A Doctor In The House Essay -- essays research papers

A Doctor in the House Henrik Ibsen's character, Dr. Rank, in "A Doll's House" is an important component of the play, though he is not a lead character. Rank enhances the story in his own right as a character, but mainly serves a greater purpose as an accentuation of Nora'a character. Nora's relationship with Rank is equal, and perhaps it implants in Nora's mind the idea that relationships should be equal. Their relationship brings up questions about social correctness and even the values necessary in a marriage. Essentially, Dr. Rank's purpose is to refine the audience's understanding of Nora's character. Dr. Rank's presence establishes the lack of communication between Nora and her husband. Nora confides in Dr. Rank, involving him in secrets and everyday conversation. For instance, Rank is the first character to be let in on Nora's secret plan to take Helmer on a "vacation," supposedly paid for by her father. Also, Rank refers to Christine Linde as "a name I have often heard in this house," when Helmer is virtually unaware of Linde's existence (Ibsen 542). The quote further indicates Rank and Nora share things in which Helmer is not included. Rank is like a messenger for the couple on one occasion when Nora finds out about Helmer's new job from the doctor. Nora asks Rank, "Tell me Dr. Rank--will everyone who works at the bank come under Torvald now?" (542). These conversations help to conclude that most of Nora's meaningful and informative conversation is not with her own husband. Furthermore, the doctor encourages Nora to confide in him; "You can say it to us†¦say it, here he is," says Rank, urging Nora to do as she wishes around him (542). Nora seems to divulge her thoughts to Rank and not Helmer, relaying an inward struggle in Nora to do as she wishes. She lies to Helmer about the macaroons, but hastily reveals her hidden snack to the doctor. Rank and Nora's relationship shows Nora's longing for independence from Helmer and society's rules. Even Mrs. Linde, a relatively liberated woman, feels Nora's intimate relationship with the doctor is curiously inappropriate. Linde is shocked that Nora would speak with Rank about the debt behind Helmer's back, to which Nora replies, "I've got to get out of this other busine... ...ra's father, and then subsequently, how they see Nora. Ibsen makes the hereditary flaws available in Rank in order to make the theme clear. While Rank's flaws end with his death, Nora's bad traits threaten to rub-off on her children, continuing the line of bad heredity. According to Helmer, Rank's dark life "accentuates the light of their marriage," but the importance of the character, Dr. Rank, is to accentuate the darkness of Nora's life. Rank's life parallels Nora's situation until the role reversal at the end. Throughout the play, both suffer the consequences of morally corrupt fathers; Nora has her secret debt and Rank with his illness. Rank's announcement of death also marks the end of the masquerade, literally and figuratively speaking: Nora's masquerade of a content marriage is over as well as the ball that are her last moments of "fun." Instead of dying when Rank dies, however, Nora is reborn as an independent woman in society. Her situation may again parallel Rank's; there is uncertainty associated with death as there is definite uncertainty as to Nora's fate.

