text:
Railroad Company v. Alabama/Opinion of the Court

This case, like that of Railroad Company v. Tennessee (supra, p. 337), presents the question of the constitutionality of a law taking away the right to sue a State on its contracts. The Constitution and laws bearing on the question are much the same in Alabama as in Tennessee; but in Alabama it was provided 'that if judgment should be rendered against the State, it was the duty of the comptroller, on the certificate of the clerk of the court, together with that of the judge who tried the cause, that the recovery was just, to issue his warrant for the amount, but no certificate could issue until six months after the recovery of the judgment.' Code 1867, sect. 2536. It was also the duty of the treasurer to pay all warrants drawn on him by the comptroller under the authority of law (Code, sect. 422); but the Constitution, in force then and now, provided in express terms that no money should be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law. Const., 1834 and 1870, art. 2, sect. 24.

The proceedings in this case were begun while these laws were in force; but before final hearing the laws were repealed, and thereupon, on motion of the State, the suit was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision; and the question is, therefore, directly presented by this writ of error, whether the repealing statute is valid and constitutional as against this plaintiff in error, so far as it affects the present cause of action, which accrued while the right to sue existed.

We are unable to see any substantial difference between this case and that of Railroad Company v. Tennessee, supra. Under both the Tennessee and Alabama statutes the courts are made little else than auditing boards. If funds are not voluntarily provided to meet the judgment, the courts are not invested with power to supply them. In Alabama, a warrant for the payment may be secured, but the State may stop payment by withholding an appropriation. Perhaps the judgment creditor may take one step further towards the collection in Alabama than he can in Tennessee; but both States may refuse to pay, that is, may refuse to make the necessary appropriation, and the courts are powerless to compel them to do so. In neither State has there been granted such a remedy for the enforcement of the contracts of the sovereignty as may not, under the Constitution of the United States, be taken away.

Judgment affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE dissented.

MR. JUSTICE STRONG took no part in deciding this case.

NOTE.-At a subsequent day of the term a petition for rehearing was filed.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.

We have examined with care the cases in Alabama referred to in the elaborate brief filed with this petition, and are unable to see that they decide more than that a judgment creditor is entitled to his warrant on the treasury for the amount of his recovery. No case has gone beyond this. The treasurer must pay the warrant when issued, if he has funds in his hands appropriated for the purpose; but if there has been no appropriation, he cannot any more pay a warrant issued on a judgment than one lawfully issued without a judgment. Take this case as an illustration. The demand made by the railroad company is an extraordinary one, and involves a large amount of money. Should a recovery be had, and the warrant paid without reference to the specific appropriations, which had been made by the legislature, of the funds in the treasury, it would almost of necessity embarrass the government in its daily operations. The constitutional provi ion referred to in our former opinion was, among other things, intended to meet just such a state of facts. Knowing what appropriations are made, the legislature provide the funds to meet them. If, from any cause, an unusual claim arises, the parties must wait for the payment until the legislature can provide the money. The case is precisely like that of a judgment in the Court of Claims against the United States. By the Constitution of the United States no 'money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law.' Art. 1, sect. 9. Hence the party who gets a judgment must wait until Congress makes an appropriation before his money can be had.

Petition denied.


text: Talk:Railroad Company v. Alabama/Opinion of the Court

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


text:
Railroad Company v. Turrill

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Mr. Enoch Totten and Mr. George Payson for the appellants.

The court declined hearing Mr. Francis H. Kales for the appellee.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.

title: Railroad Company v. Turrill


text: Talk:Railroad Company v. Turrill

title: Talk:Railroad Company v. Turrill


text:
Railroad Company v. Turrill/Opinion of the Court

When this case was here before (94 U.S. 695), we affirmed the decree then appealed from 'with costs and interest until paid at the same rate per annum that similar decrees bear in the courts of the State of Illinois.' In this way we established the validity of the patent sued on, and directed the court below to proceed with the collection of its money decree, with such interest as similar decrees bear in the State. By 'similar' we meant decrees for the payment of money, and not decrees in patent suits, for of such suits the State courts have no jurisdiction.

The courts of Illinois have uniformly held that money decrees carry interest at the rate of six per cent per annum, the statutory rate for judgments. For this reason it was right for the Circuit Court, when our mandate went down, to order that the decree affirmed be executed by the collection of the money found to be due, and interest, which, under the established rule in the State, will be at six per cent.

Decree affirmed.


text: Talk:Railroad Company v. Turrill/Opinion of the Court


text:
Howard v. Railway Company

ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

This is an action of ejectment brought by Charles Howard against the Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company, to recover certain parcels of ground on which the defendant's railway and depots in the city of Milwaukee are situate. The La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad Company constructed this end of its road in 1853-54, and erected its passenger and freight depots and its warehouses and road tracks in that city on the demanded premises. The latter have been in use since 1856 for railway purposes. Howard claims title under a deed executed June 13, 1862, by the sheriff to him as the purchaser for $7,500, at a sale which took place Jan. 15, 1859, under an execution sued out on a judgment for $25,586.78 against the latter company, and in favor of Sebre Howard, which was recovered and docketed in the Circuit Court of Milwaukee County, May 1, 1858. The deed was recorded Nov. 20, 1863, in the office of the register of deeds of that county.

The defendant also claims title under a judicial sale. A judgment was rendered Oct. 7, 1857, for $111,727.21 in favor of Newcomb Cleveland against the La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad Company by the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. It was docketed on that day, and by several mesne assignments transferred to Frederick P. James.

That company executed its mortgage, dated June 21, 1858, and recorded July 8 of that year, to William Barnes, to secure the bonds issued by it, amounting in the aggregate to $2,000,000. A supplemental mortgage was executed to him by way of further security. Default having been made, the mortgaged property, including that now in controversy, was, with all the franchises, rights, and privileges of the company, advertised for sale, and sold to Barnes, May 21, 1859. He purchased the same for $1,503,333.33, in trust for the bondholders, and they organized a new corporation, under the name of the Milwaukee and Minnesota Railroad Company, to which was transferred all the property and the rights and franchises acquired by the sale.

There was, however, a mortgage prior in date to both the judgments above mentioned. It was executed Aug. 17, 1857, by the La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad Company to Bronson and Soutter to secure the payment of $1,000,000, and covered the entire road and property of the company from Milwaukee to Portgage City. The mortgagees filed, Dec. 9, 1859, their bill of foreclosure against that company, the Milwaukee and Minnesota Railroad Company, the plaintiff in this suit, said Sebre Howard, and others, defendants. The court passed a decree for the sale of the property, providing, however, that if the last-named company should pay into court a certain sum of money for the complainants, possession should be delivered to it of the eastern division of the La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad, being that portion of the road from Milwaukee to Portage, upon said company executing a bond to pay such sums of money as should come into the hands of the company to satisfy the Howard and Chamberlain judgments, if they should be established as liens upon the road. The company was let into possession of the road, and retained it until March 6, 1867. No sale was ever had under this decree.

James and other creditors of the La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad Company filed their bill in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin against that company, and the Milwaukee and Minnesota Railroad Company, praying that the sale to the latter company under the mortgage to Barnes be set aside as fraudulent and void, &c. This court, on appeal (6 Wall. 752), declared such sale to be void, and pursuant to its mandate a decree was entered in the lower court enjoining that company from setting up any right or title to the property by virtue of its purchase under that mortgage. Said James filed his bill, April 18, 1866, in the court below against the Milwaukee and Minnesota Railroad Company to enforce the lien, and have execution of the said judgment, whereof he was the assignee, by a sale of the property, subject to certain liens and judgments thereon. A decree was passed declaring that the judgment was a lien upon the property, and fixing the amount due thereon; that the La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad Company had ceased to exist as a corporation; and that the other company had succeeded to its property, subject to all valid and subsisting liens and incumbrances. The court further adjudged that all and singular the railroad formerly known as the La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad, from Milwaukee to Portage City, its depots, station-houses, and buildings, together with all its rolling-stock, franchises, and appurtenances now in the possession of or claimed by the Milwaukee and Minnesota Railroad Company, be sold at public auction by the marshal of that district, unless prior to such sale said defendant pay to said complainant, or his solicitor, or to said marshal, the amount so as aforesaid adjudged due said complainant, with interest and costs up to the time of such payment; and that after such sale the company and all persons claiming or to claim from or under it be for ever barred and foreclosed of and from all equity of redemption and claim of, in, and to said railroad, rolling-stock, franchises, and appurtenances, and every part and parcel thereof.

The sale was made subject to said prior liens and incum brances on the day prescribed by the decree, and was reported to and confirmed by the court. The marshal thereupon executed a deed to the defendant, purchaser at said sale. It has been ever since in possession of the premises.

Said Charles Howard was not a party to the said proceedings and decree.

There was verdict for the defendan, and judgment having been rendered thereon, Howard sued out this writ of error.

The remaining facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Mr. H. M. Finch for the plaintiff in error.

Mr. John W. Cary, contra.

MR. JUSTICE CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court.

title: Howard v. Railway Company


text: Talk:Howard v. Railway Company

title: Talk:Howard v. Railway Company


text:
Howard v. Railway Company/Opinion of the Court

Possession of the lands in controversy was held by the defendants at the time laid in the declaration, as the road-bed, depot site, and other structures of their railroad, at the described locality, and the plaintiff brought ejectment to recover the premises, claiming title to the same by purchase at a sheriff's sale by virtue of a seizure to satisfy a judgment recovered in the name of Sebre Howard against the original company owning and operating the railroad and under which both parties claim title.

Sufficient appears to show that the company became indebted to the judgment creditor in the sum of $25,000, and gave him its promissory note for that amount. Payment being refused, he sued the same, and on May 1, 1858, recovered judgment for the amount. Execution in due form issued on the judgment, and the sheriff, by virtue thereof, seized and sold the property to the plaintiff, Jan. 15, 1859, as appears by the deed given in evidence.

Such a deed, it is claimed by the plaintiff, is by the law of the State made prima facie evidence that the title of the person against whom the judgment was rendered and by virtue of which the sale and deed surport to have been made in the lands and real estate described in the deed, passed to and vested in the grantee in such deed, and this without making other proof, either of the judgment or sale, than that furnished by the deed. Laws Wis. (1869), 39; Ehle v. Brown, 31 Wis. 405, 412.

