text:
Jacobo Árbenz

Juan Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán (14 September 1913 –27 January 1971) was a Guatemalan military officer and politician who served as the 25th president of Guatemala. He was Minister of National Defense from 1944 to 1950, before he became the second democratically elected President of Guatemala, from 1951 to 1954. He was a major figure in the ten-year Guatemalan Revolution, which represented some of the few years of representative democracy in Guatemalan history. The landmark program of agrarian reform Árbenz enacted as president was very influential across Latin America.

Árbenz was born in 1913 to a wealthy family, son of a Swiss German father and a Guatemalan mother. He graduated with high honors from a military academy in 1935, and served in the army until 1944, quickly rising through the ranks. During this period, he witnessed the violent repression of agrarian laborers by the United States-backed dictator Jorge Ubico, and was personally required to escort chain-gangs of prisoners, an experience that contributed to his progressive views. In 1938, he met and married María Vilanova, who was a great ideological influence on him, as was José Manuel Fortuny, a Guatemalan communist. In October 1944, several civilian groups and progressive military factions led by Árbenz and Francisco Arana rebelled against Ubico's repressive policies. In the elections that followed, Juan José Arévalo was elected president, and began a highly popular program of social reform. Árbenz was appointed Minister of Defense, and played a crucial role in putting down a military coup in 1949.

After the death of Arana, Árbenz ran in the presidential elections that were held in 1950 and without significant opposition defeated Miguel Ydígoras Fuentes, his nearest challenger, by a margin of over 50%. He took office on 15 March 1951, and continued the social reform policies of his predecessor. These reforms included an expanded right to vote, the ability of workers to organize, legitimizing political parties, and allowing public debate. The centerpiece of his policy was an agrarian reform law under which uncultivated portions of large land-holdings were expropriated in return for compensation and redistributed to poverty-stricken agricultural laborers. Approximately 500,000 people benefited from the decree. The majority of them were indigenous people, whose forebears had been dispossessed after the Spanish invasion.

His policies ran afoul of the United Fruit Company, which lobbied the United States government to have him overthrown. The U.S. was also concerned by the presence of communists in the Guatemalan government, and Árbenz was ousted in the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état engineered by the government of U.S. president Dwight D. Eisenhower through the U.S. Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency. Árbenz went into exile through several countries, where his family gradually fell apart, and his daughter committed suicide. He died in Mexico in 1971. In October 2011, the Guatemalan government issued an apology for Árbenz's overthrow.

Early life
Árbenz was born in Quetzaltenango, the second-largest city in Guatemala, in 1913. He was the son of a Swiss German pharmacist, Hans Jakob Arbenz Gröbli, who immigrated to Guatemala in 1901. His mother, Octavia Guzmán Caballeros, was a Ladino woman from a middle-class family who worked as a primary school teacher. His family was relatively wealthy and upper-class; his childhood has been described as "comfortable". At some point during his childhood, his father became addicted to morphine and began to neglect the family business. He eventually went bankrupt, forcing the family to move to a rural estate that a wealthy friend had set aside for them "out of charity". Jacobo had originally desired to be an economist or an engineer, but since the family was now impoverished, he could not afford to go to a university. He initially did not want to join the military, but there was a scholarship available through the Polytechnic School of Guatemala for military cadets. He applied, passed all of the entrance exams, and became a cadet in 1932. His father committed suicide two years after Árbenz entered the academy.

Military career and marriage
Árbenz excelled in the academy, and was deemed "an exceptional student". He became "first sergeant", the highest honor bestowed upon cadets; only six people received the honor from 1924 to 1944. His abilities earned him an unusual level of respect among the officers at the school, including Major John Considine, the US director of the school, and of other US officers who served at the school. A fellow officer later said that "his abilities were such that the officers treated him with a respect that was rarely granted to a cadet." Árbenz graduated in 1935.

After graduating, he served a stint as a junior officer at Fort San José in Guatemala City and later another under "an illiterate Colonel" in a small garrison in the village of San Juan Sacatepéquez. While at San José, Árbenz had to lead squads of soldiers who were escorting chain gangs of prisoners (including political prisoners) to perform forced labor. The experience traumatized Árbenz, who said he felt like a capataz (i.e., a "foreman"). During this period he first met Francisco Arana.

Árbenz was asked to fill a vacant teaching position at the academy in 1937. Árbenz taught a wide range of subjects, including military matters, history, and physics. He was promoted to captain six years later, and placed in charge of the entire corps of cadets. His position was the third highest in the academy and was considered one of the most prestigious positions a young officer could hold.

In 1938 he met his future wife María Vilanova, the daughter of a wealthy Salvadoran landowner and a Guatemalan mother from a wealthy family. They were married a few months later, without the approval of María's parents, who felt she should not marry an army lieutenant who was not wealthy. María was 24 at the time of the wedding, and Jacobo was 26. María later wrote that, while the two were very different in many ways, their desire for political change drew them together. Árbenz stated that his wife had a great influence on him. It was through her that Árbenz was exposed to Marxism. María had received a copy of The Communist Manifesto at a women's congress and left a copy of it on Jacobo's bedside table when she left for a vacation. Jacobo was "moved" by the Manifesto, and he and María discussed it with each other. Both felt that it explained many things they had been feeling. Afterwards, Jacobo began reading more works by Marx, Lenin, and Stalin and by the late 1940s was regularly interacting with a group of Guatemalan communists.

Historical background
In 1871 the government of Justo Rufino Barrios passed laws confiscating the lands of the native Mayan people and compelling them to work in coffee plantations for minimal compensation. Several United States-based companies, including the United Fruit Company, received this public land, and were exempted from paying taxes. In 1929 the Great Depression led to the collapse of the economy and a rise in unemployment, leading to unrest among workers and laborers. Fearing the possibility of a revolution, the landed elite lent their support to Jorge Ubico, who won the election that followed in 1931, an election in which he was the only candidate. With the support of the United States, Ubico soon became one of Latin America's most brutal dictators. Ubico abolished the system of debt peonage introduced by Barrios and replaced it with a vagrancy law, which required all men of working age who did not own land to perform a minimum of 100 days of hard labor. In addition, the state made use of unpaid Indian labor to work on public infrastructure such as roads and railroads. Ubico also froze wages at very low levels, and passed a law allowing landowners complete immunity from prosecution for any action they took to defend their property, including allowing them to execute workers as a "disciplinary" measure. The result of these laws was a tremendous resentment against him among agricultural laborers. Ubico was highly contemptuous of the country's indigenous people, once stating that they resembled donkeys. He gave away 200,000 ha of public land to the United Fruit Company, and allowed the US military to establish bases in Guatemala.

October revolution
In May 1944 a series of protests against Ubico broke out at the university in Guatemala City. Ubico responded by suspending the constitution on 22 June 1944. The protests, which by this point included many middle-class members and junior army officers in addition to students and workers, gained momentum, eventually forcing Ubico's resignation at the end of June. Ubico appointed a three-person junta led by General Federico Ponce Vaides to succeed him. Although Ponce Vaides initially promised to hold free elections, when the congress met on 3 July soldiers held everyone at gunpoint and forced them to appoint Ponce Vaides interim president. The repressive policies of the Ubico administration were continued. Opposition groups began organizing again, this time joined by many prominent political and military leaders, who deemed the Ponce regime unconstitutional. Árbenz had been one of the few officers in the military to protest the actions of Ponce Vaides. Ubico had fired Árbenz from his teaching post at the Escuela Politécnica, and since then Árbenz had been living in ElSalvador, organizing a band of revolutionary exiles. Árbenz was one of the leaders of the plot within the army, along with Major Aldana Sandoval. Árbenz insisted that civilians also be included in the coup, over the protests of the other military men involved. Sandoval later said that all contact with the civilians during the coup was through Árbenz.

On 19 October 1944, a small group of soldiers and students led by Árbenz and Francisco Javier Arana attacked the National Palace in what later became known as the "October Revolution". Arana had not initially been a party to the coup, but his position of authority within the army meant that he was key to its success. They were joined the next day by other factions of the army and the civilian population. Initially, the battle went against the revolutionaries, but after an appeal for support their ranks were swelled by unionists and students, and they eventually subdued the police and army factions loyal to Ponce Vaides. On 20 October, the next day, Ponce Vaides surrendered unconditionally. Árbenz and Arana both fought with distinction during the revolt, and despite the idealistic rhetoric of the revolution, both were also offered material rewards: Árbenz was promoted from captain to lieutenant colonel, and Arana from major to full colonel. The junta promised free and open elections to the presidency and the congress, as well as for a constituent assembly. The resignation of Ponce Vaides and the creation of the junta has been considered by scholars to be the beginning of the Guatemalan Revolution. However, the revolutionary junta did not immediately threaten the interests of the landed elite. Two days after Ponce Vaides' resignation, a violent protest erupted at Patzicía, a small Indian hamlet. The junta responded with swift brutality, silencing the protest. The dead civilians included women and children.

Elections subsequently took place in December 1944. Although only literate men were allowed to vote, the elections were broadly considered free and fair. Unlike in similar historical situations, none of the junta members stood for election. The winner of the 1944 elections was a teacher named Juan José Arévalo, who ran under a coalition of leftist parties known as the "Partido Acción Revolucionaria'" ("Revolutionary Action Party", PAR), and won 85% of the vote. Arana did not wish to turn over power to a civilian administration. He initially tried to persuade Árbenz and Toriello to postpone the election, and after Arévalo was elected, he asked them to declare the results invalid. Árbenz and Toriello insisted that Arévalo be allowed to take power, which Arana reluctantly agreed to, on the condition that Arana's position as the commander of the military be unchallenged. Arévalo had no choice but to agree to this, and so the new Guatemalan constitution, adopted in 1945, created a new position of "Commander of the Armed Forces", a position that was more powerful than that of the defense minister. He could only be removed by Congress, and even then only if he was found to have broken the law. When Arévalo was inaugurated as president, Arana stepped into this new position, and Árbenz was sworn in as defense minister.

