Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette

April 16

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (April 16, 1775).

“He finds himself obliged to raise the subscription to Fifteen Shillings a year instead of Ten.”

As Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette; or, the Baltimore General Advertiser neared the end of its first year of publication, John Dunlap, the printer, ran a notice addressed “TO THE SUBSCRIBERS.”  In the April 16, 1776, edition, just a couple of weeks shy of the anniversary of establishing the newspaper, that notice appeared first among the advertisements.  Dunlap exercised his discretion as printer to give his notice a privileged place.

“AS the price of Printing Paper is greatly encreased since the first Publication of the Maryland Gazette, and the labor an expence of Publishing and delivering it to the Subscribers much more than the Printer expected” he explained, “he finds himself obliged to raise the subscription to Fifteen Shillings a year instead of Ten.”  Dunlap happened to commence publication a couple of weeks after the battles at Lexington and Concord.  The Continental Association, a nonimportation agreement devised by the Second Continental Congress in protest of the Intolerable Acts, already disrupted the supply of paper.  The outbreak of war meant even more shortages, causing some printers in New England to make adjustments or to suspend publication.  Printers in other regions also commented on the scarcity of paper and its impact on their newspapers.  To make matters even more complicated, Dunlap continued publishing Dunlap’s Pennsylvania Packet in Philadelphia and entrusted his printing office in Baltimore to James Hayes, Jr.  They experienced other difficulties, including the theft of newspapers intended for delivering in Elk Ridge, Annapolis, and Alexandria in the summer of 1775.

Now Dunlap found it necessary to increase the annual subscription significantly, raising it from ten shilling to fifteen.  “Those who do not approve of this advance,” he advised, “are desired to call and pay off as speedily as possible.”  Those customers presumably dealt with Hayes in the printing office on Market Street in Baltimore rather than directly with Dunlap.  He also called on “they who think him not unreasonable in his Demands … to pay up their former subscriptions, which will prevent confusion hereafter.”  Whatever their decision about whether to continue receiving Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette, the printer wanted subscribers to check in to confirm their decision and, just as importantly, to pay what they owed for the past year.  Printers often allowed generous credit to subscribers and depended on advertising revenue to make their newspapers viable ventures.  Dunlap did brisk business in advertising, but he apparently wished for more security than those paid notices provided.  The issue that carried his notice also featured resolutions passed “In CONGRESS” in Philadelphia and a “Proclamation … by his Excellency General Washington, on his taking possession of the town of Boston.”  If subscribers wished to continue receiving such news, they needed to share the cost with advertisers by paying more for their subscriptions.

March 26

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (March 26, 1776).

“All Watch and Clock Maker’s please to stop the above mentioned Watch.”

What happened to Alexander Shaw’s watch?  In an advertisement in Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette, he reported that it had been “STOLEN out of the house of James Carson, in Gay-street” in Baltimore on March 12, 1776.  He did not give other details about the circumstances, instead focusing on a description of the “SILVER WATCH.”  It could be identified as “No. 178, the make’s name Daniel Hubert, White Frier’s, London,” though Shaw did not indicate whether those details had been engraved on the watch or appeared on a watch paper that protected the face of the watch when stored.  Other identifying characteristics included: “siler faced, with a pinchbeck chain, and a seal stamped King George’s head.”  Shaw offered a reward of forty shillings to anyone who returned the watch to him.

He also took an opportunity to enlist the aid of watchmakers and clockmakers in recovering his stolen watch.  In a nota bene, he requested that they “stop the above mentioned Watch, if given to be cleaned or offered for sale.”  Artisans and shopkeepers sometimes placed advertisements to alert readers that they “stopped” or confiscated items that they suspected had been stolen and presented to them for repairs, for sale, or to barter.  Thieves, burglars, and shoplifters participated in what Serena Zabin has called an “informal economy” that gave them access to consumer culture in early America, though not everyone who possessed stolen goods had taken them.  Instead, consumers active in the “informal economy” purchased items that had been fenced, sometimes knowingly and sometimes unknowingly.  Shaw seemed less concerned with capturing whoever had stolen his watch than with recovering it, perhaps realizing that anyone who took it to a watchmaker or clockmaker to have it cleaned or to sell it had not necessarily stolen it.  He hoped that the reward would encourage members of that trade to be vigilant in examining watches brought to their shops, increasing the chances of recovering his precious keepsake.  Many newspaper notices promoted goods to consumers, but Shaw used this advertisement to recover an item previously in his possession.