Title to the lands in controversy is also claimed by the defendants through a purchase pursuant to a prior lien made by a creditor of the company, under whom they claim, at a sheriff's sale of a subsequent date, by virtue of an execution issued on a judgment docketed Oct. 7, 1857, and the lawful deed of the sheriff executed to the creditor in pursuance of such sale. Without entering into details, suffice it to say that the judgment was rendered against the company in that case for $111,727.71, together with the costs of suit, and the evidence exhibited in the transcript shows that the title of the judgment in due form of law passed to the defendants by certain operative mesne assignments.

Suppose the law of the State to be such as is contended by the plaintiff, it is plain that it is as applicable to the purchase by the creditor under whom the defendants claim as to that under which plaintiff claims title.

Service was made, and the defendants appeared and filed an answer denying each and every allegation in the complaint or declaration. Preliminary matters being settled, the parties went to trial, and the verdict and judgment were in favor of the defendants. Exceptions were filed by the plaintiff, and he sued out the present writ of error and removed the cause into this court for re-examination.

Since the cause was entered here, the plaintiff has assigned errors pursuant to the rule making that requirement: 1. Five of the assignments call in question the rulings of the Circuit Court in admitting evidence offered by the defendants. 2. Then follows the sixth assignment of error, which calls in question the ruling of the court that the title of the lands in controversy is in the defendants, and that the verdict of the jury should be in their favor. 3. Thirty-three requests for instruction were presented by the plaintiff, and he calls in question the ruling of the court in refusing each one of those requests.

When the plaintiff made the purchase under which he claims title, there were subsisting liens upon the property prior in date to the judgment for the satisfaction of which the sale was made, to wit, a mortgage dated Aug. 17, 1857, executed by the original company to Bronson and Soutter to secure the payment of one million dollars, and  judgment in favor of Newcomb Cleveland, dated Oct. 7, 1857, for the amount before described, and which was docketed on the day it was rendered.

Bonds to the amount of two millions of dollars were issued by the company, and June 21st of the next year they executed a mortgage upon its railroad and property to William Barnes as trustee, to secure the payment of those securities, and on the 11th of the next month they executed a supplemental mortgage to the same party for the same purpose. Interest having fallen due, which was not paid, the mortgage was foreclosed by advertisement, and on the 21st of May of the next year all the property, franchises, and rights of the mortgagor were sold under the mortgage, and were bid off by the mortgagee in trust for the bondholders. By virtue of that sale the bondholders and the mortgagee became the owners of the property, franchises, and rights of the mortgagor, and they united two days later in organizing a corporation under the statutes of the State, which received the name of the Milwaukee and Minnesota Railroad Company, to which they transferred all the rights and interests they acquired by that purchase.

Enough appears to show that the Bronson and Soutter mortgage covered the line of the road from Milwaukee to Portage City, and it appears that the mortgagees, Dec. 9, 1859, filed a bill in the District Court for the district to foreclose that mortgage, in which they made both the old corporation and the new company, together with Sebre Howard and the plaintiff in the present action, parties defendants in the suit. Somewhat protracted litigation followed, but it will be sufficient to say that it culminated in a decree of sale, with an order that if the successor company should, before sale, pay into court certain sums of money they should be let into possession of the road, rollingstock, and other property of the old company from Milwaukee to Portage City, subject to prior liens. Pursuant to that order the new company paid the specified sums into court, and on the same day took possession of the property, and managed and operated it from that time until the same was sold to the defendants.

Other judgment creditors of the old company, including Frederick P. James, on the 22d of April, 1863, filed a bill in the Circuit Court against the successor company, joining the old company and Selah Chamberlain as parties respondent in the suit. What the bill prayed was that the sale to the new company might be decreed fraudulent, and that the company should be enjoined from exercising any control over the property and franchises mentioned in the mortgage. Hearing was had, and the bill was dismissed in the Circuit Court; but, on appeal to the Supreme Court, the decree of the Circuit Court was reversed, and the cause remanded for a decree in favor of the complainants.

It appears from the mandate that it was decreed that the foreclosure and sale of the mortgage be set aside and annulled as fraudulent, and that the new company was perpetually enjoined from setting up any right or title under it to the railroad and other property sold under the mortgage, and that the mortgage remain only as security for bonds issued under it in the hands of bona fide holders without notice. Besides that, an order of sale was contained in the decree, but no sale of the railroad or property was ever made under that decree.

James became the assignee of the judgment rendered Oct. 7, 1857, in favor of Cleveland, and on the 18th of April, 1866, he, the assignee, filed his bill in the Circuit Court against the successor company to enforce the lien of that judgment, and to have the property covered by the lien sold to pay the judgment debt. Among other things, he set out the judgment, the mortgage, and the organization of the new company, and alleged that the mortgage was fraudulent, and that the new company was holding the property in fraud of the creditors of the original company, and prayed that the property might be sold to satisfy the judgment, subject to certain pri r liens and incumbrances.

Due process was served, and the respondent appeared and filed an answer. Litigation followed, which resulted in a decree that there was due to the complainant, as such assignee, $98,801.51, and that the same was a lien and incumbrance as of the date of Oct. 7, 1857, upon all the right, title, and interest which the original company had in and to the property situated between Milwaukee and Portage City. Provision was also made in the decree for the sale of all that portion of the railroad, the same being then in the possession of the successor company, and that that company and all persons claiming under it be barred from all equity of redemption. Explicit recitals were contained in the decree that the original company had ceased to exist as a corporation, and that the new company had succeeded to its property, subject to subsisting liens and incumbrances.

On the 2d of March, 1867, pursuant to that decree a sale was made of the property by the marshal to the defendants for the sum specified in the transcript, and three days later the sale was confirmed by the Circuit Court, when the defendants received their deed of the premises, duly executed by the marshal. Demand of possession was made by the purchasers on the following day, which was duly surrendered by the occupants, and the defendants have continued to operate the road to the present time.

Separate exception was taken to the introduction of each of the documents offered by the defendants to prove the facts set forth in the preceding statement, and those exceptions constitute the basis of the first five assignments of error. Without entering into details, suffice it to say in that regard that the court is of the opinion that those assignments of error must be overruled, as it is clear that the entire evidence to which they relate was admissible either to show the title of the defendants, or to explain the changes made in the name of the corporation, or the regularity of the judgments, or the creation of the liens, or the transfers of the titles, or regularity of the proceedings by which the title was acquired or transmitted from one party to another.

Suppose that is so, still it is insisted by the plaintiff that the Circuit Court erred in directing the jury to return a verdict for the defendants, as specified in the sixth assignment of error.

None of the facts were in dispute, nor was there any conflict of testimony. Nothing of the kind is pretended, as all the material facts were exhibited in the documents given in evidence, consisting of judicial proceedings, mesne conveyances, judicial sales, and written assignments or conveyances, leaving nothing as an issue of fact to be determined by the jury.

Judges are forbidden to submit a question to the jury where there is no evidence to sustain the theory of the party making the request, nor are they any longer required to do so even when there is some evidence to support the theory, unless the evidence is of such a character that it would warrant the jury in finding a verdict in favor of the party presenting the request. Improvement Company v. Munson, 14 Wall. 442, 448; Ryder v. Wombwell, Law Rep. 4 Ex. 32.

Both parties set up a lien as the foundation of their title, and it is undeniable that the judgment upon which the defendants rest their claim of title was rendered and docketed so as to become a lien upon the premises in controversy more than six months earlier than that which constitutes the basis of the title claimed by the plaintiff. Nor can it benefit the plaintiff in this litigation that he first took the necessary steps to enforce his lien, unless he can show that by some means the prior lien of the defendants has been displaced or has become inoperative, which is not pretended. Priority of lien certainly gave priority of legal right, just as in the case of a first and second mortgage. Either may proceed in the case of mortgage, where the condition is broken, to foreclose; but if the second mortgagee proceeds first, his decree of foreclosure does not supersede or impair the rights of the first mortgagee, nor did the proceedings of the plaintiff to enforce the lien of his judgment have any effect whatever to supersede or displace the prior lien under which the defendants claim.

Concede that the judgment under which the defendants claim is prior in time and legal effect, still it is suggested by the plaintiff that it should have been enforced by seizure and sale instead of by a proceeding in equity.

Pending that litigation the decree declaring the lien was appealed to this court, and this court, Mr. Justice Nelson giving the opinion, decided that judgments, by the law of the State, are liens on real estate, and that the judgment, being the one now in question, became a lien on the road from the time of its rendition, and that a sale under a decree in chancery and a conveyance in pursuance thereof, confirmed by the court, passed the whole of the interest of the company, existing at the time of its rendition, to the purchaser. Railroad Company v. James, 6 Wall. 750.

Weighed in view of that decision, it is clear that the suggestion of the plaintiff cannot be adopted.

Failing in that, his next suggestion is that he is not bound by the decree, inasmuch as he was not made a party to the suit which resulted in the decree, to which several answers may be given: 1. That he was not a necessary party, even if within the jurisdiction. 2. That he was not within the jurisdiction, and did not ask to be made a party. 3. That the decree in the case, being a decree in equity, did not supersede or displace his lien. 4. That the decree left him still the right, as second lienholder, to redeem, which he may still do if his right is not lost by laches or lapse of time.

Much discussion of the mortgage to the trustee to secure the two millions of bonds is unnecessary, as it was subsequent in date to the judgment of the plaintiff. Nor is it necessary to add to what has already been remarked in respect to the foreclosure of the mortgage, as it left the judgment under which the sale to the plaintiff was enforced wholly unaffected as to priority and as to any rights accruing from priority. Evidence in that regard was not material to aid the alleged title of the defendants in any respect, except to show the origin of the new company and the transfer of the property from the old company to its successor.

Regular proceedings to foreclose the one million mortgage was also instituted; but there was no sale under that decree, the only result affected by it being to vest in the new company the possession of the railroad and its appurtenances. By paying the amount ascertained as allowed by the court, the new company acquired both the right of possession and the actual possession of the mortgaged property, and to that extent at least it stepped into the place of the old company as mortgagor, and became by the decision of the court the owner of the equity of redemption.

