Supplying the Troops at Valley Forge

In the movie version of Steinbeck’s East of Eden, Cal, played by the incomparable James Dean, wants to know if growing beans will make money when America is in World War I.

Question: Is war good for business?
Answer from a family business acquaintance: The best there is!

Generally, business prospers in war. Included are contractors, suppliers, manufacturers. It isn’t just for obtaining food, but all kinds of commodities that people want and are in short supply.

The winter of 1777 that our troops spent at Valley Forge certainly made money for some people, but not the soldiers. They were literally starving. But many people in the supply chain made lots of money, particularly contractors. These worked in a state of confusion and avarice. It was very difficult to find competent administrators for the quartermaster corps. Both the army and Congress despaired of ever finding an honest contractor.

In the Revolutionary War, nobody wanted to fight in the winter. Harsh weather, impassible roads, and a lack of supplies had Washington convinced that he didn’t want to “winter” his troops at Valley Forge, 25 mile northwest of Philadelphia. He just wanted to leave the whole area. But in 1777 the Pennsylvania Assembly wanted Washington’s troops to remain as a defensive maneuver. So the soldiers marched into a frozen wilderness. What they found was no shelter, no winter clothing, shortage of food and water, no sanitation, and constant threat of disease. A more unsuitable location could not have been found.

Washington’s first priority was bringing some rough shelter into the camp, and a basic food supply. Washington now had to rely on contractors, who knew every trick in the book.

As for delivery of food, critical from the beginning, much of it was of poor or downright dangerous quality. Some food was blatantly traded to the British, who paid in hard currency rather than accepting paper money. Attempts to install price controls only drove prices to below market value. Some farmers would not trade with the army at all; they found better markets at other locations to be far more lucrative.

With administration in confusion, constant inefficiency, and contractor dishonesty, it was no wonder that soldiers were starving. The whole situation was a disaster. It was a miracle that troops tolerated the conditions throughout this winter. It wasn’t even that severe, just normal for the time of year.

Contractor problems have always persisted. In all fairness, it’s got to be remembered that a lot of the quartermastering had to be done very quickly with little supervision. The supervisor has to ideally be a combination manager, accountant, and often engineer; above all, a wheeler dealer. Who is trained for all that?

In the current Iraq war, we have heard many times about Cheney-Halliburton contract problems. Private business suddenly working in a military setting creates special problems.

How many four-star generals come from a background of the quartermaster corps?

Fifty years ago, Blake Edwards cast Cary Grant and Tony Curtis in a light, very amusing movie, Operation Petticoat, set in the Philippines in 1941. Everything is confused; everyone is trying to deal with supplies the best way they can, which is generally no way at all. But junior officer Curtis has a flair for quartermastering. He is clever and at times quite dishonest. He delivers one line which suits his role perfectly: “In confusion lies profit”.

Washington needed the skills of a Tony Curtis character desperately at Valley Forge. Curtis would have outsmarted every contractor hands down. Probably he would have stolen enough money, and not the paper kind either, to obtain enough food and labor to make the soldiers’ lives more tolerable. For him, enemies were those who wouldn’t trade what he needed. – Renata Breisacher Mulry


Friends of 1776 Holiday Wish List

Shays' Rebellion

I apologize for the interval between this post and the previous one, Pulaski, due to a personal emergency. So now I have to make up for this gap with more posts of interest to you. But I won’t tell you the subjects; they should be a surprise.

Just a year before our Constitution (1787), the new United States had a rebellion. The insurgents were farmers in Western Massachusetts. Where else? Massachusetts was always in a state of unrest and rebellion during the period of our revolution. The leader of this rebellion was Daniel Shays, a farmer of modest means, and it took everyone by surprise and alarm. The fact that it occurred at all was believed to be a major reason that our Constitution was put in place.

Shays' Rebellion was about money and debt.

The war had created a lot of profit for some in Massachusetts, particularly in Boston. There were also a lot of debts. Some of the successful investors bought a lot of the mortgage notes of the hard-working farmers. The investors had also lent a lot of money to the state. When the occasion arose, they expected to be paid, and not with worthless paper currency. They also had powerful interests in the Legislature.

