Whose history are we really talking about?

Hands on earth colorful peace avatarWhose history are we really talking about is a great question to focus on as it raises where we came from, our history, and everyone else's. We have learned from different teachers. The history many of us grew up with involved powerful kings, queens, wars, governments, and the development of parliamentary democracy with some historical and romantic novels. But for the British when England leaves the Catholic Church in 1534 major changes occurred after Henry the VIII that changed how we approach the subject.

Bumper Sticker VVAW

By the time we hit university things were already changing. Marxism had arrived bringing a heightened attention to the arc of class and economics. Many works like them have helped to revolutionize our view of the past, but surely began filling up with depth from new historical knowledge.

Buddha in Kamakura Avatar

Another force connected with women involved half the population followed by equally powerful questions about race and racism. The idea of history as a procession of dead white males written by live ones may sound ridiculous now, but the war to open up a wider perspective was a real one. So writers of history began demonstrating different point of emphasis and views. Soon the teaching of science and engineering became increasingly important.

Einstein world peace avatar

All exposes the current assault on the humanities within higher education as even more uncultured. The thinking goes like this: the study of history, English, philosophy or art doesn't help anyone get a job and does not contribute to the economy to the same degree that science or engineering or business studies do. I believe most of us say balderdash.

Vietnam Women and children huddled by tree at My Lai

The humanities, including history, teach people how to think analytically while at the same time appreciating innovation and creativity. Isn't that a good set of skills for most jobs?

police misconduct we can't Breathe poster 121014

One could wish that the historians were all more accurate. Who would dare mess with science in the way some fool with history.

Bob Dylan and Joan Baez

Toni Morrison brought to life the inner life of slavery, and pushed the modern reader to confront this reality. Another confronted the same difficult history from a white woman's perspective. One memoir produces anti-war feelings from gross misuse of power. Another accuses those who cringe at the horrors of Hiroshima as "hand wringers". Any society that doesn't pay proper attention to whose history we are exploring, and from what perspective, maybe starving his/her own imagination and missing an opportunity to participate spreading useful historical knowledge so mistakes of the past may be understood and avoided in the future.

sunrise over Fuji with Torii

Related Images:

The Autobiography of Benvenuto Cellini

As a high school student at an American High School at Yokohama, Japan, my English teacher required us to explore the world of history of a place and time in the past by reading and reporting on a world class autobiography. After looking at the choices available, I chose the Autobiography of Benvenuto Cellini. I brought the book home to discuss it with my naval officer Dad, Annapolis ’32 and Harvard grad school in electronics, and my new step-mother, two master’s degrees in History and Foreign Languages from U. C. Berkeley. She had been a high school principal before she married Dad to allow him to bring his children to Japan. Dad scoffed at the choice and wanted me to study military history. His wife disagreed emphasizing what an extraordinary experience it is to learn of an artist in a foreign country whose experiences are recorded in an autobiography of high repute. When I learned that Cellini was a rascal, wanted for many crimes, and nothing like the heroes other students were reading about, I was excited to learn from this highly regarded non-fiction historical book.

Benvenuto Cellini

Cellini lived from 3 November 1500 – 13 February 1571, was a goldsmith, sculptor, draftsman, soldier, musician, artist, poet, and autobiographer. Many contend Cellini’s considerable distinction is due more to his autobiography that recorded his life than it is to his extraordinary artistic creations. Those looking for adventure and intrigue will find it here as he was a wanted criminal for many charges. His autobiography began during the Romantic Movement, spoken to a helper where he worked and reads in idiomatic language. It begins with a rendition of Cellini’s episodes and creations in Rome, France, and the Florence of Cosimo de’ Medici. His hyperbole often boasts but preserves a genuine presentation of the place and time in his candid language.

Cellini's Salt Cellar (Salieri), 1543, in gold, enamel, and ivory

Cellini Salt Cellar

His notable works are too numerous to mention but they include his Cellini Salt Cellar (Salieri), 1543, in gold, enamel, and ivory; A sculpture of Perseus with the head of Medusa, now in Florence; Crafting metals, the most famous of which are "Hercules and the Nemean Lion", in gold raised in relief by hammering on the reverse side, and "Atlas supporting the Sphere", in chased gold.