Beyond doubt such was the prima facie effect of the proceeding, but the possession and interest acquired by the new company were during all the time subordinate and subject to subsisting prior liens and incumbrances, among which was the judgment of the plaintiff as enforced by the prior sale. Prior liens and incumbrances were not affected by that proceeding, nor is it of much materiality in the present controversy, except to show the relation which the new company bears to the railroad and property in question.

Questions of various kind arise in the case, but the main question throughout is who holds the paramount legal title to the property which the plaintiff seeks to recover by his action of ejectment; and in determining that question it is evident that the controlling inquiry is who has the prior lien, as it is clear that the sale of the property by one having only a subsequent lien will not supersede or displace a prior lien held by another; and it is equally clear that a sale in equity under a prior lien will not impair any rights hich belong to the holder of the subsequent lien, if the latter duly asserts his rights in proper season. Such propositions cannot be successfully controverted; but the plaintiff contends that inasmuch as the new company was enjoined from asserting any right or title to the property on account of the fraudulent character of the proceeding, and inasmuch as the plaintiff was not a party to the proceeding to enforce the prior judgment against the old company, that the defendants did not acquire any superior legal rights by the sale under that decree.

Other suggestions of various kinds are made to show that the sale under that decree is ineffectual to give effect to the lien secured by the judgment; but the principal one is that the plaintiff was not made a party to the proceeding, and has not had his day in court, in opposition to the final decision which ordered the sale. Mere equities are not involved in the controversy, but the court is required to deal with the strict legal rights of the parties.

Frequent reference is made in argument to the fact that the proceeding for the foreclosure of the larger mortgage was subsequently adjudged fraudulent, and to the injunction which followed; but it is nevertheless true that the new company was duly organized, and that its actual existence as a corporation has been recognized in repeated instances by the courts in litigations of great importance. It was recognized as such in the proceeding to foreclose the smaller mortgage, and in the decree or order of the court in letting the new company as such into the possession of the railroad and its property, and throughout the period, exceeding fourteen months, that its directors and agents possessed, controlled, managed, and operated the railroad and all its fixtures and appurtenances. Public acts of the kind cannot be overlooked, and it was recognized in the proceeding to enforce the lien of the judgment under which the defendants claim title, both by the Circuit Court and the Supreme Court in three appeals here, as evidenced by the reported decisions of this court. Railroad Companies v. Chamberlain, 6 Wall. 748; Railroad Company v. James, id. 750; James et al. v. Railroad Company, id. 752.

Judicial recognitions of the kind are repugnant to the theory of the plaintiff, to which it may be added that it was the new company that was in possession of the property when the proceeding was commenced to enforce the lien of the judgment under which the defendants claim title, and they were still in actual possession of the same when the first decree was entered.

Complaint is made by the plaintiff that he was not made a party to the proceeding, but the omission to make him a party did not displace any lien he had upon the property, nor did it give him any new or enlarged interest in the same. Coming to the question of priority of legal title, the court must look at the judgments from which the respective titles flow. In settling legal rights, the court must give the party superiority whose lien was first acquired and perfected by an appropriate proceeding.

By omitting to make the plaintiff a party to the equity proceeding to enforce their lien, the defendants did not deprive the plaintiff of any legal right, nor was he cut off from any equitable rights which under the law had accrued to him in his position as a subsequent judgment creditor. Had the plaintiff been in possession of the premises when the decree was rendered and when the sale was made, he could not have been dispossessed by any process issued in the equity suit; the rule being that the writ of assistance cannot go against a stranger in a suit for foreclosure, and that the remedy of the party in such a case is ejectment.

Grant all that, and still it is suggested that the plaintiff lost his right to redeem which he could have exercised if the sale had been made at law; but it is not admitted that the suggestion as to loss of remedy is well founded, as it is clear that he might have had a remedy in equity after the sale as we l as before. Equity in such a case is a convenient remedy, and it is obvious that the plaintiff could have filed his bill, and if there had been no other difficulty than priority of lien the court of equity would have granted him the right to redeem.

Subsequent incumbrancers, when not made parties to a bill for foreclosure or sale, are not bound by the decree; nor is that rule violated in the least degree when it is held that the title of the defendants is paramount, as that consequence flows from the fact that the lien of the judgment under which the defendants claim is prior to that under which the plaintiff claims his title. Whatever rights the plaintiff had prior to the sale in equity which gives the defendants the paramount title, he still has, wholly unimpeached by that sale or by any other cause, unless they are barred by lapse of time or laches.

Process against the plaintiff under that decree could not affect his rights, as he was not a party to the proceeding, consequently the lien of his judgment still remained in full force. Even if the plaintiff had been made a party to that proceeding, the only effect would have been to cut off his equity of redemption, and as he was not made a party, his equity of redemption is not extinguished.

Authorities are scarcely needed to support these propositions, it being universally admitted that writs of assistance can only issue against parties affected by the decree, which is only saying that the execution cannot exceed the decree which it enforces, the rule being that the owner of property mortgaged which is directed to be sold can only be barred when he has had notice of the proceedings for its sale, if he acquired his interest prior to their institution. Terrell v. Allison, 21 Wall. 289, 292.

Everybody admits the correctness of that rule; but it by no means follows that the decree of sale in equity is void because a second incumbrancer is not made a party to the proceeding, as it is clear that his lien remains in full force notwithstanding the decree of sale entered pursuant to such a proceeding.

Tested by these considerations, it follows that the sixth assignment of error must be overruled.

Most of the material matters involved in the seventh assignment of errors have already been sufficiently examined. Many of the assignments of error under this number aimed to show that the Circuit Court erred in refusing to adopt the theory of the plaintiff, that certain portions of the premises in controversy occupied by the defendants for railroad tracks or as sites for their depot and other structures are not necessary for the purposes suggested, or that the title to the same did not pass to the defendants. Careful efforts to examine these matters to the extent of the means exhibited in the transcript have been made, and it must suffice to say in that regard that the court is unable to perceive that it is shown that the Circuit Court erred materially in any of those matters to the prejudice of the plaintiff.

Remarks already made cover all the other grounds of complaint, and are sufficient to show that there is no error in the record.

Judgment affirmed.


text: Talk:Howard v. Railway Company/Opinion of the Court


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 2, 1891.djvu/368

 312 5. Lastly, recourse may be had to a ritual of the same nature as that observed by the druid of ancient Erinn, when, burdened with a heavy meal of the flesh of a red pig, he laid him down for the night in order to await a prophetic dream as to the manner of man the nobles of Erinn assembled at Tara were to elect to be their king. The incident is given in the story of Cúchulainn's sick-bed; and you all know the passage about Brian and the taghairm in the 4th Canto of Scott's Lady of the Lake. But the Manx girl has only to eat a salt herring, bones and all, without drinking or uttering a word, and to retire backwards to bed. When she sleeps and dreams, she will behold her future husband approaching to give her drink.

Probably none of the practices which I have enumerated, or similar ones mentioned to me, are in any sense peculiar to the Isle of Man; but what interests me in them is the divided opinion as to the proper night for them in the year. I am sorry to say that I have very little information as to the blindman's-buff ritual (No. 4); what information I have, to wit, the evidence of two persons in the South, fixes it on Hollantide Eve. But as to the others (Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5), they are observed by some on that night, and by others on New Year's Eve, sometimes according to the Old Style and sometimes the New. Further, those who are wont to practise the Salt Heap ritual, for instance, on Hollantide Eve, would be very indignant to hear that anybody should think New Year's Eve the proper night, and vice versa. So by bringing women bred and born in different parishes to compare notes on this point, I have witnessed arguing hardly less earnest than that which characterised the ancient controversy between British and Italian ecclesiastics as to the proper time for keeping Easter. I have not been able to map the island according to the practices


text: Folk-Lore/Volume 2/Manx Folk-Lore and Superstitions


text:
Author:John Gresham Machen

Books

 * The Literature and History of New Testament Times (1915) (archive.org)
 * The Origin of Paul's Religion (1921) (scans)
 * A Brief Bible History (1922) (scans)
 * Christianity and Liberalism (1923), a classic defense of orthodox Christianity
 * What Is Faith? (1925) (archive.org)
 * The Virgin Birth of Christ (1930)

Articles

 * "The New Testament Account of the Birth of Jesus" (PTR, 3, 1905 and PTR, 4, 1906) (part 1 and part 2 on archive.org)
 * "The Hymns of the First Chapter of Luke" (PTR, 10, 1912) (archive.org)
 * "The Origin of the First Two Chapters of Luke" (PTR, 10, 1912) (archive.org)
 * "The Virgin Birth in the Second Century" (PTR, 10, 1912) (scans)
 * "Christianity and Culture" (PTR, 11, 1913)
 * "History and Faith" (PTR, 13, 1915)
 * "Recent Criticism of the Book of Acts" (PTR, 17, 1919) (archive.org)
 * "Liberalism or Christianity?" (PTR, 20, 1922)
 * "Christianity vs. Modern Liberalism" (Moody Bible Institute Monthly, 23, 1923)
 * "Does Fundamentalism Obstruct Social Progress?" (The Survey, July 1, 1924)
 * "The God of the Early Christians" (PTR, 22, 1924) (archive.org)
 * "The Modern Use of the Bible" (PTR, 23, 1925) (archive.org)
 * "The Relation of Religion to Science and Philosophy" (PTR, 24, 1926) (archive.org)
 * "The Integrity of the Lucan Narrative of the Annunciation" (PTR, 25, 1927) (archive.org)

title: Author:John Gresham Machen


text:
Page:History of West Australia.djvu/521

 One of the large buildings to be erected was the Daily News newspaper office, the plans of which Mr. Trigg prepared. At the time of its erection it was the only building of special architectural merit in the colony. With the advent of prosperity, people who were previously content with very modest edifices grew more particular, and demanded large houses and immense stores. There was a rush of orders for architects, and particularly for Mr. Trigg. In every part of the city are monuments of his work, and perhaps the most notable is the Congregational Church in St. George's Terrace. The façade is a vigorous treatment in American Romanesque, and shows the magnificent building off to advantage. The acoustic properties are excellent, and the whole edifice is equal to the best ecclesiastical buildings in Australia. Another structure designed by him is the office of the Commercial Union Insurance Company in St. George's Terrace, which is perhaps the handsomest of its kind in the colony. Of other of his buildings are Sandover's, in the Italian style of architecture, the Royal Hotel in French Renaissance, and the Governor Broome Hotel in American Romanesque. Mr. Trigg's practice is not confined to the metropolis; it extends to all parts of the colony. Visitors to Geraldton have to thank him for that splendid structure known as "The Freemasons," which is one of the chief adornments of that port. Mr. Trigg, who was married in 1881 to Miss Rodgers, daughter of Mr. I. Rodgers of Perth, has a charming abode at Claremont, known as "The Grange." Of his own design, the house is built for a semi-tropical climate, with fine broad verandahs, high ceilings, &c.