Effective Human Resources Leadership for Nursing Home and Assisted Living Facilities Essay

Management Style for Assisted Living and Nursing Home Facilities Human Resource Management in Healthcare Organizations The type of organization I chose to discuss is an independent the assisted living facility and nursing home. They both provide some of the same functions, although the name of the facility may be slightly different. While these are separate types of organizations now, in the future, they will blend due to the fact that the longer the clientele is a â€Å"resident† of the Assisted Living Facility (ALF), the more likely they will be in need of full-time nursing care. (NursingCenter). I chose this particular type of organization because it is one that I am interested in due to the fact that such a large portion of our population will be served by these organizations in the near future and for some time to come based on our aging population statistics. Forty-two percent of the population that lives until the age of seventy will spend time in a nursing home before they die. (Knickman). Residents, or patients, in those facilities will receive services from a variety of providers like physical and occupational therapists, medication management for mental and physical ailments and perhaps social service support services as they move toward the nursing home in lieu of assistance from family members when they have none to call for assistance. Because the environment is clinical and service oriented over longer periods of time, it is important to examine what kind(s) of management style is successful in order to manage the intensive daily clinical needs and the ongoing relationships that develop among the staff and residents. One report on the study of leadership styles suited for nursing homes and assisted living facilities reported that a consensus leadership style had a strong association with quality of care. (Castle). Models indicate that consensus leadership style is also the best approach in limiting staff turnover, which is essential in how the residents rate their satisfaction of service. (Donoghue). Consensus management style is not a majority vote. After management has  reached a decision, consensus approach seeks to determine if all the team members find it acceptable and if they are in support of the decision. In this management style we would ask what could be changed in order to obtain staff support. All members of the group should feel that their ideas and views were heard and that they heard the others in the group as well. The idea is that the team will support the management because decisions were arrived at fairly. (Mayoclinic). To meet all the demands of infection control, government regulations, service to the residents, clinicians, families and inherent risks associated with the geriatric population, management must not only be task oriented, but people-centered. Management must develop clear and effective strategic plans, but with a humanistic approach of consensus so that all the team members that serve the clientele are happy and effective. It is truly an environment where management must foster employee relations which will decrease risk, and improve patient satisfaction which should in turn also reduce marketing needs as each point of contact that the staff has with a family member is also an ambient sales opportunity. In order to meet the patient needs in such a high demand environment where a majority of the time the patient/customer is in contact with a lower educated, less clinical staff such as a certified nurse assistant making a low wage, that staff must have a voice to understand that they make a huge impact on the organization. When they feel valuable, the organization will run much more smoothly. My first job and customer training out of high school was working the front desk of a four star hotel. We were the lowest paid on the totem pole, but management and human resources through incentive programs and awards recognized our achievements and solicited our input of ideas at all times. WORKS CITED Castle, N., & Decker, F. (2011), Top Management Leadership Style and Quality of Care in Nursing Homes. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnr064. Epub 2011 Jun 30. Donoghue C, & Castle NG, (2009), Leadership Styles of Nursing Home Administrators and Their Association with Staff Turnover, doi: 10.1093/geront/gnp021. Epub 2009 Mar 27. Knickman JR, & Snell EK, (2002), The 2030 problem: Caring for Aging Baby Boomers. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12236388 Kreofsky, B., & Vrtiska T., & Rego S., & Lewis T., & Chihak A., & Spurrier B., & Larusso N., & Farrugia G. (2011), Using Innovative Idea Management Tools in a Large Health Care Organization: Lessons Learned. Retrieved from http://www.mayo.edu/mayo-edu-docs/center-for-innovation-documents/wp-cfi-lessons.pdf Nursing Center. Nursingcenter.com. N.p. n.d. Web. 1 Sept 2013. Olson, Dana. (2007). Effective leadership in long term care: the need and the opportunity. Retrieved from http://www.achca.org/content/pdf /ACHCA_Leadership_Need_and_Opportunity_Paper_Dana-Olson.pdf

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Essay

The three types of Assistance from the lists that I believe that will benefit the organization profiled in Appendix A the most is: 1. Civil Rights and Privacy Rule Compliance Activities (http://www.hhsgov/ocr) 2. Intergovernmental Personal Act (IPA) Mobility Program ( http://www.opm.gov) 3. Labor Mediation and Conciliation (http://www.fmcs.gov) The one program that I feel that is the most valuable to the organization from Appendix A is Civil Rights and Privacy Rule Compliance Activities. The programs objectives are that the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Health and Human Services ensures that the people have equal opportunities to participate in these services without any unlawful discrimination and to make sure that their health information is protected and to ensure that any electronic health information is safe. The eligibility requirements consist of anyone who believes that he or she has been discriminated against in some type of manner above or seek information concerning civil rights, and any recipients of Federal financial assistance who desire technical assistance and information assuring that their compliance with nondiscrimination laws. The type of assistance types are Advisory Services and Counseling, and Investigation of Complaints. The dollar range is not applicable. The average amount of assistance awarded (Salaries) FY 11 $40,699,293; FY 12 est $40,938,000; and FY 13 est $38,966,000. How this program is utilized by the organization profiled in Appendix A is that it is there to help the needs of the residents to provide counseling when needed and provide care for those who are medically indigent. Also to help the residents who are below the poverty level. This organization will bring a big impact to the needs of these residents.