Cellini A sculpture of Perseus with the head of Medusa

Perseus with the head of Medussa

Cellini Hercules and the Nemean Lion, in gold

Hercules and the Namean Lion

Cellini Atlas Supporting the sphere

Atlas supporting the sphere

Some of his female models were known mistresses, but he was bi-sexual. He was officially accused of sodomy with one woman and three men according to records. He even wrote of his planned murders in his autobiography before carrying them out. This book transported me into a wholly unknown world four hundred years ago that showed expertise I could never imagine. The value of such graphic descriptions of life in the distant past makes for an awareness that the people were much like me when the same age, but went in directions unique to me at my age thereafter. It was an adventure in making the past come alive in real people and actions that helped me imagine a life I thought I would never emulate. When a naïve teenager, it made me aware of much more than I thought possible in my high school education and frightened me with its frankness. It awakened me to the artistic, erotic, and dangerous world I might soon enter when I matured. I was fascinated by Cellini’s wildness and creativity. This was one of the best examples of how non-fiction can bring the past alive.

Related Images:

The Golden Rule and supporters present at the Onion Social Justice meeting

Sepulveda Unitarian Universalist Society Onion

The "Onion" where S.U.U.S. holds services, events, music, and presentations:

August 19, 2015 Helen Jacard spoke to the Sepulveda Unitarian Universalist Society about the Golden Rule, a 30-foot ketch and its crew, Capt. Albert Bigelow, William Huntington, George Willoughby, and Orion Sherwood, which was stopped by the Coast Guard from interfering with nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands in 1958. They were part of an international movement to stop the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. They were arrested at Honolulu, Hawaii.

Another peace keeping yacht, The Phoenix, led by Earl Reynolds, Skipper, Barbara (wife), Ted (son), Jessica (daughter), and Nick Nakami, crew member, sailed The Phoenix, into the nuclear test zone to protest nuclear testing in 1958 and were arrested. Earl was a physical anthropologist whom the Atomic Energy Commission sent to Hiroshima to research the effects of radiation on children. In 1961 they sailed to Vladivostok, Russia, with Thomas C, Yoneda replacing Nick as a crew member to share their message to the Soviet Union. For extraordinary civil disobedience, they were branded as traitors in the U. S., while Japan held them up as national heroes.

The Golden Rule was resurrected, repaired, with the help of Garberville Chapter of Veterans For Peace and other West Coast Chapters formed a movement to bring her back to sail again on June 20th 2015 carrying their peace and anti-nuclear weapon message for the next two months in California (set forth below). They plan to undertake a ten-year peacemaking voyage around North America challenging military solutions to the world problems. Helen is a part of the crew and member of Women International League For Peace and Freedom.

Albert Bigelow, is author of the book, Voyage of the Golden Rule, and a former naval officer in WWII who resigned his commission a month before he was eligible for a pension. “To Russia with Love,” An American Family Challenges Nuclear Testing, by Jessica Reynolds Renshaw, follows the Phoenix on its mission to spread the truth about radiation from nuclear testing and finding peaceful solutions rather than military ones.

Golden Rule Schedule:

8/ 27-29 in Long Beach

8/30 Arlington Memorial

8/31-9/ 1 Marina Del Rey

9/3-9/19 Seal Beach, San Luis Obispo, Morro Bay, Monterey, Santa Cruz

9/21-10/10 San Francisco Bay

10/12 Morro Bay/ Ft. Bragg

  Bomber Hiroshima Hiroshima Mushroom

(Never, ever, again!)

VVAW member Daniel C. Lavery graduated Annapolis, navigated a Navy jet, and a ship, turned peace activist and became a civil rights lawyer for Cesar Chavez's UFW. His memoir, All the Difference, describes his experiences.  www.danielclavery.com. He regularly attends the Onion presentations since 1980


Related Images:

Kelly v. General Telephone Co. (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 278 , Daniel C. Lavery for appellant

Kelly v. General Telephone Co. (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 278 , 186 Cal.Rptr. 184

[Civ. No. 64781. Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division One. October 4, 1982.]JOHN R. KELLY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent.(Opinion by Dalsimer, J., with Spencer, P. J., and Lillie, J., concurring.)COUNSEL

Daniel C. Lavery for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Albert M. Hart, H. Ralph Snyder, Jr., and Richard E. Potter for Defendant and Respondent.



Plaintiff, John Kelly, appeals from the order of dismissal entered following the sustaining of demurrers of defendant, General Telephone Company, without leave to amend.

On August 5, 1980, plaintiff filed a complaint containing three causes of action: slander, interference with business relations, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. An uncertainty demurrer to the cause of action for slander was sustained, general demurrers to the other causes of action were sustained, and plaintiff was given leave to amend.

