صور الصفحة
PDF

of the city, is the most important in the United States. It included in 1910 a commissioner appointed by the mayor and exercising a wide range of authority; four deput commissioners; a chief inspector, who has immediate charge 0 the force and through whom al orders are issued; he is assisted by 18 inspectors, who are in charge of different sections of the city, and who carry out the orders of the chief; 87 captains, each of whom is in direct charge of a precinct; 583 sergeants; and last of all, the ordinary policemen, or patrolmen, as they are often called from the character of their duties. There is a separate branch, the detective bureau, composed of picked men, charged with the investigation and, still more, the prevention of crime. The total number of patrol men in 1909 was 8562. Appointments are for life, with ensions in case of disability and after a given number of years 0 service. LITERATURE—Patrle Colquhoun, Treatise on the Police 0 the Metropolis (1796); Pierre Clement, La Police sous Louis I V. (1866); Maxime Du Camp, Paris, ses organes, ses fonctions et sa vie (1869—1875); Dr Norman Chevers, Indian Medical Jurisprudence (Calcutta, 1870); A. T. Crawford, Reminiscence: of an I ndian Police Oflicial (1894); C. R. W. Hervey, Records of Indian Crime (1892); Arthur Griffiths, Mysteries of Police and Crime (1203); Captain W. L. Melville Lee, A History of Police in Englan ( ethuen, 1901); Sidney and Beatrice Webb, English Local Government (Longmans, 1906—1908); article by H. B. Simpson, “ The Office of Constable," in the English Historical Review (October 1895); F. W. Maitland, Justice and Police (Macmillan, 1885) ; L. F. Fuld, Police Administration (New York, 1910). (A. G.)

POLICE COURTS, courts of summary jurisdiction, held in London and certain large towns of the United Kingdom by specially appointed and salaried magistrates. They were originally called “ public offices ” (Middlesex Justices Act 1792), but after the establishment of the police force, in 1829, they came to be called “ police offices,” although no change had taken place in their nature. They are so described in a report of a select committee which inquired into the system in 1837 and 1838; in the same report the magistrates who presided in the courts were first described as “police magistrates.” Police offices were first officially described by their modern title in the Metropolitan Police Courts Act 1839. In 1839 there were nine police courts; since 1792 there had been three magistrates 'to each court, and the act of 1839 retained twenty-seven as the maximum number at any time (s. 2). In 1835 unsalaried justices ceased to sit in the police courts along with the paid magistrates. The Metropolitan Police Courts Act 1840 gave power to map out the whole of the metropolitan police district into police court divisions, and to establish police courts wherever necessary, the artificial limit of twenty-seven magistrates being at the same time preserved. Additional courts have from time to time been established by orders in council, and in 1910 there were in London fourteen courts with twenty-five magistrates. Their divisions are regulated by orders in council of 1903 and 1905; the nine original courts are Bow Street, Westminster, Marylebone, Marlborough Street, Worship Street, Clerkenwell, Thames, Tower Bridge and Lambeth.

The courts are held every day from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except on Sunday, Christmas Day,_Good Friday or_any day appointed for a public fast or thanksgiving or bank holida . he Greenwrch and Woolwich court, which com rises one ivision, is held at Greenwich in the morning and at oolwich in the afternoon. The chief magistrate (sitting at Bow Street) receives a sala of {1800 a year and the other magistrates £1500 each. The magistrates are appointed by the Crown ;they must have been practising barristers for seven years or stl ndiary magistrates for some place in England or Wales. One poice magistrate has the. same powers as two justices, but may not act in anything which has to be done at special or petty sessions of all the justices actin in the division or at quarter sessions. He can do alone when sitting in a police court any act which any justice or justices can do under the Indictable Offences Act 1848, or under the Summary Jurisdiction Act; he has special powers under the Metropolitan Police Courts Act 1839, and is also given special powers under certain other acts. The Bow Street court has jurisdiction in extradition. The precedent of appointing salaried magistrates was followed for certain towns in the provinces by particular acts, and in 1863 the Sti ndiary Magistrates Act gave power to towns and boroughs $25,000 inhabitants and upwards to obtain a stipendiary magistrate.

