Monday at the Bar: Courthouses of the West: Natrona County Courthouses from the air.

Courthouses of the West: Natrona County Courthouses from the air.:

Natrona County's courthouses from the air, as viewed from a Ford Tri Motor.  The classic old courthouse is in the upper middle of the photograph, but the Townsend Justice Center and the Hall of Justice are also visible.  The Federal Courthouse is not visible, however.

Roads to the Great War: 100 Years Ago: The Arab Revolt Begins

Roads to the Great War: 100 Years Ago: The Arab Revolt Begins: Ten Things to Remember About the Arab Revolt  Faisal After the Capture of Aqaba, Lawrence to His Left 1.  The Arab Revolt started ...

Louis Brandeis sworn in as Justice of the United States Supreme Court: June 5, 1916

 

 On this date in 1916, Louis Brandeis was sworn in as Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

Brandeis was the first Jewish Supreme Court Justice.  Now this would hardly seem remarkable, but prior to Brandeis there   Presently, three out of the current nine Justices is Jewish, and the current nominee is also Jewish.  The first Catholic Justice was appointed in 1836, which in some ways makes the Brandeis story all the more remarkable as Catholics were a fairly despised minority in the US when Roger Taney was appointed that year.  That makes the Supreme Court one of the more egalitarian bodies in the American government but it also shows, I suspect, the extent to which Jews were disadvantaged in some ways in the US even though they have always been well represented in the law.

Brandeis was a liberal justice and received opposition to his appointment for that reason, which was compounded by the fact that he was Jewish. That was overcome however.  This does make his appointment more interesting, however, as it does demonstrate that Woodrow Wilson was a true progressive, as he appointed a progressive justice, but it also make all the more curious Wilson's racism, which was focused on blacks.  A person would suspect that a progressive President who did not base his choice on matters of faith, would have supported American blacks, but he didn't.

The Arab Revolt commences: June 5, 1916

The Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire commences, lead by the Hashemites of Mecca.

Movements towards greater Arab autonomy within the  Ottoman Empire had been going on for some time prior to the revolt.  Perhaps not surprisingly, they had been centered in the Lavant, i.e., Syria, which was a much more cosmopolitan and urban region of Arabia than the Arabian Peninsula.  Given the slow movement of the Ottoman Empire in this direction, indeed, given the slow disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, it's unlikely that a revolt would have broken out in 1916, let alone that it would have been centered in the Hajez, but for the outbreak of World War One which stressed the "sick man of Europe" and which gave rise to opportunities to potential Arabian rulers.  The British presence in Egypt (technically part of the Ottoman Empire), the raging war in Europe, the commitment to the Ottoman Empire to the Central Powers in November 1914, all gave rise to a situation which brought about the halting revolution against the Ottomans in 1916.

Sunday Morning Scence: Churches of the West: Horizon Christian Fellowship, Laramie Wyoming

Churches of the West: Horizon Christian Fellowship, Laramie Wyoming.:

This is an extremely poor photograph of an older church located directly across from the Albany County Courthouse.  I was taking photographs of the courthouse at the time, and as must be with the nature of such things, I used the same opportunity to photograph this church.

This downtown Laramie Church was built as a Presbyterian church originally.

Wyoming Fact and Fiction: Old West Gamblers and Beer

Wyoming Fact and Fiction: Old West Gamblers and Beer: Faro and Warm Beer I’m not sure how many times, hundreds if not thousands, I have read or watched on TV or the movies, a poker game i...

Roads to the Great War: 100 Years Ago: The Brusilov Offensive Launched

Roads to the Great War: 100 Years Ago: The Brusilov Offensive Launched: Russian Infantry Advancing After an Initial Success Against an Austrian Position Where:    Galicia on the Southwestern Eastern Fro...

Imperial Russia commences the Brusilov Offensive: June 4, 1916

The high water mark for Imperial Russia commences with the launch of the Brusilov Offensive.  The offensive was successful against Austria Hungary but was incredibly violent, resulting in over 500,000 Russian casualties and over 1,300,000 German and Austrian casualties.