His faith in Western Australia is abundantly manifested in the valuable real estate he owns in the colony. His buildings just erected in Barrack Street are an ornament to the city. He is a typical Australian—acute, enterprising, and genial.

GEORGE ALFRED DAVIES, J.P.

HE name of Davies has been prominently associated with Western Australia almost from the foundation of the colony. Davies père arrived here very shortly after Captain Stirling, and embarked in mercantile pursuits. He was lucky in his investments, and as he participated in the advantages that the early settlers enjoyed of obtaining property at low prices he amassed, if not a fortune, a competence which enabled him to pass the eve of his life free from the worries of business. The family name is being handed down to posterity by the sons, one having occupied a seat in the Legislative Council of his country, and the other, with whom we are now dealing, having for many years been a leading light in the local municipal world and also in commerce.

George Alfred Davies was born in Fremantle in 1846. After his school days, which were ended when he was seventeen years of age, he entered his father's office, and remained with him for ten years, securing a thorough business training. He then struck out for himself, opening in business at the Grosvenor Cellars, in High and Bannister Streets, Fremantle, as a wine and spirit merchant. His Grosvenor wines are famous all over the colony, and the demand for them is so great that Mr. Davies is compelled to buy the grape crops of other vignerons in order to supply the demand for his wines. The cellars are large and extensive, and replete with every convenience for the bottling of the precious liquid.

Mr Davies is among the well-known men of Western Australia, and has been associated with the Fremantle Council either as a councillor or auditor for the last twenty-eight years. His knowledge of municipal affairs has obtained for him the dignified office of mayor. The duties pertaining to the position during his term of office were exceptionally onerous, but so well did he discharge them that when his term expired he was asked to allow himself to be nominated again. This, however, Mr. Davies would not sanction, for, in addition to the duties being a great call upon his time, he is a firm believer in the policy of distributing the honours attached to so important an office.

Long before the majority of people dreamt that Fremantle would ever assume the dignity of being a leading seaport in Australia, Mr. Davies realised that it had a great future. From his seat in the council he strenuously advocated the improvement of the town, and to him is due much of the credit of the systematic manner in which it is laid out. Had it not been for the foresight of Mr. Davies and his colleagues, many of the reserves and beauty spots around Fremantle would have fallen into the hands of private owners, and been lost to the ratepayers. Now, however, these reserves, which have been dedicated to the public for recreation purposes, are rapidly undergoing transformation, and will ere long be laid out in beautiful gardens and lawns, and

title: Page:History of West Australia.djvu/521


text:
User:Ingram/chick.js

function curlyQuotes(inp) { return inp.replace(/(\b)'/, "$1’") .replace(/'(\b)/, "‘$1") .replace(/(\b)"/, "$1”")             .replace(/"(\b)/, "“$1") }

title: User:Ingram/chick.js


text:
Author:Francis Mahony

 * Francis Prout Mahony (1862-1916), Australian painter and illustrator
 * Francis Sylvester Mahony (1804–1866), Irish humourist

title: Author:Francis Mahony


text:
Author:Francis Prout Mahony

Illustrated

 * While the Billy Boils (1913)

title: Author:Francis Prout Mahony


text:
User:Charles Matthews/Waylett, Harriet missing page

‘Theatrical Looker-On,’ a Birmingham paper, the ownership of which the Birmingham public insisted on ascribing to Bunn, had given rise to a crop of scandals and to threats on his part of prosecutions for libel. On 14 Jan. 1825 Mrs. Waylett was Mrs. Page in the ‘Merry Wives of Windsor.’ Her appearances must, however, have been few, perhaps on account of the rivalry and jealousy of Mrs. Bunn, and she is no further traced at Drury Lane.

On 12 May she made, as Zephyrina in the ‘Lady and the Devil,’ her first appearance at the Haymarket, where she played, among other parts, Catalina in the ‘Castle of Andalusia,’ Lady Emily in ‘Match-making,’ Daphne in ‘Midas,’ was the first Sophia Fielding in Ebsworth's ‘Rival Valets’ on 14 July, and the first Harry Stanley in ‘Paul Pry’ on 13 Sept. In 1826 she was Lady Racket in ‘Three Weeks after Marriage,’ Ellen in ‘Intrigue,’ Phœbe in the ‘Review,’ Charlotte (Mrs. Abington's part) in the ‘Hypocrite,’ Louisa in the ‘Duenna,’ and Rosa in ‘John of Paris.’ For her benefit on 9 Oct. 1827 she enacted Virginia in ‘Paul and Virginia.’ On 16 June 1828 she was the original Mary in ‘Daughters to Marry,’ and on the 28th the original Bridget in ‘Milliners.’ She was also Clari for the first time in London. In November 1828 she played at the Hawkins Street Theatre, Dublin, Phœbe in ‘Paul Pry.’ She was also seen as Maria in ‘Of Age To-morrow,’ Letitia Hardy in the ‘Belle's Stratagem,’ Maria Darlington in ‘A Roland for an Oliver,’ Don Giovanni in ‘Giovanni in London.’ She stood in highest favour as a singer and actress both in Dublin and Cork. Among her favourite songs were ‘Buy a Broom,’ which she sang in ‘Bavarian costume,’ ‘Kate Kearney,’ ‘Cherry Ripe,’ ‘The Light Guitar,’ ‘Nora Creina,’ ‘Away, away to the Mountain's Brow,’ and ‘Love was once a little boy.’ After her return from Dublin she played at the Haymarket, Drury Lane, Queen's Theatre (afterwards the Prince of Wales's), the Olympic, Covent Garden, and other houses. In 1832 she was acting at the Strand, of which house in 1834 she was ‘sole manager.’ Here she played original parts in the ‘Loves of the Angels,’ the ‘Cork Leg,’ the ‘Four Sisters,’ ‘Wooing a Widow,’ and in various burlesques. Admission to the house was obtained by paying four shillings an ounce at a neighbouring shop for sweetmeats, or purchasing tickets for the Victoria Theatre, which admitted also to the Strand, whereat the performances were nominally gratis. There were few London houses at which she was not seen, and she was a favourite in the country. In October 1835 she received in Dublin 800l. and half a clear benefit for twenty-one nights' performances. In 1838 she was engaged at the Haymarket.

In 1840 Waylett, from whom she had long been separated, who seems to have been a thoroughly objectionable, unworthy, and unpopular personage, and who, as Fitzwaylett, had married another woman, died, and she shortly afterwards married George Alexander Lee [q. v.], a musician, composer of many of her favourite songs, who survived her a few months, dying on 8 Oct. 1851; he was at one time page to the notorious Lord Barrymore (see Notes and Queries, 5th ser. xi. 276), at another lessee of Drury Lane, and in the end pianoforte-player to ‘Baron’ Nicholson's exhibition in Bow Street of poses plastiques.

In May 1843 Mrs. Waylett, as she was still called, was at the Lyceum, where she was the President in the ‘Ladies' Club,’ and played in the farce of ‘Matrimony.’ Her appearances became, through ill-health, infrequent, and in 1849 she was spoken of as retired. She died on 29 April 1851, after a long and painful illness.

Mrs. Waylett was one of the best soubrettes of her day, was almost as popular in ballad and song as Madame Vestris, was symmetrically proportioned, and was always acceptable in burlesque and extravaganza, and in masculine characters generally. Her life was associated with many scandals. Bunn demanded an apology for what was said concerning her and him in Oxberry's ‘Dramatic Biography’ in 1827. This was proffered by the publisher, but Oxberry refused to carry it out, and, after some talk of a duel, the matter dropped. Mrs. Waylett was taxed with ostentatiously overdressing the chambermaid parts in which she was seen.

A portrait of Mrs. Waylett as Elizabeth in some piece unnamed accompanies a memoir in the ‘Dramatic Magazine’ (ii. 97, 1 May 1830); a second, as Davie Gelletley (Gellatley), is prefixed to the ‘Public and Private life of Mrs. Waylett,’ forming No. 1 of a series to be called ‘Amatory Biography;’ a third, as Miss Dorville, is in Oxberry's ‘Dramatic Biography.’

[Most particulars of the early life of Mrs. Waylett are taken from the memoir in Oxberry's Dramatic Biography, new ser. 1827, i. 55. This life and a vindication by Bunn were reprinted in the Private and Public Life of Mrs. Waylett, n.d., a sixpenny tract of extreme rarity. Oxberry's memoir is copied into the Georgian Era, the Dramatic Magazine, and other theatrical publications. See also Genest's Account of the English Stage; Dramatic Observer, Dublin; Theatrical Looker-On, Birmingham; History of the Theatre Royal, Dublin; Dramatic and Musical Review; Era Almanack; and New Monthly Magazine.]


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/51

 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 17th, 1894.

ANNUAL MEETING.

The (Mr. G. Laurence Gomme, F.S.A.), in the chair.

The minutes of the last Annual Meeting were read and confirmed.

On the motion of the Chairman, seconded by Dr. Gaster. it was resolved that the Annual Report (printed infra) be received and adopted.

On the motion of Mr. Nutt, seconded by Mr. Jacobs, it was resolved that the Balance-Sheet appended to the Report be also adopted.

The President, Vice-President, Members of Council, and Officers of the Society for the ensuing year, were duly elected.

The President delivered his Annual Address (infra, pp. 43-69), and a short discussion ensued, in which Dr. Gaster and Mr. Nutt took part.

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS.

"There is nothing new under the sun." The Council has not even recommended for your selection a new President, and as it thus falls to my lot to once more address you from this chair, I must perforce discuss some old problems, perhaps with an iteration which you may not quite appreciate, but, at all events, with a purpose that is all-important to our science.

