September 3, 1763 – Treaty of Paris Ends the American Revolutionary War

On this day in history, The Treaty of Paris was signed, formally ending the American Revolutionary War between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the United States of America that had rebelled against British rule in 1776.

The treaty began with the words “In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity.”

The most important article of the treaty was the first, which declared:

His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.”

The wording of the Treaty promised to “forget all past misunderstandings and differences that have unhappily interrupted the good correspondence and friendship which they mutually wish to restore, and to establish such a beneficial and satisfactory intercourse, between the two countries upon the ground of reciprocal advantages and mutual convenience as may promote and secure to both perpetual peace and harmony….”

Peace negotiations had begun in April of 1782, and continued through the summer. The United States was represented by Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, Henry Laurens, and John Adams. David Hartley and Richard Oswald represented Great Britain. The treaty was signed at the Hotel d’York in Paris by Adams, Franklin, Jay, and Hartley.

Benjamin West's painting of the delegations at the Treaty of Paris: John Jay, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Laurens, and William Temple Franklin. The British delegation refused to pose, and the painting was never completed.

Benjamin West’s painting of the delegations at the Treaty of Paris: John Jay, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Laurens, and William Temple Franklin. The British delegation refused to pose, and the painting was never completed.

The treaty was ratified by the U.S. Congress on January 14, 1784.

You can read the full text of the treaty here.

Review of “The Founding Foodies: How Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin Revolutionized American Cuisine” by Dave DeWitt

This incredibly interesting and fun book combines three great subjects: American History, food, and trivia. The author tells the story of how Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin, among others, influenced the course of American food. In the process, the reader learns fascinating information about how the colonists learned to produce their sustenance. A large number of recipes are included as well.

Just to share but a few of the many absorbing bits of history: In the Founding Fathers’ time, meats were roasted using spits turned over the fire by dogs in circular cages. The “turnspit” dogs were specially bred with short legs and a long body to run in the dog wheel. These dogs were also known as “kitchen dogs.”

Turnspit Dog at Work

Thomas Jefferson was always touting the virtues of living like the “common man,” but he had no desire to include himself in that category. While in France living the good life, he wrote back home to a friend in America, “I had rather be shut up in a very modest cottage, with my books, my family, and a few old friends, dining on simple bacon, and letting the world roll on as it liked.” In fact, this demonstrates the historian’s problem of taking the letters of famous men at their words. In 1789, on his way back to his “modest cottage” at Monticello, Jefferson took back to America eighty-six crates of European art, silver, porcelain, cookware, exotic food items not available in America, and 680 bottles of wine. What’s more, he thought he would only be gone from France for six months, so these were just sort of “emergency” supplies.

Jefferson's recipe for ice cream, in his own hand

The colonists drank huge amounts of alcohol. As one historian noted:

…most colonists avoided water, which could be fatal…as a result, most drinks were alcoholic, because no bacteria known to be harmful to man can survive in them.”

And in fact, colonists regarded water as “better suited to barnyard animals than humans.” Rum, wine, hard cider and brandy were consumed in great quantities. Drunkenness was frowned upon. Yet if you read about the amounts of alcohol the colonists had each day, you have to marvel at the tolerance they developed, and wonder how much you actually had to have to become drunk! [Full disclosure: in the interest of research for this review, I procured some Madeira and tried a glass. Holy smokes! If I had had a bottle of wine, a bottle of ale or two, and then Madeira, as was common during a dinner with the Founders, I would have been way way under the table!] It is amazing to me all they managed to accomplish, given their “spirited” lives!

In 1797 George Washington established the largest whiskey distillery in America (interior view of reconstructed building)

Evaluation: This is a tremendously entertaining book that combines history with food facts and quite a few recipes. The recipes look surprisingly good – or not so surprising, considering that colonists were big on adding butter and cream to almost everything. Highly recommended for enthusiasts of both food and American history!

Rating: 5/5

Published by Sourcebooks, Inc., 2010

August 30, 1967 – Thurgood Marshall Confirmed As the First African-American Supreme Court Justice

On this day in history, Thurgood Marshall was confirmed as an Associate Justice by a Senate vote of 69–11. He was the 96th person to hold the position, and the first African American. He had been nominated to that office on June 13, 1967 by President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Thurgood Marshall in the Oval Office, 1967

Thurgood Marshall in the Oval Office, 1967

Marshall served on the Court for the next 24 years, compiling a liberal record that included strong support for Constitutional protection of individual rights, especially the rights of criminal suspects against the government.