Government of Juan José Arévalo
Arévalo described his ideology as "spiritual socialism". He was anti-communist and believed in a capitalist society regulated to ensure that its benefits went to the entire population. Arévalo's ideology was reflected in the new constitution that was ratified by the Guatemalan assembly soon after his inauguration, which was one of the most progressive in Latin America. It mandated suffrage for all but illiterate women, a decentralization of power, and provisions for a multiparty system. Communist parties were forbidden. Once in office, Arévalo implemented these and other reforms, including minimum wage laws, increased educational funding, and labor reforms. The benefits of these reforms were largely restricted to the upper-middle classes and did little for the peasant agricultural laborers who made up the majority of the population. Although his reforms were based on liberalism and capitalism, he was viewed with suspicion by the United States government, which would later portray him as a communist.

When Árbenz was sworn in as defense minister under President Arévalo, he became the first to hold the portfolio, since it had previously been known as the Ministry of War. In the fall of 1947, Árbenz, as defense minister, objected to the deportation of several workers after they had been accused of being communists. Well-known communist José Manuel Fortuny was intrigued by this action and decided to visit him, and found Árbenz to be different from the stereotypical Central American military officer. That first meeting was followed by others until Árbenz invited Fortuny to his house for discussions that usually extended for hours. Like Árbenz, Fortuny was inspired by a fierce nationalism and a burning desire to improve the conditions of the Guatemalan people, and, like Árbenz, he sought answers in Marxist theory. This relationship would strongly influence Árbenz in the future.

On 16 December 1945, Arévalo was incapacitated for a while after a car accident. The leaders of the Revolutionary Action Party (PAR), which was the party that supported the government, were afraid that Arana would take the opportunity to launch a coup and so struck a deal with him, which later came to be known as the Pacto del Barranco (Pact of the Ravine). Under the terms of this pact, Arana agreed to refrain from seizing power with the military; in return, the PAR agreed to support Arana's candidacy in the next presidential election, scheduled for November 1950. Arévalo himself recovered swiftly, but was forced to support the agreement. However, by 1949 the National Renovation Party and the PAR were both openly hostile to Arana due to his lack of support for labor rights. The leftist parties decided to back Árbenz instead, as they believed that only a military officer could defeat Arana. In 1947 Arana had demanded that certain labor leaders be expelled from the country; Árbenz vocally disagreed with Arana, and the former's intervention limited the number of deportees.

The land reforms brought about by the Arévalo administration threatened the interests of the landed elite, who sought a candidate who would be more amenable to their terms. They began to prop up Arana as a figure of resistance to Arévalo's reforms. The summer of 1949 saw intense political conflict in the councils of the Guatemalan military between supporters of Arana and those of Árbenz, over the choice of Arana's successor. On 16 July 1949, Arana delivered an ultimatum to Arévalo, demanding the expulsion of all of Árbenz's supporters from the cabinet and the military; he threatened a coup if his demands were not met. Arévalo informed Árbenz and other progressive leaders of the ultimatum; all agreed that Arana should be exiled. Two days later, Arévalo and Arana had another meeting; on the way back, Arana's convoy was intercepted by a small force led by Árbenz. A shootout ensued, killing three men, including Arana. Historian Piero Gleijeses stated that Árbenz probably had orders to capture, rather than to kill, Arana. Arana's supporters in the military rose up in revolt, but they were leaderless, and by the next day the rebels asked for negotiations. The coup attempt left approximately 150 dead and 200 wounded. Árbenz and a few other ministers suggested that the entire truth be made public; however, they were overruled by the majority of the cabinet, and Arévalo made a speech suggesting that Arana had been killed for refusing to lead a coup against the government. Árbenz kept his silence over the death of Arana until 1968, refusing to speak out without first obtaining Arévalo's consent. He tried to persuade Arévalo to tell the entire story when the two met in Montevideo in the 1950s, during their exile: however, Arévalo was unwilling, and Árbenz did not press his case.

1950 election
Árbenz's role as defense minister had already made him a strong candidate for the presidency, and his firm support of the government during the 1949 uprising further increased his prestige. In 1950 the economically moderate Partido de Integridad Nacional (PIN) announced that Árbenz would be its presidential candidate in the upcoming election. The announcement was quickly followed by endorsements from most parties on the left, including the influential PAR, as well as from labor unions. Árbenz carefully chose the PIN as the party to nominate him. Based on the advice of his friends and colleagues, he believed it would make his candidacy appear more moderate. Árbenz himself resigned his position as Defense Minister on 20 February and declared his candidacy for the presidency. Arévalo wrote him an enthusiastic personal letter in response but publicly only reluctantly endorsed him, preferring, it is thought, his friend Víctor Manuel Giordani, who was then Health Minister. It was only the support Árbenz had, and the impossibility of Giordani being elected, that led to Arévalo deciding to support Árbenz.

Prior to his death, Arana had planned to run in the 1950 presidential elections. His death left Árbenz without any serious opposition in the elections (leading some, including the CIA and US military intelligence, to speculate that Árbenz personally had him eliminated for this reason). Árbenz had only a couple of significant challengers in the election, in a field of ten candidates. One of these was Jorge García Granados, supported by some members of the upper-middle class who felt the revolution had gone too far. Another was Miguel Ydígoras Fuentes, who had been a general under Ubico and had the support of the hardline opponents of the revolution. During his campaign, Árbenz promised to continue and expand the reforms begun under Arévalo. Árbenz was expected to win the election comfortably because he had the support of both major political parties of the country, as well as that of the labor unions, which campaigned heavily on his behalf. In addition to political support, Árbenz had great personal appeal. He was described as having "an engaging personality and a vibrant voice". Árbenz's wife María also campaigned with him; despite her wealthy upbringing she had made an effort to speak for the interests of the Mayan peasantry and had become a national figure in her own right. Árbenz's two daughters also occasionally made public appearances with him.

The election was held on 15 November 1950, with Árbenz winning more than 60% of the vote, in elections that were largely free and fair with the exception of the disenfranchisement of illiterate female voters. Árbenz got more than three times as many votes as the runner-up, Ydígoras Fuentes. Fuentes claimed electoral fraud had benefited Árbenz, but scholars have pointed out that while fraud may possibly have given Árbenz some of his votes, it was not the reason that he won the election. Árbenz's promise of land reform played a large role in ensuring his victory. The election of Árbenz alarmed US State Department officials, who stated that Arana "has always represented the only positive conservative element in the Arévalo administration" and that his death would "strengthen Leftist [sic] materially", and that "developments forecast sharp leftist trend within the government." Árbenz was inaugurated as president on 15 March 1951.

Inauguration and ideology
In his inaugural address, Árbenz promised to convert Guatemala from "a backward country with a predominantly feudal economy into a modern capitalist state". He declared that he intended to reduce dependency on foreign markets and dampen the influence of foreign corporations over Guatemalan politics. He said that he would modernize Guatemala's infrastructure without the aid of foreign capital. Based on advice from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, he set out to build more houses, ports, and roads. Árbenz also set out to reform Guatemala's economic institutions; he planned to construct factories, increase mining, expand transportation infrastructure, and expand the banking system. Land reform was the centerpiece of Árbenz's election campaign. The revolutionary organizations that had helped put Árbenz in power kept constant pressure on him to live up to his campaign promises regarding land reform. Agrarian reform was one of the areas of policy which the Arévalo administration had not ventured into; when Árbenz took office, only 2% of the population owned 70% of the land.

Historian Jim Handy described Árbenz's economic and political ideals as "decidedly pragmatic and capitalist in temper". According to historian Stephen Schlesinger, while Árbenz did have a few communists in lower-level positions in his administration, he "was not a dictator, he was not a crypto-communist". Schlesinger described him as a democratic socialist. Nevertheless, some of his policies, particularly those involving agrarian reform, would be branded as "communist" by the Guatemalan upper class and the United Fruit Company. Historian Piero Gleijeses has argued that although Árbenz's policies were intentionally capitalist in nature, his personal views gradually shifted towards communism. His goal was to increase Guatemala's economic and political independence, and he believed that to do this Guatemala needed to build a strong domestic economy. He made an effort to reach out to the indigenous Mayan people, and sent government representatives to confer with them. From this effort he learned that the Maya held strongly to their ideals of dignity and self-determination; inspired in part by this, he stated in 1951 that "If the independence and prosperity of our people were incompatible, which for certain they are not, I am sure that the great majority of Guatemalans would prefer to be a poor nation, but free, and not a rich colony, but enslaved."

Although the policies of the Árbenz government were based on a moderate form of capitalism, the communist movement did grow stronger during his presidency, partly because Arévalo released its imprisoned leaders in 1944, and also through the strength of its teachers' union. Although the Communist party was banned for much of the Guatemalan Revolution, the Guatemalan government welcomed large numbers of communist and socialist refugees fleeing the dictatorial governments of neighboring countries, and this influx strengthened the domestic movement. In addition, Árbenz had personal ties to some members of the communist Guatemalan Party of Labour, which was legalized during his government. The most prominent of these was José Manuel Fortuny. Fortuny played the role of friend and adviser to Árbenz through the three years of his government, from 1951 to 1954. Fortuny wrote several speeches for Árbenz, and in his role as agricultural secretary helped craft the landmark agrarian reform bill. Despite his position in Árbenz's government, however, Fortuny never became a popular figure in Guatemala, and did not have a large popular following like some other communist leaders. The communist party remained numerically weak, without any representation in Árbenz's cabinet of ministers. A handful of communists were appointed to lower-level positions in the government. Árbenz read and admired the works of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin (before Khrushchev's report); officials in his government eulogized Stalin as a "great statesman and leader ... whose passing is mourned by all progressive men". The Guatemalan Congress paid tribute to Joseph Stalin with a "minute of silence" when Stalin died in 1953, a fact that was remarked upon by later observers. Árbenz had several supporters among the communist members of the legislature, but they were only a small part of the government coalition.

Land reform

The biggest component of Árbenz's project of modernization was his agrarian reform bill. Árbenz drafted the bill himself with the help of advisers that included some leaders of the communist party as well as non-communist economists. He also sought advice from numerous economists from across Latin America. The bill was passed by the National Assembly on 17 June 1952, and the program went into effect immediately. It transferred uncultivated land from large landowners to their poverty-stricken laborers, who would then be able to begin a viable farm of their own. Árbenz was also motivated to pass the bill because he needed to generate capital for his public infrastructure projects within the country. At the behest of the United States, the World Bank had refused to grant Guatemala a loan in 1951, which made the shortage of capital more acute.