Plaintiff's first amended complaint contained five causes of action: slander, interference with prospective advantage, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violation of Labor Code section 1050. The general demurrers to the causes of action for interference with prospective advantage and violation of Labor Code section 1050 were sustained without leave to amend. The general demurrers to the other causes of action were sustained with 30 days leave to amend. Since the order sustaining the demurrers did not include a statement of the grounds on which the order was based as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 472d, we are unable to ascertain the basis for the trial court's decision.

Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. The general demurrer to plaintiff's second amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend "per [the] points and authorities in [defendant's] moving papers."


[1] In our review of the orders sustaining the demurrers without leave to amend, we accept as true all factual allegations properly pleaded. (Daar v. Yellow Cab Co. (1967) 67 Cal.2d 695, 713 [63 Cal.Rptr. 724, 433 P.2d 732]; Goldstein v. Enoch (1967) 248 Cal.App.2d 891, 894 [136 Cal.App.3d 284] [57 Cal.Rptr. 19].) Plaintiff's cause of action for slander, the first cause of action in the second amended complaint, alleges that plaintiff voluntarily terminated his 13-month period of employment by defendant in July 1979. Plaintiff had an excellent work record with defendant and had a reputation as "a person of good name, honesty and credit." In December 1979, plaintiff reapplied for employment with defendant and was informed that he was "'ineligible for rehire.'" Plaintiff alleges that his former supervisor, Tom Hansen, "acting within the scope of his employment," said to Mr. Robert McGinity, Mr. Hansen's supervisor and managing agent of defendant, that plaintiff "'misused company funds by buying materials without the proper authorization'" and falsified invoices. Plaintiff alleges that these statements were made to various other employees of defendant, including people in the personnel office. As a result, defendant changed plaintiff's personnel records to state that he was "'ineligible for rehire.'"

Plaintiff alleges that Hansen made the statements with intent to injure plaintiff's reputation. He alleges that Hansen made the statements for the reason that he hated plaintiff because of plaintiff's union activities.

[2] Defendant argues that plaintiff did not allege publication of these statements because plaintiff alleged only that the statements were made by one of defendant's employees to other employees of defendant. This argument is without merit as publication occurs when a statement is communicated to any person other than the party defamed. (Bindrim v. Mitchell (1979) 92 Cal.App.3d 61, 79 [155 Cal.Rptr. 29], cert. den.,444 U.S. 984 [62 L.Ed.2d 412, 100 S.Ct. 490].) Under principles of respondeat superior, an employer may be held liable for a defamatory statement made by its employee. (SeeSanborn v. Chronicle Pub. Co. (1976) 18 Cal.3d 406, 411 [134 Cal.Rptr. 402, 556 P.2d 764].) That publication may involve internal corporate statements was recognized inAgarwal v. Johnson (1979) 25 Cal.3d 932, 944 [160 Cal.Rptr. 141, 603 P.2d 58], the court stating that internal company statements regarding the plaintiff's "'lack of job knowledge and cooperation'" were "published." (Ibid)

[3] The statement that plaintiff falsified invoices was slanderous per se in that it charged plaintiff with forgery. Civil Code section 46 defines slander in pertinent part as follows: "Slander is a false and unprivileged publication, orally uttered ... which: [?] 1. Charges any person with crime ...." Forgery may be committed by falsification of invoices with intent to defraud. (Pen. Code, ? 470.) The statement that plaintiff falsified [136 Cal.App.3d 285] invoices clearly implied that plaintiff did so with intent to defraud. (See Carl v. McDougal (1919) 43 Cal.App. 279, 281 [184 P. 885].)

[4a] The qualified privilege of Civil Code section 47, subdivision 3, may apply to the statement that plaintiff falsified invoices. That section provides in pertinent part that "A privileged publication ... is one made ... [?] 3. In a communication, without malice, to a person interested therein, (1) by one who is also interested ...." [5] This qualified privilege may exist where the communicator and recipient have a common interest and the communication is reasonably calculated to further that interest. (Deaile v. General Telephone Co. of California (1974) 40 Cal.App.3d 841, 846 [115 Cal.Rptr. 582].) Communication among a company's employees that is designed to insure honest and accurate records involves such a common interest.

