It took a great chunk of my summer vacation to read this monster, but it was worth it. This is incredible!
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
LewsTherin: Maybe we'll check in on Foster later. 
Vann the Red: Yes, some of the formatting and such is off. When I wrote the last chapter it was in the middle of the night because I couldn't sleep due to the heat, so I imagine I should be grateful there weren't more mistakes. Thanks for noticing though.
Draco Rexus: Jones could be an ally...but how much can Tom really say? As jwolf notes - not much.
jwolf: Bristol has the advantage, especially since all the commissioned and warrant officers will vouch for him, but Foster's not out of tricks yet.
coz1: Bristol's doing well, but Halifax could prove interesting. Heyward IS having a better time of it - but the Americans aren't quite happy to see him either.
J. Passepartout: Unfortunately no, the Articles of War do not apply to her. She's not military. A few of the articles imply anyone 'on the ship' applies as well, but even then those are nebulous. Even then he'd be pretty much confined to locking her up. She doesn't come under naval discipline.
Draco Rexus: Wow, 30K views? I didn't know I was anywhere that close. Of course, 10-15K are probably me rereading and checking for little details
Storey: Right, Foster's clearly done...unless she can discredit Bristol beyond any recall. The British admiralty is not going to be amused she effectively tried to take command of the ship (by ordering the gunner to fire), or that Reliance is crippled. The Foreign Office - Foster's own people - is also going to be rather upset she's invited American retaliation.
Stuyvesant: Well, not just the necessities of the story. Master of his ship or not, if anyone on land finds out he hung someone, Bristol will die for murder. He cannot execute people. He certainly can't act without a court martial (or in Foster's case a criminal court) on his side. Of course, if she were to die while escaping....damn.
You (and everyone) are right: The more Tom reveals about Black, the crazier he sounds and the more credibility he loses.
Even if Black did mess up, people tend to judge by 'Occam's Razor' - the simplest explanation. They'll believe he's just being a political megalomaniac. That's probably Tom's best hope - if they believe Rutledge is on a powertrip, that's a lot easier than making them believe he's a fallen angel.
GhostWriter: Thanks for reading, and I'm glad you finally caught up! Welcome to the show!
The Articles of War do apply: First, England is at war...with Poland. :rofl: Second, the Articles are for peacetime as well. They're a set of rules regarding what you can and can't do on a warship - for example, mutiny is bad even if you're not at war at the moment.
Fulcrumvale: Welcome, and thanks!
Vann the Red: Yes, some of the formatting and such is off. When I wrote the last chapter it was in the middle of the night because I couldn't sleep due to the heat, so I imagine I should be grateful there weren't more mistakes.
Thanks for noticing though.Draco Rexus: Jones could be an ally...but how much can Tom really say? As jwolf notes - not much.
jwolf: Bristol has the advantage, especially since all the commissioned and warrant officers will vouch for him, but Foster's not out of tricks yet.
coz1: Bristol's doing well, but Halifax could prove interesting. Heyward IS having a better time of it - but the Americans aren't quite happy to see him either.
J. Passepartout: Unfortunately no, the Articles of War do not apply to her. She's not military. A few of the articles imply anyone 'on the ship' applies as well, but even then those are nebulous. Even then he'd be pretty much confined to locking her up. She doesn't come under naval discipline.
Draco Rexus: Wow, 30K views? I didn't know I was anywhere that close. Of course, 10-15K are probably me rereading and checking for little details
Storey: Right, Foster's clearly done...unless she can discredit Bristol beyond any recall. The British admiralty is not going to be amused she effectively tried to take command of the ship (by ordering the gunner to fire), or that Reliance is crippled. The Foreign Office - Foster's own people - is also going to be rather upset she's invited American retaliation.
Stuyvesant: Well, not just the necessities of the story. Master of his ship or not, if anyone on land finds out he hung someone, Bristol will die for murder. He cannot execute people. He certainly can't act without a court martial (or in Foster's case a criminal court) on his side. Of course, if she were to die while escaping....damn.
You (and everyone) are right: The more Tom reveals about Black, the crazier he sounds and the more credibility he loses.
Even if Black did mess up, people tend to judge by 'Occam's Razor' - the simplest explanation. They'll believe he's just being a political megalomaniac. That's probably Tom's best hope - if they believe Rutledge is on a powertrip, that's a lot easier than making them believe he's a fallen angel.