POLIGNAC, an ancient French family, which had its seat in the Cevennes near Puy-en-Velay (Haute Loire). Its authentic pedigree can be traced to the 9th century, but in 1421 the male line became extinct. The heiress married Guillaume, sire de

[graphic]

Chalancon (not to be confused with the barons of Chalancon in Vivarais), who assumed the name and arms of Polignac. The first member of the family who was of any historical importance was Cardinal Melchior de Polignac (1661-1742), a younger son of Armand XVI., marquis de Polignac, who at an early age achieved distinction as a diplomatist. In 1695 he was sent as ambassador to Poland, where he contrived to bring about the election of the prince of Conti as successor to John Sobieski (1697). The subsequent failure of this intrigue led to his temporary disgrace, but in 1702 he was restored to favour, and in 1712 he was sent as the plenipotentiary of Louis XIV. to the Congress of Utrecht. During the regency he became involved in the Cellamare plot, and was relegated to Flanders for three years. From 172 5 to 1732 he acted for France at the Vatican. In 1726 he received the archbishopric of Auch, and he died at ,Paris in 1742. He left unfinished a metrical refutation of Lucretius which was published after his death by the abbé de Rothelin (Anti-Lucretius, 1745), and had considerable vogue in its day. Count Jules de Polignac (d. 1817), grandnephew of the preceding, was created duke by Louis XVI. in 1780, and in 1782 was made postmaster-general. His position and influence at court were largely due to his wife, Gabrielle de Polastron, the bosom friend of Marie Antoinette; the duke and duchess alike shared the unpopularity of the court, and were among the first to “ emigrate ” in 1789. The duchess died shortly after the queen, but her husband, who had received an estate from Catherine II. in the Ukraine, survived till 1817. Of their three sons the second, Prince Jules de Polignac (1780—1847), played a conspicuous part in the clerical and ultra-royalist reaction after the Revolution. Under the empire he was implicated in the conspiracy of Cadoudal and Pichegru (1804), and was imprisoned till 1813. After the restoration of the Bourbons he held various offices, received from the pope his title of “ prince ” in 1820, and in 1823 was made ambassador to the English court. On the 8th of August 1829 he was called by Charles X. to the ministry of foreign affairs, and in the following November he became president of the council. His appointment was taken as symbolical of the king’s intention to overthrow the constitution, and Polignac, with the other ministers, was held responsible for the policy which culminated in the issue of the Four Ordinances which were the immediate cause of the revolution of July 1830. On the outbreak of this he fled for his life, but, after wandering for some time among the wilds of Normandy, was arrested at Granville. His trial before the chamber of peers resulted in his condemnation to perpetual imprisonment (at Ham), but he benefited by the amnesty of 1836, when the sentence was commuted to one of exile. During his captivity he wrote Considerations politiques (1832). He afterwards spent some years in England, but finally was permitted to re-enter France on condition that he did not take up his abode in Paris. He died at St Germain on the 29th of March 1847.

POLIGNY, a town of eastern France, capital of an arrondissement in the department of Jura, 18 m. N. N. E. of Lons-le-Saunier

. on the Paris—Lyons railway. Pop. (1906), 3756. The town lies

in the valley of the Glantine at the base of a hill crowned by the ruins of the old castle of Grimont, once the repository of the archives of the county of Burgundy. The church of Montivillard, its most remarkable building, dates in the oldest portions from the 12th century, its chief features being a Romanesque tower and reredos of the Renaissance period. Amongst the other old buildings of the town, the church of St Hippolyte, of the first half of the 15th century, and a convent-church serving as corn market are of some interest. The tribunal of first instance belonging to the arrondissement is at Arbois. Poligny has a sub-prefecture, a communal college and a schOol of dairy instruction. Under the name of Polernniacum the town seems to have existed at the time of the Roman occupation. ' POLISH SUCCESSION WAR (1733—1735), the name given to a war which arose out of the competition for the throne of Poland between the elector August of Saxony, son of August II. (the Strong), and Stanislaus LesZCynski, the king of Poland installed thirty years before by Charles XII. of Sweden and displaced by August the Strong when Charles’s projects collapsed. The claims of Stanislaus Were supported by France, Spain and Sardinia, those of the Saxon prince by Russia and the empire, the local quarrel being made the pretext for the settlement of minor outstanding claims of the great powers amongst themselves. The war was therefore a typical 18th century “ war with a limited object,” in which no one but the cabinets and the professional armies were concerned. It was fought on two theatres, the Rhine and Italy. The Rhine campaigns were entirely unimportant, and are remembered only for the last appearance in the field of Prince Eugene and Marshal Berwick—the latter Was killed at the siege of Philippsburg—and the baptism of fire of the young crown prince of Prussia, afterwards Frederick the Great. In Italy, however, there were three hard-fought— though indecisive—battles, Parma (June 29, 1734), Luzzara (Sept. 19, r734) and Bitonto (May 25, 1735), the first and last won by the Austrians, the second by the French and their allies. In Poland itself, Stanislaus, elected king in September 1733, was soon expelled by a Russian army and was afterwards besieged in Danzig by the Russians and Saxons (F eb.—June r733).