The Russian offensive halted German operations against Verdun, which was one of its goals, but it was so costly that it effectively impeded the Russians from repeating it.  Had the Russians been able to do so, they may have forced a conclusion to the war and prior to the collapse of Russia itself.  It can be regarded as a genuine Imperial Russian feat of arms.

 Imperial Russian infantrymen, World War One.

The return of the garden

For the first time in many years, maybe a decade, we put a garden in.

We put it in late, I'm afraid, but we put it in.

Some of us here in the household have wanted to do this for some time, but one thing or another prevented it.  This year, however, all the denizens of the household save for one wanted to do it, and in addition that section of the household demographic recently graduated into full adulthood, together with a colleague in a similar situation, expressed a desire to do it and to contribute labor to the same, as part of an effort to reduce their anticipated costs this fall.

And hence it was planted.

The return of row crop agriculture to our familial efforts.

Friday Farming: Land and the Wyoming Cattle Industry Convention on Educating for Ranching Success in the 21st Century

A news release from Wyoming Public Media notes the following:

Agriculture Conference To Focus On Attracting Younger Generation To Ranching

An upcoming agriculture conference will look at how to entice younger Wyomingites to work in ranching.

The article notes the following problem:

This year’s Wyoming Cattle Industry Convention is titled Educating for Ranching Success in the 21st Century. The average age of a U.S. rancher today is 57. Wyoming Stockgrower’s Association Vice President Jim Magagna would like to see that number go down.

And it goes on to note:

“A lot of our focus in recent years has been bringing young people into our industry,” he says. “We hear so much about the average age of ranchers creeping up. And so we really want to make it attractive for young people to be engaged in our industry.” Magagna says the best way to do that is to teach young people how to make ranching profitable. Consultant Dave Pratt will provide ideas for that in one session.

Well, making it profitable would help, but one of the best ways to do that would be for the thing most needed to be a rancher, land, to not be priced at playground prices.  That, more than any single thing, is what makes ranching and farming today impossible to get into.

No doubt the average age is 57.  And that's because those people were born into the places they are operating.  There's no earthly way that a person who is 27, or 37, for example, who wasn't born into agriculture to get into it.  None.  Indeed the only only people from the outside getting into it are those who are very wealthy.

Indeed, since some point after World War Two, and I'm not exactly sure if it was as early as the 1950s or late as the 1980s, omitting price fluctuations here and there for peculiar reasons, this has been the case. Ranching is hard work, as is farming, with a generally low profit margin.  If you have to buy land to do it, you'll never make the money back. Never.

This isn't an exaggeration.  It's a fact.  When large outfits exchange hands today only one of two things is occurring.  If its actually being purchased as a production unit by a producer, he's basically exchanging one outfit for another. That's how he's affording it.  If a person is purchasing from the outside, he's buying with something other than ever making a profit in mind, as he wont.  

Now, this isn't a good situation for a lot of reasons.  It means anyone from the outside, or even anyone simply surplus to a family operation, wanting to get a place of their own, at best must plan on leasing most of their ground.  That is one way to do it, but there are always disadvantages to that.  Otherwise, the only way younger people can get into agriculture is to work for an existing ranch, few of which actually hire outside of their own families.  If they do, and some do, they tended to be owned by people who don't need to really make a profit at ranching, but that doesn't make the pay generous.

In an era in which a college education has seemingly become necessary for absolutely everything, then, that often means a person who feels drawn to ranching might have to plan on going to college for four years, getting a degree, and then working for wages that are fairly low.  That's becoming increasingly common for some degrees in any event, and needs to be seriously examined in its own right, but it also means that this person, who is essentially pursuing a type of science degree, at some point is likely to consider the economic payoff of what he's undertaking, and undertake something else.

Land, is the key.  This can be addressed. But it can't be addressed in an environment in which the only prerequisite to owning agricultural land is money.  And that seems to be unlikely to be something that anyone is going to address in the near future.