The official title of the agrarian reform bill was Decree 900. It expropriated all uncultivated land from landholdings that were larger than 673 acre. If the estates were between 672 acre and 224 acre in size, uncultivated land was expropriated only if less than two-thirds of it was in use. The owners were compensated with government bonds, the value of which was equal to that of the land expropriated. The value of the land itself was the value that the owners had declared in their tax returns in 1952. The redistribution was organized by local committees that included representatives from the landowners, the laborers, and the government. Of the nearly 350,000 private land-holdings, only 1,710 were affected by expropriation. The law itself was cast in a moderate capitalist framework; however, it was implemented with great speed, which resulted in occasional arbitrary land seizures. There was also some violence, directed at landowners as well as at peasants who had minor landholdings of their own. Árbenz himself, a landowner through his wife, gave up 1700 acre of his own land in the land reform program.

By June 1954, 1.4 million acres of land had been expropriated and distributed. Approximately 500,000 individuals, or one-sixth of the population, had received land by this point. The decree also included provision of financial credit to the people who received the land. The National Agrarian Bank (Banco Nacional Agrario, or BNA) was created on 7 July 1953, and by June 1951 it had disbursed more than $9million in small loans. 53,829 applicants received an average of 225US dollars, which was twice as much as the Guatemalan per capita income. The BNA developed a reputation for being a highly efficient government bureaucracy, and the United States government, Árbenz's biggest detractor, did not have anything negative to say about it. The loans had a high repayment rate, and of the $3,371,185 handed out between March and November 1953, $3,049,092 had been repaid by June 1954. The law also included provisions for nationalization of roads that passed through redistributed land, which greatly increased the connectivity of rural communities.

Contrary to the predictions made by detractors of the government, the law resulted in a slight increase in Guatemalan agricultural productivity, and to an increase in cultivated area. Purchases of farm machinery also increased. Overall, the law resulted in a significant improvement in living standards for many thousands of farmer families, the majority of whom were indigenous people. Gleijeses stated that the injustices corrected by the law were far greater than the injustice of the relatively few arbitrary land seizures. Historian Greg Grandin stated that the law was flawed in many respects; among other things, it was too cautious and deferential to the planters, and it created communal divisions among farmers. Nonetheless, it represented a fundamental power shift in favor of those that had been marginalized before then. In 1953 the reform was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, but the Guatemalan Congress later impeached four judges associated with the ruling.

Relationship with the United Fruit Company

The relationship between Árbenz and the United Fruit Company has been described by historians as a "critical turning point in US dominance in the hemisphere". The United Fruit Company, formed in 1899, had major holdings of land and railroads across Central America, which it used to support its business of exporting bananas. By 1930, it had been the largest landowner and employer in Guatemala for several years. In return for the company's support, Ubico signed a contract with it that included a 99-year lease to massive tracts of land, and exemptions from virtually all taxes. Ubico asked the company to pay its workers only 50 cents a day, to prevent other workers from demanding higher wages. The company also virtually owned Puerto Barrios, Guatemala's only port to the Atlantic Ocean. By 1950, the company's annual profits were 65million USdollars, twice the revenue of the Guatemalan government.

As a result, the company was seen as an impediment to progress by the revolutionary movement after 1944. Thanks to its position as the country's largest landowner and employer, the reforms of Arévalo's government affected the UFC more than other companies, which led to a perception by the company that it was being specifically targeted by the reforms. The company's labor troubles were compounded in 1952 when Árbenz passed Decree900, the agrarian reform law. Of the 550,000 acre that the company owned, 15% were being cultivated; the rest of the land, which was idle, came under the scope of the agrarian reform law. Additionally, Árbenz supported a strike of UFC workers in 1951, which eventually compelled the company to rehire a number of laid-off workers.

The United Fruit Company responded with an intensive lobbying campaign against Árbenz in the United States. The Guatemalan government reacted by saying that the company was the main obstacle to progress in the country. American historians observed that "to the Guatemalans it appeared that their country was being mercilessly exploited by foreign interests which took huge profits without making any contributions to the nation's welfare." In 1953 200,000 acre of uncultivated land was expropriated under Árbenz's agrarian reform law, and the company was offered compensation at the rate of 2.99 USdollars to the acre, twice what it had paid when buying the property. This resulted in further lobbying in Washington, particularly through Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, who had close ties to the company. The company had begun a public relations campaign to discredit the Guatemalan government; overall, the company spent over a half-million dollars to influence both lawmakers and members of the public in the US that the Guatemalan government of Jacobo Árbenz needed to be overthrown.

Political motives
Several factors besides the lobbying campaign of the United Fruit Company led the United States to launch the coup that toppled Árbenz in 1954. The US government had grown more suspicious of the Guatemalan Revolution as the Cold War developed and the Guatemalan government clashed with US corporations on an increasing number of issues. The US was also concerned that it had been infiltrated by communists although historian Richard H. Immerman argued that during the early part of the Cold War, the US and the CIA were predisposed to see the revolutionary government as communist, despite Arévalo's ban of the communist party during his 1945–1951 presidency. Additionally, the US government was concerned that the success of Árbenz's reforms would inspire similar movements elsewhere. Until the end of its term, the Truman administration relied on purely diplomatic and economic means to attempt to reduce communist influences.

Árbenz's enactment of Decree 900 in 1952 provoked Truman to authorize Operation PBFortune, a covert operation to overthrow Árbenz. The plan had originally been suggested by the US-backed dictator of Nicaragua, Anastasio Somoza García, who said that if he were given weapons, he could overthrow the Guatemalan government. The operation was to be led by Carlos Castillo Armas. However, the US state department discovered the conspiracy, and secretary of state Dean Acheson persuaded Truman to abort the plan. After being elected president of the US in November 1952, Dwight Eisenhower was more willing than Truman to use military tactics to remove regimes he disliked. Several figures in his administration, including Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and his brother and CIA director Allen Dulles, had close ties to the United Fruit Company. John Foster Dulles had previously represented United Fruit Company as a lawyer, and his brother, then-CIA director Allen Dulles was on the company's board of directors. Thomas Dudley Cabot, a former CEO of United Fruit, held the position of director of International Security Affairs in the State Department. Undersecretary of State Bedell Smith later became a director of the UFC, while the wife of the UFC public relations director was Eisenhower's personal assistant. These connections made the Eisenhower administration more willing to overthrow the Guatemalan government.

Operation PBSuccess
The CIA operation to overthrow Jacobo Árbenz, code-named Operation PBSuccess, was authorized by Eisenhower in August 1953. Carlos Castillo Armas, once Arana's lieutenant, who had been exiled following the failed coup in 1949, was chosen to lead the coup. Castillo Armas recruited a force of approximately 150 mercenaries from among Guatemalan exiles and the populations of nearby countries. In January 1954, information about these preparations were leaked to the Guatemalan government, which issued statements implicating a "Government of the North" in a plot to overthrow Árbenz. The US government denied the allegations, and the US media uniformly took the side of the government; both argued that Árbenz had succumbed to communist propaganda. The US stopped selling arms to Guatemala in 1951, and soon after blocked arms purchases from Canada, Germany, and Rhodesia. By 1954, Árbenz had become desperate for weapons, and decided to acquire them secretly from Czechoslovakia, an action seen as establishing a communist beachhead in the Americas. The shipment of these weapons was portrayed by the CIA as Soviet interference in the United States' backyard, and acted as the final spur for the CIA to launch its coup.

Árbenz had intended the shipment of weapons from the Alfhem to be used to bolster peasant militia, in the event of army disloyalty, but the US informed the Guatemalan army chiefs of the shipment, forcing Árbenz to hand them over to the military, and deepening the rift between him and the chiefs of his army. Castillo Armas' forces invaded Guatemala on 18 June 1954. The invasion was accompanied by an intense campaign of psychological warfare presenting Castillo Armas' victory as a fait accompli, with the intent of forcing Árbenz to resign. The most wide-reaching psychological weapon was the radio station known as the "Voice of Liberation", whose transmissions broadcast news of rebel troops converging on the capital, and contributed to massive demoralization among both the army and the civilian population. Árbenz was confident that Castillo Armas could be defeated militarily, but he worried that a defeat for Castillo Armas would provoke a US invasion. Árbenz ordered Carlos Enrique Díaz, the chief of the army, to select officers to lead a counter-attack. Díaz chose a corps of officers who were all known to be men of personal integrity, and who were loyal to Árbenz.

By 21 June, Guatemalan soldiers had gathered at Zacapa under the command of Colonel Víctor M. León, who was believed to be loyal to Árbenz. The leaders of the communist party also began to have their suspicions, and sent a member to investigate. He returned on 25 June, reporting that the army was highly demoralized, and would not fight. PGT Secretary General Alvarado Monzón informed Árbenz, who quickly sent another investigator of his own, who brought back a message asking Árbenz to resign. The officers believed that given US support for the rebels, defeat was inevitable, and Árbenz was to blame for it. The message stated that if Árbenz did not resign, the army was likely to strike a deal with Castillo Armas. On 25 June, Árbenz announced that the army had abandoned the government, and that civilians needed to be armed in order to defend the country; however, only a few hundred individuals volunteered. Seeing this, Díaz reneged on his support of the president, and began plotting to overthrow Árbenz with the assistance of other senior army officers. They informed US ambassador John Peurifoy of this plan, asking him to stop the hostilities in return for Árbenz's resignation. Peurifoy promised to arrange a truce, and the plotters went to Árbenz and informed him of their decision. Árbenz, utterly exhausted and seeking to preserve at least a measure of the democratic reforms that he had brought, agreed. After informing his cabinet of his decision, he left the presidential palace at 8 pm on 27 June 1954, having taped a resignation speech that was broadcast an hour later. In it, he stated that he was resigning in order to eliminate the "pretext for the invasion," and that he wished to preserve the gains of the October Revolution. He walked to the nearby Mexican Embassy, seeking political asylum.