GhostWriter: Thanks for reading, and I'm glad you finally caught up! Welcome to the show!
The Articles of War do apply: First, England is at war...with Poland. :rofl: Second, the Articles are for peacetime as well. They're a set of rules regarding what you can and can't do on a warship - for example, mutiny is bad even if you're not at war at the moment.
Fulcrumvale: Welcome, and thanks!
-= 156 =-
North Atlantic Ocean
June 1784
"Mister Heyward? Allow me to introduce Thomas Simpson." Jones stepped aside as his first lieutenant entered the cabin, Simpson was shorter than the other men, with sparse grey hair in his mid-fifties.
"Your servant," Tom said, rising.
"Sir, I am very happy to meet you." Simpson regarded him a moment, then turned to his captain. "I should manage the pumping parties."
"Mister Hall can do that. I wanted you to hear Mister Heyward's tale, which he was about to share." Jones sat and regarded his guest, not blinking.
"Captain, I ... told you what happened."
Jones turned his head just enough to speak to Simpson: "Mister Heyward tells me there is an urgent need for him to speak with Congress. He also says it has little to do with the British that captured him. Isn't that odd?"
"Very odd, sir."
"And do you not find it strange the British would risk a casus bel..," Jones paused, thrown by the term, "...risk a war to get him back?"
"Casus bellorum. Very strange, sir," Simpson replied coldly.
Heyward's head snapped up. Lieutenant Simpson returned his gaze, hands behind him, back ramrod straight. He clearly didn't like his new role.
The ship abruptly heaved, and through the cabin walls they heard a dim cheer as Ranger began rocking on the waves - sluggish perhaps, but very much alive. Simpson turned his head to the door. "Captain, I should..."
"Mister Heyward," Jones cut him off. "I firmly believe every man's business is his own - until they involve me. You have done so by joining my ship," he held up a finger for emphasis, "and you have done so by obliging me into a fight where men died." A second finger joined the first, and he pointed both. "Why did that ship attack us?"
"Reliance," added Simpson with some satisfaction.
"Yes, Reliance."
"That's obvious, Captain. They wanted you to return me."
"Why?"
Heyward sighed and closed his eyes. "Probably because I'm a general in the army. I should be in Cherokee Country."
Simpson whistled. Jones lifted his head and frowned. "That can be verified," he warned softly.
"I know. Do so."
"Very well. And how did the British capture you?"
"They pulled me out of their hospital in Savannah."
"What the devil were you doing in Georgia!?"
"THAT...is why I need to speak to Congress."
Jones drummed his fingers and glanced at Simpson. The first lieutenant's eyebrows arched in a shrug. He turned back. "Continue."
Heyward sighed again. Maybe it'd be good to talk about this - though obviously he couldn't tell them everything. They barely believed him as it stood. "There...is a problem in Carolina."
"What kind of problem?"
"Mister...Rutledge. Edward Rutledge." Tom frowned at the pair, trying to gauge their reaction.
Jones made a circular motion with his hand. "Details!"
"He is..." Christ, what could he tell them!? "He is planning to betray us - or at least what we fought for. He's trying to turn Carolina into a dictatorship. He's doing so by provoking a series of crises - our last harvest failed."
"Your last crop failed because your slaves didn't work the fields," Simpson commented.
"Yes. By his order." Tom turned to Simpson. Jones might be the superior naval officer, but the lieutenant appeared to keep up on events at home "He also continues to provoke the Indians, and now English Georgia as well."
"Speaking of the Indians," Jones responded, "you said you should be in Cherokee Country. Why aren't you?"
"I received reports of a...that Indian prisoners were being mistreated. I thought that might relate to Mister Rutledge's attempts to provoke a crisis and investigated." He paused. "I reached Branchville, South Carolina and found..." He shuddered visibly and closed his eyes.
"Mister Heyward?" Jones jerked to his feet. "Simpson, compliments to the surgeon and I need....!"
"No, I'm fine!" Tom shook his head. "As I said..."
"That looked like more than a passing weakness, sir."
Tom shook his head again. "It's only the memory of Branchville, captain. It was...horrible. Far too crowded, insufficient food, polluted water. With summer approaching, God knows what will happen now. There are thousands of them."
