Breaking Points

2019 ◽  
pp. 145-188
Author(s):  
Jean H. Baker

Chapter 5 covers Latrobe’s efforts to make money after he lost his job as surveyor of public buildings in Washington. In order to do so, he moved to Pittsburgh and, financed by Robert Fulton, he intended to build a commercial boat powered by steam. But this relationship ended when Fulton cut off his credit. After his return to Washington, Latrobe began rebuilding the Capitol, which had been largely destroyed by the British during the War of 1812. Soon, however, with his expenditures for the building receiving harsh criticism, Latrobe quarrelled with the commissioner of public buildings, resigned, and without any salary was forced to declare bankruptcy.

Author(s):  
Gwynne Tuell Potts

Casual readers of American history may assume the United States enjoyed relative peace between the end of the Revolution and the War of 1812, but in fact, the West remained in turmoil and Kentucky lay at the center of British, French, and Spanish intrigue. Kentuckians struggled with significant decisions leading to statehood: should they remain part of Virginia, join the United States, or become an independent entity aligned with another nation? Navigation rights on the Mississippi River were at the heart of Kentuckians’ concerns, and as long as the federal government refused to negotiate the matter with Spain, most farmers initially were reluctant to commit themselves and their children to land-locked futures. George Rogers Clark, with the encouragement of his former soldiers, agreed to lead a contingent of settlers to form a colony on the Mississippi. Going so far as to ask Spain for permission to do so (as did Sevier, Steuben, and others), Clark unnerved the federal government.


Author(s):  
Anthony S. Pitch

Symbols are the choicest targets for those who would make war or instill terror. Destroying the symbolic center of a nation or culture destroys the spirit of its people—or so it would seem. This chapter examines the British invasion of Washington, D.C., during the War of 1812 and reveals how the attackers carefully chose to torch a set of buildings symbolically important for the upstart republic. In the wake of the attack, Washington nearly lost its raison d’être, as Philadelphia, Georgetown, Lancaster, and other cities vied for the honor of becoming the national capital. Invoking the memory of General George Washington himself, the city’s proponents finally convinced Congress to stay put. By hastily reconstructing the edifices of government, Congress effectively sealed the decision to remain and assured the recovery of Washington, D.C. The program of surgical destruction calls to mind the events of September 11, 2001, when another set of symbols—the Pentagon and the World Trade Center—was similarly targeted and, in the case of the WTC, destroyed. But rather than wreck the country’s spirit, both actions instead galvanized the nation and strengthened its commitment to unity, freedom, and democracy. Washington in 1814 was a steamy southern backwater with a population of only 8,000 residents, one-sixth of whom were slaves. The attorney general at the time, Richard Rush, described it as “a meager village, with a few bad houses and extensive swamps.” Nonetheless, it was the capital of the young republic, and capitals, however meager, have symbolic import. The British raided Washington in 1814 partly because they wanted to humiliate and demoralize the Americans, and they calculated that razing public buildings in the nascent capital would accomplish this in the most direct way. After all, Americans had done much the same in the Canadian capital of York the year before, when they torched and plundered public buildings before raiding villages on the Niagara frontier the following year. To retaliate, the British admiral George Cockburn pressed for the seizure of Washington, arguing that the fall of a capital was “always so great a blow to the government of a country.” By this time the countries had been at war for two years.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duane T. Wegener ◽  
Leandre R. Fabrigar

AbstractReplications can make theoretical contributions, but are unlikely to do so if their findings are open to multiple interpretations (especially violations of psychometric invariance). Thus, just as studies demonstrating novel effects are often expected to empirically evaluate competing explanations, replications should be held to similar standards. Unfortunately, this is rarely done, thereby undermining the value of replication research.


Author(s):  
Keyvan Nazerian

A herpes-like virus has been isolated from duck embryo fibroblast (DEF) cultures inoculated with blood from Marek's disease (MD) infected birds. Cultures which contained this virus produced MD in susceptible chickens while virus negative cultures and control cultures failed to do so. This and other circumstantial evidence including similarities in properties of the virus and the MD agent implicate this virus in the etiology of MD.Histochemical studies demonstrated the presence of DNA-staining intranuclear inclusion bodies in polykarocytes in infected cultures. Distinct nucleo-plasmic aggregates were also seen in sections of similar multinucleated cells examined with the electron microscope. These aggregates are probably the same as the inclusion bodies seen with the light microscope. Naked viral particles were observed in the nucleus of infected cells within or on the edges of the nucleoplasmic aggregates. These particles measured 95-100mμ, in diameter and rarely escaped into the cytoplasm or nuclear vesicles by budding through the nuclear membrane (Fig. 1). The enveloped particles (Fig. 2) formed in this manner measured 150-170mμ in diameter and always had a densely stained nucleoid. The virus in supernatant fluids consisted of naked capsids with 162 hollow, cylindrical capsomeres (Fig. 3). Enveloped particles were not seen in such preparations.


2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.


1996 ◽  
Vol 26 (11) ◽  
pp. 1246-1252 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. CUSTOVIC ◽  
R. GREEN ◽  
S. C. O. TAGGART ◽  
A. SMITH ◽  
C. A. C. PICKERING ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Alicia A. Stachowski ◽  
John T. Kulas

Abstract. The current paper explores whether self and observer reports of personality are properly viewed through a contrasting lens (as opposed to a more consonant framework). Specifically, we challenge the assumption that self-reports are more susceptible to certain forms of response bias than are informant reports. We do so by examining whether selves and observers are similarly or differently drawn to socially desirable and/or normative influences in personality assessment. Targets rated their own personalities and recommended another person to also do so along shared sets of items diversely contaminated with socially desirable content. The recommended informant then invited a third individual to additionally make ratings of the original target. Profile correlations, analysis of variances (ANOVAs), and simple patterns of agreement/disagreement consistently converged on a strong normative effect paralleling item desirability, with all three rater types exhibiting a tendency to reject socially undesirable descriptors while also endorsing desirable indicators. These tendencies were, in fact, more prominent for informants than they were for self-raters. In their entirety, our results provide a note of caution regarding the strategy of using non-self informants as a comforting comparative benchmark within psychological measurement applications.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document