[4b] Malice necessary to prevent application of the qualified privilege may be alleged by pleading that the publication was motivated by hatred or ill will toward the plaintiff. (SeeSanhorn v. Chronicle Pub. Co., supra, 18 Cal.3d 406, 413-414.) Plaintiff alleges, "the statements set forth above were published ... with express and implied malice and with design and intent to injure plaintiff in his good name, reputation and employment .... The statements were made with malice in fact by Tom Hansen ... in that: ... [?] (c) Mr. Hansen ... harbored ill will and hatred for the plaintiff in that he has a history of being active with his union ...." By these allegations, plaintiff sufficiently pleaded malice. (See ibid) The trial court erred in sustaining the demurrer to the cause of action for slander.


Plaintiff employs in part a "chain letter" or cumulative type of pleading. That is, plaintiff's cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress, the second cause of action in the second amended complaint, incorporates by reference the entire first cause of action. This type of pleading should be avoided as it tends to cause ambiguity and creates redundancy.

Plaintiff alleges that defendant had a duty not to accuse any of its employees of falsifying invoices without conducting a reasonable investigation. Plaintiff then alleges that defendant breached this duty "by its conduct mentioned herein." There is no express allegation of defendant's failure to investigate. Plaintiff further alleges that as a proximate result of defendant's breach, he suffered humiliation and emotional distress. [136 Cal.App.3d 286]

As discussed ante at page 285, the qualified privilege under Civil Code section 47, subdivision 3, protects a defendant from being held liable in defamation for statements made without malice by any of its employees to other employees of that defendant. Thus, an employer is not liable for defamation if one of its employees advises other employees, such as personnel officers, of a suspicion that a former employee falsified records as long as the communication is not motivated by malice. [6] We hold that this privilege applies with equal force to negligent infliction of emotional distress. [7] We also hold that a corporation may be held liable for negligent infliction of emotional distress when its employee, acting within the scope of his employment, makes a defamatory internal corporate communication concerning a third party without first conducting a reasonable investigation as to the truth of the matter if the communication is motivated by malice. A corporation can act only through its agents. Mr. Witkin has stated, "A private corporation is ordinarily liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior for torts of its agents or employees committed while they are acting within the scope of their employment." (4 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (8th ed. 1974) Torts, ?26, p. 2326, original italics; also see 1 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (8th ed. 1973) Agency and Employment, ? 155, p. 754.) As mentioned ante, at page 284, the second amended complaint alleged that Mr. Hansen's acts were done within the scope of his employment by defendant.

Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1980) 27 Cal.3d 916, 930 [167 Cal.Rptr. 831, 616 P.2d 813], held that there is a cause of action for negligent infliction of serious emotional distress. The court there held that such a cause of action was present because the defendant's conduct was objectively verifiable conduct that foreseeably elicited a serious emotional response, thus serving as a measure of the validity of the plaintiff's claim of emotional distress. Failure to investigate charges of falsification of invoices is also objectively verifiable and likely to cause serious emotional distress.

Although plaintiff alleged that he suffered emotional distress, he failed to allege the degree of emotional distress suffered. Serious emotional distress is an essential element of a cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress. (See Ibid) Since plaintiff failed to allege that defendant's conduct caused him to suffer serious emotional distress and also failed to allege that Mr. Hansen did not conduct a reasonable investigation of the charges, there was no error in sustaining the [136 Cal.App.3d 287] demurrer to the second cause of action of the second amended complaint, but plaintiff should have been given leave to amend. (Ibid)


Plaintiff's cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the third cause of action in the second amended complaint, incorporates by reference both causes of action already summarized. Plaintiff alleges that the statements complained of were made to cause plaintiff to suffer emotional distress and caused plaintiff "humiliation, mental anguish and emotional and physical distress." He also alleges that defendant persisted in the described conduct even after plaintiff informed defendant that the statements were false. The allegation that defendant persisted in the described conduct is ambiguous in that various acts of defendant were alleged, including the change made in plaintiff's personnel records as well as the communication of the defamatory matter to numerous employees.

[8a] Our Supreme Court has stated that conduct may be considered outrageous when a defendant abuses a position that gives it the power to damage a plaintiff's interest. (Agarwal v. Johnson, supra, 25 Cal.3d 932, 946.) We hold that the spreading of deliberately false statements that a former employee in effect committed forgery is extreme and outrageous conduct. When such conduct results in alteration of the former employee's personnel records to reflect that he is ineligible for rehire, a position of power has been abused. As our Supreme Court has stated, abuse of a position that gives one the power to damage a plaintiff's interest is outrageous conduct.