March 12

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (March 12, 1776).

“AN ORATION, IN MEMORY OF GENERAL MONTGOMERY.”

The March 12, 1776, edition of Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette carried an advertisement for “AN ORATION, IN MEMORY OF GENERAL MONGTOMERY: And of the OFFICERS and SOLDIERS who fell with him before QUEBEC.”  Readers knew well that Major General Richard Montgomery, the commander of the American invasion of Canada, had been killed in action in failed attack on Quebec City on December 31, 1775.  The deaths of Montgomery and Major General Joseph Warren at the Battle of Bunker Hill on June 17, 1775, had been the most significant losses during the first year of the Revolutionary War.  After the war, John Trumbull memorialized both patriots in paintings that depicted their sacrifice.

Shortly after Montgomery’s death, the Continental Congress invited William Smith, an Anglican minister and provost of the College of Philadelphia (now the University of Pennsylvania, to preach at a memorial service for Montgomery on February 19, 1776.  The message that he delivered surprised many members of the Continental Congress, angering them with the blatant loyalism he espoused.  As Christopher A. Hunter outlines, Smith “prais[ed] Montgomery’s ‘loyalty to his sovereign.’”  Furthermore, he proclaimed that “the delegated voice of the continent … supports me in praying for a restoration ‘of the former harmony between Great Britain and these Colonies.”[1]  Smith directly quoted the Olive Branch Petition, a final effort to broker peace and a redress of grievances.  When George III refused to even read that missive, it convinced many colonizers that reconciliation was not possible.

In a letter to Abigail Adams, John described the oration as “an insolent Performance” and described what happened after William Livingston, a delegate from New Jersey, suggested that the Continental Congress publish Smith’s memorial to Montgomery.  “A Motion was made to Thank the orator and ask a Copy—But opposed with great Spirit, and Vivacity from every Part of the Room, and at last withdrawn, lest it be should be rejected as it certainly would have been with Indignation.”  Yet an advertisement for the oration appeared in Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette and several other newspapers.  “The orator then printed it himself,” Adams continued, “after leaving out or altering some offensive Passages.”  Hunter notes that Smith doubled down on some parts that Adams and others found most troublesome, “adding a preface declaring, ‘whatever claim he may have to the appellation of a good Citizen or Friend to Liberty’ must rest on his efforts to prevent American independence.”[2]

John Dunlap, the printer of Dunlap’s Pennsylvania Packet and Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette, printed the “ORATION,” advertised it in his newspapers, and sold it at his printing offices in Philadelphia and Baltimore.  Despite the controversy, printers in New York, Newport, and Norwich published local editions, disseminating even more copies.  Each also published, marketed, and sold their own editions of Thomas Paine’s Common Sense, a pamphlet that strongly advocated for declaring independence.  Perhaps they thought that honoring Montgomery and the officers and soldiers killed during the Battle of Quebec outweighed the portions of Smith’s commentary that patriots found so “insolent.”  Perhaps they merely sought to generate revenue by publishing a pamphlet that commemorated Montgomery.  Maybe they simultaneously pursued both courses.  Whatever their inspiration, readers of Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette and other newspapers repeatedly saw Montgomery memorialized when they perused the advertisements.  Many likely did not associate that act of veneration with the problematic rhetoric Smith introduced in his “ORATION.”

**********

[1] Christopher A. Hunter, “William Smith’s Catonian Loyalism, Race, and the Politics of Language,” Early American Literature 52, no. 3 (2017): 531.

[2] Hunter, “William Smith’s Catonian Loyalism,” 531.