Among his many law clerks were attorneys who went on to become judges themselves, such as Judge Douglas Ginsburg of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge Ralph Winter of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan; as well as notable law professors and law school deans.

One former clerk of Marshall’s, Stephen Carter, who went on to become a law professor at Yale Law School, spoke in this short video about how Marshall would never say a bad word about anyone, even his segregationist opponents.

August 28, 1963 – March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom

On this day in history, more than 200,000 demonstrators took part in a March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in Washington, D.C. to protest high levels of black unemployment, work that offered most African Americans only minimal wages and poor job mobility, systematic disenfranchisement of many African Americans, and the persistence of racial segregation in the South.

March on Washington

According to historian Taylor Branch, the public was “girded for mayhem”:

NBC’s Meet the Press aired official predictions that it would be “impossible” for Negroes to petition in numbers without civic disorder. A preview in Life magazine surveyed Washington’s “worst case of invasion jitters since the First Battle of Bull Run.”  The Kennedy Administration quietly deployed 4,000 riot troops near downtown, with 15,000 paratroopers on alert.  A District of Columbia order banned liquor sales for the first time since Prohibition.  Local hospitals stockpiled plasma and canceled elective surgery to save beds.  Most federal agencies urged employees to stay home.  Eighty percent of private business closed for the day.  A week ahead, to be safe, Major League Baseball postponed not one but two home games for the Washington Senators.”

Young Women Singing At The March On Washington

The diverse collection of speakers and performers at the march included singers Marian Anderson, Odetta, Joan Baez, and Bob Dylan; Little Rock civil rights veteran Daisy Lee Bates; actors Ossie Davis and Ruby Dee; American Jewish Congress president Rabbi Joachim Prinz; Randolph; UAW president Walter Reuther; march organizer Bayard Rustin; NAACP president Roy Wilkins; National Urban League president Whitney Young and SNCC leader John Lewis. 

But the high point of the day came when King took the podium toward the end of the event, and delivered what has come to be known as his ‘‘I Have a Dream’’ speech. (You can listen to that speech here.)

Martin Luther King Jr

After the march, King and other civil rights leaders met with President Kennedy and Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson at the White House, where they discussed the need for bipartisan support of civil rights legislation.

Civil Rights Leaders Meet With John F. Kennedy

August 26, 1957 – The Soviet Union Announces Its First Successful Launch of an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile

On this day in history, Tass, the official Soviet news agency of the USSR, announced that the U.S.S.R. had successfully launched a “super long distance intercontinental multistage ballistic rocket (ICBM).” Then, on October 4, the Soviets used the ICBM to blast into orbit the first artificial Earth satellite, a bundle of instruments weighing about 184 pounds called Sputnik, a combination of words meaning “fellow-traveler of the Earth.”

Sputnik 1 is launched aboard an ICBM from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan close to the Aral Sea on Oct. 4, 1957. Photo courtesy of Novosti

Sputnik 1 is launched aboard an ICBM from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan close to the Aral Sea on Oct. 4, 1957. Photo courtesy of Novosti

Sputnik was followed a month later with Sputnik II, weighing some 1120 pounds and carrying a dog named Laika.

Russia's Laika, the first dog in space

Russia’s Laika, the first dog in space

Senator Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas, who was at his ranch in Texas the night of October 4 when he heard the news about Sputnik, called for a full inquiry into the state of national defense, opining that “[s]oon [the Russians] will be dropping bombs on us from space like kids dropping rocks onto cars from freeway overpasses.” He wasn’t the only one whipping up public fear and paranoia for partisan advantage.

But Eisenhower had important national security reasons for keeping satellite and military information secret, and did not defend his Administration as vigorously as he could have. In 1960, as “The Atlantic Magazine” reported, Kennedy campaigned hard against the Republican “negligence” that had allowed the Soviet Union to overtake the United States in producing missiles. Once in office, however, he learned that there was no missile gap—which gave him an opening to negotiate with Moscow from a position of strength.

Summit Meeting between Nikita Khrushchev and John Kennedy in Vienna in June, 1961

Summit Meeting between Nikita Khrushchev and John Kennedy in Vienna in June, 1961

August 24, 1939 – Great Britain Passes the Emergency Powers (Defence) Act of 1939 Enabling “Enemy” Internment

On this day in history, the British Parliament enacted legislation granting the government special powers pursuant to the growing threat of war in Europe. The Act was passed in reaction to the Nazi-Soviet Pact the day previously. The House of Commons was recalled from its summer recess to pass this act, which gave authority to implement the Defence Regulations that had existed in draft form after the first world war.