It is one of the fundamental laws of that science that man, until he has reached the academic stage of culture, never invents a new thing: new things develop gradually from old things, but new things are not created by man—not new arts, new customs, new legends, new beliefs, nor new fairy tales. As an old Bechuana chief said to a French


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Bradick, Walter


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/52

 44 missionary, "One event is always the son of another, and we must never forget the parentage."

I, myself, do not believe that even the imaginative faculty of the human brain is capable of absolutely "inventing" anything. It may alter the conception of things already in existence, add together incongruous elements, and produce results which are marvellous or supernatural, according to the frame of mind in which we look at them. It may produce many incongruous equations—such, for instance, as human body + bird's wings = angels; it may create a hell out of its own gloomy and dismal fears, and a heaven out of the delights of life. But it is one of the satisfactions of scientific inquiry into human thought that the mind is not capable of absolutely freeing itself from the region of fact. It reaches back into the past by the effort of memory, tradition, and record; it reaches forward into the future by the sublime function of hope. But as what it sees in the past cannot be its own creation, independent of fact, so what it foresees in the future cannot be independent of fact; that is, the function of hope being granted, it must take its rise from some fact with which it is correlated—a fact of which we may know little or next to nothing, but which does not cease to be a fact because of our ignorance. Always, therefore, as it seems to me, there is a reality at the bottom of all fancy and all tradition. It is difficult always to find this reality. For instance, there is the story of "A man who once had a melon, and as he was cutting it, he let his knife fall into it, whereupon he took his garden ladder and went down into the melon to look for his knife. And in the melon he met a man, who asked him what he was seeking. 'What!' said he, 'are you only looking for a knife? Why, I have lost sixteen spoons in this horrid place, and have been trying high and low to find them for a month past!'" (Ossete Tale, Haxthausen, Transcaucasia, 421). What fact this can have come from I confess I am not prepared to suggest; all I say is that it is not the result of an


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/53

 Rh invention of facts outside all human experience. It is a transposition of one set of facts to another locale; or a general mix-up of several sets of originally independent facts; or simply an exaggerated way of saying that melons grow very large in Eastern Europe; but it is not invention.

I do not think that the reference from myth to fact is quite acknowledged as a doctrine of the science of folk-lore. It is too often the practice to characterise a particular belief as "mere superstition", a particular action as "mere custom", a particular tradition as a mere fragment of literature borrowed somehow from somewhere at some time or other; and then to think that the whole inquiry about the superstition, custom, or tradition is settled once for all. Our late distinguished President is, I hold, a sinner in this respect. In his last address from this chair he criticised a study of mine on Totemism in Britain, upon the basis that particular items of belief, which I classified as totemistic, were, after all, only popular superstitions. But I went behind this stage. I inquired as to the origin of the superstitions, and because they classified under a plan which was drawn up from the facts of savage totemism, I drew conclusions from the similarity of classification as to the similarity of origin, and my subsequent studies on the same subject have not altered my opinion.

Well, then, if every fragment of belief, custom, or tradition that is not academic in origin has an origin in man's observation of fact, we have before us the doctrine that the primitive thought of man does not change radically, but slowly develops from one stage to another. And it is this doctrine that alone justifies the comparison of beliefs and customs in widely separated areas. In any given society, all that is in the process of development is culture; all that has ceased to develop, and remains crystallized, is folk-lore. We may compare, therefore, the culture of one people with the folk-lore of another, because both are upon the same level of development; or we may


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/54

 46 pare the different elements of folk-lore or of culture together.

Thus there are two elements in the comparative study of custom and belief—namely, the comparison of like elements in two distinct areas, and the comparison of unlike elements in the same area. The first of these two elements of comparison has been studied very thoroughly, and to some purpose, by the most distinguished philosophers, anthropologists, and folk-lorists, and we are beginning to see some results. The second of these two elements has scarcely been studied at all. In my little book on Ethnology in Folk-lore, I touched the fringe of this subject, and for a long time I flattered myself that I was the first student who had noted the importance of unlike classes of belief existing side by side. But I must now confess that I fall a victim to the inexorable dictum of the Hebrew king, which forms the opening words of this address. So long ago as 1886, the phenomenon of unlike classes of belief was noted in a paper read before the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. I did not know of this when I wrote my book, and, in fact, it has remained a dead-letter in folk-lore studies until now. But the words of Professor Duns add a weight to the idea, that anything I have said cannot pretend to give, and I therefore gladly record them as a contribution to our study of first principles. Hitherto, he says, the argument in favour of the doctrine of the unity of the human race has had chiefly in view the existence of similar habits and observances in nations widely different and remote. But the same argument, from the diversities of customs, domestic, social, or superstitious, among families closely connected, both as tribes and geographically, yet remains to be worked out.

How important these words are, let me illustrate by the force of contrast. It is, of course, well known to us all here that parallel customs of a remarkable nature do occur in places very distant from each other. In my collection of parallels to British custom, I know none quite so close


text:
Denied Persons Pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution

25 August 2003 Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.html

---

[Federal Register: August 25, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 164)] [Notices] [Page 51048-51056] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25au03-68]

---

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 4455]

=Bureau of Political-Military Affairs; Denied Persons Pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution=

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

---

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of an updated list of persons that are subject to an arms embargo in implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions 1390 (2002) and 1455 (2003). This action is being taken pursuant to sections 38 and 42 of the Arms Export Control Act and in accordance with section 5 of the UN Participation Act (UNPA) and E.O. 12918.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 25, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Sweeney, Office of Defense Trade Controls Management, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department of State (202) 633-2700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: UN Security Council Resolutions 1390 (2002) and 1455 (2003) require UN Member States to implement an arms embargo (and other sanctions) against those individuals, groups, undertakings and entities listed in the consolidated list created in accordance with UN Security Council Resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1333 (2000) and maintained by the UN 1267 Sanctions Committee. Specifically, the resolutions require that Member States prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale and transfer, to those on the 1267 Sanctions Committee list, from their territories or by their nationals outside their territories, or using their flag vessels or aircraft, of arms and related material of all types including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned and technical advice, assistance, or training related to military activities.

Effective October 24, 2002, U.S. manufacturers and exporters and any other affected parties were notified that the Department imposed a policy of denial for any new license application or other request for approval for the export or transfer of defense articles (including technical data) or defense services (whether or not all the information relied upon by the U.S. person in performing the defense service is in the public domain) if any of the names on the list published on October 24, 2002 appear in connection with the application or other request for approval subject to section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act. Further, that action also precluded the use of any exemptions from licensing or other approval (e.g. brokering) requirements available under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) involving any person on the list. A consolidated list created pursuant to UN Security Council Resolutions 1267 (1999), 1333 (2000) and 1390 (2002), updated on September 11, 2002, was published in the Federal Register on October 24, 2002, by the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs. This notice contains the list updated as of June 25, 2003, which also reflects UN Security Council Resolution 1455, adopted in January 2003.

Thus, U.S. manufacturers and exporters and any other affected parties are hereby notified the Department has imposed a policy of denial for any new license application or other request for approval for the export or transfer of defense articles or defense services if any of the names on the list below appear in connection with the application or other request for approval subject to section 38 of the Arms Export

Page 51049

Control Act. This action also precludes the use of any exemptions from licensing or other approval (e.g. brokering) requirements available under the ITAR involving any person on the list.

The term "person", as defined in 22 CFR 120.14 of the ITAR, means a natural person as well as a corporation, business association, partnership, society, trust, or any other entity, organization or group, including governmental entities.

This action has been taken pursuant to sections 38 and 42 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778 and 2791) and 126.7 of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations in furtherance of the foreign policy of the United States, and in accordance with section 5 of the UNPA (22 U.S.C. 287(c)) and E.O. 12918.

In accordance with these authorities the following persons are subject to this arms embargo:

D. The list of entities belonging to or associated with the Al-Qaida organization.
Dated: August 13, 2003. John R. Bolton, Under Secretary, Arms Control and International Security, Department of State. [FR Doc. 03-21790 Filed 8-22-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-25-P


text:
User talk:Alegend

--Longfellow (talk) 12:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alegend


text:
Then She bore Pale desire/original

(as published by David V. Erdman)