POLITIAN (1454—1494). Angelo Ambrogini, known in literary annals as Angelo Poliziano or Politianus from his birthplace, was bom at Montepukiano in Tuscany on the 14th of July 1454. His father, Benedetto, a jurist of good family and distinguished ability, was murdered by political antagonists for adopting the cause of Piero de’ Medici in Montepulciano; and this circumstance gave his eldest son, Angelo, a claim on the family of Medici. At the age of ten the boy came to prosecute his studies at Florence, where he learned Latin under Cristoforo Landino, and Greek under Argyropulos and Andronicos Kallistos. From Marsilio F icino he imbibed the rudiments of philosophy. The precocity of his genius for scholarship and poetry was early manifested. At thirteen years of age he began to circulate Latin letters; at seventeen he sent forth essays in Greek versification; at eighteen he published an edition of Catullus. In 1470 he won for himself the title of H omerz'cu: juvenis by translating four books of the Iliad into Latin hexameters. Lorenzo de’ Medici, who was then the autocrat of Florence and the chief patron of learning in Italy, took Poliziano into his household, made him the tutor of his children, and secured him a. distinguished post in the university of Florence. Before he reached the age of thirty, Poliziano expounded the humanities with almost unexampled lustre even for that epoch of brilliant professors. Among his pupils could be numbered the chief students of Europe, the men who were destined to carry to their homes the spolia opima of Italian culture. Not to mention Italians, it will sufiice to record the names of the German Reuchliu, the English Grocyn and Linacre, and the Portuguese Tessiras. ,

Poliziano ,had. few advantages of person to recommend him. He was ungainly in form, with eyes that squinted, and a nose of disproportionate length. Yet his voice was rich and capable of fine modulation; his eloquence, ease of utterance and copious stream of erudition were incomparable. It was the method of

professors at that period to read the Greek and Latin authors

with their class, dictating philological and critical notes, emend

ing corrupt passages in the received texts, ofiering elucidations.

of the matter, and pouring forth stores of acquired knowledge regarding the laws, manners, religious and philosophical opinions of the ancients. Poliziano covered nearly the whole ground of classical literature during the years of his professorship, and published the notes of his courses upon Ovid, Suetonius, Statius, the younger Pliny, Quintilian, and the writers of Augustan histories. He also undertook a recension of the text of the Pandects of Justinian, which formed the subject of one of his courses; and this recension, though it does not rank high in the scale of juristic erudition, gave an impulse to the scholarly criticism of the Roman code. At the same time he was busy as a translator from the Greek. His versions of Epictetus, Herodian, Hippocrates, Galen, Plutarch‘s Eroticus and Plato’s Charmidcr delighted contemporaries by a certain limpid fluency of Latin style and grace of manner which distinguished him also

[graphic]

as an original writer. Of these learned labours the most universally acceptable to the public of that time were a series of discursive essays on philology and criticism, first published in 1489 under the title of Miscellanea. They had an immediate, a lasting and a wide renown, encouraging the scholars of the next century and a half to throw their occasional discoveries in the field of scholarship into a form at once so attractive and so instructive. Poliziano was not, however, contented with these simply professorial and scholastic compositions. Nature had endowed him with literary and poetic gifts of the highest order. These he devoted to the composition of Latin and Greek verses, which count among the best of those produced by men of modern times in rivalry with ancient authors. The M anto, in which be pronounced a panegyric of Virgil; the Ambra, which contains a beautiful idyllic sketch of Tuscan landscape, and a studied eulogy of Homer; the Rusticus, which celebrated the pleasures of country life in no frigid or scholastic spirit; and the Nutricra, which was intended to serve as a general introduction to the study of ancient and modern poetry—these are the masterpieces of Poliziano in Latin verse, displaying an authenticity of inspiration, a sincerity of feeling, and a command of metrical resources which mark them out as original productions of poetic genius rather than as merely professorial lucubrations. Exception may be taken to their style, when compared with the best work of the Augustan or even of the Silver age. But what renders them always noteworthy to the student of modern humanistic literature is that they are in no sense imitative or conventional, but that they convey the genuine thoughts and emotions of a born poet in Latin diction and in metre moulded to suit the characteristics of the singer’s temperament.