So, kudos to the conference for addressing this topic.  But until one of the topics is "land for the producer. . .must it be land for the wealthy?", nothing is really going to be achieved.

Friday Farming: The passing of Gene Logsdon

It's worth noting here that Gene Logsdon, who together with Wendell Berry, defined modern American Agrarianism, passed away on May 31.

Logsdon was an Ohio farmer who fit the agrarian mold, arguing for small farms that were self sufficient.  A prolific writer, like Berry he wrote extensively about his experiences and views.  His writing, however, differed from Berry's in that it often touched on the nuts and bolts of farming while Berry's tends to be more esoteric and philosophical.  Also, while neither Berry nor Logsdon eschewed technology, Logsdon was more inclined to use it, being a small mechanized farmer while Berry leans more towards earlier methods.  Logsdon embraced the use of the computer, something that Berry has not.

With his passing a powerful voice for agrarianism has been silenced.  Its distressing to note that the two most powerful of such voices have been very elderly ones at that, with Berry's now being the surviving one.

Casper Journal: How does working in agriculture enhance hireability?

Casper Journal:  How does working in agriculture enhance hireability?

In this period of economic challenge, many people are looking for steady sources of income with greatly reduced opportunities. This is the case especially for youth since many adults are being forced to take jobs which youth have filled for years. At the same time, agriculture in Wyoming — predominantly hay, beef and sheep production — are always looking for good reliable help.

So You've Managed to Get Started Farming. Now What?

So You've Managed to Get Started Farming. Now What?: Coming up with the capital to acquire land is a showstopper for many would-be new farmers. But it's just the first hurdle to making it in agriculture.

The local news, June 2, 1916. The Battle of Jutland hits the news. . . but not quite accurately.

Residents of Cheyenne were waking up to the shocking news that the British had a "naval disaster", something that was far from the truth.

This is interesting in several respects.  One is that it still took some time for news of naval engagements, not surprisingly, to hit the wire services.  That isn't surprising.  The other interesting thing is, of course, the matter of perception. Today we'd regard the Battle of Jutland as a British victory or, at worst, a draw, albeit one with some serious British losses. At the time, however, the press, at least locally, was weighing the British losses to conclude the Royal Navy had been beaten.

It's also important to note, however, the propaganda aspect of this. 

As noted, the British effort at Jutland was to keep the German High Seas Fleet in harbor, or to sink it. Either way, the British had to keep it from breaking out into the North Atlantic.  If the Germans had managed to do that, the Germans may have seriously contested for control of the North Atlantic.  Indeed, what would have occurred is a big spike in the loss of commercial shipping, the probable near complete shut down of the sea life line to the Allies at this critical point in the war, and a massive game of cat and mouse until one or the other of the fleets got the advantage of the other. There's no real way to tell how that would have come out.

So, the British effort, as we know, was to keep the Germans from breaking out, either by keeping them bottled up, or destroying the fleet. An outright destruction of an opposing force would have been a great thing for the navy achieving it, but very risky at the same time.

It's widely assumed now that the Royal Navy had such an advantage in the final maneuvers at Jutland that it could have in fact destroyed the German Navy.  But what it it had?  It would have made little difference to the war effort, as the Allies could not effect a sea landing on the German coast. So the risk entailed in achieving that had to be weighed against the risk of loosing the British fleet.  If that had occurred, the Germans, absent a sudden American intervention, would have won the war within a matter of months. Even in the highly unlikely scenario of the United States intervening in 1916, it's quite uncertain that the US could have swept the Germans from the North Atlantic.  Jellicoe was right not to risk it.

In not risking it, of course, he was risking a later German outbreak, and the British had to live with that.  But, hindsight being 20/20, what actually occurred is that the German navy became an expensive liability to Germany.  It was impossible, in those days, not to keep the ships basically ready to put to sea at any time, which meant that the Germans had to consume expensive resources simply to keep the fleet.  Having determined not to use it again, the Germans would have been better off simply docking the entire thing and walking away from it, but no nation can do that.  So, the Germans consumed fuel, oil  and rations for something it could ill afford and didn't need.  German sailors, in turn, became radicalized and actually sparked the rebellion in 1918 that would bring Imperial Germany down.