then She bore Pale desire father of Curiosity a Virgin ever young. And after. Leaden Sloth from whom came Ignorance. who brought forth wonder. These are the Gods which Came from fear. for Gods like these. nor male nor female are but Single Pregnate or if they list together mingling bring forth mighty powrs[.] She knew them not yet they all war with Shame and Strengthen her weak arm. But Pride awoke nor knew that Joy was born. and taking Poisnous Seed from her own Bowels. in the Monster Shame infusd. forth Came Ambition Crawling like a toad Pride Bears it in her Bosom. and the Gods. all bow to it. So Great its Power. that Pride inspird by it Prophetic Saw the Kingdoms of the World & all their Glory. Giants of Mighty arm before the flood. Cains City. built With Murder. Then Babel mighty Reard him to the Skies. Babel with thousand tongues Confusion it was calld. and Givn to  Shame. this Pride observing inly Grievd. but knew not that. the rest was Givn to Shame as well as this. Then Nineva & Babylon & Costly tyre. And evn Jerusalem was Shewn. the holy City. Then Athens Learning & the Pride of Greece. and further from the Rising Sun. was Rome Seated on Seven hills the mistress of the world. Emblem of Pride She Saw the Arts their treasures Bring and luxury his bounteous table Spread. but now a Cloud oercasts. and back to th'East. to Constantines Great City Empire fled, Ere long to bleed & die a Sacrifice done by a Priestly hand[.] So once the Sun his. Chariot drew. back. to  prolong a Good kings life. The Cloud oer past & Rome now Shone again Miterd & Crown'd with triple crown. Then Pride was better Pleasd She Saw the World fall down in Adoration[.]   But now full to the Setting Sun a Sun arose out of the Sea. it rose & shed Sweet Influence oer the Earth Pride feared for her City, but not long. for looking Stedfastly She saw that Pride Reignd here. Now Direful Pains accost her. and Still pregnant. so Envy came & Hate. twin progeny Envy hath a Serpents head of fearful bulk hissing with hundred tongues, her poisnous breath breeds Satire foul Contagion from which none are free. oer whelmd by ever During Thirst She Swalloweth her own Poison. which consumes her nether Parts. from whence a River Springs. Most Black & loathsom through the land it Runs Rolling with furious [p 3] Noise. but at the last it Settles in a lake called Oblivion. tis at this Rivers fount where evry mortals Cup is Mix't My Cup is fill'd with Envy's Rankest Draught a miracle No less can set me Right. Desire Still Pines but for one Cooling Drop and tis Deny'd, while others in Contentments downy Nest do sleep, it is the Cursed thorn wounding my breast that makes me sing. however sweet tis Envy that Inspires my Song. prickt. by the fame of others how I mourn and my complaints are Sweeter than their Joys but O could I at Envy Shake my hands. my notes Should Rise to meet the New born Day. Hate Meager hag Sets Envy on unable to Do ought herself. but Worn away a Bloodless Daemon The Gods all Serve her at her will so great her Power is[.] like. fabled hecate She doth bind them to her law. Far in a Direful Cave She lives unseen Closd from the Eye of Day. to the hard Rock transfixt by fate and here She works her witcheries that when She Groans She Shakes the Solid Ground Now Envy She controlls with numming trance & Melancholy Sprung from her dark womb There is a Melancholy, O how lovely tis whose heaven is in the heavenly Mind for she from heaven came, and where She goes heaven still doth follow her. She brings  true joy once fled. & Contemplation is her Daughter. Sweet Contemplation. She brings humility to man Take her She Says & wear her in thine heart lord of thy Self thou then art lord of all. Tis Contemplation teacheth knowledge truly how to know. and Reinstates him on his throne once lost how lost I'll tell. But Stop the motley Song I'll Shew. how Conscience Came from heaven. But O who listens to his Voice. T'was Conscience who brought Melancholy down Conscience was sent a Guard to Reason. Reason once fairer than the light till fould in Knowledges dark Prison house. For knowledge drove sweet Innocence away. and Reason would have followd but fate sufferd not. Then down Came conscience With his lovely band The Eager Song Goes on telling how Pride against her father Warrd & Overcame. Down his white Beard the Silver torrents Roll. and Swelling Sighs burst forth his Children all in arms appear to tear him from his throne Black was the deed. most Black. Shame in a Mist Sat Round his troubled bead. & filld him with Confusion. Fear as a torrent wild Roard Round his throne the mighty pillars shake Now all the Gods in blackning Ranks appear. like a tempestuous thunder Cloud Pride leads. them on. Now they Surround the God. and bind him fast. Pride bound him, then usurpd oer all the Gods. She Rode upon the Swelling wind and Scatterd all who durst t'oppose. but Shame opposing fierce and hovering. over her in the darkning Storm. She brought forth Rage. Mean while Strife Mighty Prince was born Envy in direful Pains him bore. then Envy brought forth Care. Care Sitteth in the wrinkled brow. Strife Shapeless Sitteth under thrones of kings. like Smouldring fire. or in the Buzz of Cities flies abroad Care brought forth Covet Eyeless & prone to th' Earth, and Strife brought forth Revenge. Hate brooding in her Dismal den grew Pregnant & bore Scorn, & Slander. Scorn waits on Pride. but Slander. flies around the World to do the Work of hate her drudge & Elf. but Policy doth drudge for hate as well as Slander. & oft makes use of her. Policy Son of Shame. Indeed hate Controlls all the Gods. at will. Policy brought forth Guile & fraud. these Gods last namd live in the Smoke of Cities. on Dusky wing breathing forth Clamour & Destruction. alas in Cities wheres the man whose face is not a mask unto his heart Pride made a Goddess. fair or Image rather till knowledge animated it. 'twas Calld Selflove. The Gods admiring loaded her with Gifts as once Pandora She 'mongst men was Sent. and worser ills attended her by far. She was a Goddess Powerful & bore Conceit and Shame bore honour & made league with Pride & Policy doth dwell with her by whom she [had] Mistrust & Suspition. Then bore a Daughter called Emulation. who. married. honour these follow her around the World[.] Go See the City friends Joind Hand in Hand. Go See. the Natural the of flesh & blood. Go See more strong the ties of marriage love, thou Scarce Shall find but Self love Stands Between

title: Then She bore Pale desire/original


text:
Then She bore Pale desire/rearranged

then She bore Pale desire father of Curiosity a Virgin ever young. And after. Leaden Sloth from whom came Ignorance. who brought forth wonder. These are the Gods which Came from fear. for Gods like these. nor male nor female are but Single Pregnate or if they list together mingling bring forth mighty powrs[.] She knew them not yet they all war with Shame and Strengthen her weak arm. But Pride awoke nor knew that Joy was born. and taking Poisnous Seed from her own Bowels. in the Monster Shame infusd. forth Came Ambition Crawling like a toad Pride Bears it in her Bosom. and the Gods. all bow to it. So great its Power. that Pride inspird by it Prophetic Saw the Kingdoms of the World & all their Glory. Giants of Mighty arm before the flood. Cains City. built with Murder. Then Babel mighty Reard him to the Skies. Babel with thousand tongues Confusion it was calld. and Givn to Shame. this Pride observing inly Grievd. but knew not that. the rest was Givn to Shame as well as this. Then Nineva & Babylon & Costly tyre. And evn Jerusalem was Shewn. the holy City. Then Athens Learning & the Pride of Greece. and further from the Rising Sun. was Rome Seated on Seven hills the mistress of the world. Emblem of Pride She Saw the Arts their treasures Bring and luxury his bounteous table Spread. but now a Cloud oercasts. and back to th'East. to Constantines Great City Empire fled. Ere long to bleed & die a Sacrifice Done by a Priestly hand So once the Sun his. Chariot drew. back. to prolong a Good kings life. The Cloud oer past & Rome now Shone again Miterd & Crown'd with triple crown. Then Pride was better Pleasd She Saw the World fall down in Adoration [.] But now full to the Setting Sun a Sun arose out of the Sea. it rose & shed Sweet Influence oer the Earth Pride feared for her City, but not long. for looking Stedfastly She saw that Pride Reignd here. Now Direful Pains accost her. and Still pregnant. so Envy came & Hate. twin progeny Envy hath a Serpents head of fearful bulk hissing with hundred tongues, her poisnous breath breeds Satire foul Contagion from which none are free. oer whelmd by ever During Thirst She Swalloweth her own Poison. which consumes her nether Parts. from whence a River Springs. Most Black & loathsom through the land it Runs Rolling with furious Noise. but at the last it Settles in a lake called Oblivion. tis at this Rivers fount where evry mortals Cup is Mix't My Cup is fill'd with Envy's Rankest Draught a miracle No less can set me Right. Desire Still pines but for one Cooling Drop and tis Deny'd.	while others in Contentments downy Nest do sleep, it is the Cursed thorn wounding my breast that makes me sing. however sweet tis Envy that Inspires my Song. prickt. by the fame of others how I mourn and my complaints are Sweeter than their Joys but O could I at Envy Shake my hands. my notes Should Rise to meet the New born Day. Hate Meager hag Sets Envy on unable to Do ought herself. but Worn away a Bloodless Daemon The Gods all Serve her at her will So great her Power is[.] like. fabled hecate She doth bind them to her law. Far in a Direful Cave She lives unseen Closd from the Eye of Day. to the hard Rock transfixt by fate and here She works her witcheries that when She Groans She Shakes the Solid Ground Now Envy She controlls with numming trance & Melancholy Sprung from her dark womb There is a Melancholy, O how lovely tis whose heaven is in the heavenly Mind for she from heaven came, and where She goes heaven still doth follow her. She brings true Joy once fled. & Contemplation is her Daughter. Sweet Contemplation. She brings humility to man Take her She Says & wear her in thine heart lord of thy Self thou then art lord of all. Tis Contemplation teacheth knowledge truly how to know. and Reinstates him on his throne once lost how lost I'll tell. But Stop the motley Song. I'll Shew. how Conscience Came from heaven. But O who listens to his Voice T'was Conscience who brought Melancholy down Conscience was sent a Guard to Reason. Reason once fairer than the light till fould in Knowledges dark Prison house. For knowledge drove sweet Innocence away. and Reason would have followd but fate sufferd not Then down Came Conscience with his lovely band The Eager Song Goes on telling how Pride against her father Warrd & Overcame. Down his white Beard the Silver torrents Roll. and Swelling Sighs burst forth his Children all in arms appear to tear him from his throne Black was the deed. most Black. Shame in a Mist Sat Round his troubled head. & filld him with Confusion. Fear as a torrent wild Roard Round his throne the mighty pillars shake Now all the Gods in blackning Ranks appear. like a tempestuous thunder Cloud Pride leads. them on. Now they Surround the God. and bind him fast. Pride bound him, then usurpd oer all the Gods. She Rode upon the Swelling wind and Scatterd all who durst t'oppose. but Shame opposing fierce and hovering. over her in the darkning Storm. She brought forth Rage. Mean while Strife Mighty Prince was born Envy in direful Pains him bore. then Envy brought forth Care. Care Sitteth in the wrinkled brow. Strife Shapeless Sitteth under thrones of kings like Smouldring fire. or in the Buzz of Cities flies abroad Care brought forth Covet Eyeless & prone to th' Earth, and Strife brought forth Revenge Hate brooding in her Dismal den grew Pregnant & bore Scorn, & Slander. Scorn waits on Pride. but Slander. flies around the World to do the Work of hate her drudge & Elf. but Policy doth drudge for hate as well as Slander. & oft makes use of her. Policy Son of Shame. Indeed Hate Controlls all the Gods. at will. Policy brought forth Guile & fraud. these Gods last namd live in the Smoke of Cities. on Dusky wing breathing forth Clamour & Destruction. alas in Cities wheres the man whose face is not a mask unto his heart Pride made a Goddess. fair  or I mage rather till knowledge animated it. 'twas Calld Selflove. The Gods admiring loaded her with Gifts as once Pandora She 'mongst men was Sent. and worser ills attended her by far. She was a Goddess Powerful & bore Conceit and Shame bore honour & made league with Pride & Policy doth dwell with her by whom she [had] Mistrust & Suspition. Then bore a Daughter called Emulation. who. married. honour these follow her around the World[.] Go See the City friends Joind Hand in Hand. Go See. the Natural tie of flesh & blood. Go See more strong the tie of marriage love thou Scarce Shall find but Self love Stands Between

title: Then She bore Pale desire/rearranged


text:
Then She bore Pale desire/edited

(as edited by Geoffrey Keynes)

then She bore Pale desire, father of Curiosity, a Virgin ever young. And after, Leaden Sloth, from whom came Ignorance, who brought forth Wonder. These are the Gods which came from fear, for Gods like these nor male nor female are, but Single Pregnate, or, if they list, together mingling bring forth mighty pow'rs. She knew them not; yet they all war with Shame and strengthen her weak arm. [Now day arose, the golden Sun his mighty Race began, Refreshing the Cold earth with beaming Joy (del.) But Pride awoke, nor knew that Joy was born, and taking Pois'nous Seed from her own Bowels in the Monster Shame infus'd; forth Came Ambition, crawling like a toad. Pride Bears it in her Bosom, and the Gods all bow to it. So Great its Power that Pride, inspir'd by it, Prophetic saw the Kingdoms of the World & all their Glory, Giants of Mighty arm, before the flood, Cain's City. built with Murder. Then Babel mighty Rear'd him to the Skies, Babel with thousand tongues. Confusion it was call'd. and Given to Shame; this Pride observing inly Griev'd, but knew not that the rest was Giv'n to Shame as well as this. [words del.]

