Friday, September 07, 2012

Today -100: September 7, 1912: Of suicides, horses, claims, bull moosers, and altitude

The Paris authorities refuse to allow a Monsieur Paul Robin to be cremated, because he committed suicide. That’ll show him.

Mexican rebels cross the border to steal some horses from the US 3rd Cavalry. It does not end well for them.

For 50 years Mexico has been contesting something called the Manning & Mackintosh claim, first with Britain, and now with the US, or the syndicate which now owns the claim. Claim for what, the article never explains, but the syndicate is demanding $100 million from Mexico, including interest. Maybe Mexico knows what they’re on about.

Much of the Taft-Roosevelt fight is taking place in the courts. A US Circuit Court just refused to kick 8 Roosevelt electors off the Republican ballot in Kansas.

The New York Bull Moose Party convention nominates for governor Oscar Straus, TR’s secretary of commerce and labor (the first-ever Jewish cabinet member) and former ambassador to the Ottoman Empire.

A new altitude record is set by Roland Garros in France, 16,240 feet. At which point his engine cut out and he had to glide to earth.

Don't see comments? Click on the post title to view or post comments.


  1. Here is a link to far more than you ever wanted to know about the "Manning and Mackintosh Claim". Basically, Manning and Mackintosh were acting as agents for British financial giant Barclays & Co. to provide financial, commercial and management services for the Mexican government for which they were paid a lot of money and exerted a lot of influence on the Mexican economy. In the end, the owners of the rights to all of the Manning and Mackintosh partnership claims were awarded more than $105 million but I don't think it was ever paid.

  2. Yeah, it seems quite modern in that the claim was sold off or inherited, in other words a legal claim was treated as a commodity in much the same way as a sub-prime loan. My joke, and several others to come, is based on the complete failure of the NYT or anyone discussing this claim to ever explain it. It's like one of these legal cases in Dickens novels that goes or for decades, becoming a thing unto itself, unconnected with the original cause.