Beginning of exile
After Árbenz's resignation, his family remained for 73 days at the Mexican embassy in Guatemala City, which was crowded with almost 300 exiles. During this period, the CIA initiated a new set of operations against Árbenz, intended to discredit the former president and damage his reputation. The CIA obtained some of Árbenz's personal papers, and released parts of them after doctoring the documents. The CIA also promoted the notion that individuals in exile, such as Árbenz, should be prosecuted in Guatemala. When they were finally allowed to leave the country, Árbenz was publicly humiliated at the airport when the authorities made the former president strip before the cameras, claiming that he was carrying jewelry he had bought for his wife, María Cristina Vilanova, at Tiffany's in New York City, using funds from the presidency; no jewelry was found but the interrogation lasted for an hour. Through this entire period, coverage of Árbenz in the Guatemalan press was very negative, influenced largely by the CIA's campaign.

The family then initiated a long journey in exile that would take them first to Mexico, then to Canada, where they went to pick up Arabella (the Árbenzs' oldest daughter), and then to Switzerland via the Netherlands and Paris. They hoped to obtain citizenship in Switzerland based on Árbenz's Swiss heritage. However, the former president did not wish to renounce his Guatemalan nationality, as he felt that such a gesture would have marked the end of his political career. Árbenz and his family were the victims of a CIA-orchestrated and intense defamation campaign that lasted from 1954 to 1960. A close friend of Árbenz, Carlos Manuel Pellecer, turned out to be a spy working for the CIA.

Europe and Uruguay
After being unable to obtain citizenship in Switzerland, the Árbenz family moved to Paris, where the French government gave them permission to live for a year, on the condition that they did not participate in any political activity, then to Prague, the capital of Czechoslovakia. After only three months, he moved to Moscow, which came as a relief to him from the harsh treatment he received in Czechoslovakia. While traveling in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, he was constantly criticized in the press in Guatemala and the US, on the grounds that he was showing his true communist colors by going there. After a brief stay in Moscow, Árbenz returned to Prague and then to Paris. From there he separated from his wife: María traveled to ElSalvador to take care of family affairs. The separation made life increasingly difficult for Árbenz, and he slipped into depression and took to drinking excessively. He tried several times to return to Latin America, and was finally allowed in 1957 to move to Uruguay. The CIA made several attempts to prevent Árbenz from receiving a Uruguayan visa, but these were unsuccessful, and the Uruguayan government allowed Árbenz to travel there as a political refugee. Árbenz arrived in Montevideo on 13 May 1957, where he was met by a hostile "reception committee" organized by the CIA. However, he was still a figure of some note in leftist circles in the city, which partially explained the CIA's hostility.

While Árbenz was living in Montevideo, his wife came to join him. He was also visited by Arévalo a year after his own arrival there. Although the relationship between Arévalo and the Árbenz family was initially friendly, it soon deteriorated due to differences between the two men. Arévalo himself was not under surveillance in Uruguay and was occasionally able to express himself through articles in the popular press. He left for Venezuela a year after his arrival to take up a position as a teacher. During his stay in Uruguay, Árbenz was initially required to report to the police on a daily basis; eventually, however, this requirement was relaxed somewhat to once every eight days. María Árbenz later stated that the couple was pleased by the hospitality they received in Uruguay, and would have stayed there indefinitely had they received permission to do so.

Daughter's suicide and death
After the Cuban Revolution of 1959, a representative of the Fidel Castro government asked Árbenz to come to Cuba, to which he readily agreed, sensing an opportunity to live with fewer restrictions on himself. He flew to Havana in July 1960, and, caught up in the spirit of the recent revolution, began to participate in public events. His presence so close to Guatemala once again increased the negative coverage he received in the Guatemalan press. He was offered the leadership of some revolutionary movements in Guatemala but refused, as he was pessimistic about the outcome.

In 1965 Árbenz was invited to the Communist Congress in Helsinki. Soon afterwards, his daughter Arabella committed suicide in Bogotá, an incident that badly affected Árbenz. Following her funeral, the Árbenz family remained indefinitely in Mexico City, while Árbenz himself spent some time in France and Switzerland, with the ultimate objective of settling down in Mexico.

On one of his visits to Mexico, Árbenz contracted a serious illness, and by the end of 1970 he was very ill. He died soon after. Historians disagree as to the manner of his death: Roberto García Ferreira stated that he died of a heart attack while taking a bath, while Cindy Forster wrote that he committed suicide. On 19 October 1995, Árbenz's remains were repatriated to Guatemala, accompanied by his widow María. After his remains were returned to Guatemala, Árbenz was given a military honor as military officers fired cannons in salute as Árbenz's coffin was placed onto a horse-drawn carriage and transported to San Carlos University, where students and university officials paid posthumous homage to the former president. The Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, which previously held autonomy following the 1944 Guatemala Revolution, awarded Árbenz with a posthumous decoration soon after. After departing from the university, the coffin containing Árbenz's remains was then taken to the National Palace, where it would remain until midnight. On 20 October 1995, thousands of Guatemalans flocked to the Guatemala City's cemetery for his burial service. During the burial service, then-Guatemala Defense Minister Gen. Marco Antonio González, who received Árbenz's remains after they were returned to the country, stayed in his car after crowds booed and screamed, "Army of assassins get out of the country."

Guatemalan government apology
In 1999, the Árbenz family went before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to demand an apology from the Guatemalan government for the 1954 coup which saw him ousted. Following years of campaigning, the Árbenz Family took the Guatemalan Government to Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, D.C. It accepted the complaint in 2006, leading to five years of stop-and-start negotiations. In May 2011 the Guatemalan government signed an agreement with Árbenz's surviving family to restore his legacy and publicly apologize for the government's role in ousting him. This included a financial settlement to the family, as well as the family's insistence on social reparations and policies for the future of the Guatemalan people, a first for a judgement of this kind from the OAS. The formal apology was made at the National Palace by Guatemalan President Alvaro Colom on 20 October 2011, to Jacobo Árbenz Vilanova, the son of the former president, and a Guatemalan politician. Colom stated, "It was a crime to Guatemalan society and it was an act of aggression to a government starting its democratic spring." The agreement established several forms of reparation for the next of kin of Árbenz Guzmán. Among other measures, the state:
 * held a public ceremony recognizing its responsibility
 * sent a letter of apology to the next of kin
 * named a hall of the National Museum of History and the highway to the Atlantic after the former president
 * revised the basic national school curriculum (Currículo Nacional Base)
 * established a degree program in Human Rights, Pluriculturalism, and Reconciliation of Indigenous Peoples
 * held a photographic exhibition on Árbenz Guzmán and his legacy at the National Museum of History
 * recovered the wealth of photographs of the Árbenz Guzmán family
 * published a book of photos
 * reissued the book Mi esposo, el presidente Árbenz (My Husband President Árbenz)
 * prepared and published a biography of the former president, and
 * issued a series of postage stamps in his honor.

The official statement issued by the government recognized its responsibility for "failing to comply with its obligation to guarantee, respect, and protect the human rights of the victims to a fair trial, to property, to equal protection before the law, and to judicial protection, which are protected in the American Convention on Human Rights and which were violated against former President Juan Jacobo Árbenz Guzman, his wife, María Cristina Villanova, and his children, Juan Jacobo, María Leonora, and Arabella, all surnamed Árbenz Villanova."

Legacy
Historian Roberto García Ferreira wrote in 2008 that Árbenz's legacy was still a matter of great dispute in Guatemala itself, while arguing that the image of Árbenz was significantly shaped by the CIA media campaign that followed the 1954 coup. García Ferreira said that the revolutionary government represented one of the few periods in which "state authority was used to promote the interests of the nation's masses." Forster described Árbenz's legacy in the following terms: "In 1952 the Agrarian Reform Law swept the land, destroying forever the hegemony of the planters. Árbenz in effect legislated a new social order ... The revolutionary decade ... plays a central role in twentieth-century Guatemalan history because it was more comprehensive than any period of reform before or since." She added that even within the Guatemalan government, Árbenz "gave full compass to Indigenous, campesino, and labor demands" in contrast to Arévalo, who had remained suspicious of these movements. Similarly, Greg Grandin stated that the land reform decree "represented a fundamental shift in the power relations governing Guatemala". Árbenz himself once remarked that the agrarian reform law was "most precious fruit of the revolution and the fundamental base of the nation as a new country." However, to a large extent the legislative reforms of the Árbenz and Arévalo administrations were reversed by the US-backed military governments that followed.

In popular culture
The Guatemalan movie The Silence of Neto (1994), filmed on location in Antigua Guatemala, takes place during the last months of the government of Árbenz. It follows the life of a fictional 12-year-old boy who is sheltered by the Árbenz family, set against a backdrop of the struggle in which the country is embroiled at the time.

The story of Árbenz's life and subsequent overthrow in the CIA sponsored coup d'état has been the subject of several books, notably PBSuccess: The CIA's covert operation to overthrow Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz June–July 1954 by Mario Overall and Daniel Hagedorn (2016), American Propaganda, Media, And The Fall Of Jacobo Arbenz Guzman by Zachary Fisher (2014), as well as New York Times Best Seller The Devil's Chessboard by Author David Talbot (HarperCollins 2015). The Árbenz story was also the subject of the multi award-winning 1997 documentary by Andreas Hoessli Devils Don't Dream!

Government/NGO reports

 * CIA file about Operations against Jacob Árbenz
 * CIA file about Operations against Jacob Árbenz

News

 * From Árbenz to Zelaya: Chiquita in Latin America, Democracy Now!, 21 July 2009

title: Jacobo Árbenz


text:
Burglary

Burglary, also called breaking and entering (B&E) and housebreaking, is the act of illegally entering a building or other areas without permission, typically with the intention of committing a further criminal offence. Usually that offence is theft, larceny, robbery, or murder, but most jurisdictions include others within the ambit of burglary. To commit burglary is to burgle, a term back-formed from the word burglar, or to burglarize.