Then Nineva & Babylon & Costly tyre And ev'n Jerusalem was shewn, the holy City. Then Athens' learning, & the Pride of Greece; and, further from the Rising Sun, was Rome, seated on Seven hills, the mistress of the world, Emblem of Pride. She Saw the Arts their treasures Bring, and luxury his bounteous table spread: but now a cloud o'er casts and back to th'East. to Constantine's Great City, Empire fled, Ere long to bleed & die, A sacrifice done by a Priestly hand. So, once, the Sun his Chariot drew back to prolong a Good King's life. The Cloud o'er past & Rome now Shone again, Miter'd & Crown'd with triple crown. Then Pride was better Pleas'd. She Saw the World fall down in Adoration. [Nor could Refrain but Cry'd, "O this is the blest time when Pride shall hold the sway" (del.)] But now, full to the Setting Sun, a Sun arose out of the Sea; it rose, & shed Sweet Influence o'er the Earth. Pride feared for her City, but not long, for looking stedfastly, she saw that Pride Reign'd here. Now Direful Pains accost her, and Still pregnant, so Envy came, & Hate, twin progeny. Envy hath a serpent's head of fearful bulk, hissing with hundred tongues; her pois'nous breath breeds Satire foul contagion, from which none are free: o'er whelmd by ever During Thirst she swalloweth her own Poison, which consumes her nether Parts, from Whence a River Springs. Most Black & loathsom through the land it Runs, Rolling with furious Noise; but at the last it settles in a lake called Oblivion: 'tis at this River's fount where ev'ry mortal's Cup is Mix't. My Cup is fill'd with Envy's Rankest Draught [and Death is in the Pot (del.)]; a miracle, No less, can set me Right. Desire still pines but for one Cooling Drop, and 'tis Deny'd; while others in Contentment's downy Nest do sleep, it is the cursed thorn wounding my breast that makes me sing: however sweet 'tis Envy that Inspires my Song: prickt by the fame of others how I mourn, and my com- plaints are Sweeter than their Joys; but O, could I at Envy Shake my hands, my notes should Rise to meet the New born Day. Hate, Meager hag sets Envy on, Unable to Do ought herself, but Worn away a Bloodless Daemon. The Gods all Serve her at her will; so great her Power is, like fabled hecate, she doth bind them to her law. Far in a Direful Cave she lives unseen, Clos'd from the Eye of Day, to the hard Rock transfixt by fate, and here she works her witcheries, that when she Groans she shakes the Solid Ground. Now Envy she controlls with numming trance, & Melancholy, sprung from her dark womb. There is a Melancholy, O how lovely 'tis whose heaven is in the heavenly Mind, for she from heaven came, and where she goes heaven still doth follow her. She brings  true Joy once fled, & Contemplation is her Daughter. Sweet Contemplation! [She teacheth knowledge how to know (del.)] She brings humility to man. "Take her," she says, "& wear her in thine heart, lord of thyself, thou then art lord of all." [humility, her Daughter (del.)] 'Tis Contemplation teacheth knowledge truly how to know, and Reinstates him on his throne, once lost; how lost, I'll tell. But stop the motley Song. I'll shew how Conscience Came from heaven. But O, who listens to his Voice. 'Twas Conscience who brought Melancholy down, Conscience was sent, a Guard to Reason, Reason once fairer than the light, till foul'd in Knowledge's dark Prison house. For knowledge drove sweet Innocence away, and Reason would have follow'd, but fate suffer'd not; then down came Conscience with his lovely band. The Eager Song Goes on, telling how Pride against her father Warr'd & Overcame. Down his white Beard the silver torrents Roll and swelling sighs burst forth, his Children all in arms appear to tear him from his throne. Black was the deed, most Black. Shame in a Mist sat Round his troubled head, & filld him with confusion. Fear as a torrent wild Roar'd Round his throne; the mighty pillars shake. Now all the Gods in black'ning Ranks appear, like a tempestuous thunder Cloud. Pride leads. them on. Now they surround the God and bind him fast. Pride bound him, then usurp'd o'er all the Gods. She Rode upon the swelling wind, and scatter'd all who durst t'oppose; but Shame opposing fierce and hovering over her in the darkning storm, She brought forth Rage. And Shame bore honour, & made league with Pride. Meanwhile Strife, Mighty Prince, was born. Envy in direful Pains him bore; then Envy brought forth Care. Care sitteth in the wrinkled brow. Strife, shapeless, sitteth under thrones of kings, like smould'ring fire, or in the Buzz of cities flies abroad. Care brought forth Covet, Eyeless & prone to th'Earth, and Strife brought forth Revenge. Hate, brooding in her Dismal den, grew Pregnant, & [brought forth (del.)] bore Scorn, & Slander. Scorn waits on Pride, but Slander flies around the World to do the Work of hate, her drudge & Elf: but Policy doth drudge for hate, as well as Slander, & oft makes use of her. Policy, Son of Shame. Indeed hate controlls all the Gods at will. Policy brought forth Guile & fraud; these Gods last nam'd live in the Smoke of Cities, on Dusky wing breathing forth Clamour & Destruction; alas, in Cities where's the man whose face is not a mask unto his heart? Pride made a Goddess fair, or Image rather, till knowledge animated it; 'twas Calld Self love. The Gods admiring loaded her with Gifts, as once Pandora. She 'mongst men was sent, and worser ills attended her by far. She was a Goddess Powerful & bore Conceit [& Emulation. Conceit] and Shame bore honour & made league with Pride & Policy doth dwell with her by whom she had Mistrust & Suspition; [by Shame she had a Son call'd Honour who bore Revenge (del.)] then [Self love  (del.)] bore a Daughter called Emulation, who married honour; these follow her around the World. Go See the city friends, Join'd Hand in Hand. Go see the Natural tie of flesh & blood. Go See more strong the ties of marriage love—thou Scarce Shall find, but Self love Stands Between.

title: Then She bore Pale desire/edited


text: User talk:AndreyFelipeMartins

title: User talk:AndreyFelipeMartins


text:
User talk:Altonego

--Longfellow (talk) 12:29, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Altonego


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/184

 though a provincial counsel, his opinions were everywhere received with the greatest respect. His drafts, like Booth's, were prolix to excess, but some of them were, to a very recent period, in use as precedents in the northern counties. He published (London, 1779) 'An Enquiry into the Nature of Property and Estates as defined by English Law, in which are considered the opinions of Mr. Justice Blackstone and Lord Coke concerning Real Property.' There was also published in 1804 in London 'Practical Points, or Maxims in Conveyancing, drawn from the daily experience of a late eminent conveyancer (Bradley), with critical observations on the various parts of a Deed by J. Ritson.' This was a collection of Bradley's notes on points of practice, and the technical minutiae of conveyancing as they were suggested in the course of his professional life. Ritson was a contemporary and fellow-townsman of Bradley. The latter by his will left a considerable sum (40,000l.) on trust for the purchase of books calculated to promote the interests of religion and virtue in Great Britain and the happiness of mankind. Lord Thurlow, by a decree in chancery, set aside the charitable disposition of Bradley in favour of his next of kin. Bradley died at Stockton-on-Tees on 28 Dec. 1788, and was buried in the parish church of Greatham, where a mural monument was erected to his memory on the north side of the chancel.

 BRADLEY, RICHARD (d. 1732), botanist and horticultural writer, was a very popular and voluminous author. His first essays in print were two papers published in the 'Philosophical Transactions' for 1716, on mouldiness in melons, and the motions of the sap. He was elected F.R.S. in 1720; and professor of botany at Cambridge on 10 Nov. 1724, the latter by means of a pretended verbal recommendation from Dr. William Sherard to Dr. Bentley, with pompous assurances that he would found a public botanic garden in the university by his private purse and interest. Very soon after his election the vanity of his promises was seen, and his entire ignorance of Latin and Greek excited great scandal : Dr. Martyn, who afterwards succeeded him, was appointed to read the prescribed courses of lectures, in consequence of Bradley's neglect to do so. In 1729 he gave a course of lectures on 'Materia Medica,' which he afterwards published. In 1731 it is stated that 'he was grown so scandalous that it was in agitation to turn him out of his professorship,' though the details of his delinquency do not appear to be given. He died at Cambridge 5 Nov. 1732.

The use of Bradley's name was paid for by the publishers of a translation of Xenophon's 'Economics' solely on account of his popularity, as he knew nothing of the original language. His botanical publications show acuteness and diligence, and contain indications of much observation in advance of his time.

Adanson, Necker, and Banks, in succession, named genera to commemorate Bradley, but they have not been maintained distinct by succeeding botanists.

His works include:
 * 1) 'Historia plantarum succulentarum, &c.,' London, 1716-27, 5 decades, 4to, reissued together in 1734.
 * 2) ' New Improvements of Planting and Gardening,' London, 1717 (two editions), 8vo, 1731.
 * 3) 'Gentleman's and Farmer's Calendar,' London, 1718, 8vo; French translations (1723, 1743, 1756).
 * 4) 'Virtue and Use of Coffee with regard to the Plague and Contagious Distempers,' London, 1721, 8vo.
 * 5) 'Philosophical Account of the Works of Nature,' London (1721 and 1739), 8vo.
 * 6) 'Plague of Marseilles considered,' London, 1721, 8vo.
 * 7) 'New Experiments and Observations on the Generation of Plants,' 1724, 8vo.
 * 8) 'Treatise of Fallowing,' Edinburgh, 1724, 8vo.
 * 9) 'Survey of Ancient Husbandry and Gardening collected from Cato, Varro, Columella, &c.,' London, 1725, 8vo and several small treatises on gardening and agriculture.

