Talk:Richard Worsam Meade I/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Kaiser matias (talk · contribs) 20:17, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~Will review shortly. Kaiser matias (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2019 (UTC)~~[reply]

Comments

"...was an American merchant and art collector, the father of Civil War General George Gordon Meade." Should be "and the father..."

"...and was U.S. naval agent there." "...and was the U.S. naval agent there."

"At first he became quite wealthy and as a consequence, one of the first American collectors of European art." Can be re-worded: "Meade became quite wealthy and was one of the first American collectors of European art."

"Under the Adams–Onís Treaty he unsuccessfully sought compensation for the nearly $400,000 Spanish debt from the U.S. government." I would reword the second half: "he sought compensation form the U.S. government for the nearly $400,000 owed to him by the Spanish."

"The Meade claim became known for its longevity as his descendants continued to pursue it long after his death." Was it ever resolved? I'd note that here, whatever the answer may be.

"He was born..." "Meade was born..." (first mention of the subject in the body of the article, so use his name).

"...which Meade estimated to be close to $1 million..." Denote what dollar is being used (link to US dollar if that's the case). Also is there any reference to contemporary or modern value of $1 million in 1803? I realise it's a lot, but some context is always good.

As well, was there any reason his attempt to claim the money was unsuccessful?

"However, he decided to move his business to the port of Cadiz..." Is there a reason he decided to move?

"President Thomas Jefferson, a relatively of Hackley's..." Do you mean "relative"?

"...Meade extensively supplied the Spanish monarchy against the French invasion." Supplied with what? I see flour mentioned in the next sentence, but it should be made clear here as well if it was money or food or whatever.

"...he was fined two thousand ducats for libel." First link "ducat" and again give context to its value: is it a lot, a little, etc.

"They continued to petition Congress into the 20th century." Did they eventually stop, or was it resolved? It's unclear.

The caption of the Lansdowne portrait of Washington is a little brief. I'd mention it is the Lansdowne portrait at the very least.

For the children, any idea of their years of death? Not important to have, but it would just be more complete.

There is a citation with the author listed as "Sergeant, John?" I'm of the opinion that if the author is not known, leave it blank, though if that is the convention for this particular publication, then ignore this suggestion.

Nothing too major to worry about, and I'll take a look over once these are addressed, but should be good to go after. Kaiser matias (talk) 15:52, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The fate of the Meade claim is unclear. Secondary sources I've read don't mention it. I've searched the Congressional Record and have seen no successful bill; it seems like they just stop being introduced around the mid-20th century. But that does not mean the family was not lobbying after that. It seemed appropriate for the article to state the facts even if this leaves it open-ended.
I've provided an inflation adjustment for the first dollar figure, and a conversion from Spanish ducats. That seems like it provides enough context without the need to adjust every figure.
Why the claim for the $1 million on his first trip to Spain was unsuccessful is not mentioned in the secondary sources. I get the sense that seeking restitution was a long shot to begin with; it had to do with property confiscated at Buenos Aires under what Stowe calls "murky circumstances".
Atzbach and Stowe infer that Meade entered business in Cadiz because of its importance in the trans-Atlantic trade. If there was a more specific trigger than seeing favorable business conditions, it's not mentioned.
"The Case of Richard W. Meade" purports to be published at Cadiz. It lists no single author on the title page, but it contains a memorial signed by Meade as well as several supporting letters from US and Spanish officials. The apparent intent is to suggest Meade himself as the author of the pamphlet. But Cleaves says it "came probably from [Sergeant's] hand"; Stowe says Sergeant "likely penned" it. I followed the Turabian recommendation for listing an anonymous author "known or guessed at" but uncertain.
Your other comments have been addressed. Kim Post (talk) 19:02, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great, looks good, and thanks for clarifying the above. Kaiser matias (talk) 19:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]