Russian foreign minister Molotov signs Nazi-Soviet Pact in front of his German counterpart Ribbentrop, center, and dictator Stalin in 1939

Russian foreign minister Molotov signs Nazi-Soviet Pact in front of his German counterpart Ribbentrop, center, and dictator Stalin in 1939

Defence Regulation 18B, often referred to as simply 18B, was part of the Defence (General) Regulations 1939 and allowed for the internment of people suspected of being Nazi sympathizers. The effect of 18B was to suspend the right of affected individuals to habeas corpus for the first time since the Magna Carta was adopted in 1215.

Most of the British citizens detained were members of Fascist or extreme Right-wing groups, who were generally opposed to the war with Germany. But the majority of detainees were not British citizens, but technically enemy aliens. The fact was however that many of these people were refugees trying to escape Nazi Germany.

In 1940, the Act was extended in reaction to several events: the rapid seizure of power in Norway by Germany, the fall of the Low Countries, the invasion of France, and the discovery that a clerk at the U.S. Embassy had stolen thousands of telegrams, including highly confidential correspondence between Churchill to FDR.

More and more Germans and Austrians were rounded up. Italians were also included, even though Britain was not at war with Italy until June, 1940. When Italy and Britain did go to war, there were at least 19,000 Italians in Britain, and Churchill ordered they all be rounded up. This was despite the fact that most of them had lived in Britain for decades.

British internment camp

British internment camp

After Italy’s Mussolini declared war on Great Britain and France on June 10, 1940, angry anti-Italian riots broke out in many British cities. Terrified shop owners, many with British citizenship and having been resident in the British Isles (often for decades), were forced to barricade themselves into back rooms. The worst riots were in Liverpool, Cardiff, Swansea and Newport, all with large pre-war Italian populations. In places the police were forced to charge the rampaging mobs with batons.

The worse violence occurred in Scotland with major riots in Glasgow, Clydebank and Edinburgh. Many of the rioters were young men from areas of high youth unemployment. It was thought that they used Italy’s declaration of war as an excuse to vent their xenophobia, frustration at unemployment, and anti-Catholicism. Many of their victims were not only British citizens, but had sons serving in the armed forces.

But on June 11 Prime Minister Winston Churchill announced to the country that all Italians males between the ages of seventeen and seventy who had not been resident in Britain for more than twenty years, plus all those, male and female, on the MI5 suspects list would be subject to internment.

Tatura Internment Camp, Victoria, Australia

Tatura Internment Camp, Victoria, Australia

Thousands of internees were sent to camps set up at racecourses and incomplete housing estates. The majority were interned on the Isle of Man, where internment camps had been set up in World War One.

Even though many of the ‘enemy aliens’ were Jewish refugees and hardly likely to be sympathetic to the Nazis, they were still treated as German and Austrian nationals. In one Isle of Man camp over 80 per cent of the internees were Jewish refugees. More than 7,000 internees were deported, the majority to Canada, some to Australia.


The liner Arandora Star left for Canada July 1, 1940. Designed to carry 500 passengers, Arandora Star was carrying 1,300 internees. It was torpedoed and sunk with the loss of 714 lives, including many Italian British citizens and Jewish refugees. A week later, 2,542 men were taken to Australia on the Dunera. Internees were subjected to anti-Semitism, humiliating treatment and intentionally abysmal conditions on the two-month voyage. Many had their possessions destroyed by the British military guards. The Dunera was labeled a “hell-ship.”

A subsequent outcry in Parliament led to the first releases of internees in August 1940. By February 1941 more than 10,000 had been freed, and by the following summer, only 5,000 were left in internment camps. Many of those released from internment subsequently contributed to the war effort on the Home Front or served in the armed forces.

Review of “Forever Free: The Story of Emancipation & Reconstruction” by Eric Foner

Eric Foner begins this excellent short elaboration of his earlier book (Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877) with the observation that, in spite of the biblical proportions of the transformation of four million slaves from bondage to citizenship, “this critical moment in our nation’s history has failed to establish itself in the national memory, at least with any accuracy or full depth of understanding.” Because of this omission, he charges, problems with race remain that have never been fully addressed.


Foner charges that the legacy of the Civil War developed into “a fascination with the valor of combat,” a war of “noble tragedy pitting brother against brother.” Black Americans are relegated to a minor role. This characterization dominates the history, memorialization and discussion of the Civil War and post-Civil War period. Largely obliterated is the service of some 200,000 African Americans in the Union army and navy; the vast exodus of southern slaves to northern lines as the Union came through; the excitement over freedom by African Americans; their desire to work, own land, engage in civic activities, vote, and above all, to get educated; and the violent suppression of those aspirations.

Most school children come to understand Reconstruction as a period of scalawags, carpetbaggers, and ignorant, easily-manipulated freed blacks. It was widely believed that blacks were lazy and would not work, and prone to committing crimes. But the truth is much more complex. Freed slaves were denied their own land as they had been promised (“40 acres and a mule”) and were forced to sign punitive contracts that obligated them and their families to work from sun-up to sunset for whites who might or might not pay them. Only after this labor could they work their own little plot of land to feed their families. Naturally they had more interest in working on the latter than the former. Black men also did not want their women working in white houses, given the history of white sexual exploitation of black women. These attitudes on the part of blacks were translated for public consumption as “lazy.”

Additionally, laws were enacted in the South such as Mississippi’s infamous “pig law” defining the theft of a farm animal as grand larceny. Black men once free soon found themselves imprisoned for minor offenses – often the hapless victims of false accusations – and on chain gangs. Thus with such techniques did whites manage to return the South to a system of cheap, forced labor done by disempowered blacks.

And still, with all that, blacks tried to make better lives for themselves, to run for office, to protest conditions, and improve their education. There was one final recourse for Southerners, and that was violence. The Ku Klux Klan, formed in 1866, and other ad hoc groups, did not even feel the need for disguises when they began their reign of terror. In the first half of 1871, the KKK destroyed 26 schools in one county in Mississippi alone. There were some three thousand victims of lynchings carried out between 1882 and 1930, 88 percent of which were African American men, most of whom charged with offenses such as self-defense, effrontery, or sexual offenses against white women (generally found to be false or so harmless as to be ludicrous). Others who were lynched included white shopkeepers or schoolteachers thought to be treating Negroes “fairly” or speaking up for their civil rights.

Harper's Weekly, 1872

Harper's Weekly, 1872

Foner stresses that the North was complicitous in these crimes: “they could not have taken place “without the full acquiescence of the North.” Labor unrest by immigrants in the North made Northerners nervous about setting a “bad precedent” by giving more rights to black workers. Moreover, by the late 1800s, racism was acquiring the “scientific” imprimatur of social Darwinism, phrenology, and other dubious, later-discredited disciplines. Political compromises sealed the South’s fate. (Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was declared the winner of a disputed election in 1876 after agreeing to restore full local autonomy to the South.)

“Jim Crow” laws taking rights away from blacks were enacted in one state of the South after another. The Klan was given free reign to exercise police powers over blacks without fear of reprisal. Schools and other public services for blacks were defunded. History textbooks used in southern schools were designed to teach white superiority and black backwardness, so that children imbibed these ideas from the earliest age.


These practices helped structure the commemorative patterns that came to inform the dominant narratives of our history, and which thus kept alive the negative stereotypes of Reconstruction. Combined with pictures, statuary, and movies, Southerners have been determinative in structuring a mix of affect and information that reinforces the view they chose to promulgate of the Civil War and its aftermath. These images and narrative constructs in turn legitimated discriminatory political policies and practices. That blacks have had so many fewer opportunities to accumulate wealth and property over the generations, that they have suffered generations of economic disempowerment and educational disadvantage, that their family structures continue to be assaulted by disparate imprisonment standards, are conveniently forgotten. Rather, the popular narrative of self-responsibility and pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps dominates the discussion of the persistent disparities between black and white.

Foner bemoans the fact that “At the dawn of the twenty-first century, what is remarkable is both how much America’s racial situation has changed, and how much it remains the same.” For example, school segregation is once again on the rise, now because of housing patterns and the divide between urban and suburban school districts rather than laws. The black prison population is eight times higher than that for whites, in part because of sentencing disparities that favor white patterns of drug use over black. And as Foner explains, twenty-nine states deny the right to vote to those on probation and those who have ever served in prison for a felony, disenfranchising an estimated one-seventh of the black male population.


Foner implores us to reexamine Reconstruction and its effects, to help challenge the dominant narratives that successfully keep traditionally oppressed groups from receiving equal opportunity. He asks us to cease effacing the stories of black achievement during Reconstruction, and to recognize the ideological components of memory. Only then can we make good on the promises that were made to blacks so long ago that they too could be part of the American dream.

Rating: 5/5

Published by Knopf, 2005


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 92 other followers