Part II. of Cowell's 'Curious and Profitable Gardener, concerning the great American Aloe,' has been attributed with little reason to Bradley.

 BRADLEY, THOMAS (1597–1670), divine, a native of Berkshire, states that he was 72 years old in 1669, and was therefore born in 1597. He became a battler of Exeter College, Oxford, in 1616, and proceeded B.A. on 21 July 1620. He was chaplain to the Duke of Buckingham for several years, and accompanied him in the expedition to Rochelle and the Isle of Rhé in 1627. After Buckingham's murder in the following year he became chaplain to Charles I, and on 16 June 1629 a captain in the expedition to France


text:
Author:Robert Surtees

Works

 * The History and Antiquities of the County Palatine of Durham (1820)

Works about Surtees

 * A memoir of Robert Surtees, esq., M. A., F. S. A., (1852), by George Taylor 1771-1851, edited by James Raine

title: Author:Robert Surtees


text:
Author:Richard Bradley

Works

 * Treatise of Succulent Plants (1710)
 * History of Succulent Plants (appeared in five instalments). (1716–1727) Second edition corrected (London, 1739)
 * New Improvements of Planting and Gardening (1719–1720)
 * A Philosophical Account of the Works of Nature (1721)
 * The Plague at Marseilles Considered (1721)
 * A General Treatise of Husbandry and Gardening (appeared in fifteen issues and later collected into three volumes from 1721–1724)
 * Ten Practical Discourses Concerning Earth and Water, Fire and Air, as They Relate to the Growth of Plants (1727)
 * The Country Housewife and Lady's Director (1727)
 * A Course of Lectures upon the Materia Medica, Ancient and Modern (1730)

title: Author:Richard Bradley


text: A Book of the Cevennes/Le Puy

title: A Book of the Cevennes/Le Puy


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/55

 Rh as the Kourdish practice of bread-making as it occurs at Sinjate. "One woman makes the dough into balls, the size of her fist: this she beats with her hand into flat cakes, about a quarter of an inch thick and ten inches across. This she hands to the chief bakeress, who presides over the tanure [or oven], and who, by some mysterious legerdemain, merely by throwing the cake from hand to hand, expands it to a thin oval sheet, the thickness of paper; this she deposits on a very dirty pillow, one end of which is open to let in her hand, and thus poised, she dashes it against the heated side of the tanure, and, when baked to her satisfaction, she removes it with two sticks" (British Assoc. Report, 1889, p. 184). The British parallel to this belongs to a subject which my wife has taken up, and which my friend, Professor Haddon—rather irreverently, as I think, but still expressively—styled folk-grub:—

"An ancient custom, for the observance of which Rutherglen has long been famous, is the baking of sour cakes. Some peculiar circumstances attending the operation render an account of the manner in which it is done not altogether unnecessary. About eight or ten days before St. Luke's Fair (for they are baked at no other time of the year), a certain quantity of oatmeal is made into dough, with warm water, and laid up in a vessel to ferment. Being brought to a proper degree of fermentation and consistency, it is rolled up into balls, proportionable to the intended largeness of the cakes. With the dough is commonly mixed a small quantity of sugar, and a little aniseed or cinnamon. The baking is executed by women only, and they seldom begin their work till after sunset, and a night or two before the Fair. A large space of the house, chosen for the purpose, is marked out by a line drawn upon it. The area within is considered as consecrated ground, and is not, by any of the bystanders, to be touched with impunity. A transgression incurs a small fine, which is always laid out on drinks for the use of the company. This hallowed spot is occupied by six or eight women, all of whom, except the toaster, seat themselves on the ground in a circular figure, having their feet turned towards the fire. Each of them is provided with a bake-board about two feet square, which they hold on their knees. The


text: A Book of the Cevennes/Round About Le Puy


text: A Book of the Cevennes/L’Auberge De Peyrabeille


text: A Book of the Cevennes/Les Boutières

title: A Book of the Cevennes/Les Boutières


text:
Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Freiligrath, Ferdinand

FREILIGRATH, FERDINAND (frī'lig-rät), a German poet; born in Detmold, Germany, June 17, 1810. His first volume of “Poems” (1838), won a royal pension, which he renounced as discrediting his liberalism, publishing a “Confession of Faith” in verse (1844). Banished as a sower of sedition, he took refuge in London till the Revolution of 1848. Returning, he was tried for high treason for his poem “The Dead to the Living,” but acquitted; then threatened with prosecution for “Political and Social Poems”; he returned to London and lived there till 1868. Many of his songs are widely popular. He was an admirable translator, notably from Scott, Shakespeare, and Longfellow. He died in Cannstatt, Germany, March 18, 1876.


text: A Book of the Cevennes/The Volcanoes of the Vivarais


text:
Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Gutenberg, Johannes

GUTENBERG, JOHANNES, or HENNE, a German printer; born in Mainz, about 1400. In 1434 he was living in Strassburg, and seems to have been well known as a man of considerable mechanical skill, who taught stone cutting, mirror polishing, and similar arts. When and where he made his first attempts in the art of printing cannot with certainty be ascertained. Some time between 1444 and 1448 he returned to Mainz, where, in 1449 or 1450, he entered into partnership with Johannes Fust or Faust, a wealthy goldsmith, who furnished the money required to set up a printing press. This partnership was, however, dissolved after the lapse of a few years, Fust bringing an action at law against Gutenberg to recover the sums he had advanced. In consequence of the legal verdict, Fust retained the printing concern, and carried it on in conjunction with Peter Schöffer of Gernsheim. Gutenberg, with the assistance of a Dr. Homery, afterward set up another printing press. He is considered the inventor of movable type. He died in Mainz, Feb. 24, 1468.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/185

 applied to the council to take Bradley with him as chaplain of his ship (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1628-9, p. 579). Soon afterwards (5 May 1631) Bradley married Frances, the daughter of Sir John Savile, baron Savile of Pontefract, and he was presented by his father-in-law about the same time to the livings of Castleford and Ackworth, near Pontefract. As a staunch royalist, he was created D.D. at Oxford on 20 Dec. 1642, and was expelled a few years later by the parliamentary committee from both his Yorkshire livings. 'His lady and all his children,' writes Walker, 'were turned out of doors to seek their bread in desolate places,' and his library at Castleford fell into the hands of his oppressors. He published in London in 1658 a curious pamphlet entitled 'A Present for Cæsar of 100,000l. in hand and 50,000l. a year,' in which he recommended the extortion of first-fruits and tithes according to their true value. The work is respectfully dedicated to Oliver Cromwell. At the Restoration he was restored to Ackworth, but he found it necessary to vindicate his pamphlet in another tract entitled 'Appello Cæsarem' (York, 1661). But his conduct did not satisfy the government, and in an assize sermon preached at York in 1663 and published as 'Cæsar's Due and the Subject's Duty,' he said that the king had bidden him 'preach conscience to the people and not to meddle with state affairs,' and that he had to apologise for his sermons preached against the excise and the excisemen, the Westminster lawyers, and 'the rack-renting landlords and depopulators.' He also expressed regret for having suggested the restoration of the council of the north. In 1666 he was made a prebendary of York. He died in 1670.

His publications consist entirely of sermons. The earliest, entitled 'Comfort from the Cradle,' was preached at Winchester and published at Oxford in 1650; four others, preached at York Minster, were published at York between 1661 and 1670, and six occasional sermons appear to have been issued collectively in London in 1667. Walker describes Bradley as 'an excellent preacher' and 'a ready and acute wit.'

A son, Savile, was at one time fellow of New College, Oxford, and afterwards fellow of Magdalen. Wood, in his autobiography, tells a curious story about his ordination in 1661.

 BRADLEY, THOMAS, M.D. (1751–1813), physician, was a native of Worcester, where for some time he conducted a school in which mathematics formed a prominent study. About 1786 he withdrew from education, and, devoting himself to medical studies, went to Edinburgh, where he graduated M.D. in 1791, his dissertation, which was published, being 'De Epispasticorum Usu in variis morbis tractandis.' He settled in London, and on 22 Dec. 1791 was admitted licentiate of the College of Physicians. From 1794 to 1811 he was physician to the Westminster Hospital. For many years he acted as editor of the 'Medical and Physical Journal.' He published a revised and enlarged edition of Fox's 'Medical Dictionary,' 1803, and also a 'Treatise on Worms and other Animals which infest the Human Body,' 1813. In the practice of his profession he was not very successful. He died in St. George's Fields at the close of 1813.

 BRADLEY, WILLIAM (1801–1857), portrait painter, was born at Manchester on 16 Jan. 1801. He was left an orphan when three years old, and commenced life as an errand-boy; but having a natural talent for art, he at the age of sixteen advertised himself as a 'portrait, miniature, and animal painter, and teacher of drawing,' and drew portraits at a shilling apiece. Having received some lessons from Mather Brown, who was then living at Manchester, he came to London when about twenty-one, and, obtaining an introduction to Sir Thomas Lawrence, established himself in the metropolis, where he enjoyed some practice as a portrait painter. Between 1823 and 1846 he exhibited thirteen portraits at the Royal Academy, twenty-one at the Free Society of Artists, and eight at the British Institution. He returned in 1847 to his native city, broken down in health, and he died in poverty on 4 July 1857. Bradley's portraits were successful as likenesses, and well drawn. Among his sitters were Lords Beresford, Sandon, Bagot, and Ellesmere, Sheridan Knowles, W. C. Macready, and the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone. His portrait of the last-mentioned has been engraved in mezzotinto by W. Walker.

 BRADOCK, THOMAS (fl. 1576–1604), translator, was educated at Christ's College, Cambridge, proceeded B.A. 1576, and was elected fellow of his college in 1578. In 1579 his name appears in a protest against the


text: A Book of the Cevennes/Preface

title: A Book of the Cevennes/Preface