Simpson glanced at his captain doubtfully. He seemed soft-hearted for a general. "Surely you know," he began, "this happens in war. Why, in '73 the British kept their prisoners on hulks in New York harbor. I hear many died."
"Not like this, Lieutenant." Jones handed him a cup of grog. Heyward took it and sipped. "So I went to Charleston."
"You tired of the war and went home? God, I wish I had that luxury!" Simpson laughed. Did he desert?
"No," Tom glared, "I went to confront Rutledge. I found...I found out about his plans. Having provoked enough of a crisis to declare absolute rule at home, he'll use the ongoing crises with the Indians and Britain to force himself on the rest of America."
"So you went to Savannah to warn them?" A deserter and a traitor?
"No, damn it!" Heyward folded his arms. "There was a fire. I couldn't stay there for treatment. A friend took me to the nearest hospital. Unfortunately that happened to be in Georgia." Jones shook his head, and Tom continued insistently. "The signs are already out there, Captain! You said yourself: Congress now meets in closed sessions over 'security issues.' It is illegal to speak sedition. Congress is heading down the same..."
"You forget, sir," Simpson noted, "Congress is elected by the people."
"Congress is elected by the rich and powerful in the state assemblies," Tom snapped. "And even Congress members can be manipulated. It's already begun."
"Even if you're right, Mister Heyward, I think it'll take more than one man to undermine America. If King George can't stop us, I have little hope for Mister Rutledge."
"Can you prove it?" interrupted Jones.
"Eh?" Both men turned to him.
"This kind of accusation requires proof. Otherwise they will call you blackguard. Can you prove any of this?"
Heyward paused, then slowly shook his head. "Not much."
"Then you have nothing to take to Congress?"
Heyward snapped his mouth shut, knowing this interview was over. He drained his cup. "What will you do?" he asked.
"As I said," Jones replied. "I will take you to Boston."
So it begins… I have an odd, "unsubstantiated" feeling that Heyward’s meeting with congress is going to be less than fully successful, to say the least. He has no evidence other than his word and his highly suspicious activities against the entire state of South Carolina. Were I in congress, not knowing the full story, I would call Heyward mentally ill and order him put in a straight jacket, at the very least (or shot as a deserter).
Last edited:
Congress is going laugh Heyward out on his face.
Jones may not be happy but I suspect (hope) that he will be an ally, however grudging.
Jones may not be happy but I suspect (hope) that he will be an ally, however grudging.
CatKnight: ..."As I said," Jones replied. "I will take you to Boston."
Rutledge has all the aces, save one. so Heyward is gonna have to be very careful when he plays his one ace...
excellent update! !
Rutledge has all the aces, save one. so Heyward is gonna have to be very careful when he plays his one ace...
excellent update! !
Tom has, I think, finally come to realize that he is going to need to come up with a group of allies in order to take down Rutledge/Black... what better place to begin than in Boston, home of the revolutionary fervor that started the whole War for Independence to begin with, eh?
Thinking long term.... with this turn being taken by Congress now, with it's closed meetings and whatnot, once Black/Rutledge has been taken out and all is made well again (call me crazy :wacko: ), America of the future just might take a very dim view of nations that operate in such a manner, i.e. Nazi Germany, and just might take steps to prevent such governments from staying in power for very long... could prove to be quite interesting...
Thinking long term.... with this turn being taken by Congress now, with it's closed meetings and whatnot, once Black/Rutledge has been taken out and all is made well again (call me crazy :wacko: ), America of the future just might take a very dim view of nations that operate in such a manner, i.e. Nazi Germany, and just might take steps to prevent such governments from staying in power for very long... could prove to be quite interesting...
Yes, the key question is who are Heyward's allies at the moment? What tale will he concoct that has enough truth but definitely not the whole truth that he will be able to sway people...key people to his thinking.
Here is my analysis of the situation:
Heyward's short term goal: stop Black from having too much influence to stop his immediate threat
Heyward's long term goal: oust Black altogether from this world, or at least from any influential positions
method: Heyward would be VERY hard pressed to kill Black, at least not by himself. Besides, even if Black’s current body dies he will just possess someone elses, but Rutledge is convenient for Black because Rutledge is in a key position AND has the right character for Black to take over easily. That leaves discrediting Black. For that, Heyward needs proof and Black doesn’t commit his plans to paper simply because a) he can keep it all in his head and b) he wouldn’t be so careless. Thus, Heyward has to gather circumstantial evidence and/or eyewitness testimony and that will be difficult because most people are going along with Black/Rutledge at the moment.