However, the farmers weren’t doing so well. Harsh taxes, a depressed business climate because the war was over. That awful word, foreclosure, was facing a lot of them. They had vigorously petitioned the Legislature for relief, and got nowhere. It was time for strong action.

Shays and his followers (500 – 1000, the number is not quoted consistently, with wildly inflated rumors), many putting on their old Continental uniforms, went on the march. Destination, Hampshire County Court. This plan was quite practical. Since foreclosure was a legal process, if a courthouse was essentially shut down, that would delay any proceedings.

The farmers got little if no support. Instead, reaction was swift, punitive, and entirely hostile. Washington declared that the campaign of the farmers was disgusting. Even Sam Adams, that perennial supporter of revolt, did a complete about face and called the rebels traitors.

Hancock sat out all the trouble. Militia hounded the farmers, imprisoned them, labeled them traitors. Shays had fled Massachusetts for safety, but was declared a traitor in absentia anyway and sentenced to death.

The rebels’ cause, which seemed so hopeless, did take a brighter turn. The next Massachusetts legislature was far more sympathetic to the farmers. Some remedies at least were started. Hancock was governor again and pardoned Shays.

But the impact of their rebellion persisted. The rich were frightened; the new country was very fragile. It’s good we had the bold ideas and practical applications of an Alexander Hamilton. Financial problems continued to persist.

I think farmers have always been treated harshly, all over the world. It’s a very hard occupation, 24 / 7, with disaster just around the corner: weather, precipitation, pests, and some very hard government policies, such as estate taxes, land taxes, and regulations. Today, we have a lot of large farming conglomerates, which has given the industry much more bargaining power and political influence. These huge operations have been blasted for all kinds of reasons, but they keep our food supply steady and available. I think we have the best of both worlds today. We have the huge inventory at the local supermarket, and a growing local supply, often organic.

Growing food yourself is not easy. Your crop of tomatoes, lemons, and vegetables is not exactly cheap. There are problems from nibbling rabbits to every pest known to man. The only remedy is a green thumb. I envy people who have one.

So, zucchini ladies, your home-grown bounty is well-received by me. I like to eat. We all know that a home-grown tomato beats a conglomerate version hands down.

I don’t think the rich Bostonians appreciated their Shays farmers at all. – Renata Breisacher Mulry

Casimir Pulaski, Polish Cavalry Officer in Our Revolutionary War

On November 6, President Obama signed an interesting bill, HJ Res. 26. It proclaimed Casimir Pulaski, a high-ranking Polish nobleman (1745 – 1779), an honorary citizen of the United States. He is only the 7th honoree holding this title. The others are William Penn and his wife Hannah, Lafayette, Winston Churchill, Swede Raoul Wallenberg, who rescued Jews during the Holocaust, and Mother Theresa.

In Poland, Pulaski fought in many campaigns, plots, and insurrections to try and liberate his country from domination, predominantly the Russians.

He was a fugitive from Europe, arriving here to commence a very distinguished reputation as a noted cavalry officer. Saving George Washington’s life at the Battle of Brandywine is attributed to him.

He followed our war into the South, where he fought in tough battles, including Charleston and Savannah, where he was mortally wounded in 1779.

I’m not sure that Pulaski is generally that well-known all across the country, so I was amazed how many places and events are named after him. The list is quite extensive, including counties, some cities, schools, highways, and festivals.

Pulaski is an excellent example of the committed role foreigners played in our Revolution. Lafayette and the French of course come to mind immediately.

Locally, I often notice names assigned to highways, bridges, and other public venues. Generally, I don’t recognize the names at all. They deserve more publicity. The have all contributed in some major way to be commemorated. It’s very fitting that Pulaski has been.

The President and this bill are a good fit. He calls Chicago home. The city has a very large number of Polish Americans; they exert considerable influence politically and culturally. They regard Pulaski as one of their own. –Renata Breisacher Mulry

Friends of 1776 Holiday Wish List

With Christmas and all the other celebrations just a few weeks away, a lot of people think about gifts, friends, family, travel … I hope a lot of pleasant things.

Friends of 1776 isn’t going to be left out.

So I’ve prepared a short list, what else, for your consideration and approval. Please add your personal wishes to our Web site. We are interested.

Let’s start with a few gift suggestions, books and movies / DVDs. (All citations appear at end of post.)