The election of Abraham Lincoln – a threat to South Carolina

Abraham Lincoln returned to politics with his inflamed speech outlining his arguments against slavery, opposed to the Kansas-Nebraska Act that was passed by Congress in 1854. The legislation opened lands to the possibility of the spread of slavery. In 1860 Lincoln was chosen by the Republican Party as their candidate. He won the presidential election defeating the Northern Democrat Douglas, the southern democrat representative and the union candidate. His election was unacceptable to southern politicians, who viewed his political stands as a threat to South Carolina and other southern states. Factors that led the South to secedeLincoln’s election as the 16th president of the US formed a pretext to the southerners and few other states seceding from the union. The slave system was viewed by the southerner’s as a more pro-southern system that gave them a stronghold across the nation’s territories. Following Lincoln’s election as president, Southern Carolina a nd six other cotton–growing states in the south seceded from the union, they declared themselves as ‘the confederate states of America. ‘. Attempts by Lincoln to hold the union together by force failed. Tensions between North and South increased which led to the American Civil War that broke out in April 1861.The role of 1860 Election The 1860 election was critical to the political scenario that marked a substantial change in the existing political context. Abraham Lincoln went on to become the first republican who was elected purely by the strength of northern support. His election to power led to the seceding of South Carolina and other southern states fuelling tensions in the political stage. The Emancipation Proclamation that was announced by Lincoln in September 1862 and was put to effect in 1863, freed slaves in the territories that was not already in the control of the union.As quoted by a researcher in a web article â€Å"The Southern army was forced to r etreat, and for the first time the North got the upper hand† (David Maiden), the advancement of the union armies in the southern territory led to the freeing of all slave in the confederation,. The thirteenth amendment passed by Lincoln, led to the permanent abolition of slavery across the nation. Abraham Lincoln is undoubtedly one of the greatest presidents of the US, an eloquent speaker and a great leader. Saving the Union and freeing slaves are viewed as two great achievements of Lincoln.

Indian Monsoon Essay

Remember the ‘Famine 1975!’ (?) – A bestseller by William and Paul Paddock which had created ripples throughout the world by their comments on the underdeveloped countries especially India. Their message was loud and clear â€Å"Let the (hopeless) Indians starve to death†. Humiliated by the inefficiency due to lack of advanced technology and inability to be self-dependent to feed the population drastic changes were implemented by then policy makers of Democratic Republican of India. Mr Monkombu Sambasivan Swaminathan led the crusade to make India self-sufficient by spreading the green revolution throughout India. Since then India has never looked back despite weak monsoons frequently. Impact of green revolution – So what led to the doomsday being averted? The modern practices in agriculture were implemented with newer technology. But the turning point was the introduction of high yielding variety of seeds which made the dependence on monsoon much less. The genetically modified seeds increased India’s production from 120 tonnes to 170 tonnes in a span of just one year. India also invested in agricultural universities to promote research in drought resistant seeds. Land reforms in that era resulted in the consolidation of small holdings which resulted in implementation of technology optimally. MS Swaminathan was instrumental in spreading the awareness rapidly regarding the ill effects of fertilizers and pesticides which eroded the quality of soil. New policies were implemented to make the credit supply for farmers easy and convenient. The cumulative effects of all these changes made sure India would not have to be completely dependent on monsoons in future. Initially the food grain production did increase with the implementation of green revolution but after ten years it reached its saturation. The food grain available per person reached its peak at 480 gms per person. The consumption of protein rich foods which were not dependent on agriculture increased simultaneously with growth of India’s economy. Although the penetration of superior foods among the lower strata of population was still insignificant but the consumption among the higher end of the society increased considerably. Implementation of PDS – The game changer however was the improved public distribution system. Monsoon in India is peculiar in the sense that the rainfall may be deficient in some areas whereas abundant in other. So the production also follows the same pattern being under target in the monsoon deficient areas whereas bumper production in the abundant monsoon areas. But the irony was that he food grain in the bumper production region were left to rot despite of the people starving in other regions. The rapid development of roads led to a better connectivity which ensures that the food grain output can be equitably distributed across India. So even if the monsoon being deficient in some areas the excessive output from other regions could be sent across to