Home → Columnists ( July 8, 2026 )
On Tuesday last, agreeably to arrangements, the citizens of this and the neighboring towns assembled to commemorate the “fiftieth” anniversary of that great and glorious day, which declared that these states should be “free and independent.” About eleven o’clock a procession was formed, under the direction of Wm. Jessup, Esq. Marshal of the day, and marched to the Presbyterian meeting house, where the Exercises were commenced by an able and appropriate prayer by the Rev. B. Baldwin – then followed an address, suited to the occasion, with the reading of the Declaration of Independence, by Doct. Charles Fraser, after which an Oration, which would do honor to the head and heart of any gentleman, was pronounced by A. [Almon] H. Read, Esq.
At the close of the exercises, the procession was again formed, and proceeded in beautiful order to a well stocked table, prepared by E. Fuller. After the cloth was removed, the toasts which follow, were drank, accompanied by the discharge of cannon and the hearty cheers of the company, Jonah Brewster, Esq. presiding, assisted by Maj. Benj. Lathrop.
We cannot refrain from remarking, in this place, that, in our opinion this memorable event, which has called millions together, once in each year for fifty years, was never celebrated in a manner more honorable to all engaged, and more gratifying to the feelings of the moral and religious part of community, than the fiftieth anniversary. No drunkenness, no rioting, nor any thing occurred to disturb the good feeling which seemingly pervaded every bosom.
It was highly gratifying to observe, seated at the head of the table, twelve of the heroes of the Revolution, assisting, and seemingly participating in all the fervor of youth, with their children, and their children’s children, in the general rejoicing for the enjoyment of those privileges which they fifty years ago spilt their best blood to establish.
1. The day – While the nations of Europe celebrate the nativity of their monarchs – our Jubilee is the birthday of the nation, and of equal rights – May they emulate our example.
2. Our political institutions – The experience of half a century has tested their stability.
3. The memory of Washington.
4. The heroes and statesmen of the Revolution – The tears of national gratitude have bedewed the graves of the departed – may the survivors receive a more solid remuneration.
5. The President of the United States.
6. The Governor of Pennsylvania.
7. The Congress of the United States – More doing and less talking.
8. The Army and Navy of the United States – The best guarantee of peace.
9. Agriculture, Manufactures and Commerce – The three pillars of national prosperity.
10. Bolivar, the hero and statesman of the South – May no improper act ever tarnish his fame.
11. The Republics of the South – May their councils be guided by wisdom and union, peace and prosperity reign within their borders.
12. The Ex-Presidents of the United States.
13. The Ladies – God bless them.
The Orator of the day.
By Asa Dimock, Jr. – The Declaration of Independence – Who will doubt the inspiration of its author.
By J. Brewster, Esq. – General Jackson – He needs no fawning sycophants, no political Jesuits, to spread the glory of his achievements! His fame is as broad as the earth, and its height will extend to all succeeding generations.
By Wm. Salmon, Esq. – The United States America. – As worthy the emulation of all nations, as she is fearless of any.
By F. F. Jones – Correct principles against private interest. – The cause of the United States Gaines upon the Troup of Georgia.
By Daniel Ross – Gen. Andrew Jackson – The retaliation for the eight dollar scalps sold to John Bull – the next president.
More news reported in this newspaper:
MARRIED. In Lenox, n Monday the 3rd inst. by J. B. Bill, Esq., Mr. Erastus Corey, to Miss Amy Bell, of the former place.
DIED. In Exeter, Luzerne co., on the 26th ult., Mr. John Harding, aged 63.
NOTICE. The person that borrowed the History of the late War, will please to return the same to the Subscriber immediately. DANIEL CURTIS.
In April 2024, there was a shooting on Broad Street in Philadelphia. No one was injured. The police recovered spent shell casings from a 9mm pistol. The police then began to canvas the various surveillance cameras in the neighborhood and where able to get a video of the shooter as a person wearing an all-black outfit with a black hood pulled over the face, a white lining inside the hood and white socks. Thereafter, using time stamps, the police tracked the black-clothed shooter at various locations both prior to and after the shooting occurred.
On May 24, 2024, in an unrelated incident, the police recovered a 9mm pistol from Tysheen Reed. The police had the pistol tested – and it matched the shell casings that were recovered at the location of the shooting on Broad Street three weeks earlier. Thereafter, Reed was charged with a criminal attempt to commit an aggravated assault and various gun charges. The matter proceeded to a preliminary hearing and the judge concluded that there was sufficient evidence to hold the case for trial.
In the trial court, Reed filed a motion to dismiss the charges contending that there was insufficient evidence to support the charges. Reed noted that the video evidence of the shooting never clearly showed his face, that there were many people wearing black clothing in all the videos, and his mere possession of the firearm three-weeks later was not significant because of “the frequency with which handguns change hands” in Philadelphia. The trial court agreed and dismissed the charged. The Commonwealth appealed.
The Superior Court noted that when a trial court considers a motion to dismiss charges, it must consider all evidence in a light most favorable to the Commonwealth. The trial court cannot weigh the evidence. The trial court cannot assess the credibility of the evidence. The trial court must accept all evidence as true – and likewise take all reasonable inferences from that evidence in a manner most favorable to the Commonwealth. In other words, the trial court is not the jury, which has the responsibility as the finder of fact to weigh and assess the credibility and believability of the evidence.
With this standard in mind, the Superior Court concluded that the video evidence tracked an individual dressed in black clothing with a black hood with white lining and white socks over a considerable geographic span both prior to and immediately after the shooting. While it may be true that the defense can argue that it was not Reed, or that the video evidence was not clear enough to support proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the Superior Court explained that the Commonwealth presented sufficient evidence form which a jury could reasonable infer that the video evidence demonstrated Reed’s course of travel – and placed him at and around the scene of the shooting.