The only part of the German Navy that remained viable was the submarine wing of it. But it was primitive and figured outside the morals of the Edwardian world.  Indeed, it quite frankly figures outside the morals of the world of 2016 as well.  Primitive ships that were barely able to engage in combat underwater, they relied upon stealth and darkness for cover, and normally attacked on the surface.  Tiny ships, they couldn't pick up the survivors of their attacks as a rule, and a single merchant seaman determining to fight on with small arms could sink them.  And yet Imperial Germany had to turn to them.

Before that, however, its High Seas Fleet would go back into harbor. Germany would report the British losses, which were truly grater than its own, and the Press would react as if it was a German victory, as seen here.

It wasn't.

Today is World Milk Day

Seriously, it really is. By decree of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

To draw attention to milk as a food.

Which is nifty, but I have to admit that I never pour myself a glass of milk (which isn't to say that I don't use it on my cereal, etc.).  I just don't like drinking the stuff.

The local news, June 1, 1916. No Jutland yet

But both the epic Battle of Verdun and the ongoing Punitive Expedition were.

And there's an education headline that looks surprisingly similar to those we read today.

Mid Week At Work: Hot Dog Vendors, Ebbets Field, 1920.

So, on the day thousands lost their lives violently at sea, what did the local news look like? May 31, 1916

Well, given that the Battle of Jutland was a naval battle, we can't expect it to show up in the day's news, even the late editions, at all.

Indeed, something that's easy to forget about the battle, as we tend to think of the later battles of World War Two a bit more (which also features some large surface engagements, contrary to the myth to the contrary) is that World War One naval battles were exclusively visual in nature.

That's not to say that radio wasn't used, it most certainly was. But targeting was all visual.  And as the battle took place in the North Sea, dense fog and hanging smoke played a prominent role in the battle.

Now, we note that, as while the British and German fleets were using radio communications, they weren't broadcasting the news, and they wouldn't have done that even if it were the 1940s.  And the radio communications were there, but exclusively military.  News of the battle had to wait until the fleets returned home, which is interesting in that the Germans were closer to their ports, so closer to press outlets.  Indeed, the point of the battle was to keep the Germans in port, or at the bottom of the sea.

So, on this day of a major battle, maybe in some ways the major battle of World War One, what news did local residents see?

The death of Mr. Hill, and the draft Roosevelt movement were receiving headline treatment in Sheridan.

I'm surprised that there was a University of Wyoming student newspaper for this day, as I would have thought that the university would have been out of school by then.  Maybe not.  However.  Interesting to note that this was published the day after Memorial Day, so it was a contemporary paper.  Now, the current paper, The Branding Iron, is weekly, I think.  The crises of the times show up in the form of UWs early ROTC making an appearance on Memorial Day.

The Battle of Jutland Commences: May 31, 1916

The epic clash of the German and British fleets commences off of Jutland.  The end result is still debated, but that the British retained naval dominance in the Atlantic is not.

Of small interest here, Jutland is that Danish peninsula that juts into the North Sea and which some believe gave its name to the Jutes, once of the three Germanic tribes that immigrated to Great Britain in the 400s.

The 1916 naval battle has gone down as oddly contested in its recollections, which it still is today.  The Germans immediately declared it a victory, but as British historians have noted, the end result was that the German fleet was bottled up for the rest of the war where it did nothing other than consume resources and, in the end, contribute to revolt against its employer.