compensate or the low production. Improved irrigation – The dependence of agriculture on monsoon has declined over the years. Compared to 1965, when 67% of the agriculture was dependent on monsoon, only 40 % of the agriculture is dependent on rainfall today. The irrigation earlier was due to canals which were indirectly dependent on rainfall but now the irrigation is mostly by tube wells which are not dependent on monsoons. So a decline in monsoon won’t affect the production output drastically. India traditionally produces two crops, kharif and rabi. Kharif crops are cultivated in the monsoons and rabi crops are cultivated in the winters. So kharif crops are dependent on, whereas rabi crops are unaffected by, monsoons. Earlier the kharif crops accounted for three fourths of the total output but in the contemporary scenario the output of kharif and rabi crops are almost equal. So a deficient monsoon may change the output of kharif crops slightly but the rabi output won’t be affected. Inflation rendered ineffective – Weak monsoon will fuel inflation due to the supply and demand mismatch. The increase in level of prices will have some effect on other commodities as well. Having said that, as per the the PDS scheme the population under the BPL gets 35 kg of food grain every month. So the poor won’t be affected much by increase in the food inflation Effect on GDP – India’s agriculture contributed to around 52% of the total GDP in 1950. The investments in the manufacturing sector as well as the rise of Indian services sector led to decrease in the share of the agriculture in India’s GDP. Presently agriculture contributes only 14% to the GDP. So even if the production decreases due to weak monsoon its effect on the GDP will be negligible. Even 7% drop in the output, though very unlikely would decrease the GDP by only 1 %. Forex sufficiency – Earlier India received foodgrains on charity – primarily from USA, Australia and Canada. But dependencies have been worked upon. Scenarios have been mitigated. Today, India has $300 billion as foreign reserves and has earned enough forex reserves to buy food grains in times of emergency. The current reserves of the food grain stands at 80 million tonnes, so a situation of import is highly improbable. These all contribute as the major reasons which have ceased Indian-draughts & fickle monsoon conditions from being calamities anymore. Foodgrain availability remains as low as in the 1960s, despite the green revolution. But rapid GDP growth, by hugely boosting the share of services and industry in GDP, has made agriculture a relative pygmy, greatly reducing the economy’s monsoon dependence. Yet when everything is said and read, things aren’t as rosy as we have depicted above. There remains a catch : a drought may no longer mean mass starvation, but it still means food inflation!

Alexander H. Stephens - Cornerstone Speech

Alexander H. Stephens Cornerstone Speech Delivered 21 March 1861, Savannah, Georgia When perfect quiet is restored, I shall proceed. I cannot speak so long as there is any noise or confusion. I shall take my time I feel quite prepared to spend the night with you if necessary. I very much regret that everyone who desires cannot hear what I have to say. Not that I have any display to make, or anything very entertaining to present, but such views as I have to give, I wish all, not only in this city, but in this State, and throughout our Confederate Republic, could hear, who have a desire to hear them.I was remarking that we are passing through one of the greatest revolutions in the annals of the world. Seven States have within the last three months thrown off an old government and formed a new. This revolution has been signally marked, up to this time, by the fact of its having been accomplished without the loss of a single drop of blood. This new constitution. or form of government, constitutes the subject to which your attention will be partly invited. In reference to it, I make this first general remark: it amply secures all our ancient rights, franchises, and liberties. All the great principles of Magna Charta are retained in it. No citizen is deprived of life, liberty, or property, but by the judgment of his peers under the laws of the land. The great principle of religious liberty, which was the honor and pride of the old constitution, is still maintained and secured. All the essentials of the old constitution, which have endeared it to the hearts of the American people, have been preserved and perpetuated. Some changes have been made. Some of these I should have preferred not to have seen made; but other important changes do meet my cordial approbation. They form great improvements upon the old constitution. So, taking the whole new constitution, I have no hesitancy in giving it as my judgment that it is decide dly better than the old. Allow me briefly to allude to some of these improvements. The question of building up class interests, or fostering one branch of industry to the prejudice of another under the exercise of the revenue power, which gave us so much trouble under the old constitution, is put at rest forever under the new. We allow the imposition of no duty with a view of giving advantage to one class of persons, in any trade or business, over those of another. All, under our system, stand upon the same broad principles of perfect equality. Honest labor and enterprise are left free and unrestricted in whatever pursuit they may be engaged. This old thorn