Etymology
Sir Edward Coke (1552–1634) explains at the start of Chapter 14 in the third part of Institutes of the Lawes of England (pub. 1644), that the word Burglar ("or the person that committeth burglary"), is derived from the words burgh and laron, meaning house-thieves. A note indicates he relies on the Brooke's case for this definition.

According to one textbook, the etymology originates from Anglo-Saxon or Old English, one of the Germanic languages. (Perhaps paraphrasing Sir Edward Coke:) "The word burglar comes from the two German words burg, meaning "house", and laron, meaning "thief" (literally "house thief")."

Another suggested etymology is from the later Latin word burgare, "to break open" or "to commit burglary", from burgus, meaning "fortress" or "castle", with the word then passing through French and Middle English, with influence from the Latin latro, "thief". The British verb "burgle" is a late back-formation.

History
Ancient references to breaking into a house can be found in the Code of Hammurabi (no. 21 ) and the Torah (Exodus 22:2 ).

Sir Edward Coke, in chapter 14 of the third part of the Institutes of the Lawes of England, describes the felony of Burglary and explains the various elements of the offence. He distinguished this from housebreaking because the night aggravated the offence since the night time was when man was at rest. He also described the night as the time when the countenance of a man could not be discerned.

In ''Pleas of the Crown. A Methodical Summary, Sir Matthew Hale classifies Burglary'' and Arson as offences "against the dwelling or habitation".

In chapter 16 of the fourth book of the Commentaries on the Laws of England, Sir William Blackstone observes that Burglary "... has always been looked on as a very heinous offence: not only because of the abundant terror that it naturally carries with it, but also as it is a forcible invasion of that right of habitation..."

During the 19th Century, English politicians turned their minds to codifying English law. In 1826, Sir Robert Peel was able to achieve some long advocated reforms by codifying offences concerning larceny and other property offences as well as offences against the person. Further reforms followed in 1861. Colonial legislatures generally adopted the English reforms. However, while further Criminal Code reforms failed to progress through the English parliament during the 1880s, other colonies, including Canada, India, New Zealand and various Australian states codified their criminal law.

Common-law definition
At common law, burglary was defined by Sir Matthew Hale as: "The breaking and entering the house of another in the night time, with intent to commit a felony therein, whether the felony be actually committed or not."

 * 1) Breaking can be either actual, such as by forcing open a door, or constructive, such as by fraud or threats. Breaking does not require that anything be "broken" in terms of physical damage occurring. A person who has permission to enter part of a house, but not another part, commits a breaking and entering when they use any means to enter a room where they are not permitted, so long as the room was not open to enter.
 * 2) Entering can involve either physical entry by a person, or the insertion of an instrument to remove property. Insertion of a tool to gain entry may not constitute entering by itself. There must be a breaking and an entering for common-law burglary. Breaking without entry or entry without breaking is not sufficient for common-law burglary.
 * 3) Although rarely listed as an element, the common law required that "entry occur as a consequence of the breaking". For example, if wrongdoers partially open a window with a pry bar—but then notice an open door, which they use to enter the dwelling instead, there is no burglary under common law. The use of the pry bar would not constitute an entry even if a portion of the prybar "entered" the residence. Under the instrumentality rule the use of an instrument to effect a breaking would not constitute an entry. However, if any part of the perpetrator's body entered the residence in an attempt to gain entry, the instrumentality rule did not apply. Thus, if the perpetrators uses the prybar to pry open the window and then used their hands to lift the partially opened window, an "entry" would have taken place when they grasped the bottom of the window with their hands.
 * 4) House includes a temporarily unoccupied dwelling, but not a building used only occasionally as a habitation.
 * 5) Night time is defined as hours between half an hour after sunset and half an hour before sunrise.
 * 6) Typically this element is expressed as the intent to commit a felony "therein". The use of the word "therein" adds nothing and certainly does not limit the scope of burglary to those wrongdoers who break and enter a dwelling intending to commit a felony on the premises. The situs of the felony does not matter, and burglary occurs if the wrongdoers intended to commit a felony at the time they broke and entered.

The common-law elements of burglary often vary between jurisdictions. The common-law definition has been expanded in most jurisdictions, such that the building need not be a dwelling or even a building in the conventional sense, physical breaking is not necessary, the entry does not need to occur at night, and the intent may be to commit any felony or theft.

Canada
In Canada, breaking is prohibited by section 348 of the Criminal Code. It is an indictable offense when committed in residence, and otherwise a hybrid offense. Breaking and Entering is defined as breaking into a place with intent to commit another indictable offense (including, but not limited to theft). The crime is commonly referred to in Canada as breaking and entering, which in turn is often shortened to B and E.

Finland
There is no crime of burglary as such in Finland. In the case of breaking and entering, the Finnish penal code states that "A person who unlawfully

(1) enters domestic premises by force, stealth or deception, or hides or stays in such premises [...] shall be sentenced for invasion of domestic premises to a fine or to imprisonment for at most six months."

However, if theft is committed during unlawful entering, then a person is guilty of theft or aggravated theft depending on the circumstances of the felony. "Aggravated theft: (1) If in the theft
 * (5) the offender breaks into an occupied residence,

and the theft is aggravated also when assessed as a whole, the offender shall be sentenced for aggravated theft to imprisonment for at least four months and at most four years."

New Zealand
In New Zealand, burglary is a statute offence under section 231 of the Crimes Act 1961. Originally this was a codification of the common law offence, though from October 2004 the break element was removed from the definition and entry into the building (or ship), or a part of it, now only needed to be unauthorised. The definition of a building is very broad to cover all forms of dwelling, including an enclosed yard. Unauthorised entry onto agricultural land with intent to commit an imprisonable offence (section 231A) was added in March 2019 as a burglary type offence.

Sweden
In Sweden, burglary does not exist as an offence in itself; instead, there are two available offences. If a person simply breaks into any premise, they are technically guilty of either unlawful intrusion (olaga intrång) or breach of domiciliary peace (hemfridsbrott), depending on the premise in question. Breach of domiciliary peace is applicable only when people "unlawfully intrude or remain where others have their living quarters". The only punishments available for any of these offences are fines, unless the offences are considered gross. In such cases, the maximum punishment is two years' imprisonment.

However, if the person who has forced themself into a house steals anything ("takes what belongs to another with intent to acquire it"), they are guilty of (ordinary) theft (stöld). However, the section regarding gross theft (Chapter 6, 4s of the Penal Code, grov stöld) states "in assessing whether the crime is gross, special consideration shall be given to whether the unlawful appropriation took place after intrusion into a dwelling." For theft, the punishment is imprisonment of at most two years, while gross theft carries a punishment of between six months and six years.

England and Wales
Burglary is defined by section 9 of the Theft Act 1968, which describes two variants:
 * 1) A person is guilty of burglary if they enter any building or part of a building as a trespasser with intent to steal, inflict grievous bodily harm or do unlawful damage to the building or anything in it.
 * 2) A person is guilty of burglary if, having entered a building or part of a building as a trespasser, they steal or attempt to steal anything in the building, or inflict or attempt to inflict grievous bodily harm on any person in the building.

Northern Ireland
The offence is defined in similar terms to England and Wales by the Theft Act (Northern Ireland) 1969.

Scotland
Under Scots law, the crime of burglary does not exist. Instead theft by housebreaking covers theft where the security of the building is overcome. It does not include any other aspect of burglary found in England and Wales. It is a crime usually prosecuted under solemn procedure in a superior court. Another common law crime still used is Hamesuken, which covers forced entry into a building where a serious assault on the occupant takes place. Common law crimes in Scotland are gradually being replaced by statutes.

United States
In the United States, burglary is prosecuted as a felony or misdemeanor and involves trespassing and theft, entering a building or automobile, or loitering unlawfully with intent to commit any crime, not necessarily a theft – for example, vandalism. Even if nothing is stolen in a burglary, the act is a statutory offense. Buildings can include hangars, sheds, barns, and coops; burglary of boats, aircraft, trucks, military equipment, and railway cars is possible. Burglary may be an element in crimes involving rape, arson, kidnapping, identity theft, or violation of civil rights; indeed, the "plumbers" of the Watergate scandal were technically burglars. Any entry into the building or automobile of another with the intent to commit a crime, even if the entry would otherwise be permitted for lawful purposes, may constitute burglary on the theory that the permission to enter is only extended for lawful purposes (for example, a shoplifter may be prosecuted for burglary in addition to theft, for entering a shop with the intent to steal). As with all legal definitions in the U.S., the foregoing description may not be applicable in every jurisdiction, since there are 50 separate state criminal codes, plus federal and territorial codes in force.

Home invasion
Commission of a burglary with the intention or result of confronting persons on the premises may constitute an aggravated offense known as "home invasion". Taking or attempting to take property by force or threat of force from persons on the premises also constitutes the offense of robbery.

Nighttime burglaries
In some states, a burglary committed during the hours of daylight is technically not burglary, but housebreaking. In many jurisdictions in the U.S., burglary is punished more severely than housebreaking. In California, for example, burglary was punished as burglary in the first degree, while housebreaking was punished as burglary in the second degree. California now distinguishes between entry into a residence and into a commercial building, with the burglary of a residence bearing heavier punishment.

In states that continue to punish burglary more severely than housebreaking twilight, night is traditionally defined as hours between 30 minutes after sunset and 30 minutes before sunrise.

Inchoate crime
There is some recent scholarly treatment of burglaries in American law as inchoate crimes, but this is in dispute. Some academics consider burglary an inchoate crime. Others say that because the intrusion itself is harmful, this justifies punishment even when no further crime is committed.

"Burglary, as a preliminary step to another crime, can be seen as an inchoate, or incomplete, offense. As it disrupts the security of persons in their homes and in regard to their personal property, however, it is complete as soon as the intrusion is made. This dual nature is at the heart of a debate about whether the crime of burglary ought to be abolished and its elements covered by attempt or aggravating circumstances to other crimes—or retained, and the grading schemes reformed to reflect the seriousness of individual offenses."

Possession of burglars' tools, in jurisdictions that make this an offense, has also been viewed as an inchoate crime: "In effect piling an inchoate crime onto an inchoate crime, the possession of burglary tools with the intent to use them in a burglary is a serious offense, a felony in some jurisdictions. Gloves that defendants were trying to shake off as they ran from the site of a burglary were identified as burglar's tools in Green v. State (Fla. App. 1991)."