While the defense likewise contended that the time stamps on the videos were not reliable, the Superior Court again noted that this is a question for the jury – not the trial court. The trial court had to accept the evidence presented by the Commonwealth as true – and even if the defense had raised questions regarding the veracity of the video time stamps, the trial court could not make that credibility determination; rather, weighing and assessing the evidence rests with the jury after the trial.
Finally, as to Reed contention that you cannot infer that he was the shooter simply because he possessed the handgun three weeks later – especially in a place like Philadelphia where handguns are apparently traded more readily than baseball cards – the Superior Court again explained that a reasonable inference can be drawn that Reed was the shooter because he was found in possession of the firearm used in the shooting. The strength of this inference is to be determined by the jury which will eventually consider Reed’s argument that handguns never stay with one owner for very long on the streets of Philadelphia. The trial court was reversed, the charges reinstated, and Reed will be heading to trial.
This case presents a great example of something the public – and certainly the media – often misinterpret in the early stages of a criminal proceeding. When a judge determines that there is sufficient evidence to have a criminal matter proceed to a jury trial, this is a very low bar because the court must accept everything presented by the government as true – even if the trial court thinks that the evidence is weak tea. So long as the government has presented some evidence to support each element of a criminal offense, the case proceeds to trial as it is the jury’s job to weight the evidence – not the trial judge.
Good day dear hearts, I love you. Every one of us knows what it feels like to have an unmet need. Some are small, like a bill that arrives before the paycheck does. Others cut deeper, like loneliness that lingers, prayers that seem unanswered, or a longing for direction when life takes a turn we didn’t expect. Unmet needs are part of human experience and they often arrive without warning. They can shake our confidence, test our faith and leave us wondering whether God sees what we’re going through. Paul understood this reality well. When he wrote to the Philippians, he wasn’t sitting in comfort. He was in prison, facing uncertainty, hardship and isolation. Yet from that place of lack, he penned one of the most reassuring promises in all of Scripture: “And my God will supply all your needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus.” He follows it with a declaration of praise: “To our God and Father be glory forever and ever. Amen.” Philippians 4:19-20. These verses don’t deny the existence of unmet needs, they speak directly into them.
When our needs go unmet, our first instinct is often frustration. We want solutions, answers and relief. But unmet needs also reveal something deeper, they expose what we rely on. They show us where we place our trust. They uncover whether our confidence rests in our own ability, in other people, or in God Himself. Paul’s promise in Philippians 4:19 is not a blank check for every desire. It is a reminder that God knows the difference between what we want and what we truly need. And sometimes, unmet needs are the very tools God uses to draw us closer to Him. They remind us that we are not self-sufficient. They push us to pray again, to seek again, to trust again.
If unmet needs reveal our dependence, they also reveal God’s character. Paul says God will supply our needs “according to His riches in glory.” That means God gives out of His abundance, not out of scarcity. He is not limited by our circumstances, our resources, or our fears. His supply is not measured by the size of our problem but by the size of His glory. This is important because unmet needs often make God feel distant. We assume that if He hasn’t answered yet, He isn’t listening. But Paul reminds us that God’s provision is rooted in His nature. He is faithful. He is generous. He is aware. And He is never late, though He often arrives later than we would prefer. One of the quiet assurances of Philippians 4:19 is that God sees what we need, even when we don’t say it out loud. Some needs are too personal to share. Some are too painful to articulate. Some are buried so deeply we barely admit them to ourselves. Yet God sees them all. He sees the parent praying for a child who has wandered far from home. He sees the widow who sits in a quiet house wishing for one more conversation. He sees the worker who wonders how long the job will last. He sees the person who smiles in public but cries in private. Unmet needs are not invisible needs. They are seen by the God who promises to supply.
Paul wrote his promise to a church that had just given sacrificially to support him. They met his need and then he reminded them that God would meet theirs. But God’s provision doesn’t always arrive through the channels we expect. Sometimes He supplies through people. Sometimes through opportunities. Sometimes through strength we didn’t know we had. Sometimes through a closed door that protects us from something we didn’t see coming. And sometimes through patience, because waiting is part of His provision too. God’s supply is not always immediate, but it is always intentional. Paul ends with praise: “To our God and Father be glory forever and ever.” He praises God before the Philippians receive what they need. That’s faith. That’s trust. That’s confidence in the character of God rather than the timing of God. Praise in the middle of unmet needs is not denial, its declaration. It says, “I believe God is working even when I cannot see it.” It says, “I trust His heart even when I don’t understand His hand.” It says, “My need is real, but so is His promise.”
Philippians 4:19–20 is not just a verse for the first-century church. It is a promise for every believer who has ever faced a need they could not meet on their own. It is for the family struggling to make ends meet. It is for the person wrestling with fear. It is for the one who feels forgotten. It is for the one who wonders what tomorrow will bring. God’s supply is not limited by our lack. His riches are not diminished by our needs. And His promise is not weakened by our circumstances. Unmet needs are part of life, but they are not the end of the story. Paul reminds us that God is both aware of our needs and committed to meeting them. Not always in the way we expect. Not always in the time we prefer. But always according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus. And that is why, even in seasons of lack, we can join Paul in saying, “To our God and Father be glory forever and ever.” Because the God who sees our needs is the same God who supplies them. God Bless.
Dear Lord, as we enter the dog days of summer bless us with your guidance, watch over us, keep us safe. Touch the hearts of all those in need. Amen.