Obviously, a lot of books are available of interest to Friends of 1776. Many have been mentioned here before. Some are quite long, well-researched, quite scholarly. They may not be so easy to read. They often have excellent notes and bibliographies.

Here are the selections: Berkin’s A Brilliant Solution, on the formation of the American Constitution, and Kitman, The Making of the Prefident 1789, a very humorous, irreverent retelling of Washington’s first Presidential campaign. You can obtain these books with confidence that they will make good gifts.

Selecting movies / DVDs was more difficult. There is not all that much out there. I had to stretch our interest quotient quite a bit. Keeping in mind that perennial favorite, HBO’s John Adams, in conjunction with the original book, McCullough’s John Adams, three movies are suggested. All have broad appeal, lasting interest, and excellent production.

One is Amazing Grace, the biography of the British abolitionist William Wilberforce and his decades-long struggle to finally end British slave trade. In the United States, it affected how we conducted our slave trade for decades longer.

Another is that stunning remake of The Last of the Mohicans, with Daniel Day Lewis, set at the time of the French and Indian War (1757), which defined the colonies as geographical areas. This war was the foundation of our independence only twenty years later.

That bright, patriotic musical 1776 brings out effectively the many differing attitudes about independence at the 2nd Continental Congress. There was no uniformity of opinion. This movie also hints at the danger facing those who considered independence at all. This movie would make a nice gift for all ages and backgrounds.

For holiday travel, a popular pastime, consider the following: a trip to scenic Virginia, touring the homes and lands of important men in our Revolution, in addition to those of the Founding Fathers. It’s significant that of the first nine presidential terms, eight were filled by Virginians!

Now for some wishes of longer duration. Many military campaigns of our Revolution had unique locations, strategies, and outcomes. Not all were victories by any means. I would really wish that Friends of 1776 was the sponsor and organizer of a military history lecture series for the American Revolution. Of course, lecturers from the Pentagon, West Point, the Department of Defense, etc. are very welcome. But we don’t need t be greedy. Here in the proximity we have the huge Marine base Camp Pendleton and there’s plenty of talent there!

When was the last time you were in a bookstore and you really could talk books with the seller? In a book chain, are you kidding? If you have such a store, treasure it, because economic forecasts for these are always dismal.

How about a wish-bookstore, “U.S. History in Print”, well-located, smallish, its owners not dependent on it for their living expenses, or else this store will fail. But millions of well-pensioned retirees are entering the market now, so the time may actually never be better.

I don’t recommend locating and competing with an academic bookstore; students do not have money for buying books, not even for those they have to buy. I’d rather locate it in a smaller city a little off the beaten track. That’s where you’ll find browsing interest, time, and money!

Hopefully, U.S. Constitution Day (September 17, 1787) will be considered as a national holiday (as already suggested in a previous post).

A very personal wish: that Friends of 1776 holds an annual meeting, maybe around George Washington’s birthday, with lots of input, good company, and probably a speaker. All of our Founding Fathers, with very few exceptions, were very active in social activities, and I see no reason why we shouldn’t copy them.

And as a final wish, in this world today, a lot more freedom and democracy, and a lot less poverty and illness.

It’s going to be 2010.

It’s time. – Renata Breisacher Mulry




Citations

A Brilliant Solution: inventing the American Constitution. Carol Berkin. A Harvest Book, Harcourt Inc. 2002. 310 pp.

The Making of the Prefident 1789. Marvin Kitman. Grove Press. 1989. 358 pp.

Amazing Grace. 2007. Michael Apted, Director. Movie.

The Last of the Mohicans. 1992. Michael Mann, Director. Movie.

1776. Released in 1972. Peter H. Hunt, Director. Movie.

Your Most Outstanding Revolutionary War Personality? Mine is John Hancock

Some months ago, I was interested in which Founding Father you considered the greatest. My choice was John Adams. This may have come as a surprise, but his intellect and perseverance to the cause of American independence was unparalleled. Your responses didn’t agree with mine at all.

It’s time for another questionnaire. Just which Revolutionary War personality is your favorite? Let’s omit the Founding Fathers because the results would be badly slanted. Otherwise, your choice could be from any colony or background. Giving a reason for your choice would add a great deal.