of the tariff, which was the cause of so much irritation in the old body politic, is removed forever from the new. Again, the subject of internal improvements, under the power of Congress to regulate commerce, is put at rest under our system. The power, claimed by construction under the old constitution, was at least a doubtful one; it rested solely upon construction. We of the South, generally apart from considerations of constitutional principles, opposed its exercise upon grounds of its inexpediency and injustice. Notwithstanding this opposition, millions of money, from the common treasury had been drawn for such purposes. Our opposition sprang from no hostility to commerce, or to all necessary aids for facilitating it. With us it was simply a question upon whom the burden should fall. In Georgia, for instance, we have done as much for the cause of internal improvements as any other portion of the country, according to population and means. We have stretched out lines of railroads from the seaboard to the mountains; dug down the hills, and filled up the valleys at a cost of not less than $25,0 00,000. All this was done to open an outlet for our products of the interior, and those to the west of us, to reach the marts of the world. No State was in greater need of such facilities than Georgia, but we did not ask that these works should be made by appropriations out of the common treasury. The cost of the grading, the superstructure, and the equipment of our roads was borne by those who had entered into the enterprise. Nay, more not only the cost of the iron no small item in the aggregate cost was borne in the same way, but we were compelled to pay into the common treasury several millions of dollars for the privilege of importing the iron, after the price was paid for it abroad. What justice was there in taking this money, which our people paid into the common treasury on the importation of our iron, and applying it to the improvement of rivers and harbors elsewhere? The true principle is to subject the commerce of every locality, to whatever burdens may be necessary to fac ilitate it. If Charleston harbor needs improvement, let the commerce of Charleston bear the burden. If the mouth of the Savannah river has to be cleared out, let the sea-going navigation which is benefited by it, bear the burden. So with the mouths of the Alabama and Mississippi river. Just as the products of the interior, our cotton, wheat, corn, and other articles, have to bear the necessary rates of freight over our railroads to reach the seas. This is again the broad principle of perfect equality and justice, and it is especially set forth and established in our new constitution. Another feature to which I will allude is that the new constitution provides that cabinet ministers and heads of departments may have the privilege of seats upon the floor of the Senate and House of Representatives and may have the right to participate in the debates and discussions upon the various subjects of administration. I should have preferred that this provision should have gone further, and required the President to select his constitutional advisers from the Senate and House of Representatives. That would have conformed entirely to the practice in the British Parliament, which, in my judgment, is one of the wisest provisions in the British constitution. It is the only feature that saves that government. It is that which gives it stability in its facility to change its administration. Ours, as it is, is a great approximation to the right principle. Under the old constitution, a secretary of the treasury for instance, had no opportunity, save by his annual reports, of presenting any scheme or plan of finance or other matter. He had no opportunity of explaining, expounding, enforcing, or defending his views of policy; his only resort was through the medium of an organ. In the British parliament, the premier brings in his budget and stands before the nation responsible for its every item. If it is indefensible, he falls before the attacks upon it, as he ought to. This will now be the case to a limited extent under our system. In the new constitution, provision has been made by which our heads of departments can speak for themselves and the administration, in behalf of its entire policy, without resorting to the indirect and highly objectionable medium of a newspaper. It is to be greatly hoped that under our system we shall never have what is known as a government organ. Another change in the constitution relates to the length of the tenure of the presidential office. In the new constitution it is six years instead of four, and the President rendered ineligible for a re-election. This is certainly a decidedly conservative change. It will remove from the incumbent all temptation to use his office or exert the powers confided to him for any objects of personal ambition. The only incentive to that higher ambition which should move and actuate one holding such high trusts in his hands, will be the good of the people, the advancement, prosperity, happiness, safety, honor, and true glory of the confederacy. But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the rock upon which the old Union would split. He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the storm came and the wind blew. Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in n ature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal. In the conflict thus far, success has been on our side, complete throughout the length and breadth of the Confederate States. It is upon this, as I have stated, our social fabric is firmly planted; and I cannot permit myself to doubt the ultimate success of a full recognition of this principle throughout the civilized and enlightened world. As I have stated, the truth of this principle may be slow in development, as all truths are and ever have been, in the various branches of science. It was so with the principles announced by Galileo it was so with Adam Smith and his principles of political economy. It was so with Harvey, and his theory of the circulation of the blood. It is stated that not a single one of the medical profession, living at the time of the announcement of the truths made by him, admitted them. Now, they are universally acknowledged. May we not, therefore, look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgment of the truths upon which our system rests? It is the first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society. Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of natur e. Our system commits no such violation of natures laws. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite; then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is best, not only for the superior, but for the inferior race, that it should be so. It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances, or to question them. For His own purposes, He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made one star to differ from another star in glory. The great objects of humanity are best attained when there is conformity to His laws and decrees, in the formation of governments as well as in all things else. Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders is become the chief of the corner the real corner-stone in our new edifice. I have been asked, what of the future? It has been apprehended by some that we would have arrayed against us the civilized world. I care not who or how many they may be against us, when we stand upon the eternal principles of truth, if we are true to ourselves and the principles for which we contend, we are obliged to, and must triumph. Thousands of people who begin to understand these truths are not yet completely out of the shell; they do not see them in their length and breadth. We hear much of the civilization and Christianization of the barbarous tribes of Africa. In my judgment, those ends will never be attained, but by first teaching them the lesson taught to Adam, that in the sweat of his brow he should eat his bread, and teaching them to work, and feed, and clothe themselves. But to pass on: Some have propounded the inquiry whether it is practicable for us to go on with the confederacy without further accessions? Have we the means and ability to maintain nationality among the powers of the earth? On this point I would barely say, that as anxiously as we all have been, and are, for the border States, with institutions similar to ours, to join us, still we are abundantly able to maintain our position, even if they should ultimately make up their minds not to cast their destiny with us. That they ultimately will join us be compelled to do it is my confident belief; but we can get on very well without them, even if they should not. We have all the essential elements of a high national career. The idea has been given out at the North, and even in the border States, that we are too small and too weak to maintain a separate nationality. This is a great mistake. In extent of territory we embrace five hundred and sixty-four thousand square miles and upward. This is upward of two hundred thousand square miles more than was included within the limits of the original thirteen States. It is an area of country more than double the territory of France or the Austrian empire. France, in round numbers, has but two hundred and twelve thousand square miles. Austria, in round numbers, has two hundred and forty-eight thousand square miles. Ours is greater than both combined. It is greater than all France, Spain, Portugal, and Great Britain, including England, Ireland, and Scotland, together. In population we have upward of five millions, according to the census of 1860; this includes white and black. The entire population, incl uding white and black, of the original thirteen States, was less than four millions in 1790, and still less in 76, when the independence of our fathers was achieved. If they, with a less population, dared maintain their independence against the greatest power on earth, shall we have any apprehension of maintaining ours now? In point of material wealth and resources, we are greatly in advance of them. The taxable property of the Confederate States cannot be less than twenty-two hundred millions of dollars! This, I think I venture but little in saying, may be considered as five times more than the colonies possessed at the time they achieved their independence. Georgia, alone, possessed last year, according to the report of our comptroller-general, six hundred and seventy-two millions of taxable property. The debts of the seven confederate States sum up in the aggregate less than eighteen millions, while the existing debts of the other of the late United States sum up in the aggregate the enormous amount of one hundred and seventy-four millions of dollars. This is without taking into account the heavy city debts, corporation debts, and railroad debts, which press, and will continue to press, as