Florida
Under Florida State Statutes, "burglary" occurs when a person "enter[s] a dwelling, a structure, or a conveyance with the intent to commit an offense therein, unless the premises are at the time open to the public or the defendant is licensed or invited to enter." Depending on the circumstances of the crime, burglary can be classified as third, second, first-degree, or life felonies, with maximum sentences of five years, fifteen years, thirty years, and life, respectively. The minimum sentences are probation, 21 months, and 124 1/2 months, except that if the person had a gun, a judge uses the 10-20-Life Law, 10 years on anyone convicted of committing or attempting to commit any of the above felonies (with certain exceptions), while armed with a firearm or destructive device. If a firearm was discharged, 20 years. If a bullet injures or kills someone, 25 years.

Georgia
A person commits the offense of burglary when, without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, he enters or remains within the dwelling house of another or any building, vehicle, railroad car, watercraft, or other such structure designed for use as the dwelling of another or enters or remains within any other building, railroad car, aircraft, or any room or any part thereof. A person convicted of the offense of burglary, for the first such offense, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years. For the purposes of this Code section, the term "railroad car" shall also include trailers on flatcars, containers on flatcars, trailers on railroad property, or containers on railroad property. O.C.G.A. § 16-7-1.

Kentucky
Burglary and the intended crime, if carried out, are treated as separate offenses. Burglary is a felony, even when the intended crime is a misdemeanor, and the intent to commit the crime can occur when one "enters or remains unlawfully" in the building, expanding the common-law definition. It has three degrees. Third-degree burglary is the broadest, and applies to any building or other premises. Second-degree burglary retains the common-law element of a dwelling, and first-degree burglary requires that the accused be in a dwelling and armed with a weapon or have intent to cause injury. A related offense, criminal trespass, covers unlawful entry to buildings or premises without the intent to commit a crime, and is a misdemeanor or, in the third degree, a violation. Possession of burglar's tools, with the intent to use them to commit burglary or theft, is a misdemeanor.

Massachusetts
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts uses the term "burglary" to refer to a night-time breaking and entering of a dwelling with the intent to commit a felony. Burglary is a felony punishable by not more than twenty years; should the burglar enter with a dangerous weapon, they may be imprisoned for life. Unlawful entries of a structure other than a dwelling are labeled "breaking and entering" and punishments vary according to structure.

Maryland
In Maryland, under title 6, subtitle 2 of the criminal law code, the crime of burglary is divided into four degrees. The first three degrees are felonies, while fourth-degree burglary is a misdemeanor. Breaking and entering into a dwelling with intent to commit theft or a crime of violence is first-degree burglary. Breaking and entering into a "storehouse" (a structure other than a dwelling, also including watercraft, aircraft, railroad cars, and vessels) with intent to commit theft, arson, or a crime of violence is second-degree burglary. Third-degree burglary is defined as breaking and entering into a dwelling with intent to commit a crime.

Simple breaking and entering into a dwelling or storehouse without specific intent to commit an additional crime is fourth-degree burglary. This degree also includes two other offenses that do not have breaking and entering as an element: Being in or on the yard, garden, or other property of a storehouse or dwelling with the intent to commit theft, or possession of burglar's tools with the intent to use them in a burglary offense.

New Hampshire
In the criminal code of New Hampshire, "A person is guilty of burglary if they enter a building or occupied structure, or separately secured or occupied section thereof, with purpose to commit a crime therein, unless the premises are at the time open to the public or the actor is licensed or privileged to enter."

New York
Under the New York Penal Law, burglary is always a felony, even in third degree. It is more serious if the perpetrator uses what appears to be a dangerous weapon or enters a dwelling.

Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania, it is a defense to prosecution if the building or structure in question is rendered abandoned.

Virginia
In Virginia, there are degrees of burglary, described as "Common Law Burglary" and "Statutory Burglary".

Common Law Burglary is defined as: if any people break and enter the dwelling of another, in the nighttime, with intent to commit a felony or any larceny (theft < $500) therein, shall be guilty of burglary, punishable as a class 3 felony; provided, however, that if such people was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, they shall be guilty of a class 2 felony.

Statutory Burglary is defined as: If any people in the nighttime enter without breaking, or in the daytime break and enter or enter and conceal themselves in a dwelling house or an adjoining, occupied outhouse, or, in the nighttime enter without breaking or at any time break and enter or enter and conceal themselves in any office, shop, manufactured home, storehouse, warehouse, banking house, church or other house, or any ship, vessel or river craft, or any railroad car, or any automobile, truck, or trailer, if such automobile, truck or trailer is used as a dwelling or place of human habitation, with intent to commit murder, rape, robbery or arson in violation of Virginia State code section 18.2–77, 18.2–79, or 18.2–80, shall be deemed guilty of statutory burglary, which offense shall be a class 3 felony. However, if such people were armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, they shall be guilty of a class 2 felony.

Additionally, if any people commit any of the acts mentioned in the VA state code section 18.2–90 with intent to commit larceny, or any felony other than murder, rape, robbery or arson in violation of VA state code section 18.2–77, 18.2–79, or 18.2–80, or if any people commit any acts mentioned in 18.2–89 or 18.2–90 with intent to commit assault and battery, shall be guilty of statutory burglary, punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for not less than one or more than twenty years, or, in the discretion of the jury or the court trying the case without a jury, be confined in jail for a period not exceeding twelve months or fined not more than $2,500, either or both. However, if the people were armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, they shall be guilty of a Class 2 felony.

Finally, if any people break and enter a dwelling house while said dwelling is occupied, either in the day or night time, with intent to commit any misdemeanor except assault and battery or trespass (which falls under the previous paragraph), shall be guilty of a class 6 felony. However, if the people were armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, they shall be guilty of a class 2 felony.

Wisconsin
In Wisconsin, burglary is committed by one who forcibly enters a building without consent and with intent to steal or to commit another felony. Burglary may also be committed by entry to a locked truck, car or trailer or a ship. The crime of burglary is treated as being more serious if the burglar is armed with a dangerous weapon when the burglary is committed or arms him/herself during the commission of the burglary.

Protection against burglars
Protection of property against burglars can include defenses such as anti-climb paint, safety and security window film, lock and key, and burglar alarms. Dogs of any size can warn residents through loud barking, with larger dogs or multiple medium-to-small dogs posing a threat of severe injury to an intruder. Self-defense is also an option in some jurisdictions.

Classifications
The March 2015 version (1.0) of the International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes (ICCS) classifies burglary under section 0501, a subsection of section 05 "Act against property only" (Category 05 at level 1).

In the US, the FBI Uniform Crime Reports classify burglary as a distinct Part 1 index crime.

The Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC) has a separate top level division (Division 07) for "Unlawful entry with intent/burglary, break and enter".

Burglaries by country
The UNODC notes "that when using the figures, any cross-national comparisons should be conducted with caution because of the differences that exist between the legal definitions of offences in countries, or the different methods of offence counting and recording". Also, not every crime is reported and the rate of reported crimes may vary by countries.

Evidence from the United States suggests that burglary has declined steadily since 1980 which is mainly attributed to improved household security.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Burglary


text:
Spruce

A spruce is a tree of the genus Picea, a genus of about 40 species of coniferous evergreen trees in the family Pinaceae, found in the northern temperate and boreal (taiga) regions of the Earth. Picea is the sole genus in the subfamily Piceoideae. Spruces are large trees, from about 20 to 60 m (about 60–200 ft) tall when mature, and have whorled branches and conical form.

Spruces can be distinguished from other genera of the family Pinaceae by their needles (leaves), which are four-sided and attached singly to small persistent peg-like structures (pulvini or sterigmata ) on the branches, and by their cones (without any protruding bracts), which hang downwards after they are pollinated. The needles are shed when 4–10 years old, leaving the branches rough with the retained pegs. In other similar genera, the branches are fairly smooth.

Spruce are used as food plants by the larvae of some Lepidoptera (moth and butterfly) species, such as the eastern spruce budworm. They are also used by the larvae of gall adelgids (Adelges species).

In the mountains of western Sweden, scientists have found a Norway spruce, nicknamed Old Tjikko, which by reproducing through layering, has reached an age of 9,550 years and is claimed to be the world's oldest known living tree.

Morphology
Determining that a tree is a spruce is not difficult; evergreen needles that are more or less quadrangled, and especially the pulvinus, give it away. Beyond that, determination can become more difficult. Intensive sampling in the Smithers/Hazelton/Houston area of British Columbia showed Douglas (1975), according to Coates et al. (1994), that cone scale morphology was the feature most useful in differentiating species of spruce; the length, width, length: width ratio, the length of free scale (the distance from the imprint of the seed wing to the tip of the scale), and the percentage free scale (length of free scale as a percentage of the total length of the scale) were most useful in this regard. Daubenmire (1974), after range-wide sampling, had already recognized the importance of the two latter characters. Taylor (1959) had noted that the most obvious morphological difference between typical Picea glauca and typical P. engelmannii was the cone scale, and Horton (1956,1959) found that the most useful diagnostic features of the two spruces are in the cone; differences occur in the flower, shoot and needle, "but those in the cone are most easily assessed" (Horton 1959). Coupé et al. (1982) recommended that cone scale characters be based on samples taken from the midsection of each of ten cones from each of five trees in the population of interest.