The battle is seen this way as Admiral Jellicoe did not crush the German fleet and because the British lost more men and ships than the Germans did.  In strategic terms, however, its clear that the British turned the Germans back and sent them back into port. . . forever.  Strategically, therefore, it was a British victory.  The debate otherwise is due to the lasting strong suspicion that the British could have actually continued the contest and demolished the German fleet, which would have ended any threat of German surface action for the remainder of the war.  Admiral Jellicoe did not do that, but then as was pointed out by Winston Churchill he was the only commander in the war who was capable of loosing the war in a day, which no doubt factored in his mind.  Had the British guess wrong in the battle, and the early stages of the battle were all guess work, the result may well have resulted in Allied loss in the war itself.

Jutland stands out as such a clash of naval giants that its somewhat inaccurately remembered as the "only" clash of dreadnoughts, which it isn't.  It was, however, a massive example of a naval engagement between two highly competent massive surface fleets.  It wasn't the first one of the war, but it would be the last one.  In spite of the seeming ambiguity of the result, the battle effectively destroyed Germany's surface fleet abilities forever.

How did the average person celebrate Memorial Day in 1916?

We've been looking, as the few readers of this blog know, at 1916 a lot recently. This started off with the Punitive Expedition centennial (which we're still looking at and will be until its conclusion, next year), but we've also been figuring in a lot of day in the life type of stuff, and general 1916 news.  Indeed, as we've noted, some might start to grouse that this blog is becoming the This Day In 1916 blog, which it isn't (or doesn't intend to be).  Probably the flood of miscellanea that figures here so regularly, however, keeps that from occurring.

Anyhow, one thing I started to wonder is this.  How did the average American actually celebrate a day like this, Memorial Day, in 1916?  And by this I mean outside of the public observations?

Here, as pretty much everywhere, there are public observances.  One big one here is that middle school students decorate the graves of veterans in our local cemeteries, as depicted here on Some Gave All

Highland Cemetery, Casper Wyoming

Marker noting service in the 157th Aero Squadron during World War One.

Marker noting service in the 157th Aero Squadron during World War One.

Marker of the old military pattern noting service in the 2nd U.S. Volunteer Cavalry during the Spanish American War.  The 2nd U.S. Vol Cav was raised in Wyoming.  It did not deploy everseas, in part because a severe train accident injured and killed a signficant number of its troopers en route to Florida.

Marker noting this veteran's service as a Horseshoer in the Field Artillery.

Marker noting this veteran's service as a Cook in the 24th Infantry during the Civil War.

Marker noting this trooper's service in the Army during the Spanish American War and World War One.

Marker noting this veteran's service in Co. F, 2nd Illinois Light Artillery during the Civil War.

Marker noting Civil War service.

Oddly, a big even this Memorial Day is one of the local high school's graduation ceremonies. That's not a normal Memorial Day event anywhere.  I can't recall the reason why this was scheduled this way, but the school district is fairly tightly constrained on when a graduation must occur and, if I recall correctly, use of the facility was not possible for any other day.  The local principal is game, stating:   "being able to celebrate Memorial Day with 400 graduates and over 3,000 people in the stands up at the Events Center, I just don't know how we could do it any better."  Last time, however, there were some miffed people, as in the case of this comment from 2014:  "It is as if [the district has] forgotten the sacrifices made to make this country what it is".  This time, with an oilfield slump going on, there haven't been many complaints.

But what about the other observances, other than public, that we could have found in 1916?  What did people do.

Now, I suppose they visited local cemeteries to visit the graves of their own veterans.  In 1916, there were still Civil War veterans left alive, so that would have been very much in mind, I'd suppose.  But what else occurred on this national holiday, in an age when more people took holidays off (and indeed, when I was young that was the case as well).

For example, in this day and age, we can expect a lot of barbecues on Memorial Day.  It's almost become the standard expectation of the holiday.

Did people barbecue in 1916?

I'm sure they had outdoor eating, perhaps more really than we do now (or perhaps not). But did they grill hamburgers?  Or was it a dog sort of day?  Was a lot of beer consumed?

I'm guessing the answer on the beer is likely yes.

 Shriners barbecue, October 21, 1922.  This must have been a pretty big event as Budweiser was clearly sponsoring it.  This isn't 1916, of course, but 1922 wasn't that much later

Did they barbecue?

