you would return at as early a day possible, as I wish to place them with tome others in the case, I have had made to hold the cocked hat & feather I wore during that eventful period, which I am sorry I did not exhibit when you was at my house; with reference to it I now enclose a letter from Lt. Col. Clark, residing at Port Dalhousie he was Captain & Adjutant of Militia in the War of 1812__ I send the letter in proof of the cock’d hat it is a lengthy one, but you may find time to turn over it, as I shall also place it in the hat case__ 3rd Where are [but] [for] traditionary [sic] witnesses residing in this vicinity – Col Clark above named Mr Merritt of St. Catharines, & Mr Kerby of Brantford are the only ones I now recollect, who could offord [sic] you any statistical information. 4th I have no pictorial sketches of any Military Movements or fortifications. As regards my own career, which you appear [ ? ] of knowing__ I was first a Lieutenant in a volunteer flank company stationed on the river side opposite [Navy] Island not far from the battle ground of Chippawa [Chippewa], I got promotion as Lieutenant of Cavalry before I got my Cavalry dress completed in three days more, I was called by General Brock to Fort George, was appointed Deputy Quarter Master General of Militia with the rank of Captain s the accompanying letters will show. I was at the battle of Stony Creek, several skirmishes at the Cross Roads, when the American army [ ? ] Fort George, at the taking of Col. Boerstler at the Beaver Dam, & had the honor of receiving Colonel Chapens sword at the surrender, who commanded a company of volunteer Horse Men was at the taking of 15 regulars & two officers at Fort Schlosser—was with Col. Bishop at the taking of Black Rock, near him when he fell, three men of the 8th Reg. more killed in the Boat I was in – I was at Chippawa battle, and the last, not the least in Lundy’s lane battle, which the Americans call the battle of Bridge [Waters]. I had forgot; there was another small affair at Corks Mill where I was. I could write a little history of events, but have not the time to do so. If what I have stated will be of any service for the purpose you require I shall feel happy. The history of the late War was published at Toronto in the Anglo American Magazine. Did you ever see it, I have the Books, there were however several errors which came under my notice, which I could have corrected. If my time would permit I could give you a more detailed statement of events. I trust however you may succeed with your publication , and I shall be most happy to hear from you at all times—I related many little occurances verbally to you when here, which I thought not necessary to repeat again as you would have a perfect recollection of them. Be pleased to return the letters for the purpose I require them. I am My Dear Sir Your respectful friend James Cummings

Correspondence between the American and British Plentipotentiaries relative to the commercial convention concluded on the 3rd of July, 1815

January 16, 1816. Printed by order of the House of Representatives. 14th Congress, 1st Session, 1815-1816. House. At head of title: [27].

Important state papers : declaration of war, Washington, June 18, 4 o'clock, P.M

Message to the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States / James Madison -- Report : the Committee on Foreign relations, to whom was referred the message of the President of the United States of the 1st of June, 1812 -- An Act, declaring war between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the dependencies thereof, and the United States of America and their territories -- Address of the Senate to the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Letter from the Secretary of State to Mr. Monroe, on the subject of the attack on the Chesapeake : the correspondence of Mr. Monroe with the British Government; and also Mr. Madison's correspondence with Mr. Rose on the same subject

March 23, 1808. Printed by order of the House of Representatives.

Letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting documents containing the information required by the resolution of Mr. Wright, on the 22d inst. relative to the execution of the act fixing the military peace establishment

14th Congress, 1st session, 1815-1816. House. Document no. 33. January 27, 1816. Read and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting copies of a letter from the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to the Secretary of State, with the answer of the latter

January 6, 1814. Ordered to lie on the table. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At head of title: [22]. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13th Congress, 2nd Session, House. Doc. 22. Printed by Roger C. Weightman

Le regard de l'allié britannique sur la France et son armée durant la guerre de Crimée

Ce mémoire est une étude d’un cas de rapprochement entre deux pays. Pendant la guerre de Crimée, la Grande-Bretagne s’allia à la France du Second Empire. Ennemie traditionnelle, la France est toujours considérée comme une menace. La coopération forcée entre les deux pays, résultat des circonstances, est à la base de la présente recherche. Des milliers de militaires et de civils des deux pays travaillèrent ensemble pendant deux ans. Les correspondances britanniques révèlent une fraternisation plus importante que ce qui est relevé dans l’historiographie. D’après les théories de Gordon Allport sur la diminution des préjugés, toutes les conditions nécessaires à un rapprochement se retrouvaient en Crimée. Les étapes, définies par Allport, qui mènent à cette fraternisation se perçoivent aussi dans les lettres personnelles. Ce rapprochement eut des conséquences sous-estimées : les Britanniques se comparèrent aux Français et leur fierté céda la place à une importante autocritique. Cela déclencha des controverses dans l’armée et dans les journaux dès le début de la guerre, longtemps avant les scandales de l’hiver 1854-1855.