February 13

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (February 13, 1776).

“FATHER ABRAHAM’s ALMANACK, For the Year of our LORD 1776.”

John Dunlap, the printer of Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette, apparently had surplus copies of “FATHER ABRAHAM’s ALMANACK, For the Year of our LORD 1776,” that he hoped to sell in the middle of February of that year.  Although the “Astronomical Calculations by the ingenious DAVID RITTENHOUSE” for the first six weeks of the year were no longer of use to readers, the rest of the contents still had value.  Hoping to move some or all the remaining copies out of his printing office in Baltimore, Dunlap once again placed an advertisement that had first appeared in Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette in October, well before the new year began and readers would refer to the calendars and astronomical calculations in the handy reference manual.  Prospective customers knew that the phrase “Just Published” at the beginning of the advertisement merely meant that copies were available to purchase, not that the almanacs just came off the press.

In addition to operating a printing shop and publishing a newspaper in Baltimore, Dunlap also ran a printing shop in Philadelphia.  It was there, according to his advertisement, that he had printed the almanac and then sent copies to his printing office in Baltimore.  He had also advertised the almanac in the newspaper he published in Philadelphia, Dunlap’s Pennsylvania Packet.  He did not, however, continue running advertisements for the almanac in that newspaper in February 1776.  Perhaps he sold out of copies in Philadelphia.  After all, he established his printing office and newspaper there before his second printing office and newspaper in Baltimore.  Consumers in Philadelphia and its hinterlands had greater familiarity with Dunlap, the printer, and Rittenhouse, the astronomer and mathematician who did the calculations for the almanac.  Alternately, Dunlap may not have continued advertising the almanac in the newspaper published at his printing office in Philadelphia because that location received a heavier volume of advertisements.  The printer may have determined that the revenue generated from advertisements submitted by customers outweighed any potential revenue from advertising the almanac once again.  With limited amount of space in each issue, delivering news also took precedence over yet another advertisement for the almanac.  Dunlap and those who labored in his printing offices may have had other reasons for continuing to advertise the almanac in Baltimore but not in Philadelphia.  Whatever the explanation, the advertisement in Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette became a familiar sight to readers over the course of several months.

December 26

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

Who was the subject of an advertisement in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (December 26, 1775).

“N.B. A Negroe woman Cook, healthy honest and sober, 33 years old.”

Alexander Stenhouse apparently wished to discontinue his medical supply business in Baltimore.  In the final week of December 1775, he placed advertisements in both Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette and the Maryland Journal that listed a “general Collection of DRUGS and MEDICINES” available for sale.  He added vials, “Large bottles for Distilled Waters,” “Pill pots of various sizes, labelled and plain,” “Mortars and pestles,” “Surgeons Instruments,” and other medical equipment.  He even included “Shop Furniture,” suggesting that he no longer needed it because he would no longer pursue that trade.  In addition, he declared that the “Drugs and Medicines will not be sold singly, so it is expected those who want will take an assortment.”  To make the offer even more attractive, Stenhouse promised a “considerable discount … to a person who will purchase the whole.”  Perhaps Stenhouse even intended to leave Baltimore.  His inventory concluded with a “Collection of Books, mostly modern publications,” and “Houshold and kitchen furniture, in general almost new.”

Stenhouse offered more than just the contents of his shop and home for sale.  In a nota bene that followed his signature, he described a “Negroe woman Cook, healthy honest and sober, 33 years old.”  The sale of that woman whose name was once known testifies to the widespread use of the early American press to perpetuate slavery and the slave trade.  At a glance, the phrases “TO BE SOLD” and “DRUGS and MEDICINES,” dominated Stenhouse’s advertisement.  The list of items for sale, divided into two columns, unlike any of the other in either newspaper, likely caught readers’ eyes as well.  Those aspects of Stenhouse’s advertisement overshadowed but did not eclipse the portion that offered an enslaved woman for sale.  The format did not indicate that Stenhouse felt any shame or embarrassment about selling a “Negroe woman Cook” and wanted to downplay it; instead, the format demonstrated just how casually enslavers incorporated such transactions into everyday advertising and routine business.  “N.B.” or nota bene, after all, meant “take note.”  Stenhouse wished for readers to “take note” that he wished to sell an enslaved woman as he “disposed of” the contents of his shop and home.