Well, maybe.  To my surprise, there's a lot of photographs of barbecues in that period:

Big barbecue, September 11, 1915, featuring elk.  This looks sort of like we might expect on the Olympic Highway in some localities today, but for the comparatively formal dress.

Rabbit barbecue, following rabbit hunt, Texas, 1905.

GAR Barbecue, 1895.

None of these are backyard barbecues, of course. But it seems pretty clear to me that if you went to a big outdoor gathering, and there were some to be sure, there was a good chance that you were going to eat barbecue.  A lot of it seems to be the really traditional type at that, with roasted pigs and sausage, and other meats.

That's quite a bit different, of course, from the backyard barbecue or the backyard grill.  Were people firing those up, and maybe inviting a few friends over for burgers and dogs, and a bottle of beer?  

Well, maybe, but not in the same way.

The backyard gas grill wasn't invented until the 1950s, so that was clearly out.  Surprisingly, perhaps, the common charcoal grill wasn't around until that time either, so its a near contemporary of the gas grill.  Commercial charcoal briquettes were first introduced by the Ford Motor Company (yes, Ford) as a byproduct of automobile production, as a lot of wood went into early cars and they were trying to figure out what to do with the scraps.  and you'll note these barbecues tend to feature the proverbial pig in the ground, although I'm sure they weren't all that way.

I've seen, of course, outdoor brick barbecues, including at least one I'd fear to use in nearly any circumstance, and I'm sure people did that. And there there are fire pits with grates, which would be somewhat similar.  So I'm sure that some use was made of such things, although it would also be the case that most people didn't.

Stone and iron outdoor barbecue circa 1940s.

And I'd guess the barrel type of barbecue, or smoker, like the ones my former neighbors had, that they fueled with mesquite, can't be a new item either.  None of which is to say that the average person would have fired any of these types of things up on a typical early 20th Century Memorial Day, or any other day.

Even if they were barbecuing something, it probably wasn't hamburgers, the staple for such things today.  Hamburgers, in the fashion we conceive of them, the "hamburger sandwich", originated in the late 19th Century to the early 20th Century but they didn't become a really popular item until after World War One. White Castles, one of the first hamburger chains, dates to the 1920s.  So, in 1916, we couldn't expect hamburgers to be grilled up in the backyard, even if a person grilled up anything in the backyard, which as we can see would have been a lot less common.  People used hamburger, of course, but the hamburger, as in the sandwich, wasn't around quite yet.  It came roaring in when it did, but it hadn't arrived, except in a few localities on a local basis.  Indeed, if you ordered one, you'd most likely be getting fried hamburger, which is what a hamburger actually is. Salisbury Steak, in other words (which is the same thing).

FWIW, the Library of Congress credits Louis Lunch, a lunch wagon in New Haven Connecticut as inventing the hamburger, albeit with slabs of toast, not buns.  The restaurant is still in business and still serves hamburgers in that fashion.

Well, what about hot dogs?

You'd have a better chance of running into these.  Hot dogs have been around in common food circulation since the mid 19th Century.  Indeed, they had an association with street food and with baseball by the early 20th Century.

New York hot dog carts, 1906.

None of which means that people were serving up a lot of hot dogs at Memorial Day gatherings in 1916.  But maybe a few people did.

If there were backyard Memorial Day gatherings therefore, I'm guessing that they'd be more like the July 4th gathering depicted in A River Runs Through It.  That is, people cooked stuff and brought it. I'm guessing that would have more likely been the norm.

Which isn't to say that they gathered much on that day at all.  I'm sure some folks did.  I'd guess that some veterans of the Civil War did, in the north and west.  At this time, and well after it, Confederate Memorial Day, or Decoration Day, was a different day in the south.  Oddly enough, the first Confederate Memorial Day came a few years before Memorial Day.  In 1916, this tradition would have still been a somber southern one.

Which leads me back to where I started off.  I'm speculating, and don't know the answer to my question.  Maybe somebody here does?