Poliziano was great as a scholar, as a professor, as a critic, and as a Latin poet at an age when the classics were still studied with the passion of assimilative curiosity, and not with the scientific industry of a later period. He was the representative hero of that age of scholarship in which students drew their ideal of life from antiquity and fondly dreamed that they might so restore the past as to compete with the classics in production and bequeath a golden age of resuscitated paganism to the modern world. Yet he was even greater as an Italian poet. Between Boccaccio and Ariosto, no single poet in the mother tongue of Italy deserves so high a place as Poliziano. What he might have achieved in this department of literature had he lived at a period less preoccupied with humanistic studies, and had he found a congenial sphere for his activity, can only be guessed. As it is, we must reckon him as decidedly the foremost and indubitably the most highly gifted among the Italian poets who obeyed Lorenzo de’ Medici’s demand for a resuscitation of the vulgar literature. Lorenzo led the way himself, and Poliziano was more a follower in his path than an initiator. Yet what Poliziano produced, impelled by a courtly wish to satisfy his patron’s whim, proves his own immeasurable superiority as an artist. His principal Italian works are the stanzas called La Giostra, written upon Giuliano de’ Medici’s victory in a tournament; the Orfeo, a lyrical drama performed at Mantua with musical accompaniment; and a collection of fugitive pieces, reproducing various forms of Tuscan popular poetry. La Giostra had no plan, and remained imperfect; but it demonstrated the capacities of the octave stanza for rich, harmonious and sonorous metrical efiect. The Orfeo is a slight piece of work, thrown off at a heat, yet abounding in unpremeditated lyrical beauties, and containing in itself the germ both of the pastoral play and of the opera. The Tuscan songs are distinguished by a “ roseate fluency,” an exquisite charm of half romantic, half humorous abandonment to fancy, which mark them out as improvisations of genius. It may be added that in all these departments of Italian composition Poliziano showed how the taste and learning of a classical scholar could be engra'fted on the stock of the vernacular, and how the highest perfection of artistic form might be attained in Italian without a sacrifice of native spontaneity and natural flow of language. ’

It is difficult to combine in one view the several aspects presented to us by this many-sided man of literary genius. At a period when humanism took the lead in forming Italian charac— ter. and giving tone vto European culture, he climbed with facility to the height of achievement in all the branches of scholarship which were then most seriously prized~—in varied knowledge of'ancient authors, in critical capacity, in rhetorical and poetical exuberance. This Was enough at that epoch to direct the attention of allthe learned men of Europe on Poliziano. At the same time, almbst' against his own inclination, certainly with very little enthusiasm on his part, he lent himself so successfully to Lorenzo de’ Medici’s scheme for resuscitating the decayed literature of Tuscany that his slightest Italian cflusions exercised a potent influence on the immediate future. He appears before us as the dictatoir of Italian culturelin a double capacity—as the man who most perfectly expressed the Italian conception of humanism, and brought erudition into accord with the pursuit of noble and harmonious form, and also as the man whose vernacular compositions were more significant than any others of the'great'revolution in favour of Italian poetry- which culminated in Ariosto. Beyond the sphere of pure scholarship and pure literature Poliziano did. nut-venture. He was present, indeed, at the attack made by the Pazzi conspirators on the persons of Lorenzo “and Giuliano de’ Medici, and wrote an interesting faccount of'its partial success. He also contributed a curious document on the death of Lorenzo de’ Medici to the students of Florentine history.‘ But he' was not, like many other humanists of his age, concerned in public affairs of state or diplomacy, and he held no ofiice except that of professor at Florence. His private life was also uneventful. He passed it as a house-friend and dependant of the Medici, as the idol of the learned world, and as a simple man of letters for whom (with truly Tuscan devotion to the Saturnian country) rural pleasures were always acceptable. He was never married; and his morals incurred suspicion, to which his own Greek verses lend a certain amount of plausible colouring. In character Poliziano was decidedly inferior to the intellectual and literary eminence which he displayed. He died, half broken-hearted by the loss of his friend and patron Lorenzo de’ Medici, on the 24th of September 1494, just before the wave of foreign invasion which was gathering in France swept over Italy.