Black really is using similar methods to a certain funny-mustached Austrian who became German chancellor about 70 years ago...and it took very strong external force to get rid of that guy. Cat...you have your work cut out for you...assuming, of course, that good will triumph!
Here is my analysis of the situation:
Heyward's short term goal: stop Black from having too much influence to stop his immediate threat
Heyward's long term goal: oust Black altogether from this world, or at least from any influential positions
method: Heyward would be VERY hard pressed to kill Black, at least not by himself. Besides, even if Black’s current body dies he will just possess someone elses, but Rutledge is convenient for Black because Rutledge is in a key position AND has the right character for Black to take over easily. That leaves discrediting Black. For that, Heyward needs proof and Black doesn’t commit his plans to paper simply because a) he can keep it all in his head and b) he wouldn’t be so careless. Thus, Heyward has to gather circumstantial evidence and/or eyewitness testimony and that will be difficult because most people are going along with Black/Rutledge at the moment.
Black really is using similar methods to a certain funny-mustached Austrian who became German chancellor about 70 years ago...and it took very strong external force to get rid of that guy. Cat...you have your work cut out for you...assuming, of course, that good will triumph!
Even if America begins to take a dim view of totalitarian governments after this mess sorts itself out, that's no guarantee that America will be in a position to fight Nazi Germany in World War II. If Mr. Black really wanted to mess with America's future, he'd just kill Eli Whitney. No cotton gin in 1793, slavery dies out in the South fairly quickly. No slavery, no Civil War, no rapid industrialization of the North, and America's rise to world power is delayed by decades at least. I'd love to see the Allies beat Germany with no Arsenal of Democracy to prop them up.
Heyward was actually doing fairly well in his interview with Jones until the implication came out -- unavoidably -- that he deserted and possibly turned traitor. That will be a very difficult albatross to unload from his neck.
So far we've seen only the tiniest hints of Heyward's heavenly powers, and plenty of the analagous thing from Black. Their struggle must be won on that plane, and so far it's just far too one-sided.
So far we've seen only the tiniest hints of Heyward's heavenly powers, and plenty of the analagous thing from Black. Their struggle must be won on that plane, and so far it's just far too one-sided.
Black is going to have to stumble and make a mistake; other wise Tom is in deep trouble. I wonder what it will be?
Joe
Joe
Fulcrumvale: Right. Tom has an uphill battle ahead of him.
J. Passepartout: Jones is at least willing to hear him out.
GhostWriter: Or Heyward has to steal a few aces
Draco Rexus: Tom's problem is right this second Black's won. Not winning, won. With a few more nudges here and there to prevent history from reasserting itself (see below), he can keep America dictatorial long enough for them to be just as good (or bad) as Nazi Germany for his purposes. That is the future Jess warned Tom about.
The key may be Congress. If he can convince them Black's a threat to THEIR power base, this could work. However, getting them to give up the power they've garnered for themselves will be trickier. Still, if he can just get Black out of the picture and give America time to settle down, there are still plenty of the founding fathers around to pull the US back to where it should be.
LewsTherin: Difficult...but not impossible.
dublish: I think you're mistaken.
Ignoring AARs for the moment - we know the AI obeys no rules by its own, I suspect history moves a bit like a river - over the path of least resistance. History is made up of probabilities: If the Roman Empire doesn't fall in 476, they're so weak that, barring other forces, they'll just fall in 479 or 481. The damage is already done.
There are exceptions of course, people or actions that are by themselves so brilliant that if you remove them, it causes a ripple effect - what alt historians call the butterfly effect. If we remove Churchill for example, the Conservatives probably still take power from Chamberlain....but is the replacement PM as effective an orator and such as Churchill? Will British morale hold without his constant reassurances? Those are now viable questions.
Most of the time though, history will tend to take the least possible amount of damage because events are already in motion. If we remove Whitney from the equation before 1793....well, someone else invents it in 1797 or 1798. Removing Whitney alone does not change the fact people are looking for mechanical ways to increase production and efficiency.