December 19

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (December 19, 1775).

“He carries on the Spinning-Wheel business in its various branches.”

In the final weeks of 1775, Robert White, a tobacconist in Baltimore, diversified his business.  He inserted an advertisement in the December 19 edition of Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette that announced that “he carries on the Spinning-Wheel business in its various branches.”  Why would a tobacconist decide to go into that line of business?  The Continental Association, a nonimportation and nonconsumption agreement devised by the Furst Continental Congress, remained in effect.  It called on colonizers to replace imported goods, including textiles, with alternatives produced in the colonies.  That meant more time spent spinning, a domestic chore that gained political significance.  Women styled Daughters of Liberty in newspaper accounts participated in public spinning bees to demonstrate their patriotism and inspire others to follow their example in their own homes.  To do so, they needed the right equipment.  White saw an expanding market for spinning wheels.

He was not alone in marketing equipment for producing homespun cloth.  His advertisement happened to appear immediately above Fergus McIllroy’s notice promoting “LOOMS made properly, for carrying on the Linen and Woolen Weaving-business.”  McIllroy, a “House Joiner,” also pursued a new line of work, though in his case doing so did not depart nearly as much from his primary occupation.  In addition, he reported that he had previously constructed more than two hundred looms in Ireland before migrating to the colonies.  White, the tobacconist, did not invoke such experience when it came to spinning wheels, yet he confidently proclaimed that he “will engage” his spinning wheels “to be as good as any made on the Continent” because “he has procured some of the best hands that could be had.”  In turn, White “flatters himself” that his workers and the spinning wheels they produced “will meet with general approbation” or approval from customers.  The tobacconist apparently served as a supervisor, an entrepreneur who established a business when he identified need for it during difficult time yet did not participate in making the spinning wheels.  Instead, in overseeing his new business, he pledged that “his constant study will be to please all those who favours him with their Commands.”  With no resolution in sight for the imperial crisis that became a war the previous April, White’s advertisement likely resonated with readers who understand the political implications of a tobacconist deciding to produce spinning wheels.

November 28

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (November 28, 1775).

“He will engage to make Looms for the weaving of Linen an[d] Woollen.”

At the same time that David Poe advertised that he “set up … the business of SPINNING WHEEL Making” in Baltimore in November 1775, Fergus McIllroy took to the pages of Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette to inform the public that he “will engage to make Looms for the weaving of Linen an[d] Woolen.”  Both artisans responded to demand for equipment for making textiles that arose in response to the Continental Association, a nonimportation and nonconsumption agreement devised by the First Continental Congress to leverage commerce as a means of achieving political goals.  The text of the pact stated that it would remain in place until Parliament repealed duties on tea and the Coercive Acts that punished Boston for the destruction of tea in what has become known as the Boston Tea Party.  It also issued a call to “encourage Frugality, Economy, and Industry; and promote Agriculture, Arts, and the Manufactures of this Country, especially that of Wool.”

Many colonizers, both men and women, wanted to do their part in producing domestic manufactures as alternatives to imported textiles and other goods, but they needed materials and equipment.  McIllroy reported that he “repeatedly had the opportunity of hearing several of the inhabitants of this country, complaining that they cannot get LOOMS made properly, for carrying on of the Linen and Woolen Weaving-business.”  Although he currently worked as a “House Joiner,” he claimed that he “has experience of making upwards of 200” looms before he migrated to Baltimore.  That being the case, he pledged that his looms were “as good as any made in the North of Ireland.”  Yet prospective customers did not have to take his word for it: “there is many Weavers in the country that has seen his Looms in Ireland, and can answer for their goodness.”  For good measure, he added that he was a “master” when it came to making looms and “there is not a man in the Continent capable to exceed him.”