[9] "A prima facie case [of intentional infliction of emotional distress] requires: '(1) outrageous conduct by the defendant, (2) intention to cause or reckless disregard of the probability of causing emotional distress, (3) severe emotional suffering and (4) actual and proximate causation of the emotional distress. [Citations.]'" (Ibid) [8b] As plaintiff has not alleged that he suffered severe emotional distress, the demurrer to the cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress should have been sustained, but plaintiff should have been afforded an opportunity to amend. If plaintiff amends, he should allege with greater specificity what conduct of defendant persisted after plaintiff informed defendant that the statements were false. [136 Cal.App.3d 288]


Plaintiff's cause of action for intentional interference with prospective advantage, the second cause of action in the first amended complaint, after incorporating by reference an inadequately pleaded cause of action for slander, alleges that defendant, through its employees, intentionally interfered with plaintiff's attempt to be rehired by defendant. [10] A cause of action for intentional interference with contractual relations does not lie against a party to the contract. (Dryden v. Tri-Valley Growers (1977) 65 Cal.App.3d 990, 999 [135 Cal.Rptr. 720].) [11] Plaintiff did not allege that defendant had a duty, either contractual or statutory, to rehire him. If such duty existed, the proper cause of action would be for its breach, not for interference with prospective advantage. (See Larez v. Oberti (1972) 23 Cal.App.3d 217, 226 [100 Cal.Rptr. 57].) The trial court ruled correctly in sustaining the demurrer to the cause of action for intentional interference with prospective advantage without leave to amend.


The cause of action for violation of Labor Code section 1050, the fifth cause of action in the first amended complaint, after incorporating by reference the first two causes of action and inadequately pleaded causes of action for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, alleges that defendant "knowingly caused ... its agents in its employ to commit a violation of Section 1050 of the California Labor Code" and that, as a proximate result thereof, plaintiff was not rehired. Labor Code section 1050 provides, "Any person, or agent or officer thereof, who, after having discharged an employee from the service of such person or after an employee has voluntarily left such service, by any misrepresentation prevents or attempts to prevent the former employee from obtaining employment, is guilty of a misdemeanor." Labor Code section 1054 provides that any person who violates section 1050 is liable to the aggrieved party for treble damages.

[12] Labor Code section 1050 applies only to misrepresentations made to prospective employers other than the defendant. It does not apply to misrepresentations made by employees of the defendant to other of the defendant's employees.

Labor Code section 1050 was enacted in 1937 as a restatement of former Penal Code section 653e. (Stats. 1937, ch. 90, ? 2, p. 185; Stats. 1937, ch. 90, ? 1050, p. 211; Stats. 1937, ch. 90, ? 8100, pp. 326-328.) Former Penal Code section 653e provided: "Any person, firm or corporation [136 Cal.App.3d 289] ... who, after having discharged an employee from the service of such person, firm or corporation or after having paid off an employee voluntarily leaving such service, shall ... misrepresent and thereby prevent or attempt to prevent such former employee from obtaining employment with any other person, firm or corporation ... shall be guilty of a misdemeanor .... [?] ... [A]ny person, firm, association or corporation ... who shall violate any of the provisions of this act shall be liable to the party or parties aggrieved, in a civil action, to treble damages." (Stats. 1913, ch. 350, ? 1, p. 712, as amended by Stats. 1929, ch. 586, ? 1, pp. 988-989, italics added.) Labor Code section 2 provides, "The provisions of this code, in so far as they are substantially the same as existing provisions relating to the same subject matter, shall be construed as restatements and continuations thereof and not as new enactments." The pertinent provisions of Labor Code section 1050 are substantially the same as those of former Penal Code section 653e. It is apparent that the Legislature intended that Labor Code section 1050 would apply only to misstatements to other potential employers, not to misstatements made internally by employees of the party to be charged. The demurrer to the cause of action for violation of Labor Code section 1050 was properly sustained without leave to amend.

The order of dismissal is reversed. The trial court is directed to overrule the demurrer to the first cause of action of the second amended complaint and to grant plaintiff a reasonable time within which to amend the second and third causes of action of the second amended complaint. No leave shall be granted to amend the second cause of action of the first amended complaint or the fifth cause of action of the first amended complaint.

Spencer, P. J., and Lillie, J., concurred.