Even if I grant you the loss of the cotton gin, it does not change the slavery question. It was already up: South Carolina (Rutledge!) forced Jefferson to remove anti-slavery language from the Declaration of Independence. In 1783-84 Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Maryland banned it. Even this early it's turning into a divisive issue
Removing Whitney does not stop the Industrial Revolution, and therefore the need for increased urban labor. By this time the south is already an agrarian society, and the north is beginning to change over. Removing Whitney does not stop the wave of immigration from Europe in the 1830s and 1840s. It was the increased opportunity, not the cotton gin or slavery, that had most of these people settle in the north.
Anyway, you are ignoring the truth of the Civil War: It was not about slavery. Yes, it was a hot issue and some were placing pressure on the South, but no one in power was telling the South to abolish it. Slavery allows the North to take the high ground, and maybe makes Britain (who abolished slavery in 1808) nervous....but that's all it does.
This was about the economic dominance of the North - which the Industrial Revolution and immigration guarantees, and your dropping the cotton gin makes even worse. This was also about state rights vs the national government, which was an issue in 1776.
Even if by some miracle we hold Whitney responsible de facto for the Civil War, this, as mentioned, does not stop the Industrial Revolution. The North is industrializing, and with the massive waves of immigration they're doing so faster than the rest of the planet.
With respect to Mr. Whitney, removing him from the timeline does nothing but change some of the details.
jwolf: Exactly. He can probably prove he didn't turn - but he DID desert. Even his allies are going to have trouble excusing that.
Storey: Which will it be? Oh Tom being in deep trouble of course.
J. Passepartout: Jones is at least willing to hear him out.
GhostWriter: Or Heyward has to steal a few aces
Draco Rexus: Tom's problem is right this second Black's won. Not winning, won. With a few more nudges here and there to prevent history from reasserting itself (see below), he can keep America dictatorial long enough for them to be just as good (or bad) as Nazi Germany for his purposes. That is the future Jess warned Tom about.
The key may be Congress. If he can convince them Black's a threat to THEIR power base, this could work. However, getting them to give up the power they've garnered for themselves will be trickier. Still, if he can just get Black out of the picture and give America time to settle down, there are still plenty of the founding fathers around to pull the US back to where it should be.
LewsTherin: Difficult...but not impossible.
dublish: I think you're mistaken.
Ignoring AARs for the moment - we know the AI obeys no rules by its own, I suspect history moves a bit like a river - over the path of least resistance. History is made up of probabilities: If the Roman Empire doesn't fall in 476, they're so weak that, barring other forces, they'll just fall in 479 or 481. The damage is already done.
There are exceptions of course, people or actions that are by themselves so brilliant that if you remove them, it causes a ripple effect - what alt historians call the butterfly effect. If we remove Churchill for example, the Conservatives probably still take power from Chamberlain....but is the replacement PM as effective an orator and such as Churchill? Will British morale hold without his constant reassurances? Those are now viable questions.
Most of the time though, history will tend to take the least possible amount of damage because events are already in motion. If we remove Whitney from the equation before 1793....well, someone else invents it in 1797 or 1798. Removing Whitney alone does not change the fact people are looking for mechanical ways to increase production and efficiency.
Even if I grant you the loss of the cotton gin, it does not change the slavery question. It was already up: South Carolina (Rutledge!) forced Jefferson to remove anti-slavery language from the Declaration of Independence. In 1783-84 Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Maryland banned it. Even this early it's turning into a divisive issue
Removing Whitney does not stop the Industrial Revolution, and therefore the need for increased urban labor. By this time the south is already an agrarian society, and the north is beginning to change over. Removing Whitney does not stop the wave of immigration from Europe in the 1830s and 1840s. It was the increased opportunity, not the cotton gin or slavery, that had most of these people settle in the north.
Anyway, you are ignoring the truth of the Civil War: It was not about slavery. Yes, it was a hot issue and some were placing pressure on the South, but no one in power was telling the South to abolish it. Slavery allows the North to take the high ground, and maybe makes Britain (who abolished slavery in 1808) nervous....but that's all it does.
This was about the economic dominance of the North - which the Industrial Revolution and immigration guarantees, and your dropping the cotton gin makes even worse. This was also about state rights vs the national government, which was an issue in 1776.
Even if by some miracle we hold Whitney responsible de facto for the Civil War, this, as mentioned, does not stop the Industrial Revolution. The North is industrializing, and with the massive waves of immigration they're doing so faster than the rest of the planet.
