Not al I the scandals about the income tax concern the Collectors of Internal\u00a0Revenue and their employees. Among the tax payers themselves are plenty of\u00a0crooks. Tax ch i se If ng is big bUS iness. I t costs the government a b i ilion and\u00a0a half dol lars every year. The Investigations, long overdue, are at last making\u00a0ita II too c I ear that ce rta I n taxpayers who know the ropes, or at leas t who know\u00a0the right people, have been managing to beat the tax laws year after year.\u00a0Now the tax dodger’s work Is comi ng out I nto the open for a II of us to see.<\/p>\n
The Bureau of Internal Revenue is now wise to most of the tricks, and U. S.\u00a0News and World Report issues a timely warning that anyone who thinks he can get\u00a0away with it Is in for an unhappy surprise. Inflating deductible business costs,\u00a0side payments that fail to show up in business records, under-counter -dealings,\u00a0cash transactions without the passing of any paper, kick-backs from salaried\u00a0employees — these and many other sharp practices are well known to the revenue\u00a0offl cers.<\/p>\n
But even if you can get away with it, think twice before you try it. Suppose\u00a0every citizen in America were that kind of cheater. What sort of nation\u00a0would we then have?<\/p>\n
I am interested to learn that the Watervi lie Rotary Club wi II produce, with\u00a0local talent, next Wednesday evening in the American legion Bui Idlng, that exciting\u00a0popular play “The Night of January 16th”. My own interest in that play\u00a0stems from the fact that it marked my one and only personal appearance on the\u00a0stage of the lakewood Theater. When ”The Ni ght of January 16th” was produced\u00a0there, a few years ago, I was chosen to serve as foreman of the Jury on the\u00a0opening night. Yes, the Jury for that play is chosen from the audience. Who wi II \u00a0e the twelve members of the jury when Rotary puts on the play next Wednesday\u00a0eveni ng?<\/p>\n
One of the richest mines of historical information about the Kennebec Valley\u00a0has been accumulated through the years in the home of Arthur Ellis of Fairfield.\u00a0Before her death a few years ago Mrs. Ellis was one of the region’s best\u00a0known historians and genealogists. She collected, arranged, and preserved many\u00a0precious documents of the old days.\u00a0It was my privi lege a few weeks ago to spend an afternoon with Mr. EI lis\u00a0— a very rewa~dingexp~r}Eince. Thou9h_ nea,:_’ y_ 85 years 0 I d, Mr. Ell is reta i ns\u00a0an alert mind and an extraordinary memory for facts, names and relationships\u00a0of long ago. Living in the house where he was born in 1863, Mr. Ellis is sur~\u00a0rounded by hundreds of mementos of the old days — the cruel looking gadget with\u00a0which his great-grandfather used to pul I teeth, scrap books galore, legal documents\u00a0and letters that go back more than a hundred years.<\/p>\n
Mr. Ellis’ mother was a Howard, and her grand:f;ather — Mr. Ellis’ great—::-i\u00a0grandfather — was one of the most prominent residents of Sidney in the early\u00a0days, Dr. Ambrose Howard. Genealogists have long known that the family names of\u00a0Howard and Hayward are the same. In the year 1635 two brothers, John and James\u00a0Hayward came from Somersetshlre, England to what is now Danbury, Mass. Soon John\u00a0went to I ive in Bridgewater in the family of Captain Mi les Standish. James went\u00a0to Bermuda and was never heard from again.<\/p>\n
John Hayward’s son Jonathan was a major of mi litla. His son Abia’ graduated\u00a0from Harvard in 1729 and became a physician. He changed the fam; Iy name to\u00a0Howard. His son Daniel married a Hayward just before the Revolution In 1772. It\u00a0was his son Ambrose Howard, great-great-grandson of the original immigrant, who\u00a0came to Sidney late in the 18th century as the town’s first physician. Not only\u00a0was Ambrose Howard a doctor; he was also storekeeper, postmaster and justice of\u00a0the peace. He died In 1835 and I want to tell you tonight about his wi I I and\u00a0the Inventory of his estate.<\/p>\n
Ambrose Howard’s wi I I was signed in Sidney on March 4, 1834, a little more\u00a0than a year before his death. The witnesses were John Sawtelle, Edwin Arnold,\u00a0and Columbus Howard. In usual legal language the wi I I begins: “I, Ambrose Howard\u00a0of Sidney in the County of Kennebec and the State of Maine, physician, do\u00a0make and pub I ish th Is, my last wi I I and testament.”<\/p>\n