Measuring and comparing constraints to improved biosecurity amongst GB farmers, veterinarians and the auxiliary industries

Constraints to the introduction of enhanced biosecurity systems are rarely considered in sufficient detail when population medicine specialists initiate new control schemes. The main objective of our research was to investigate and compare the different attitudes constraining improvement in biosecurity for cattle and sheep farmers, practising veterinary surgeons and the auxiliary industries in Great Britain (GB). This study was carried out utilizing farmer focus groups, a questionnaire survey of veterinary practitioners and a telephone survey of auxiliary industry representatives. It appears that farmers and veterinarians have their own relatively clear definitions for biosecurity in relation to some major diseases threatening GB agriculture. Overall, farmers believe that other stakeholders, such as the government, should make a greater contribution towards biosecurity within GB. Conversely, veterinary practitioners saw their clients' ability or willingness to invest in biosecurity measures as a major constraint. Veterinary practitioners also felt that there was need for additional proof of efficacy and/or the potential economic benefits of proposed farm biosecurity practices better demonstrated. Auxiliary industries, in general, were not certain of their role in biosecurity although study participants highlighted zoonoses as part of the issue and offered that most of the constraints operated at farm level. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Measuring and comparing constraints to improved biosecurity amongst GB farmers, veterinarians and the auxiliary industries

Constraints to the introduction of enhanced biosecurity systems are rarely considered in sufficient detail when population medicine specialists initiate new control schemes. The main objective of our research was to investigate and compare the different attitudes constraining improvement in biosecurity for cattle and sheep farmers, practising veterinary surgeons and the auxiliary industries in Great Britain (GB). This study was carried out utilizing farmer focus groups, a questionnaire survey of veterinary practitioners and a telephone survey of auxiliary industry representatives. It appears that farmers and veterinarians have their own relatively clear definitions for biosecurity in relation to some major diseases threatening GB agriculture. Overall, farmers believe that other stakeholders, such as the government, should make a greater contribution towards biosecurity within GB. Conversely, veterinary practitioners saw their clients' ability or willingness to invest in biosecurity measures as a major constraint. Veterinary practitioners also felt that there was need for additional proof of efficacy and/or the potential economic benefits of proposed farm biosecurity practices better demonstrated. Auxiliary industries, in general, were not certain of their role in biosecurity although study participants highlighted zoonoses as part of the issue and offered that most of the constraints operated at farm level. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

On the question of proportionality of the count of observed Scrapie cases and the size of holding

Background: The present paper investigates the question of a suitable basic model for the number of scrapie cases in a holding and applications of this knowledge to the estimation of scrapie-ffected holding population sizes and adequacy of control measures within holding. Is the number of scrapie cases proportional to the size of the holding in which case it should be incorporated into the parameter of the error distribution for the scrapie counts? Or, is there a different - potentially more complex - relationship between case count and holding size in which case the information about the size of the holding should be better incorporated as a covariate in the modeling? Methods: We show that this question can be appropriately addressed via a simple zero-truncated Poisson model in which the hypothesis of proportionality enters as a special offset-model. Model comparisons can be achieved by means of likelihood ratio testing. The procedure is illustrated by means of surveillance data on classical scrapie in Great Britain. Furthermore, the model with the best fit is used to estimate the size of the scrapie-affected holding population in Great Britain by means of two capture-recapture estimators: the Poisson estimator and the generalized Zelterman estimator. Results: No evidence could be found for the hypothesis of proportionality. In fact, there is some evidence that this relationship follows a curved line which increases for small holdings up to a maximum after which it declines again. Furthermore, it is pointed out how crucial the correct model choice is when applied to capture-recapture estimation on the basis of zero-truncated Poisson models as well as on the basis of the generalized Zelterman estimator. Estimators based on the proportionality model return very different and unreasonable estimates for the population sizes. Conclusion: Our results stress the importance of an adequate modelling approach to the association between holding size and the number of cases of classical scrapie within holding. Reporting artefacts and speculative biological effects are hypothesized as the underlying causes of the observed curved relationship. The lack of adjustment for these artefacts might well render ineffective the current strategies for the control of the disease.

Determinants of biosecurity behaviour of British cattle and sheep farmers: a behavioural economics analysis

The paper analyses the impact of a priori determinants of biosecurity behaviour of farmers in Great Britain. We use a dataset collected through a stratified telephone survey of 900 cattle and sheep farmers in Great Britain (400 in England and a further 250 in Wales and Scotland respectively) which took place between 25 March 2010 and 18 June 2010. The survey was stratified by farm type, farm size and region. To test the influence of a priori determinants on biosecurity behaviour we used a behavioural economics method, structural equation modelling (SEM) with observed and latent variables. SEM is a statistical technique for testing and estimating causal relationships amongst variables, some of which may be latent using a combination of statistical data and qualitative causal assumptions. Thirteen latent variables were identified and extracted, expressing the behaviour and the underlying determining factors. The variables were: experience, economic factors, organic certification of farm, membership in a cattle/sheep health scheme, perceived usefulness of biosecurity information sources, knowledge about biosecurity measures, perceived importance of specific biosecurity strategies, perceived effect (on farm business in the past five years) of welfare/health regulation, perceived effect of severe outbreaks of animal diseases, attitudes towards livestock biosecurity, attitudes towards animal welfare, influence on decision to apply biosecurity measures and biosecurity behaviour. The SEM model applied on the Great Britain sample has an adequate fit according to the measures of absolute, incremental and parsimonious fit. The results suggest that farmers’ perceived importance of specific biosecurity strategies, organic certification of farm, knowledge about biosecurity measures, attitudes towards animal welfare, perceived usefulness of biosecurity information sources, perceived effect on business during the past five years of severe outbreaks of animal diseases, membership in a cattle/sheep health scheme, attitudes towards livestock biosecurity, influence on decision to apply biosecurity measures, experience and economic factors are significantly influencing behaviour (overall explaining 64% of the variance in behaviour).

English Contract Law and the Great War: the development of a doctrine of frustration

This article examines changes that occurred in English contract law as a result of the demands made upon Great Britain by the Great War. The focus is on the development of the doctrine of frustration in English law. In particular, it is argued that the development of the doctrine of frustration was fashioned from internal legal forces in the form of both existing case law and emergency legislation in response to the demands placed upon the nation by a global war. The way in which the doctrine of frustration developed during the Great War arose as a direct result of the way in which Britain chose to meet the logistical demands created by the way it fought the Great War.