My selection is John Hancock, without hesitation.

What, you protest, that incorrigible smuggler, making himself the richest man in Boston in the process?

Let’s not forget that smuggling was a well-established component of the colonial economic system. It was anti-British, anti-tax. Hancock always drove the British nuts.

In fact, one of Hancock’s smuggling adventures can be considered a smoldering cause of the American Revolution. In response to his ownership and operation of the wine smuggler “Liberty”, aptly named, the British sent troops to Boston (1768).

Hancock was all-business, all the time. It helped define him. He was, in my opinion, a completely contemporary man. He would have fitted right in with the CEOs of today. I don’t think of him as a man of memorable speeches or resounding patriotic words. For me, he was always a man of action.

His personality left things to be desired. He had a colossal ego, great ambition. Is this bad? Most powerful men have these qualities. I like his raw courage. He was always on the run from the British. He was the first signer of the Declaration of Independence. That made him a traitor.

Maybe it’s stretching a point, but you could consider him America’s first President. At the 2nd Continental Congress in 1776, he was the President of that Congress. He had a great deal of authority. But he never became President of the United States.

His antipathy towards Washington as commander-in-chief was not just completely unfounded. Washington had no real track record. The little he had was less than distinguished. Besides, Hancock, in typical fashion, considered himself a far better choice. This man was no shrinking violet. I like his confidence.

He went on to become governor of Massachusetts for nine terms. The great unrest of farmers in that state around 1786, the Shay’s Rebellion, was a wake-up call against uncontrolled taxation and rural hardship. When Hancock was reelected with a new, sympathetic legislature in 1788, I think he did a smart thing. He pardoned Shays and instituted a series of fiscal reforms, not a complete solution but a start.

The proposed Constitution was a real dilemma for Hancock, and I think he handled it as you would expect, considering the personal business aspect. Hancock was no Federalist; far from it. He was persuaded though to support the Constitution when he was promised a Bill of Rights (to curtail its power) and a federal office. The latter obviously would improve his financial profile.

Hancock did not live long enough (1793) to influence the pivotal financial years of the early republic after 1789. But I think his contribution would have been based on sound business practices, a solid tax code, no huge deficits and a social program which requires that everyone contributes.

Is that all wishful thinking? – Renata Breisacher Mulry

Friends of 1776 on Facebook

The Lottery Wars -- Book Review

Gambling can generate big news. Several days ago, Michael Hiltzik (Los Angeles Times, Business, October 19, 2009) wrote about “calling America’s bluff on online gambling”. The Internet may undergo a dramatic change. Barney Frank (D – Massachusetts, which is a very successful lottery state) is pushing legislation to repeal a federal ban on Internet gambling.

If you can’t eradicate, regulate and take a big chunk out of the wages of sin while you’re at it.

Currently, the Internet has many legal issues. There are some elements which many do not consider suitable for the Internet at all. Financially, collection of sales taxes from state to state has never been settled. For moralists and many politicians, it is considered out of sufficient public scrutiny and particularly dangerous for the young. The usual treatment? Prohibition.

Lotteries have always been part of our colonial history. In 1754, Virginia authorized a lottery to fight the French and Indian War. In 1769, George Washington managed a lottery in Williamsburg. During our Revolutionary War, they raised money for fighting. After the war, they helped sustain the new and struggling country.

Lotteries have always been at war with causes, people, and politicians. Alexander Hamilton liked them, so I guess that his support generated strong opposition. In the decades since 1776, lotteries have gone boom or bust. They have been praised or banned. Only recently, since most states now have official lotteries, they have achieved a certain respectability. After all, they support good works, such as education.

Therefore, adding a new book, The Lottery Wars, to the Friends of 1776 library, seems timely and well-worth reading. The title describes the contents as “Long Odds, Fast Money, and the Battle Over an American Institution”. In spite of the millions who consider gambling a sin, it has never stopped.

This book makes for some very interesting reading. It is crammed full of facts including names and dates. It does not really write about gambling wars as a straight historical text. Rather, it focuses on winners and losers, who gambles and how, and the public fascination with those who win. What is that really like?