With respect to Mr. Whitney, removing him from the timeline does nothing but change some of the details.
jwolf: Exactly. He can probably prove he didn't turn - but he DID desert. Even his allies are going to have trouble excusing that.
Storey: Which will it be? Oh Tom being in deep trouble of course.
-= 157 =-
Massachusetts
June 1784
"What do you think?"
"I cannot be sure." Captain Jones sipped at his brandy, nodded at the taste and put it aside. "On the surface, I'd say he's mad." He looked around the room - small perhaps, but well furnished and an almost cheery yellow. "You've done well, upon my word. Though I must wonder at your choice in paintings."
His host looked up at the Battle of Blenheim and shrugged. "It was cheap. I've not done as well as some think. At any rate, it helps when dealing with Congress. You wouldn't believe how status conscious those braggarts are." He grinned. "It also reminds them I'm...I was... Army, that is sometimes worth a point."
Jones nodded easily and leaned back. "This is why I trouble you. I was hoping you were familiar with General Heyward."
"I know of him. I haven't met him more than a handful of times. Seemed a decent sort, though sad. Some thought maybe he lost a girl once. He took Preston home for awhile."
The name meant nothing to Jones. "No sign of madness?"
"None. If you suspect him, why bring him to me and not a hospital?"
"I thought that perhaps if you knew him, you might see through to the truth easier than I. At any rate, you know more of army matters."
"That is true." His host put down his glass and stared. Finally he laughed.
"Pardon?"
"You've already decided to help him. You just want my reassurance."
"What on Earth makes you say that?"
"Your being here." His host grinned. "You could dump him on the street and be done with it. Instead your getting involved - and now bringing me in to. You believe him."
"I don't know," Jones muttered. "It's not that so much as... you're the one who told me there are problems in Congress. The secret meetings and all that."
"And more I can't say. Go on."
"We seem to be right back where we were eleven years ago - a group of men making decisions, you don't have access to them, can't really control them, it's illegal to question their actions."
"Wondering if we've wasted our time and our persons?"
"Well....yes."
"Careful," his host noted drily. "Dangerous words in a ship commander."
"Maybe someone has to say it."
"You're a good man, John, but you fly off too easily. You know what happens when you stick out your neck." He considered. "Heyward must know too. Crazy or not, he's not a fool."
"Does that mean he's telling the truth?"
His host frowned. "As he sees it, certainly. That doesn't prove it's anything but delusional though." He poured himself another drink and downed it in one shot. "It's easy enough to find out. When will Ranger be ready for sea, and are you at leisure?"
"Ten days," Jones grinned. "And I'm always at the command of a Congressman."
"Good. In the meantime, I want to meet with General Heyward. If I can talk to the man, maybe I can see for myself if he's right in the head."
---------------------
South Carolina
"Who's there!?" Cassandra Preston called. "Don't move or I'll shoot!" Having heard someone prowling around her porch in the middle of the night, she leapt into her shift, a petticoat and one of John's jackets and circled the house with a loaded fowling piece.
"It's me, Cassie," replied the shadow turning slowly.
"John?" She didn't move until she could clearly see him in the dim light. She lowered the weapon, took a few steps towards him, then stopped. "Why did you not let us know you were coming? What happened?" Why wasn't he running towards her? She knew why she was shy of him...
"I thought I'd stay out here for awhile," Preston replied simply. "Watch the stars."
She approached him slowly. He made no move towards her, friendly or otherwise. "You've had a long trip," she told him. "Come inside, I'll have a meal started."
"No, Cassie." Then, softer: "No, I just need to think for awhile."
She sat near him, but not too near. "Did you find General Heyward?"
"No. I think he joined the British."
"Johnny..." Cassie knew better than to say 'I told you so.' "I'm sorry. Are you sure?"
"Anne Whiting told me."
"Oh." She looked down. "Is that why you...?"
"Eh?" John studied her. "Why I what?"
"Nothing."
Preston growled softly. "Why I what?" He reached for her, and to his surprise Cassie pulled back. "Hey!"
"Did you have to...?" She knew he could be temperamental, even violent, but nothing quite this unholy. If he ever turned on Christiana...
"What!?"
"Did you have to kill her?" she finished, looking up wide-eyed.