In addition, McIllroy noted the “many ways that he can make them,” so he had “models of all the different kinds, so as his customers may please themselves.”  Furthermore, they could supply the materials for constructing their looms or leave it to McIllroy to provide the materials.  In the latter instance, customers had to pay a deposit of twenty shillings before McIllroy would make their loom.  He also outlined the conditions for visiting homes to “set them up properly.”  If a town within sixty miles of Baltimore wished to order twenty or more looms, he offered to do the work there to avoid transporting the new looms over long distances.  McIllroy stood ready to contribute to the American cause with his “Industry” that in turn “promote[d] … the Manufactures of this Country,” joining with other artisans who vowed to do the same.

November 14

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (November 14, 1775).

“He has set up … the business of SPINNING WHEEL Making.”

David Poe established a workshop for making spinning wheels in Baltimore in the fall of 1775.  To attract the attention of prospective customers, he placed an advertisement in the November 14 edition of Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette, advising “his friends in particular, and the public in general, that he has set up … the business of SPINNING WHEEL Making in all its branches.”  Rather than make one spinning wheel at a time, he could produce them in quantity, “having supplied himself with a number of prime workmen for that purpose.”  Poe did not specify whether those “prime workmen” were free, indentured, or enslaved.  He instead emphasized that he “will engage to make Little Spinning or Great Wheels, equal to any made in this country.”  Furthermore, he invited readers to see for themselves, stating that he “hopes upon trial” spinning wheels made in his workshop “will prove the fact.”

Poe advertised spinning wheels at a time that they became political symbols.  In response to the Coercive Acts that Parliament passed to punish Boston after the destruction of imported tea during a protest now known as the Boston Tea Party, the First Continental Congress devised the Continental Association, a nonimportation, nonconsumption, and nonexportation pact that called on colonizers to abstain from purchasing goods, including textiles, imported from England.  The agreement also included a call for colonizers to “encourage Frugality, Economy, and Industry; and promote Agriculture, Arts, and the Manufactures of this Country, especially that of Wool.”  Poe heeded that call as homespun cloth produced in the colonies became a fashionable political statement.  Newspapers carried reports of women participating in politics by holding spinning bees in public spaces.  Rather than a useful tool operated in domestic settings, the spinning wheel became a symbol of public commitment to the American cause, a visible demonstration to friends, neighbors, and the rest of the community that industrious women hoped would inspire others to follow their lead.  Poe did his part, aiming to provide “Any Lady or Gentleman” with spinning wheels for their households.  He did not make direct reference to the Continental Association or the events that had unfolded in the seven months since the battles at Lexington and Concord, but he did not need to do so.  Readers certainly understood the connection between spinning wheels and current events.

October 31

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (October 31, 1775).

“Large allowance to those who buy Quantities to Sell again.”

When John Dunlap published “FATHER ABRAHAM’S ALMANACK, For the Year of our LORD 1776,” in the fall of 1775, he set about advertising the handy reference manual.  He gave the advertisement a privileged place in the September 11, 1775, edition of Dunlap’s Pennsylvania Packet, the newspaper he printed in Philadelphia.  It ran immediately below the lists of ships arriving and departing from the customs house, increasing the chances that readers interested more in news than advertisements would see it.  Unlike other printers who hawked almanacs, Dunlap did not provide an extensive description of the contents to entice prospective customers, though he did indicate that “the ingenious DAVID RITTENHOUSE … of this city” prepared the “Astronomical Calculations.”  The printer believed that the astronomer’s reputation would help sell copies of the almanac.