For the life and works of Politian, see F. O. Mencken (Leipzig, 1736), a vast repertory of accumulated erudition; Jac. Mah1y, An elus Politianus (Leipzig, 1864); Carducci's edition of the ltaian poems (Florence, Barbera, 1863); Del Lungo's edition of the Italian prose works and Latin and Greek poems (Florence, Barbera, 1867); the OPera omnia (Basel, 1554); Greswell's English Life of Politian (1805); Roscoe's Lorenzo de’ Jiledici (roth ed., 1851); J. Addington Symonds’s Renaissance in Italy, and transla

tions from Poliziano's Italian poems in Symonds's Sketches and Studies in Italy, which include the Orfeo. (J. A. S.)

POLK, JAMES KNOX (1795—1849), eleventh president of the United States, was born in Mecklenburg county, North Carolina, on the 2nd of November 1795. In 1806 he crossed the mountains with his parents and settled in what is now Maury county, Tennessee. He graduated from the university of North Carolina in ISIS, studied law in the office of Felix Grundy (r777—184o) at Nashville in 1819—1820, was admitted to the bar in 1820, and began to practise in Columbia, the county-seat of Maury county. After two years of service (1823—1825) in the state House of Representatives, he represented the sixth Tennessee district in the National House of Representatives from 1825 to 1839. In the party conflicts which succeeded the presidential election of 1824 he sided with the Jackson—Van Buren faction, and soon became recognized as leader of the Democratic forces. He was speaker from 1835 until 1839, when he retired from Congress to become governor of Tennessee. His administration (1839—184 1) was successful, but he was unable to overcome the popular Whig movement of that 'period, and was defeated in 1841 and again in 1843. When the Democratic national convention met in Baltimore in 1844 he was mentioned as a possible candidate for the Vice-presidency, but was suddenly brought forward as a “ dark horse ” and selected to head the ticket. Finding it impossible under the two-thirds rule to nominate their candidate, the followers of Van Buren brought forward Polk, who was popular

[graphic]

in the South, in order to defeat Lewis Cass and James Buchanan. George Bancroft, the historian, has asserted that this suggestion came originally from him, and Gideon J. Pillow, Polk’s intimate friend, did much to bring about the nomination.

The unequivocal stand of Polk and his party in favour of the immediate annexation of Texas and the adoption of a vigorous policy in Oregon contrasted favourably with the timid vacillations of Henry Clay and the Whigs. Polk was elected, receiving 170 electoral votes to 105 for his opponent Clay. In forming his cabinet he secured the services of James Buchanan of Pennsylvania, as secretary of state, Robert J. Walker of Mississippi, as secretary of the treasury, William L. Marcny New York, as secretary of war, and George Bancroft, then of Massachusetts, as secretary of the navy.1 There is no doubt that each of these men, and Bancroft in particular, influenced the policy of the administration, yet the historian James Schquler, who has made a careful study of the Polk papers, is doubtless correct in saying that the president himself was “ the 'framer of the public policy which he carried into so successful execution, and that instead of being led (as many might have imagined) by the more famous statesmen of his administration and party who surrounded him, he in reality led and shaped his OWn executive course.” Bancroft’s opinion is that Polk 'was “prudent, far-sighted, bold, exceeding any Democrat of his day in his undeviatingly correct exposition of Demoératic principles.”

The four chief events of President Polk’s administration were the final establishment of the independent treasury system, the reduction of the tariff by the Walker Bill of 1846, the adjustment of the Oregon boundary dispute with Great Britain by the treaty concluded on the 15th of June 1846, and the war with Mexico and the consequent acquisition of territory in the south-west and west. The first three of these were recommended in his first annual message, and he privately announced to Bancroft his determination to seize California. The independent treasury plan originated during Van Buren’s administration as a Democratic measure; it had been repealed by the Whigs in 1841, and was now re-enacted. Protectionists contend that the tarifl legislation of 1846 was in direct violation of a pledge given to the Democrats of Pennsylvania in a letter written by Polk during the campaign to John K. Kane of Philadelphia. Briefly summarized, this letter approves of a tariff for revenue with incidental protection, whereas the annual message of the 2nd of December 1845 criticizes the whole theory of protection and urges the adoption of a revenue tariff just sufficient to meet the needs of the government conducted on an economical basis. It is difficult to determine whether this was always his idea of incidental protection, or whether his views were changed after 1844 through the influence of Walker and the example set by Sir Robert Peel in Great Britain, or whether he was simply “ playing politics ” to secure the protectionist vote in Pennsylvania.