A great deal of The Lottery Wars focuses on the public side of lotteries, the business, including many pages exclusively on Joan Borucki, appointed California State Lottery chief in 2007. Her chief goal was to improve the whole financial position of the lottery, and therefore generate more revenue for the state, including education. The California lottery had been badly lagging. Better distribution of sales became very necessary. Tickets went into Big Retail. The $20 lottery ticket began to be accepted.

There is talk of privatizing the whole operation. States would get their money, up front, lots of it, but that would be it. Then the owner keeps the profits. There are a lot of financial and ethical issues with this proposal.

The book differentiates well between how official government regards the lottery and the players’ view. With government, you don’t consider sin, but marketing, growth, sales; it’s a business seminar. The player wants to know how much are the tickets, where are they, what are the prizes. A winner comes well-prepared with an attorney, tax accountant, financial advisor, who else knows what.

Groups, often employees, buy tickets together. I like this; there’s better organization and planning this way. More people have a chance to win something. The office football pool is a popular private lottery. You put your money in, if you win, you get everyone’s. I hope there are no expenses.

Do I gamble the state lottery? No, but I do participate in sweepstakes, a private lottery, run by Publishers’ Clearing House. This has gone on for years. There are good prices for popular magazines I sometimes order. Then I’m entered into the sweepstakes. Actually, I don’t have to order anything, just send in the entry. The payouts are quite high. Will I win? Are you kidding? But when I do, I’ve already made big plans on how to spend the money. – Renata Breisacher Mulry


The Lottery Wars: Long Odds, Fast Money, and the Battle Over an American Institution. Matthew Sweeney. Bloomsbury, 2009. 295 pp.

Gambling in America

Gambling, gaming, cards, lotteries, racing – they were an integral part of daily life during America’s Revolution. Frequenting gaming parlors and taverns was considered pleasant entertainment for aristocratic gentlemen. They were sophisticated and good company. Whatever criticism was out there, the general population cast away its doubts and gambled also.

Washington gambled all his life. He did what well-bred gentlemen did. After all, that’s what he wanted to be.

In the years since, public perception has varied widely. Lotteries, for instance, have achieved a certain respectability because they can help fund civic projects. In 1777 our Founding Fathers realized the value of lotteries to try to fund a war for which they essentially had no steady revenue. Lotteries weren’t a tax, which boosted their approval.

Today, most states run a lottery. The pay-off is good, it’s all legal, and it’s very easy to play. How much revenue for the state is generated is never completely clear to me. Schools are supposed to be large beneficiaries.

America is addicted to gambling, on anything, anytime, everywhere. Ominous facts about its effects on society have never made any difference. During our prohibition years, gambling (and alcohol) just went underground.

Washington’s troops carried their playing cards into battle. In lean times, they gambled who would get something to eat, even acorns. Washington, in a fine show of hypocrisy, was so concerned about rampant gambling in the ranks that he sent out orders to try and curtail the excessive wagering.

Gambling became an established part of US history. The Mississippi river boats plied their trade successfully. In the “Old West” every community had its representative gambling parlor, with entertainment, liquor, and probably ladies of easier virtue. Men, when not chasing outlaws, were playing and quarreling over poker. Today, casinos have become a glittering destination for serious card playing, slots, good food and accommodations, and of course, entertainment.

Alexander Hamilton, our new country’s money man, had practical ideas on how to sell lottery tickets. Make the tickets cheap. Concentrate on big pay-offs. And for state lotteries, sell ticket by their borders to entice neighbors.

Gambling was always part of our earlier culture. It helped found the colony of Virginia. There was always great dissent, as noted previously.

Americans were so fond of playing cards that when the Stamp Act (1765) included a tax on playing cards, it aroused fury. Our Declaration of Independence was declared only eleven years later!

Is it a sin, to use that potent term, ruining the very fabric of our society? Well, consider a front page article in the LA Times 10/16/2009, describing how a 97 year old woman and two sons in their sixties live in a ’73 Suburban on the streets. Among the items on the dash: lottery tickets.

Private lotteries – the raffle – are very prevalent today. Generally, they are smaller, entry is much cheaper, prizes are smaller, well, mostly. You buy a fifty cent raffle ticket, win a dozen prize cupcakes, and everyone is happy You betcha! –Renata Breisacher Mulry

Smuggling and the American Revolution