He also ran advertisements in Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette, the newspaper he printed in Baltimore.  One of those notices appeared in the October 31 edition, again highlighting Rittenhouse’s role in making the “Astronomical Calculations.”  This advertisement did not include additional information about the contents, but it did include an appeal to retails that did not appear in the first iteration of the advertisement in Dunlap’s Pennsylvania Packet on September 11 nor in the most recent insertion on October 30.  Dunlap promised a “Large allowance to those who buy Quantities to Sell again.”  In other words, he offered discounts for purchasing in volume to make the almanac attractive to booksellers, shopkeepers, and peddlers.  Did Dunlap offer the same deal at his printing office in Philadelphia yet not advertise it in the public prints?  Other printers advertised discounts for buying almanacs by the dozen or by the hundred frequently enough to suggest that it was a common practice.  Given that Philadelphia had far more printers than Baltimore, many of them publishing one or more almanacs of their own, Dunlap may have carefully managed the discounts, offering one rate in one city and another rate in the other.  That did not necessarily matter to retailers who saw his advertisement in Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette.  His printing office in Baltimore, opened less than a year earlier, gave them easier access to almanacs than in the past.  The “Large allowance” was a bonus to convince them to take advantage of the convenience rather than order almanacs from other printers in Philadelphia or Annapolis.

October 10

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette (October 10, 1775).

“A subscription book for the Military Academy, will be opened immediately.”

In the fall of 1775, Mr. Alcock advertised an academy with a specialized curriculum.  “AS there appears at this time a great alacrity amongst all ranks of people to perfect themselves in the Military Art,” he declared to readers of the Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette and the Maryland Journal, “it is presumed there are so many who would wish to possess those Mathematical Branches of it called Fortification, or Military Architecture, and Gunnery.”  To that end, Alcock, announced his plans to open a school to teach those subjects.  For his qualifications, he noted that he “made those branches a part of his studies in his youth.”  In addition, he “resided several years in some of the principal fortified towns in France, Flanders, and Holland.”  While there, he took advantage of “frequent opportunities of viewing and examining the Fortifications of the greatest Engineers those countries produced.”  In the first year of the Revolutionary War, Alcock was not the only colonizer to advertise a school of this sort.  In the summer of 1775, John Vinal advertised that he taught “the Doctrine of Projectiles, or Art of GUNNERY,” at his school in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

In advance of opening his academy in Baltimore on October 2, Alcock began advertising in early September.  His lengthy notice appeared in the Maryland Journal on September 6, 13, and 20.  It may have run in Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette as early as September 5, but that issue, if it survives, has not been digitized for wider accessibility.  Alcock’s advertisement did appear in that newspaper for at least five weeks from September 12 through October 10.  With the last two insertions, he likely hoped to pick up stragglers who had not yet enrolled yet had not missed so many classes to join the academy.  From the start, Alcock advised that a “subscription book for the Military Academy, will be opened immediately,” allowing students to commit to enrolling by signing their names.  Prospective students could also peruse the list to see who else in their community planned to attend.  Alcock intended to divide his pupils into two classes, one cohort consisting of “Gentlemen who may have learnt the necessary Branches of the Mathematics” on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays and another series of classes “for such as may have neglected those studies” on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays.

Yet Alcock would offer the course on fortifications and gunnery only if “a sufficient number of Subscribers” enrolled.  Those interested in this enterprise needed to encourage their friends and neighbors to sign up or else risk having the classes canceled.  If Alcock did not have enough students, “the undertaking will be dropped and an Evening School opened, where will be taught, Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, and all the useful branches of the Mathematics at the usual prices.”  The schoolmaster did not want to resort to that.  Accordingly, he attempted to convince prospective students of the necessity of his lessons.  “If it should be objected by some that Fortifications are not so necessary in this country defended so well by nature,” he argued, “it must be considered, that the understanding them must be absolutely necessary for every Officer, otherwise he never will be able to defend even the Field-Works with that resolution which their which their advantages when known must naturally inspire him; nor can he make the necessary approaches for attacking a Fortified Place unless he is Master of the Art.”  Prospective students apparently did not find that convincing.  On November 7, Alcock returned to Dunlap’s Maryland Gazette to advertise an evening school “where will be taught Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic” as well as “French, and the most useful branches of the Mathematics, at the usual prices.”  Either he never attracted enough students to open his “Military Academy” or classes fizzled out shortly after they began.