Without cones, morphological differentiation among spruce species and their hybrids is more difficult. Species classification for seeds collected from spruce stands in which introgressive hybridization between white and Sitka spruces (P. sitchensis) may have occurred is important for determining appropriate cultural regimens in the nursery. If, for instance, white spruce grown at container nurseries in southwestern British Columbia are not given an extended photoperiod, leader growth ceases early in the first growing season, and seedlings do not reach the minimum height specifications. But, if an extended photoperiod is provided for Sitka spruce, seedlings become unacceptably tall by the end of the first growing season. Species classification of seedlots collected in areas where hybridization of white and Sitka spruces has been reported has depended on (i) easily measured cone scale characters of seed trees, especially free scale length, (ii) visual judgements of morphological characters, e.g., growth rhythm, shoot and root weight, and needle serration, or (iii) some combination of (i) and (ii) (Yeh and Arnott 1986). Useful to a degree, these classification procedures have important limitations; genetic composition of the seeds produced by a stand is determined by both the seed trees and the pollen parents, and species classification of hybrid seedlots and estimates of their level of introgression on the basis of seed-tree characteristics can be unreliable when hybrid seedlots vary in their introgressiveness in consequence of spatial and temporal variations in contributions from the pollen parent (Yeh and Arnott 1986). Secondly, morphological characters are markedly influenced by ontogenetic and environmental influences, so that to discern spruce hybrid seedlot composition with accuracy, hybrid seedlots must differ substantially in morphology from both parent species. Yeh and Arnott (1986) pointed out the difficulties of estimating accurately the degree of introgression between white and Sitka spruces; introgression may have occurred at low levels, and/or hybrid seed lots may vary in their degree of introgression in consequence of repeated backcrossing with parental species.

Growth
Spruce seedlings are most susceptible immediately following germination, and remain highly susceptible through to the following spring. More than half of spruce seedling mortality probably occurs during the first growing season and is also very high during the first winter, when seedlings are subjected to freezing damage, frost heaving and erosion, as well as smothering by litter and snow-pressed vegetation. Seedlings that germinate late in the growing season are particularly vulnerable because they are tiny and have not had time to harden off fully.

Mortality rates generally decrease sharply thereafter, but losses often remain high for some years. "Establishment" is a subjective concept based on the idea that once a seedling has successfully reached a certain size, not much is likely to prevent its further development. Criteria vary, of course, but Noble and Ronco (1978), for instance, considered that seedlings four to five years old, or 8 cm to 10 cm tall, warranted the designation "established", since only unusual factors such as snow mold, fire, trampling, or predation would then impair regeneration success. Eis (1967) suggested that in dry habitats on either mineral soil or litter seedbeds a 3-year-old seedling may be considered established; in moist habitats, seedlings may need 4 or 5 years to become established on mineral soil, possibly longer on litter seedbeds.

Growth remains very slow for several to many years. Three years after shelterwood felling in subalpine Alberta, dominant regeneration averaged 5.5 cm in height in scarified blocks, and 7.3 cm in non-scarified blocks (Day 1970), possibly reflecting diminished fertility with the removal of the A horizon.

Classification
DNA analyses have shown that traditional classifications based on the morphology of needle and cone are artificial. A 2006 study found that P. breweriana had a basal position, followed by P. sitchensis, and the other species were further divided into three clades, suggesting that Picea originated in North America. The oldest record of spruce that has been found in the fossil record is from the Early Cretaceous (Valanginian) of western Canada, around 136 million years old.

Species
, Plants of the World Online accepted 37 species. The grouping is based on Ran et al. (2006).
 * Basal species:
 * Picea breweriana – Brewer's spruce, Klamath Mountains, North America; local endemic
 * Picea sitchensis – Sitka spruce, Pacific coast of North America; the largest species, to 95 m tall; important in forestry
 * Clade I (Northern and western North America, in boreal forests or high mountains)
 * Picea engelmannii – Engelmann spruce, western North American mountains; important in forestry
 * Picea glauca, syn. Picea laxa – white spruce, northern North America; important in forestry
 * Clade II (throughout Asia, mostly in mountainous areas, a few isolated populations in higher elevations of Mexico,)
 * Picea brachytyla – Sargent's spruce, southwest China
 * Picea chihuahuana – Chihuahua spruce, northwest Mexico (rare)
 * Picea farreri – Burmese spruce, northeast Burma, southwest China (mountains)
 * Picea likiangensis – Likiang spruce, southwest China
 * Picea martinezii – Martinez spruce, northeast Mexico (very rare, endangered)
 * Picea maximowiczii – Maximowicz spruce, Japan (rare, mountains)
 * Picea morrisonicola – Taiwan spruce, Taiwan (high mountains)
 * Picea neoveitchii – Veitch's spruce, northwest China (rare, endangered)
 * Picea orientalis – Caucasian spruce or Oriental spruce, Caucasus, northeast Turkey
 * Picea polita, syn. Picea torano – tiger-tail spruce, Japan
 * Picea purpurea – purple cone spruce, western China
 * Picea schrenkiana – Schrenk's spruce, mountains of central Asia
 * Picea smithiana – morinda spruce, western Himalaya, eastern Afghanistan, northern and northwest India
 * Picea spinulosa – Sikkim spruce, northeast India (Sikkim), eastern Himalaya
 * Picea wilsonii – Wilson's spruce, western China
 * Clade III (Europe, Asia, and North America, mostly in boreal forests or mountainous areas)
 * Picea abies – Norway spruce, Europe; important in forestry, the original Christmas tree
 * Picea alcoquiana – ("P. bicolor") Alcock's spruce, central Japan (mountains)
 * Picea asperata – dragon spruce, western China; several varieties
 * Picea crassifolia – Qinghai spruce, China
 * Picea glehnii – Glehn's spruce, northern Japan, Sakhalin
 * Picea jezoensis – Jezo spruce, northeast Asia, Kamchatka south to Japan
 * Picea koraiensis – Korean spruce, Korea, northeast China
 * Picea koyamae – Koyama's spruce, Japan (mountains)
 * Picea mariana – black spruce, northern North America
 * Picea meyeri – Meyer's spruce, northern China (from Inner Mongolia to Gansu)
 * Picea obovata – Siberian spruce, north Scandinavia, Siberia; often treated as a variant of P. abies (and hybridises with it), but has distinct cones
 * Picea omorika – Serbian spruce, Serbia and Bosnia; local endemic; important in horticulture
 * Picea pungens – blue spruce or Colorado spruce, Rocky Mountains, North America; important in horticulture
 * Picea retroflexa – green dragon spruce, China
 * Picea rubens – red spruce, northeastern North America; important in forestry, known as Adirondack in musical-instrument making
 * Others
 * Picea aurantiaca Mast.
 * Picea austropanlanica Silba
 * Picea linzhiensis (W.C.Cheng & L.K.Fu) Rushforth
 * Hybrids
 * Picea × albertiana S.Br.
 * Picea × fennica (Regel) Kom.
 * Picea × lutzii Little
 * Picea × notha'' Rehder

Fossil species
There are also a number of extinct species identified from fossil evidence:

Cones

 * †Picea anadyrensis Kryshtofovich
 * †Picea antiqua Vasskovsky
 * †Picea beckii Mai
 * †Picea bilibinii Vasskovsky
 * †Picea burtonii Klymiuk & Stockey
 * †Picea camtschatica Vasskovsky
 * †Picea deweyensis Axelrod
 * †Picea diettertiana Miller
 * †Picea eichhornii Miller
 * †Picea evenica Vasskovsky
 * †Picea fimbriata Chelebaeva
 * †Picea garoensis Tanai & Suzuki
 * †Picea harrimani Knowlton
 * †Picea hondoensis Vasskovsky
 * †Picea indigirensis Peresvetov
 * †Picea latibracteata Miki
 * †Picea latisquamosa Kinkelin
 * †Picea metechensis Kharatishvili
 * †Picea mioorientalis Usnadze
 * †Picea mugodzharica Rajushkina
 * †Picea oligocaenica Engelhardt
 * †Picea pevekensis Golovneva
 * †Picea praeajanensis Vasskovsky
 * †Picea protopicea (Velenovský) Tyroff
 * †Picea sookensis LaMotte
 * †Picea sugaii Tanai & Onoe
 * †Picea suifunensis Kryshtofovich
 * †Picea vassiljevii Vasskovsky
 * †Picea vitjasii Vasskovsky
 * †Picea wolfei Crabtree
 * †Picea wollosowiczii Sukaczev
 * †Picea yanensis Golovneva & Shczepetov

Foliage

 * †Picea cretacea Velenovský
 * †Picea echinata Müller-Stoll
 * †Picea korfiensis Chelebaeva
 * †Picea lahontensis MacGinitie
 * †Picea morosovae Akhmetiev & Shevyreva
 * †Picea nakauchii Matsumoto, Ohsawa, & Nishida
 * †Picea palaeomorika Müller-Stoll
 * †Picea quilchensis Penhallow
 * †Picea tranquillensis Penhallow

Pollen

 * †Picea alata Zaklinsk
 * †Picea bella Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea complanatiformis Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea depressa Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea distorta Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea distracta Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea exilioides Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea gigantissima Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea grandipollinia Ananova
 * †Picea grandis Panova
 * †Picea grandivescipites Wodehouse
 * †Picea kryshtofovichii Ammosov
 * †Picea longisaccata Rovnina
 * †Picea media Ananova
 * †Picea mesophytica Pokrovskaja
 * †Picea minor Mtchedlishvili
 * †Picea multigruma Chlonova
 * †Picea omoriciformis Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea parvireticulata Rovnina
 * †Picea pseudorotundiformis Maljavkina
 * †Picea rara Stanley
 * †Picea sacculifera (Maljavkina) Chlonova
 * †Picea samoilovitchiana Rovnina
 * †Picea schrenkianiformis Zaklinskaja
 * †Picea scotica Simpson
 * †Picea singularis Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea spirelliformis (Maljavkina) Bolkhovitina
 * †Picea sutschanensis Verbizkaja
 * †Picea tasaranica Zaklinskaja
 * †Picea tobolica Panova
 * †Picea valanjinica Rovnina

Seeds

 * †Picea altaica Rajushkina
 * †Picea hiyamensis Tanai & Suzuki
 * †Picea kaneharae Tanai & Onoe
 * †Picea kanoi Huzioka
 * †Picea magna MacGinitie
 * †Picea pinifructus Brown
 * †Picea sonomensis Axelrod

Wood

 * †Picea palaeomaximowiczii Watari
 * †Picea wakimizui (Watari) Watari
 * †Picea withamii (Lindley & Hutton) Morris

Multiple organs

 * †Picea columbiensis Penhallow
 * †Picea critchfieldii Jackson & Weng - Late Quaternary North America.
 * †Picea farjonii Herrera et al.
 * †Picea heisseana von Fritsch
 * †Picea koribae Miki
 * †Picea miocenica Tanai
 * †Picea rotundosquamosa (Ludwig) Mai & Walther
 * †Picea ugoana Huzioka

Unspecified

 * †Picea alba Link
 * †Picea albertensis Penhallow
 * †Picea snatolensis Chelebaeva

Fossil species formerly placed in Picea

 * †Picea cliffwoodensis Berry moved to †Pityostrobus cliffwoodensis (Bery) Miller
 * †Picea succinifera (Göppert & Berendt) moved to Pinus succinifera (Göppert) Conwentz

Cultivation
In the realm of spruce trees, the presence of Dendroctonus micans beetles significantly impacts their health and vitality. These beetles, particularly the males, display territorial behavior, diligently defending areas that are attractive to females for mating. By safeguarding these regions and providing suitable host trees, they create an environment conducive to egg-laying, thereby ensuring their reproductive success. This territoriality is closely tied to male reproductive prowess and plays a crucial role in understanding the dynamics of beetle populations and their impact on the overall health of spruce trees. Moreover, the home range of Dendroctonus micans varies based on the availability and density of host trees, with individual beetles dispersing across their habitat in search of optimal nesting sites.