Much has been made of an item in Shakespeare’s wi tI, wherein he bequeathed\u00a0to his wife his second best bed. Ambrose HOWard did better than that. The\u00a0first item of his wi II reads: “I give to my wife two of the best feather beds,\u00a0bedsteads, cords, under beds, bolsters and pillows. I give her two of the best\u00a0coverlets and two of the bedsteads, al I the woolen blankets, and al I sheets and\u00a0pi I low cases, and al I the towels and table cloths. I give her four of the best\u00a0bed comforters. I give her six of the best dining chairs, one large and two\u00a0small rocking chairs. I give her a bureau, two blue chests, all the fancy baskets\u00a0and bandboxes, and my traveling trunk. I give her one 3! foot table, one\u00a0table with a drawer and lightstand. I give her one dozen best teaspoons, half a\u00a0dozen best tablespoons, and a dozen best knives and forks. I give her one\u00a0water pa I I and one mi I k pa I I, two sma I I wash tubs and one pounding barre I, one\u00a0meat tub and one Iron-bound butter firkin. I give her one pair wrought-Iron and\u00a0irons, one crane, and six pot-hooks, one fire pan and tongs. I give he r one\u00a0cow, one large looking-glass, two of;'”the best wooden trays, al I the best earthen\u00a0plates, one sma I I meat dish, one pudding dish, and one large pewter platter, all\u00a0the sma I I glass bottles, one three-pint green glass bottle. I give her one soap\u00a0barre I, one wooden mortar, and two of the best lime cas.ks, the two best cand lesticks,\u00a0the best pair of snuffers, and the candle box. I give her one bushel basket,\u00a0one cross-hand led peat basket, and one pa I r of sma I I s tee I yards. ”<\/p>\n
More than a hundred years after that wi I I was written, it certain Iy strikes\u00a0us as strange to see bequeathed to a wife the kind of property we today take for\u00a0granted as belonging to her anyway — bed clothes, table linen, dishes, knives\u00a0and forks. But those old timers like Ambrose Howard knew both the law and the\u00a0custom. If they waAted a surviving wife to have any of the household articles,\u00a0the surest way was to particulari ze them, Item by Item, in the wi II.<\/p>\n
When Ambrose Howard made th I s wi \/I, his 01 dest son ,Erasmus Darwin Howard,\u00a0was seeking his fortune in far-away New Orleans, and on sane future pragr:am I\u00a0want to tell you about a letter which Erasmus Darwin wrote his father in the same\u00a0year, 1834. But. tonight we are talking about the father’s will. He remembered\u00a0the absent son: “I give to my oldest son, Erasmus Darwin Howard, a note Which\u00a0he gave me for $268.40, dated May 1, 1832, payable on demand with Interest annually.\u00a0give him an order he drew on me In favor of Daniel Ormoby, dated\u00a0Aprl I 28, 1828. give him an account I have against him, the balance due on\u00a0which Is $308.62. I give him Paley’s Moral and Political Philosophy, Darwin’s\u00a0Loononla In two volumes, Foster on Popular Ignorance, and six volumes of the\u00a0New York Mad I ca I Rapos I tory. ”<\/p>\n
Next comes the daughter, Marla Dunbar Brown. In June, 1828, he had loaned-)\u00a0Marla a hundred dollars. He now declared her released from the debt. He gave\u00a0her an additional hundred dollars, to be paid $50 a year, In each of the first\u00a0two years following his death. And for good measure he also gave Marla one CCN.\u00a0Like most of the careful businessmen of a century ago, Dr. Howard wanted\u00a0to make sure that his debts were cleared. He didn’t take any chance on his executor\u00a0sett II ng the debts I n hi s own way from the res i due of the estate, but\u00a0rather he laid down specific directions: “It Is my will that the half of the\u00a0ml lis that I bought of Wi II iam Lovejoy and wife, and the mill house and the store\u00a0stand I ng near It, be sol d to pay a debt lowe to Samue I Dunbar, Esq., and the\u00a0surplus, if any, be appropriated to pay my other debts. It Is my wi \/I that a\u00a0debt of about $300, due me from William and Hiram Lovejoy, be collected and let\u00a0out on undoubted security on interest payable annually, punctually collected\u00a0and paid to my wife so long as she remains my widow.”<\/p>\n
It was the second son, Barnabas Dunbar Howard, who was made executor of\u00a0his father’s estate. He was apparently the doctor’s favorite, for to him was\u00a0left “a II the rest, resl due and rema inder of my property whether real or personaI, not disposed of the foregoing bequests, after paying my Just debts and\u00a0funera I cha rges.” Since no rea I estate, except the ml II, ml II house and store\u00a0have been mentioned, we may assume that the doctor’s dwel ling went not to his\u00a0wIfe, but to this son Barnabas.<\/p>\n
The doctor also wanted to make sure that Barnabas had proper facilities\u00a0for cultivating the mind. One item in the will provides: “It is my wi” that my\u00a0medical library be sold, and that my executor appropriate the proceeds to pur~.1\u00a0chase such books and periodical publications as are calculated to Improve his\u00a0own min d and the min ds of his fam I I Y \u2022 ”<\/p>\n
Accompanying the will, preserved among Arthur Ellis’ papers, is a complete\u00a0inventory. The big foolscap sheet is headed, “Inventory of the estate of Ambrose\u00a0Howard, late of Sidney, tn the County of Kennebec”. The whole estate was\u00a0appraised at a little more than $5,000, which was a comfortable amount in those\u00a0early days of the Kennebec Valley. The items run to four long pages, and lists\u00a0objects valued as little as twenty cents. Naturally the larger items of real\u00a0estate come first. They were one undivided half of home and farm bui Idings,\u00a0valued at $1,000; one undivided half of saw and grist mill with all the machinery,\u00a0tools and land attached, valued at $950. Another dwelling house with outbui\u00a0Idings and land was set down at $200; the store with land at $200; four acres\u00a0of wi Id land at $20. His principal pew in the Baptist Meetinghouse was valued\u00a0at $37.50, another pew at $8, and one-fifth interest in eight undivided pews at\u00a0$10.<\/p>\n
Next comes the I I vestock: a horse at $30, a cow at $22, a two year old\u00a0hei fer at $16, four ca Ives at $6 rap iece, and eight sheep at $2 ! ap iece.\u00a0The farm machinery Included four ploughs, two harrows, one cart and rigging,\u00a0a wood sled, a wagon sled, six ox chains, one ox yoke, one cart tongue, axes,\u00a0wedges, forks, hoes, rakes, scythes, a wheelbarrow, a horse trace, and a grindstone.\u00a0Although five hay forks were put down at 25 cents apiece, one manure\u00a0fork was valued at a dollar. Except for the cart, which was entered at $18, the\u00a0entire outfit of farm tools was valued at less than $40.\u00a0There was, however, a chaise and harness, said to be worth $45, a buffalo\u00a0robe at $2.50, and a saddle and bridle at $1.00. A winnowing machine was entered\u00a0at $6.00.\u00a0Think of the price of lumber today, then note this entry: “215 feet clear\u00a0pine boards, $4.30”. Two white oak plank — we are not told the length — were\u00a0I I sted at $1 .00. Among the sma II i terns I s a cod line at 20 cents. Does this\u00a0mean a fish line, or is It somethl ng else? I f the former, what was a doctor up\u00a0In Inland Sidney doing with a cod line?<\/p>\n
Only $42 was allowed for four stoves and thei r funnels. In spite of the\u00a0great length of this inventory, it amazingly contains no furniture except a\u00a0writing desk, val ued at $1.75, but it does carefully list bed spreads, quilts,\u00a0coverlets, blankets, sheets and pillow cases. Two spinning wheels are valued at\u00a0$1.25, one winder at 40 cents, two tenters at 50 cents, and two cheesehooks at\u00a042 cents.\u00a0The doctor’s entire wearing apparel is apprai~sed at $36.76, and his library\u00a0at $75. Especially interesting is the list of his professional Items: “phials\u00a0and contents $3.60, medicine $8, saddlebags and contents $6, Instruments for extracting\u00a0teeth $2.50, case of Instruments $2, a mortar and pestle $1.50.”<\/p>\n
The appraJsers took due account of the doctor’s debtors, some of whom owed\u00a0him substantial amounts. The Interest was faithfully computed and Included. We\u00a0have already seen that his son Erasmus Darwin Howard owed him nearly $600; son\u00a0Bamabas owed $25.60. The Haywards — you will recall that Hayward and Howard\u00a0were or I gina I I Y the same name ,. so these Haywards we re p robab lyre I at I ves — the\u00a0Haywards owed Dr. Ambrose right and left. Ezra owed him $52.59; Edmund $12.85;\u00a0Samuel $26.13. The Hutchlnsons, the Arnolds, the Perrys, the Smi leys, the Reyno\u00a0Ids, and the Lovejoys were a I lin the doctor’s debt, though some of the amounts\u00a0were very sma II. Seth Pe rry, for instance, is recorded as ow ing Dr. Howard $1.02.<\/p>\n
Several Items in the long inventory I am not able to identify. I have no\u00a0doubt some of my I i stene rs can te II me what exact I y they we re. Anyhow here they\u00a0are: a rockeriron, an fron squim, a junk bottle, a clock reel and a close stool.<\/p>\n
We have Just time enough left for a few more words about words.\u00a0I am frequent Iy asked the origin of the word “fan” as app I ied to a follower\u00a0or supporter. We cannot be quite sure how it originated. Some people contend\u00a0that it referred to the palm-leaf fans commonly used In those hot open stands of\u00a0the baseball parks in the 1880’s. Others hold that fan is a contraction of fancy.\u00a0At any rate a . hundred years ago an ardent follower of any sport was called\u00a0a fancy. The most probably explanation is that it is a contraction of the adjective\u00a0fanatic.<\/p>\n
The origin of the word “fanatic” itself is more interesting. The Roman General\u00a0Sulla, whi Ie on his famous campaign against Mithradates in Asia Minor, had\u00a0a dream that the goddess Be Ilona urged him to return to Rome to foresta II p lotting\u00a0enemies. His success, on following her advice, caused him to erect a temple\u00a0or fane in her honor. He brought priests from Asia Minor to establish sacred\u00a0rites. and conducted worship for Bellona. Those rites were scenes of religious\u00a0frenzy, tearing of clothes, self-mutilation, and scattering of blood on the\u00a0spectators. The Romans called such frenzy “fanaticiesll , inspired by the fane.<\/p>\n
Finally, tonight, you may be interested to know that glamour and grammar are\u00a0word relatives. In days when most people could not read or write, grammar —\u00a0Latin grammar, of course, for that was the only kind studied all through the\u00a0Middle Ages — was supposed to be able to work magic. In England a person who\u00a0could work magic with Latin mumbo-jumbo was called a grammary. In Scotland he\u00a0was a g lamer. About 1800 5 i r Wa Iter Scott brought the Scott i sh vers i on, wh i ch\u00a0he spe lied “g lamour”, into genera I use as a synonym for cham. But bear in mind\u00a0that the word charm Itself originally meant working magic. As time went on the\u00a0English word “grammar” came to be associated with linguistics, the study of\u00a0words; whi Ie glamour came to have its present meaning. So perhaps you may some\u00a0day yet come to see some glamour in grammar.<\/p>\n
As we close tonight, let’s have two or three more of those interesting word\u00a0origins we occasionally talk about.<\/p>\n
What is the origin of “dumbbell”, the exercising device, and what is its\u00a0re lation to the s lang term “dumbbe II”, a s low-witted person? I n the e I ghteenth\u00a0century it became fashionable for persons In the upper classes of English\u00a0society to strive to atta In the muscu lar deve lopment of the be II-ringers, who\u00a0were famous for their strong ams. So at first a device was made to simulate\u00a0the bell-ringers gallery without the bells. Joseph Addison, the essayist and\u00a0founder of that early and most famous periodical, the Spectator, had one of\u00a0these devices in his bedroom. It consisted of a rope, attached to weights, runn\u00a0i ng over a pu Iley from the ce i I I ng. A wooden bar, knobbed at both ends to keep\u00a0the hands from s II pp lng off, was knotted to the other end of the rope and hung\u00a0just within reach of the person about to take the exercise. He could thus duplicate\u00a0the bell-ringer’s motions and regulate the weight in order to demand various\u00a0degrees of strength. Since there was no bell, it was called a “dumb bell”.\u00a0later it was discovered that the rope and pulley was excess baggage; that the\u00a0same resu It cou I d be obta i ned by simp I y I I ftl ng the bar.<\/p>\n
This kind of dumbbel I has nothing to do with the slang phrase, however. That\u00a0slang was originally directed only at the female sex, because it is a corruption\u00a0of “dumb belle” — a young woman, beautiful but dumb — and In time it lost its\u00a0sex distinction and became applied equally to slow-witted men.\u00a0Is there any connection between infant and infantry? Yes, indeed there Is.\u00a0In medieval Italy the personal attendant of a knight was called an “infante”,\u00a0probably because he was likely to be little more than a boy. A collection of\u00a0these retainers was called Infanteria — infantry. By the way, the origin of\u00a0“infant” is from the Latin “in fans”.– not speaking.<\/p>\n
Year: 1952<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Read the script for “Little Talks” program #132, broadcast on January 20, 1952<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":405,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[787,35296],"tags":[],"builder_content":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7280"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/405"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7280"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7280\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7280"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7280"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7280"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}