"WHAT!?"
"It's in the papers."
"WHAT!?"
She looked down and said nothing.
"I did no....Cassie! I swear it! I didn't touch her! Well..alright, I shoved her, but I certainly did not kill her!"
"The British have denounced you. They have witnesses."
"Rot the witnesses! I'll tell you what happened. She told me about Tom, then called for help and I ran out."
"Then came back later?" Cassie asked.
"No! I needed to think about what Tom did, try to figure out why. Cassie, please!" He looked so distressed she didn't know what to say.
"What were you thinking just now?" She asked finally, more to change the subject than anything. His expression of outraged indignation disintegrated, to be replaced by ... She moved closer to him. "Johnny?"
He closed his eyes as the memories flooded over him. "I don't know if you want to hear this."
"Try me."
"Do you remember the argument Tom and I had the night before Rutledge's house exploded?"
"Yes." That'd been good for half a night's rant.
"I was trying to figure out why Tom would turn on us...so I thought I'd check out his little story."
Her brow furrowed, then cleared. "Branchville?"
"They're dead, Cassie," he whispered. "They're all ______ dead."
Last edited:
<Does basic mental arithmic>
So Exeter killed Whiting? Nasty, nasty, That's going to be a shock for Tom, once he learns of that. But thankfully, it looks like Preston might be giving his brain some exercise again. I can only hope that he won't go to Black. The boy can think: he showed that with his investigation into the explosion at Rutledge's house. It's just that his thinking is easily (far too easily) directed by the likes of Black.
I liked the ending of that last update. Preston's being framed for murder and he discovered that Heyward wasn't making everything up. If he can discover who killed Whiting, then there's a chance he can tie Exeter to Black. And that, combined with the horrors of Branchville, might be enough to finally set John straight. Although my hopes in Preston have been dashed before (and most likely, will be dashed again), I am hopeful that maybe, just maybe, he can indeed redeem himself. If only he'll think for himself and stay way clear from Black.
PS: when will we learn the identity of this mysterious Massachusettan (or whatever the adjective is) who was having such a revealing conversation with Captain Jones? The first potential ally for Heyward in a long time... Well, I should rephrase that: the first potential ally for Heyward who might actually be able to pull his weight in a long time (though Whiting was good for him, her role in Carolina politics was non-existent).
So Exeter killed Whiting? Nasty, nasty, That's going to be a shock for Tom, once he learns of that. But thankfully, it looks like Preston might be giving his brain some exercise again. I can only hope that he won't go to Black. The boy can think: he showed that with his investigation into the explosion at Rutledge's house. It's just that his thinking is easily (far too easily) directed by the likes of Black.
I liked the ending of that last update. Preston's being framed for murder and he discovered that Heyward wasn't making everything up. If he can discover who killed Whiting, then there's a chance he can tie Exeter to Black. And that, combined with the horrors of Branchville, might be enough to finally set John straight. Although my hopes in Preston have been dashed before (and most likely, will be dashed again), I am hopeful that maybe, just maybe, he can indeed redeem himself. If only he'll think for himself and stay way clear from Black.
PS: when will we learn the identity of this mysterious Massachusettan (or whatever the adjective is) who was having such a revealing conversation with Captain Jones? The first potential ally for Heyward in a long time... Well, I should rephrase that: the first potential ally for Heyward who might actually be able to pull his weight in a long time (though Whiting was good for him, her role in Carolina politics was non-existent).
While my hopes for Preston are constantly dashed against the sharp and pointy rocks of disaster and despair, he has to eventually come around, and hopefully this is it.
I wonder who that anonymous host was?
I wonder who that anonymous host was?
I wanna know which Congressman was hosting Jones, I wanna know if Anne was actually killed ('cause that's really going to either tick Tom off or send him off the deep end), and I wanna know if John is finally going to come around or if, as Passepartout so aptly wrote, our hopes for him are going to be dashed against the sharp and pointy rocks of disaster and despair... again.
Oh, and Cat, damn fine update.
Oh, another thought, I completely agree with your position on history and the basic flow of history as it relates to the U.S. Nice work on explaining that.
Oh, and Cat, damn fine update.
Oh, another thought, I completely agree with your position on history and the basic flow of history as it relates to the U.S. Nice work on explaining that.
Marvelous update, both parts of it. Our mysterious New Englander (since I, too, don't know what to call someone from Massachusetts ) general-congressman sounds like just what Tom needs. I hope some good will come of it. And he was right about Jones -- Jones is committed and convinced, at least enough to stick his neck out a bit.
As Draco pointed out, Anne may or may not actually have been killed, but certainly enough damage was done to successfully frame Preston for murder. It would be ironic if Preston finally matured and let his head rule his body for the long term, only to be arrested and put into prison or worse for murder!
More likely, Black will sweet talk him into believing his latest line of BS.
Great update!
) general-congressman sounds like just what Tom needs. I hope some good will come of it. And he was right about Jones -- Jones is committed and convinced, at least enough to stick his neck out a bit.As Draco pointed out, Anne may or may not actually have been killed, but certainly enough damage was done to successfully frame Preston for murder. It would be ironic if Preston finally matured and let his head rule his body for the long term, only to be arrested and put into prison or worse for murder!
More likely, Black will sweet talk him into believing his latest line of BS.
Great update!
Nice update, it looks like some things might start coming up as a concentrated effort against Black/Rutledge.
In regards to slavery as the cause of the Civil War, the economic circumstances surrounding it, and Eli Whitney's introduction of the cotton gin, there really shouldn't be any doubt that slavery was not the primary cause of the war. Abolitionists were a definite minority in the North even during the war, though they were increasingly vocal. However, I think that slavery was the one issue that made Civil War inevitable, because it was the one thing that the North and South could not compromise on.
I think you underestimate the impact of the cotton gin on the South. During the late 1700s, slavery was profitable on a large scale only along the Carolina coast, where cotton could be grown efficiently. Slavery was becoming economically infeasible everywhere else- if I remember correctly, the Constitution specified that the foreign slave trade would become illegal (or that the matter would be brought up again) at a later date for precisely this reason.
Without a well-preserved slavery system in place, I think the South would have been nearly as industrialized as the West (or Midwest) by 1860. With the South no longer dependant on a single cash crop, debates on tariffs would have been much less heated throughout the early 19th century, and the Nullification and State's Rights arguments would have lost a great deal of their support. Under these circumstances, I find it highly unlikely that a Civil War would have ever started, and thus no massive industrialization of the North would have occurred to supply Union armies. Coincidentally, Eli Whitney's system of replacable parts used in mass produced weapons would also have been delayed by his death.
The cotton gin gave slavery a new economic vitality by making it easy to grow cotton all across the South. You're right in that the butterfly effect probably accounts for a later invention of the cotton gin than normal, but would it have been soon enough to ensure the economic vitality of slavery? I don't think so, but it's definitely debatable. I'm willing to concede the point if you keep writing good chapters.
In regards to slavery as the cause of the Civil War, the economic circumstances surrounding it, and Eli Whitney's introduction of the cotton gin, there really shouldn't be any doubt that slavery was not the primary cause of the war. Abolitionists were a definite minority in the North even during the war, though they were increasingly vocal. However, I think that slavery was the one issue that made Civil War inevitable, because it was the one thing that the North and South could not compromise on.
I think you underestimate the impact of the cotton gin on the South. During the late 1700s, slavery was profitable on a large scale only along the Carolina coast, where cotton could be grown efficiently. Slavery was becoming economically infeasible everywhere else- if I remember correctly, the Constitution specified that the foreign slave trade would become illegal (or that the matter would be brought up again) at a later date for precisely this reason.
Without a well-preserved slavery system in place, I think the South would have been nearly as industrialized as the West (or Midwest) by 1860. With the South no longer dependant on a single cash crop, debates on tariffs would have been much less heated throughout the early 19th century, and the Nullification and State's Rights arguments would have lost a great deal of their support. Under these circumstances, I find it highly unlikely that a Civil War would have ever started, and thus no massive industrialization of the North would have occurred to supply Union armies. Coincidentally, Eli Whitney's system of replacable parts used in mass produced weapons would also have been delayed by his death.
The cotton gin gave slavery a new economic vitality by making it easy to grow cotton all across the South. You're right in that the butterfly effect probably accounts for a later invention of the cotton gin than normal, but would it have been soon enough to ensure the economic vitality of slavery? I don't think so, but it's definitely debatable. I'm willing to concede the point if you keep writing good chapters.