Etymology
Spruce, spruse (1412), and Sprws (1378) seem to have been generic terms for commodities brought to England by Hanseatic merchants (especially beer, boards, wooden chests and leather), and the tree thus was believed to be particular to Prussia, which for a time was figurative in England as a land of luxuries. It can be argued that the word is actually derived from the Old French term Pruce, meaning literally Prussia.

Sirococcus blight (Deuteromycotina, Coelomtcetes)
The closely related species Sirococcus conigenus and Sirococcus piceicola cause shoot blight and seedling mortality of conifers in North America, Europe, and North Africa. Twig blight damage to seedlings of white and red spruces in a nursery near Asheville, North Carolina, was reported by Graves (1914). Hosts include white, black, Engelmann, Norway, and red spruces, although they are not the plants most commonly damaged. Sirococcus blight of spruces in nurseries show up randomly in seedlings to which the fungus was transmitted in infested seed. First-year seedlings are often killed, and larger plants may become too deformed for planting. Outbreaks involving < 30% of spruce seedlings in seedbeds have been traced to seed lots in which only 0.1% to 3% of seeds were infested. Seed infestation has in turn been traced to the colonization of spruce cones by S. conigenus in forests of the western interior. Infection develops readily if conidia are deposited on succulent plant parts that remain wet for at least 24 hours at 10 °C to 25 °C. Longer periods of wetness favour increasingly severe disease. Twig tips killed during growth the previous year show a characteristic crook.

Rhizosphaera kalkhoffi needle cast
Rhizosphaera infects white spruce, blue spruce (Picea pungens), and Norway spruces throughout Ontario, causing severe defoliation and sometimes killing small, stressed trees. White spruce is intermediately susceptible. Dead needles show rows of black fruiting bodies. Infection usually begins on lower branches. On white spruce, infected needles are usually retained on the tree into the following summer. The fungicide Chlorthalonil is registered for controlling this needle cast (Davis 1997).

Valsa kunzei branch and stem canker
A branch and stem canker associated with the fungus Valsa kunzei Fr. var. picea was reported on white and Norway spruces in Ontario (Jorgensen and Cafley 1961) and Quebec (Ouellette and Bard 1962). In Ontario, only trees of low vigour were affected, but in Quebec vigorous trees were also infected.

Predators
Small mammals ingest conifer seeds, and also consume seedlings. Cage feeding of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) and red-backed vole (Myodes gapperi) showed a daily maximum seed consumption of 2000 white spruce seeds and of 1000 seeds of lodgepole pine, with the two species of mice consuming equal amounts of seed, but showing a preference for the pine over the spruce (Wagg 1963). The short-tailed meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus Ord) voraciously ate all available white spruce and lodgepole pine seedlings, pulling them out of the ground and holding them between their front feet until the whole seedling had been consumed. Wagg (1963) attributed damage observed to the bark and cambium at ground level of small white spruce seedlings over several seasons to meadow voles.

Once shed, seeds contribute to the diet of small mammals, e.g., deer mice, red-backed voles, mountain voles (Microtus montanus), and chipmunks (Eutamias minimus). The magnitude of the loss is difficult to determine, and studies with and without seed protection have yielded conflicting results. In western Montana, for example, spruce seedling success was little better on protected than on unprotected seed spots (Schopmeyer and Helmers 1947), but in British Columbia spruce regeneration depended on protection from rodents (Smith 1955).

An important albeit indirect biotic constraint on spruce establishment is the depredation of seed by squirrels. As much as 90% of a cone crop has been harvested by red squirrels (Zasada et al. 1978). Deer mice, voles, chipmunks, and shrews can consume large quantities of seed; one mouse can eat 2000 seeds per night. Repeated applications of half a million seeds/ha failed to produce the 750 trees/ha sought by Northwest Pulp and Power, Ltd., near Hinton, Alberta (Radvanyi 1972), but no doubt left a lot of well-fed small mammals. Foraging by squirrels for winter buds (Rowe 1952) has not been reported in relation to young plantations, but Wagg (1963) noted that at Hinton AB, red squirrels were observed cutting the lateral and terminal twigs and feeding on the vegetative and flower buds of white spruce.

Red squirrels in Alaska have harvested as much as 90% of a cone crop (Zasada et al. 1978); their modus operandi is to cut off great numbers of cones with great expedition early in the fall, and then "spend the rest of the fall shelling out the seeds". In Manitoba, Rowe (1952) ascribed widespread severing of branch tips 5 cm to 10 cm long on white spruce ranging "from sapling to veteran size" to squirrels foraging for winter buds, cone failure having excluded the more usual food source. The damage has not been reported in relation to small trees, outplants or otherwise.

Porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum L.) may damage spruce (Nienstaedt 1957), but prefer red pine. Bark-stripping of white spruce by black bear (Euarctos americanus perniger) is locally important in Alaska (Lutz 1951), but the bark of white spruce is not attacked by field mice (Microtus pennsylvanicus Ord), even in years of heavy infestation.

Pests
The eastern spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) is a major pest of spruce trees in forests throughout Canada and the eastern United States. Two of the main host plants are black spruce and white spruce. Population levels oscillate, sometimes reaching extreme outbreak levels that can cause extreme defoliation of and damage to spruce trees. To reduce destruction, there are multiple methods of control in place, including pesticides.

Horntails, or Wood Wasps, use this tree for egg laying and the larvae will live in the outer inch of the tree under the bark.

Spruce beetles (Dendroctonus rufipennis) have destroyed swathes of spruce forest in western North America from Alaska to Wyoming.

Timber
Spruce is useful as a building wood, commonly referred to by several different names including North American timber, SPF (spruce, pine, fir) and whitewood (the collective name for spruce wood). Spruce wood is used for many purposes, ranging from general construction work and crates to highly specialised uses in wooden aircraft. The Wright brothers' first aircraft, the Flyer, was built of spruce.

Because this species has no insect or decay resistance qualities after logging, it is generally recommended for construction purposes as indoor use only (indoor drywall framing, for example). Spruce wood, when left outside cannot be expected to last more than 12–18 months depending on the type of climate it is exposed to.

Pulpwood
Spruce is one of the most important woods for paper uses, as it has long wood fibres which bind together to make strong paper. The fibres are thin walled and collapse to thin bands upon drying. Spruces are commonly used in mechanical pulping as they are easily bleached. Together with northern pines, northern spruces are commonly used to make NBSK. Spruces are cultivated over vast areas as pulpwood.

Food and medicine

The fresh shoots of many spruces are a natural source of vitamin C. Captain Cook made alcoholic sugar-based spruce beer during his sea voyages in order to prevent scurvy in his crew. The leaves and branches, or the essential oils, can be used to brew spruce beer.

In Finland, young spruce buds are sometimes used as a spice, or boiled with sugar to create spruce bud syrup. In survival situations spruce needles can be directly ingested or boiled into a tea. This replaces large amounts of vitamin C. Also, water is stored in a spruce's needles, providing an alternative means of hydration. Spruce can be used as a preventive measure for scurvy in an environment where meat is the only prominent food source.

Tonewood
Spruce is the standard material used in soundboards for many musical instruments, including guitars, mandolins, cellos, violins, and the soundboard at the heart of a piano and the harp. Wood used for this purpose is referred to as tonewood.

Spruce, along with cedar, is often used for the soundboard/top of an acoustic guitar. The main types of spruce used for this purpose are Sitka, Engelmann, Adirondack and European spruces.

Other uses
The resin was used in the manufacture of pitch in the past (before the use of petrochemicals); the scientific name Picea derives from Latin "pitch pine" (referring to Scots pine), from, an adjective from  "pitch".

Native Americans in North America use the thin, pliable roots of some species for weaving baskets and for sewing together pieces of birch bark for canoes. See also Kiidk'yaas for an unusual golden Sitka Spruce sacred to the Haida people.

Spruces are popular ornamental trees in horticulture, admired for their evergreen, symmetrical narrow-conic growth habit. For the same reason, some (particularly Picea abies and P. omorika) are also extensively used as Christmas trees, with artificial Christmas trees often being produced in their likenesses.

Spruce branches are also used at Aintree racecourse, Liverpool, to build several of the fences on the Grand National course. Spruce wood is also used to make sculptures.

Genome
The nuclear, mitochondrial and chloroplast genomes of British Columbia interior spruce have been sequenced. The large (20 Gbp) nuclear genome and associated gene annotations of interior spruce (genotype PG29) were published in 2013 and 2015.

title: Spruce


text:
Talk:Humbert II, Count of Savoy

Untitled
What an effing bloody mess. One is Humbert, not Umberto, but the other is Amedeo!.......DW

I seriously doubt the William, Bishop of Liege listed on the List of Bishops of Liege is the son of Umberto II. He would have had to have been 135 years old if he were born posthumously.Tetyler 02:30, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Humbert II, Count of Savoy