a heavy incubus upon the resources of those States. These debts, added to others, make a sum total not much unde r five hundred millions of dollars. With such an area of territory as we have-with such an amount of population-with a climate and soil unsurpassed by any on the face of the earth-with such resources already at our command-with productions which control the commerce of the world-who can entertain any apprehensions as to our ability to succeed, whether others join us or not? It is true, I believe I state but the common sentiment, when I declare my earnest desire that the border States should join us. The differences of opinion that existed among us anterior to secession, related more to the policy in securing that result by co-operation than from any difference upon the ultimate security we all looked to in common. These differences of opinion were more in reference to policy than principle, and as Mr. Jefferson said in his inaugural, in 1801, after the heated contest preceding his election, that there might be differences of opinion without differences on principle, and that all, to some extent, had been Federalists and all Republicans; so it may now be said of us, that whatever differences of opinion as to the best policy in having a co-operation with our border sister slave States, if the worst came to the worst, that as we were all co-operationists, we are now all for independence, whether they come or not. In this connection I take this occasion to state, that I was not without grave and serious apprehensions, that if the worst came to the worst, and cutting loose from the old government should be the only remedy for our safety and security, it would be attended with much more serious ills than it has been as yet. Thus far we have seen none of those incidents which usually attend revolutions. No such material as such convulsions usually throw up has been seen. Wisdom, prudence, and patriotism, have marked every step of our progress thus far. This augurs well for the future, and it is a matter of sincere gratification to me, that I am enabled to make the declaration. Of the men I met in the Congress at Montgomery, I may be pardoned for saying this, an abler, wiser, a more conservative, deliberate, determined, resolute, and patriotic body of men, I never met in my life. Their works speak for them; the provisional government speaks for them; the constitution of the permanent government wi ll be a lasting monument of their worth, merit, and statesmanship. But to return to the question of the future. What is to be the result of this revolution? Will every thing, commenced so well, continue as it has begun? In reply to this anxious inquiry, I can only say it all depends upon ourselves. A young man starting out in life on his majority, with health, talent, and ability, under a favoring Providence, may be said to be the architect of his own fortunes. His destinies are in his own hands. He may make for himself a name, of honor or dishonor, according to his own acts. If he plants himself upon truth, integrity, honor and uprightness, with industry, patience and energy, he cannot fail of success. So it is with us. We are a young republic, just entering upon the arena of nations; we will be the architects of our own fortunes. Our destiny, under Providence, is in our own hands. With wisdom, prudence, and statesmanship on the part of our public men, and intelligence, virtue and patriotism on the part of the people, success, to the full measures of our most sanguine hopes, may be looked for. But if unwise counsels prevail if we become divided if schisms arise if dissentions spring up if factions are engendered if party spirit, nourished by unholy personal ambition shall rear its hydra head, I have no good to prophesy for you. Without intelligence, virtue, integrity, and patriotism on the part of the people, no republic or representative government can be durable or stable. We have intelligence, and virtue, and patriotism. All that is required is to cultivate and perpetuate these. Intelligence will not do without virtue. France was a nation of philosophers. These philosophers become Jacobins. They lacked that virtue, that devotion to moral principle, and that patriotism which is essential to good government Organized upon principles of perfect justice and right-seeking amity and friendship with all other powers-I see no obstacle in the way of our upward and onward progress. Our growth, by accessions from other States, will depend greatly upon whether we present to the world, as I trust we shall, a better government than that to which neighboring States belong. If we do this, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas cannot hesitate long; neither can Virginia, Kentucky, and Missouri. They will necessarily gravitate to us by an imperious law. We made ample provision in our constitution for the admission of other States; it is more guarded, and wisely so, I think, than the old constitution on the same subject, but not too guarded to receive them as fast as it may be proper. Looking to the distant future, and, perhaps, not very far distant either, it is not beyond the range of possibility, and even probability, that all the great States of the north-west will gravitate this way, as well as Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, etc. Should they do so, our doors are wide enough to receive them, but not until they are ready to assimilate with us in principle. The process of disintegration in the old Union may be expected to go on with almost absolute certainty if we pursue the right course. We are now the nucleus of a growing power which, if we are true to ourselves, our destiny, and high mission, will become the controlling power on this continent. To what extent accessions will go on in the process of time, or where it will end, the future will determine. So far as it concerns States of the old Union, this process will be upon no such principles of reconstruction as now spoken of, but upon reorganization and new assimilation. Such are some of the glimpses of the future as I catch them. But at first we must necessarily meet with the inconveniences and difficulties and embarrassments incident to all changes of government. These will be felt in our postal affairs and changes in the channel of trade. These inconveniences, it is to be hoped, will be but temporary, and must be borne with patience and forbearance. As to whether we shall have war with our late confederates, or whether all matters of differences between us shall be amicably settled, I can only say that the prospect for a peaceful adjustment is better, so far as I am informed, than it has been. The prospect of war is, at least, not so threatening as it has been. The idea of coercion, shadowed forth in President Lincolns inaugural, seems not to be followed up thus far so vigorously as was expected. Fort Sumter, it is believed, will soon be evacuated. What course will be pursued toward Fort Pickens, and the other forts on the gulf, is not so well understood. It is to be greatly desired that all of them should be surrendered. Our object is peace, not only with the North, but with the world. All matters relating to the public property, public liabilities of the Union when we were members of it, we are ready and willing to adjust and settle upon the principles of right, equity, and good faith. War can be of no more benefit to the Nort h than to us. Whether the intention of evacuating Fort Sumter is to be received as an evidence of a desire for a peaceful solution of our difficulties with the United States, or the result of necessity, I will not undertake to say. I would feign hope the former. Rumors are afloat, however, that it is the result of necessity. All I can say to you, therefore, on that point is, keep your armor bright and your powder dry. The surest way to secure peace, is to show your ability to maintain your rights. The principles and position of the present administration of the United States the republican party present some puzzling questions. While it is a fixed principle with them never to allow the increase of a foot of slave territory, they seem to be equally determined not to part with an inch of the accursed soil. Notwithstanding their clamor against the institution, they seemed to be equally opposed to getting more, or letting go what they have got. They were ready to fight on the accession of Texas, and are equally ready to fight now on her secession. Why is this? How can this strange paradox be accounted for? There seems to be but one rational solution and that is, notwithstanding their professions of humanity, they are disinclined to give up the benefits they derive from slave labor. Their philanthropy yields to their interest. The idea of enforcing the laws, has but one object, and that is a collection of the taxes, raised by slave labor to swell the fund necessary to meet their heavy appropriations. The spoils is what they are after though they come from the labor of the slave That as the admission of States by Congress under the constitution was an act of legislation, and in the nature of a contract or compact between the States admitted and the others admitting, why should not this contract or compact be regarded as of like character with all other civil contracts liable to be rescinded by mutual agreement of both parties? The seceding States have rescinded it on their part, they have resumed their sovereignty. Why cannot the whole question be settled, if the north desire peace, simply by the Congress, in both branches, with the concurrence of the President, giving their consent to the separation, and a recognition of our independence? Text Source: Cleveland, H. (1886). Alexander H. Stephens, in Public and Private: With Letters and Speeches, Before, During, and Since the War. Philadelphia, PA.

Question Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 13

Question - Essay Example The event in which U.S. destroyer Maddox (conducting electronic espionage nearby) was fired on by North Vietnamese torpedo boats was just a good opportunity and reason on which United State could boldly declare war in the name of retaliation. Reports indicates that during the spring of 1964, military planners had developed a detailed design for major attacks on the North, but at that time President Lyndon B. Johnson and his advisers feared that the public would not support an expansion of the war (Dare 54-8). This explains two critical aspects of the war. First is that United States had prior plans to attack North Vietnam. The fear of President Nixon over possible public opposition indicates that significant taxpayers’ money had been spent on the war without any economic gain. These are clear evidence that United States had prior arrangement to strike North Vietnam under the shadow of supporting South Vietnam. Their actual challenge was whether the public would approve the military action and the undefined reaction of the international