The one overshadowing issue of the time, however, was territorial expansion. Polk was an ardent expansionist, but the old idea that his policy was determined entirely by a desire to advance the interests of slavery is no longer accepted. As a matter of fact, he was personally in favour of insisting upon 54° 40' as the boundary in Oregon, and threw upon Congress the responsibility for accepting 49° as the boundary, and be approved the acquisition of California, Utah and New Mexico, territory from which slavery was excluded by geographical and climatic conditions. Furthermore a study of his manuscript diary now shows that he opposed the efforts of Walker and Buchanan in the Cabinet, and of Daniel S. Dickinson (1800—1866) of New York and Edward A. Hannegau (d. 1859) of Indiana, in the Senate, to retain the whole of Mexico, territory in which slavery might have thrived. At the close of his term (March 4, 1849) Polk retired to his home in Nashville, Tennessee, where he died on the r5th of the following June.

1 Bancroft served until September I846, when he was appointed minister to England. He was succeeded as secretary of the navy by Johln J. Mason, who had previously held the office of attomeygenera . '

See John S. Jenkins, Jame: Knox Polk (Auburn and Buffalo, 1850), and L. B. Chase, History of the Polk Admmislratum (New York, 1850), both of which contain some documentary material, but are not discriminating in their method of treatment. Qeorge Bancroft contributed a good short sketch to J. G. Wilson's President: 0 the United States (New York, 2nd ed., 1894). He made copies of t e Polk manuscripts and was workin upon a_detailed biograph at the time of his death in 1821. hese copies, now deposited, in the Lenox Library, New Yor City, contain a diary in 24 typewritten volumes, besides some correspondence and other

rivate papers. They have been used by James Schouler in his glislorical Brier (New York, 1896), and by E. G. Bourne in an article entitl “The Proposed Absorption of Mexico in 1847— 1848," published in the Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1899, i. 1 7-1 (Washington, 1900). Bourne discusses the part which Pol too in preventing the complete absorption of Mexico. See also the Diary of James K. Polk . . . . I845 10 1849 (Chicago, 4 vols., 1910), edited by M. M. Quaifeiw R S )

POLK, LEONIDAS (1806—1864), American soldier, was born at Raleigh, North Carolina, on the 10th of April 1806, and was a cousin of James Knox Polk, president of the United States. He was educated at West Point, but afterwards studied theology and took orders in the Protestant Episcopal Church in 1831. In 1838 he became missionary bishop of the South-West, Arkansas, Indian Territory, Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, and in 1841 he was consecrated bishop of Louisiana. His work in the Church was largely of an educational kind, and he played a prominent part in movements for the establishment of higher

[graphic]

educational institutions in the South. At the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861 he resigned his bishopric and, like many other clergymen and ministers of religion, entered the army which was raised to defend the Confederacy. His rank in the hierarchy and the universal respect in which he was held in the South, rather than his early military education, caused him to be appointed to the important rank of major-general. He fortified the post of Columbus, Kentucky, the foremost line of defence on the Mississippi, against which Brigadier-General U. S. Grant directed the ofiensive reconnaissance of Belmont in the autumn. In the following spring, the first line of defence having fallen, Polk commanded a corps at Shiloh in the field army commanded by Albert Sidney Johnston and Beauregard. In October r862 he was promoted lieutenant-general, and thenceforward he commanded one of the three corps of the army of Tennessee under Bragg and afterwards was in charge of the Department of Alabama, Mississippi and East Louisiana. He was killed in the fighting in front of Marietta, while reconnoitring near Pine Mountain, Georgia, on the 14th of June 1864.

See Life, by his son W. M. Polk, (1893).

POLKA‘ (either from the Czech pulka, half, with an allusion to the short steps characteristic of the dance, or from the Polish Polka, feminine of Polak, a Pole), a lively dance of

Bohemian origin, danced to music written in % time. (See DANCE.)

[ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
« السابقةمتابعة »