Poem Honoring My Brother on His Birthday

(Chip the fisherman, father, and grandfather)


Click to Zoom all Photos that seem too small)

Born Richard J. Lavery III in Morgan Park near Chicago in 1938

On August 14th which later proved to be a very special date


(Chip and Val)

(Val, Lewis, and Chip Chicago 1940)

Husky, muscular, athletic, intelligent and handsome lad

Named after and followed the footsteps of his demanding Dad


( Dad, Paul, Aunt Jane, Val,Chip, Dan Morgan Park 1946) 

 (Dad Annapolis plebe year 1928)

 (Dad Commander Headquarters Support Activity Yokosuka Japan 1955-7)

Loved fishing anytime and lived in places near the sea

Natural leader who could always explain the world to me


As children we would play cards, hide and seek and hike everywhere

We played hard, competitively and no matter what we played fair


He would bait my hook, untangle my line and knew all the fish

Even organized a menu telling Gammie what to put on the dish


Playing the sax with rhythm, riffs, jazz, classical and rock

Glen Miller, Parker, Desmond, Mozart, Beethoven and Bach

Took me to Lyon & Healy music lessons in Chicago by train

Summer Michigan boys scout camps and 3 day canoe trips in rain


Boxing, softball, cowboys and Indians, and piano lessons in Vallejo

Folding newspapers & packing our bikes for our routes in Coronado


Dillon beach, Los Coronados islands or Jenner-by-the-Sea

He'd show the way and teach his little brother a better person to be

Taught me to square away my uniform, shoes and drill at MPMA

Win at monopoly, canasta, chess, pool or other games every day


Yes he’d tease me, call me names and dunk me in the pool

But never had a malicious thought while making me look a fool

He’d tell a joke and break me up with a belly laugh and roar

I would follow his lead whatever he wanted me to do and more


Once on a playground a bully threatened Chip when I was six

I screamed at him to leave Chip alone or I'd give his face a fix


He knew better than to mess with these Lavery boys

Despite our daily battles, as a team we could make much noise


Inseparable from his loving Chihuahua Tico the mascot of YoHi

Who would wander off, bark, ruffle his fur and go eye to eye

(Tico, white husky Chihuahua, YoHi Mascot)


With any animal ten times his size no matter how vicious or mean

A magnificent and loving pet, his coat shimmering white and clean


Long distance track star and halfback at fifteen for CHS

When I saw him in shoulder pads and cleats proudly I said, "Yes"

(Alex's Kamakura Birthday Party 1955, Chip, Bill, Dan top Ken, Alex  Bottom)

(YoHi Varsity Football 1956 Defense, Chip 15, Dan 13)Click to expand

Hard running YoHi fullback who could cut and run through you

Potent stiff arm, dive, rolling block or a mighty bulldoze too

(Tom running, Dan and Chip blocking for YoHi at Yokohama Japan 1956)

(YoHi Offense 1956)


(Chip and Pat, high school sweethearts, first to marry Annapolis class of 1960 at USNA Chapel)

Fell in love with a beautiful gal born on his birthday

Apple of his eye and by her side he would always stay

(Dan and Chip at Annapolis 1959)


To the Naval Academy at Annapolis at only 17 he proudly went

After much refined preparation he was appointed by our president

(Chip at Pensacola Summer Training)


Scientific mind with peerless mathematics and engineering skill

After a Rickover interview a nuclear submarine billet he did fill


First married from the proud class of 1960 he led the way

Love of family, character, and knowledge lit each day


Honest, hard-working family-man who traveled far and wide

Pat, Rick, Bill, Tim, Steve, Chris and their pets always by his side


Until one dark day when fate dealt Chip and us a bitter blow

And took her and her mother to a place some day we will know


She sang silver-toned with angelic voice any musical part

Wonderful mother and companion who was always in his heart


Five happy, healthy, handsome and hearty boys remind us every day

Of  her and her mother's beauty, commitment, and love here to stay


We see this in each wonderful grandchild's life and face

Rick, Bill, Tim, Steve, and Chris's support provided a special place


For Chip to begin a new life and find another soul-mate to share

The future with and build a business from scratch with flare

Linda came into his life at just the right time to help them both

Quell the despair from the unspeakable loss of the one they troth

Melodious voice, warm heart, love for kids, teaching, and Chip

Perfect match to ease them into the golden year's trip


Their boys moving forward steadily since they were born

All in their own way the family heritage they well-adorn

Now another fateful blow from a doctor's shrill report

A new battle against a foe that knows not fair sport


We support you with the love that characterizes your life

Knowing interceding forces will sustain you in your strife


We hope that the enormous resources of our medical world

Will help your life flourish like a bright flag unfurled


Know from your brother this poem is written from the heart

To the best brother I could have been blessed with from the start


(Presented at Richard J. Lavery III’s funeral in Gainesville, Florida, and to him in the hospital )

Related Images: