text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Hayes, Rutherford Birchard

HAYES, Rutherford Birchard, 19th President of the United States: b. Delaware, Ohio, 4 Oct. 1822; d. Fremont, Ohio, 17 Jan. 1893. He was the third son of Rutherford and Sophia (Birchard) Hayes. His earliest paternal ancestor in America was George Hayes, a Scotchman, who, prior to 1680, settled in Windsor, Conn.; was married to Sarah Dibble, and in 1698 removed to the Salmon brook district, Simsbury, now in Granby township. In 1817 the family moved to Ohio from Brattleboro, Vt. An uncle took particular interest in young Rutherford, and supplied his eager demand for books. In 1834 he took up the study of Latin and Greek under the direction of Judge Sherman Finch, of Delaware, who had been a tutor at Yale. He continued his studies in the Norwalk (Ohio) Academy, and completed his preparatory course at Middletown, Conn., under Isaac Webb. At 16 he entered Kenyon College, from which he was graduated in 1842 as the valedictorian of his class. The following year he entered the law school of Harvard University, where he remained until 1845, at the same time studying French and German and attending the lectures of Agassiz on natural science and of Longfellow on literature. He was admitted to the Ohio bar at Marietta, 10 May 1845, established himself at Lower Sandusky, now Fremont, and in April 1846 formed a law psrtnership with Ralph P. Buckland, then a member of Congress and later a major-general in the Civil War. Early in 1848 his health having failed, he wanted to enlist in the war with Mexico, but he was forbidden to do so by his physician, and, after trying the climate of New England and of Canada, he spent the following winter in Texas. Returning to Ohio with health fully restored, he settled in Cincinnati in December 1849. In 1856 he was nominated for

the office of common pleas judge, but declined the honor. His public life began two years later, when the office of city solicitor became vacant, and he was elected by the council to complete the unexpired term. In 1859 he was elected to the same office by the citizens, and he performed his duties with ability until April 1861, when he was defeated for re-election.

A Whig in politics, Hayes had cast his first vote for Henry Clay in 1844, his second for General Taylor in 1848, and his third for Winfield Scott in 1852; but having been opposed to slavery from his youth, he joined the Republican party and supported Frémont with enthusiasm in 1852, and Lincoln in 1860. On 13 April 1861, at a mass-meedng, called in response to President Lincoln's proclamation asking for 75,000 troops, he was made chairman of the committee appointed to draw up resolutions, expressive of the intense feeling which had now been aroused. Forthwith the members of his literary club organized a military company and he was chosen captain. President Lincoln sent him a commission as colonel of volunteers, but he declined it. Later, 1 June 1861, he accepted a commission from Governor Dennison as major of the 23d Ohio Volunteer Infantry, a body of 900 men, of which W. S. Rosecrans was colonel and Stanley Matthews, lieutenant-colonel. This regiment was ordered into West Virginia, under Gen. George B. McClellan, to aid in driving the Confederates from that section. From 19 Sept. 1861 Major Hayes was judge-advocate of the Department of the Ohio for about two months. During the summer of 1862 his command was transferred to the Army of the Potomac, and participated in the battle of South Mountain, where, though wounded in the arm, he led a charge and held his position at the head of his men. For his conspicuous gallantry on this occasion, he was made colonel of the 23d Regiment on 24 Oct. 1862. He was detailed from his regiment to act as brigadier-general in command of the celebrated Kanawha division; checked the raid of the Confederate, John Morgan, in July 1863, and aided in preventing his force from re-crossing the Ohio and in compelling its leader to surrender. He commanded a brigade under General Crook in the spring of 1864, which took pari in cutting the principal lines of communication between Richmond and the Southwest, and he led it in storming a fortified position on the crest of Clay's Mountain. Later, still under Crook, he joined Hunter's army in the march against Lynchburg, and covered the retreat in the dangerous passage of the Alleghanies. In the first battle of Winchester, 24 July 1864, Colonel Hayes and Col. James Mulligan were ordered to charge what proved to be a greatly superior force. Mulligan fell, but Hayes flanked and conducted the retreat of his brigade with great intrepidity and skill, eventually checking the pursuit. At Perryville he also served with credit and at the second battle of Winchester, 19 Sept. 1864, performed an act of signal bravery. Advancing against a battery situated on an eminence, he suddenly came to a deep slough, some 50 yards in width. Nevertheless, he plunged in at once, and, although his horse sank in the mire, he extricated himself, climbed to the top of the other bank, and, with about 40 who followed, charged the battery and put its defenders to flight. He led a division at Fisher's Hill,

22 Sept. 1864, where he gained the enemy's rear and routed them, capturing seven pieces of artillery. A month later, he was engaged at Cedar Creek, where while in retreat he had a horse shot under him and he was slightly wounded in the head. A few days later he was made brigadier-general and on 13 March 1865 was brevetted major-general for his distinguished services at Fisher's Hill and Cedar Creek. While still in the army, 6 Aug. 1864, he was nominated for Congress from the Second Ohio district. He was elected to the 39th Congress, and he was nominated for governor by the soldiers in the field. In August 1866, he was renominated by acclamation and was elected to the 40th Congress by a large majority. In Congress he was appointed chairman of the library committee and succeeded in greatly amending the copyright law, as well as in trebling the area, contents and usefulness of the Congressional library. His votes in matters affecting the reconstruction of the South were given with his party; his first vote was for a resolution affirming the sacredness of the public debt and denouncing every form of repudiation. He sustained the movement for the impeachment of President Johnson. In 1867 he was nominated for Governor of Ohio by the Republicans. He was elected with his Republican associates in November. He steadily increased in personal popularity and was re-elected governor in 1869. During his administration he carried out a comprehensive geological survey of Ohio, which was of great advantage in the development of the mineral resources of the State. The State debt was reduced by nearly $3,000,000 and considerable reforms brought about in regard to the debt incurring powers of municipalities. In 1872, he returned to Cincinnati determined to retire from public life, and in 1873 he moved to his old home at Frémont. In 1875, however, he was nominated governor and was with difficulty induced to accept the nomination. The great issue of the campaign was the money question, which though properly a national issue, had been forced into State politics. There were those who believed and publicly contended that all that was needed to make money was the stamp of the government of the United States, that it was not necessary to have back of it any intrinsic value. Hayes, however, stood for “sound money,” and after an active campaign won the election, thus becoming governor of Ohio for the third time.

RUTHERFORD BIRCHARD HAYES

Nineteenth President of the United States

The Republican State Convention of Ohio named him as its choice for President in the Republican National Convention. When the latter body met, at Cincinnati, 14 June 1876, his name was presented, as were the names of other prominent leaders of the party, including that of James G. Blaine, It soon became evident that none of the recognized candidates could be nominated and a “dark horse” was looked for. On the seventh ballot the opposition to Mr. Blaine gave Mr. Hayes the nomination. The Democratic party nominated Samuel J. Tilden, whose reputation as a reformer brought him the support of many dissatisfied Republicans. The result of the election was a question of long and bitter contest. The electoral votes of Louisiana, Florida and of South Carolina were in dispute and both sides charged their opponents with fraud. The canvassing

boards of the States in dispute were visited by statesmen of both parties all blinded in a measure by political prejudice. The governors of the disputed States gave certificates in favor of Mr. Hayes, but other officials gave the same document in favor of Mr. Tilden. At last a commission was appointed to decide which set of papers was legal. This commission consisted of five Senators, five Representatives and five justices of the Supreme Court. When this plan was agreed to chance favored the Democrats, owing to the composition of the Supreme Court; but while the commission was being organized, Justice Davis, who was expected to be a member and to favor Mr. Tilden, was elected a Senator and so forced to resign his seat in the Supreme Court. This led to the substitution of Justice Bradley, a strong Republican, whose vote decided the question, for the commission on every question divided eight to seven. The electoral vote, as decided hy the commission was 185 for Hayes and 184 for Tilden. Mr. Hayes was publicly inaugurated 5 Uarch 1877. He at once proceeded to satisfy the Southern States by withdrawing from them the Federal troops and leaving the local government to the people in the two disputed States then under a dual government. This course, while heartily approved by the Democrats, was severely criticized by the Republicans, who thus lost the votes of the Southern States. As regards appointment to office, Mr. Hayes' general policy was to respect the views of the advocates of civil service and his appointments were in general very acceptable. Competitive exams were instituted and applications were considered irrespective of party affiliations. On 5 May 1877 President Hayes called Congress in extra session, to meet 5 Oct. 1877, to make necessary appropriations for the support of the army. In July he suppressed the railroad riots caused by a strike, on application from the governors of West Virginia, Maryland, Illinois and Pennsylvania, by sending United States troops to the points of disturbance. In his message to Congress, 3 Dec. 1877, he congratulated the country on the peaceable and prosperous condition of affairs in the Southern States; recommended the payment of government bonds in gold; favored the limited coinage of silver; insisted that the Constitution imposed on the President the sole duty and responsibility of the selection of Federal officers and recommended that Congress make a suitable appropriation for the use of the civil service commission; and recommended the passage of laws to protect the forests on lands of the United States — all of which were disregarded. He vetoed the “silver bill,” on the ground that the commercial value of the silver dollar was then less than its nominal value, and that its use in the payment of debts already contracted would be an act of bad faith; the bill was passed over his veto. In his message of 1 Dec. 1879 he congratulated the country on the return to specie payment, and urged upon Congress the suspension of silver coinage, fearing that the cheaper coin would eventually be the sole standard of value; and recommended the retirement of United Slates notes with the capacity of legal tender in private contracts. In his message of 6 Dec. 1880 he again urged civil service reform, competitive examinations for applicants for positions, for a law against

political assessments, and suggested that an act be passed “defining the relations of members of Congress with regard to appointments to office by the President,” that the tenure of office act be repeated, etc. Throughout his administration his actions gave great offense to the politicians who had placed him in office, and both Houses of Congress were up in arms against a President who insisted upon putting empty campaign promises into practice. They refused to pass the necessary appropriation bills, even the one for the support of the army. When these measures were eventually carried through, attached to them were certain ‘riders’ repealing obnoxious laws. This proceeding President Hayes considered an infringement on his prerogative, so he vetoed the bills, stood firm, and, in the end, won the battle. Owing to this quarrel with the politicians his re-nomination was out of the question, and on 4 March 1881, he relinquished his office to President Garfield. At the close of his administration, Mr. Hayes returned to private life. His interest in education was shown by the work done as a member of the boards of trustees of the Ohio Wesleyan University at Delaware and the Ohio State University at Columbus. Hayes' Hall at the latter institution bears his name because of his devotion to the cause of manual training. He was also president of the John F. Slater Educational Fund and gave much time to its proper distribution. As president of the National Prison Reform Association he did much to educate the public to a more humane way of thinking about the treatment of convicts, many of his public utterances have become maxims in prison management, and his work along these lines has been exceedingly valuable and permanent in its results. Consult Gladden, ‘The Great Commoner of Ohio’ (Columbus 1893); Stoddard, ‘Hayes, Garfield, and Arthur’ (New York 1889); Howard, ‘Life, Public Services, and Select Speeches of Rutherford B. Hayes’ (Cincinnati 1876); Howells, ‘Life of R. B. Hayes’ (New York 1876); Conwell, ‘Life and Public Services of Governor Hayes’ (Philadelphia 1876). Consult also Haworth, ‘The Disputed Election of 1876’ (Cleveland 1906), and Bigelow (editor), ‘Letters and Literary Memorials of Samuel J. Tilden’ (Vol. 11, New York 1908).


text: The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law/Introduction

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


text: Index:American Archives, Series 4, Volume 1.djvu


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 08.djvu/190

 while on the southernmost projection of the modern Cape peninsula, whose remarkable highlands (Table Mountain, &c.) doubtless impressed him as the practical termination of the continent, he bestowed, says De Barros, the name of Cape of Storms (Cabo Tormentoso) in memory of the storms he had experienced in these far southern waters; this name (in the ordinary tradition) was changed by King John to that of Good Hope (Cabo da Boa Esperança). Some excellent authorities, however, make Diaz himself give the Cape its present name. Hard by this “so many ages unknown promontory” the explorer probably erected his last pillar. After touching at the Ilha do Principe (Prince’s Island, south-west of the Cameroons) as well as at the Gold Coast, he appeared at Lisbon in December 1488. He had discovered 1260 m. of hitherto unknown coast; and his voyage, taken with the letters soon afterwards received from Pero de Covilhão (who by way of Cairo and Aden had reached Malabar on one side and the “Zanzibar coast” on the other as far south as Sofala, in 1487–1488) was rightly considered to have solved the question of an ocean route round Africa to the Indies and other lands of South and East Asia.

No record has yet been found of any adequate reward for Diaz: on the contrary, when the great Indian expedition was being prepared (for Vasco da Gama’s future leadership) Bartolomeu only superintended the building and outfit of the ships; when the fleet sailed in 1497, he only accompanied da Gama to the Cape Verde Islands, and after this was ordered to El Mina on the Gold Coast. On Cabral’s voyage of 1500 he was indeed permitted to take part in the discovery of Brazil (April 22), and thence should have helped to guide the fleet to India; but he perished in a great storm off his own Cabo Tormentoso. Like Moses, as Galvano says, he was allowed to see the Promised Land, but not to enter in.

 DIAZO COMPOUNDS, in organic chemistry, compounds of the type R·N·2·X (where R＝a hydrocarbon radical, and X＝an acid radical or a hydroxyl group). These compounds may be divided into two classes, namely, the true diazo compounds, characterized by the grouping −N＝N−, and the diazonium compounds, characterized by the grouping N ⫶ N<.

The diazonium compounds were first discovered by P. Griess (Ann., 1858, 106, pp. 123 et seq.), and may be prepared by the action of nitrous fumes on a well-cooled solution of a salt of a primary amine,

C6H5NH2·HNO3 + HNO2＝C6H5N2·NO3 + 2H2O,

or, as is more usually the case (since the diazonium salts themselves are generally used only in aqueous solution) by the addition of a well-cooled solution of potassium or sodium nitrite to a well-cooled dilute acid solution of the primary amine. In order to isolate the anhydrous diazonium salts, the method of E. Knoevenagel (Ber., 1890, 23, p. 2094) may be employed. In this process the amine salt is dissolved in absolute alcohol and diazotized by the addition of amyl nitrite; a crystalline precipitate of the diazonium salt is formed on standing, or on the addition of a small quantity of ether. The diazonium salts are also formed by the action of zinc-dust and acids on the nitrates of primary amines (R. Mohlau, Ber., 1883, 16, p. 3080), and by the action of hydroxylamine on nitrosobenzenes. They are colourless crystalline solids which turn brown on exposure. They dissolve easily in water, but only to a slight extent in alcohol and ether. They are very unstable, exploding violently when heated or rubbed. Benzene diazonium nitrate, C6H5N(NO3)∶N, crystallizes in long silky needles. The sulphate and chloride are similar, but they are not quite so unstable as the nitrate. The bromide may be prepared by the addition of bromine to an ethereal solution of diazo-amino-benzene (tribromaniline remaining in solution). By the addition of potassium bromide and bromine water to diazonium salts they are converted into a perbromide, e.g. C6H5N2Br3, which crystallizes in yellow plates.

The diazonium salts are characterized by their great reactivity and consequently are important reagents in synthetical processes, since by their agency the amino group in a primary amine may be exchanged for other elements or radicals. The chief reactions are as follows:—

1. Replacement of -NH2 by -OH:—The amine is diazotized and the aqueous solution of the diazonium salt is heated, nitrogen being eliminated and a phenol formed.

2. Replacement of -NH2 by halogens and by the -CN and -CNO groups:—The diazonium salt is warmed with an acid solution of the corresponding cuprous salt (T. Sandmeyer, Ber., 1884, 17, p. 2650), or with copper powder (L. Gattermann, Ber., 1890, 23, p. 1218; 1892, 25, p. 1074). In the case of iodine, the substitution is effected by adding a warm solution of potassium iodide to the diazonium solution, no copper or cuprous salt being necessary; whilst for the production of nitriles a solution of potassium cuprous cyanide is used. This reaction (the so-called “Sandmeyer” reaction) has been investigated by A. Hantzsch and J. W. Blagden (Ber., 1900, 33, p. 2544), who consider that three simultaneous reactions occur, namely, the formation of labile double salts which decompose in such a fashion that the radical attached to the copper atom wanders to the aromatic nucleus; a catalytic action, in which nitrogen is eliminated and the acid radical attaches itself to the aromatic nucleus; and finally, the formation of azo compounds.

3. Replacement of -NH2 by -NO2:—A well-cooled concentrated solution of potassium mercuric nitrate is added to a cooled solution of benzene diazonium nitrate, when the crystalline salt 2C6H5N2·NO3, Hg(NO2)2 is precipitated. On warming this with copper powder, it gives a quantitative yield of nitrobenzene (A. Hantzsch, Ber., 1900, 33, p. 2551).

4. Replacement of -NH2 by hydrogen:—This exchange is brought about, in some cases, by boiling the diazonium salt with alcohol; but I. Remsen and his pupils (Amer. Chem. Journ., 1888, 9, pp. 389 et seq.) have shown that the main product of this reaction is usually a phenolic ether. This reaction has also been investigated by A. Hantzsch and E. Jochem (Ber., 1901, 34, p. 3337), who arrived at the conclusion that the normal decomposition of diazonium salts by alcohols results in the formation of phenolic ethers, but that an increase in the molecular weight of the alcohol, or the accumulation of negative groups in the aromatic nucleus, diminishes the yield of the ether and increases the amount of the hydrocarbon formed. The replacement is more readily brought about by the use of sodium stannite (P. Friedlander, Ber., 1889, 22, p. 587), or by the use of a concentrated solution of hypophosphorous acid (J. Mai, Ber., 1902, 35, p. 162). A. Hantzsch (Ber., 1896, 29, p. 947; 1898, 31, p. 1253) has shown that the chlor- and brom- diazoniumthiocyanates, when dissolved in alcohol containing a trace of hydrochloric acid, become converted into the isomeric thiocyanbenzene diazonium chlorides and bromides. This change only occurs when the halogen atom is in the ortho- or para- position to the -N2- group.

Metallic Diazo Derivatives.—Benzene diazonium chloride is decomposed by silver oxide in aqueous solution, with the formation of benzene diazonium hydroxide, C6H5·N(OH)⫶N. This hydroxide, although possessing powerful basic properties, is unstable in the presence of alkalis and neutralizes them, being converted first into the isomeric benzene-diazotic acid, the potassium salt of which is obtained when the diazonium chloride is added to an excess of cold concentrated potash (A. Hantzsch and W. B. Davidson, Ber., 1898, 31, p. 1612). Potassium benzene diazotate, C6H5N2·OK, crystallizes in colourless silky needles. The free acid is not known; by the addition of the potassium salt to 50% acetic acid at −20° C., the acid anhydride, benzene diazo oxide, (C6H5N2)2O, is obtained as a very unstable, yellow, insoluble compound, exploding spontaneously at 0° C. Strong acids convert it into a diazonium salt, and potash converts it into the diazotate. On the constitution, of these anhydrides see E. Bamberger, Ber., 1896, 29, p. 446, and A. Hantzsch, Ber., 1896, 29, p. 1067; 1898, 31, p. 636. By the addition of the diazonium salts to a hot concentrated solution of a caustic alkali, C. Schraube and C. Schmidt (Ber., 1894, 27, p. 520) obtained an isomer of potassium benzene diazotate. These iso-diazotates are formed much more readily when the aromatic nucleus in the diazonium salt contains negative radicals. Potassium benzene iso-diazotate resembles the normal salt, but is more stable, and is more highly ionized. Carbon dioxide converts it into phenyl nitrosamine, C6H5NH·NO

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 08.djvu/190


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Diaz de Novaes, Bartholomeu


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Octroi

OCTROI, ok-trwa, an old French term particularly applied to the commercial privileges granted to a person or to a company. In a like sense the term is applied to the constitution of a state granted by a prince in contradistinction to those which are derived from a compact between the ruler and the representatives of the people. The tax was levied on articles of food brought into a city or town. A great deal of the money for the expenses of the local town government in France is obtained from the Octroi, nine-tenths of which are applied to local uses and one-tenth to the national treasury. Under the name “Alcabala” a similar tax was collected in Spain and the Spanish colonies. This tax was in force in Mexico until a few years before the revolution of 1910.


text: The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law/Germination of Outer Space as a Legal Concept


text: The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law/Air Force Opposition to International Conventions on Space


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ocuba-wax

OCUBA-WAX, a vegetable wax obtained from the fruit of a nutmeg (Myristica ocuba), growing abundantly in the marshy grounds on the shores of the Amazon and its tributaries. It is easily bleached, and is used extensively in Brazil for the manufacture of candles.


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 08.djvu/192

 chloranilines and elimination of nitrogen, whilst on boiling with sulphuric acid it is converted into aminophenols.

Aliphatic Diazo Compounds.—The esters of the aliphatic amino acids may be diazotized in a manner similar to the primary aromatic amines, a fact discovered by T. Curtius (Ber., 1833, 16, p. 2230). The first aliphatic diazo compound to be isolated was diazoacetic ester, CH·N2·CO2C2H5, which is prepared by the action of potassium nitrite on the ethyl ester of glycocoll hydrochloride, HCl·NH2·CH2·CO2C2H5 + KNO2 = CHN2·CO2C2H5 + KCl + 2H2O. It is a yellowish oil which melts at −24° C.; it boils at 143-144° C., but cannot be distilled safely as it decomposes violently, giving nitrogen and ethyl fumarate. It explodes in contact with concentrated sulphuric acid. On reduction it yields ammonia and glycocoll (aminoacetic acid). When heated with water it forms ethyl hydroxy-acetate; with alcohol it yields ethyl ethoxyacetate. Halogen acids convert it into monohalogen fatty acids, and the halogens themselves convert it into dihalogen fatty acids. It unites with aldehydes to form esters of ketonic acids, and with aniline yields anilido-acetic acid. It forms an addition product with acrylic ester, which on heating loses nitrogen and leaves trimethylene dicarboxylic ester. Concentrated ammonia converts it into diazoacetamide, CHN2·CONH2, which crystallizes in golden yellow plates which melt at 114° C. For other reactions see. The constitution of the diazo fatty esters is inferred from the fact that the two nitrogen atoms, when split off, are replaced by two monovalent elements or groups, thus leading to the formula for diazoacetic ester.

Diazosuccinic ester, N2·C(CO2C2H5)2, is similarly prepared by the action of nitrous acid on the hydrochloride of aspartic ester. It is decomposed by boiling water and yields fumaric ester.

Diazomethane, CH2N2, was first obtained in 1894 by H. v. Pechmann (Ber., 1894, 27, p. 1888; 1895, 28, p. 855). It is prepared by the action of aqueous or alcoholic solutions of the caustic alkalis on the nitroso-acidyl derivatives of methylamine (such, for example, as nitrosomethyl urethane, NO·N(CH3)·CO2C2H5, which is formed on passing nitrous fumes into an ethereal solution of methyl urethane). E. Bamberger (Ber., 1895, 28, p. 1682) regards it as the anhydride of iso-diazomethane, CH3·N:N·OH, and has prepared it by a method similar to that used for the preparation of iso-diazobenzene. By the action of bleaching powder on methylamine hydrochloride, there is obtained a volatile liquid (methyldichloramine, CH3·N·Cl2), boiling at 58-60° C., which explodes violently when heated with water, yielding hydrocyanic acid (CH3NCl2 = HCN + 2HCl). Well-dried hydroxylamine hydrochloride is dissolved in methyl alcohol and mixed with sodium methylate; a solution of methyldichloramine in absolute ether is then added and an ethereal solution of diazomethane distils over. Diazomethane is a yellow inodorous gas, very poisonous and corrosive. It may be condensed to a liquid, which boils at about 0° C. It is a powerful methylating agent, reacting with water to form methyl alcohol, and converting acetic acid into methylacetate, hydrochloric acid into methyl chloride, hydrocyanic acid into acetonitrile, and phenol into anisol, nitrogen being eliminated in each case. It is reduced by sodium amalgam (in alcoholic solution) to methylhydrazine, CH3·NH·NH2. It unites directly with acetylene to form pyrazole (H. v. Pechmann, Ber., 1898, 31, p. 2950) and with fumaric methyl ester it forms pyrazolin dicarboxylic ester.

See G. T. Morgan, B.A. Rep., 1902; J. Cain, Diazo Compounds, 1908.

 DIAZOMATA (Gr. , a girdle), in architecture, the landing places and passages which were carried round the semicircle and separated the upper and lower tiers in a Greek theatre.

 DIBDIN, CHARLES (1745–1814), British musician, dramatist, novelist, actor and song-writer, the son of a parish clerk, was born at Southampton on or before the 4th of March 1745, and was the youngest of a family of eighteen. His parents designing him for the church, he was sent to Winchester; but his love of music early diverted his thoughts from the clerical profession. After receiving some instruction from the organist of Winchester cathedral, where he was a chorister from 1756 to 1759, he went to London at the age of fifteen. Here he was placed in a music warehouse in Cheapside, but he soon abandoned this employment to become a singing actor at Covent Garden. On the 21st of May 1762 his first work, an operetta entitled The Shepherd’s Artifice, with words and music by himself, was produced at this theatre. Other works followed, his reputation being firmly established by the music to the play of The Padlock, produced at Drury Lane under Garrick’s management in 1768, the composer himself taking the part of Mungo with conspicuous success. He continued for some years to be connected with Drury Lane, both as composer and as actor, and produced during this period two of his best known works, The Waterman (1774) and The Quaker (1775). A quarrel with Garrick led to the termination of his engagement. In The Comic Mirror he ridiculed prominent contemporary figures through the medium of a puppet show. In 1782 he became joint manager of the Royal circus, afterwards known as the Surrey theatre. In three years he lost this position owing to a quarrel with his partner. His opera Liberty Hall, containing the successful songs “Jock Ratlin,” “The Highmettled Racer,” and “The Bells of Aberdovey,” was produced at Drury Lane theatre on the 8th of February 1785. In 1788 he sailed for the East Indies, but the vessel having put in to Torbay in stress of weather, he changed his mind and returned to London. In a musical variety entertainment called The Oddities, he succeeded in winning marked popularity with a number of songs that included “’Twas in the good ship ‘Rover’,” “Saturday Night at Sea,” “I sailed from the Downs in the ‘Nancy,’” and the immortal “Tom Bowling,” written on the death of his eldest brother, Captain Thomas Dibdin, at whose invitation he had planned his visit to India. A series of monodramatic entertainments which he gave at his theatre, Sans Souci, in Leicester Square, brought his songs, music and recitations more prominently into notice, and permanently established his fame as a lyric poet. It was at these entertainments that he first introduced many of those sea-songs which so powerfully influenced the national spirit. The words breathe the simple loyalty and dauntless courage that are the cardinal virtues of the British sailor, and the music was appropriate and naturally melodious. Their effect in stimulating and ennobling the spirit of the navy during the war with France was so marked as to call for special acknowledgment. In 1803 Dibdin was rewarded by government with a pension of £200 a year, of which he was only for a time deprived under the administration of Lord Grenville. During this period he opened a music shop in the Strand, but the venture was a failure. Dibdin died of paralysis in London on the 25th of July 1814. Besides his Musical Tour through England (1788), his Professional Life, an autobiography published in 1803, a History of the Stage (1795), and several smaller works, he wrote upwards of 1400 songs and about thirty dramatic pieces. He also wrote the following novels:—The Devil (1785); Hannah Hewitt (1792); The Younger Brother (1793). An edition of his songs by G. Hogarth (1843) contains a memoir of his life. His two sons, Charles and (q.v.), whose works are often confused with those of their father, were also popular dramatists in their day.  DIBDIN, THOMAS FROGNALL (1776–1847), English bibliographer, born at Calcutta in 1776, was the son of Thomas Dibdin, the sailor brother of Charles Dibdin. His father and mother both died on the way home to England in 1780, and Thomas was brought up by a maternal uncle. He was educated at St John’s College, Oxford, and studied for a time at Lincoln’s Inn. After an unsuccessful attempt to obtain practice as a provincial counsel at Worcester, he was ordained a clergyman at the close of 1804, being appointed to a curacy at Kensington. It was not until 1823 that he received the living of Exning in Sussex. Soon afterwards he was appointed by Lord Liverpool to the rectory of St Mary’s, Bryanston Square, which he held until his death on the 18th of November 1847. The first of his numerous bibliographical works was his Introduction to the Knowledge of Editions of the Classics (1802), which brought him under the notice of the third Earl Spencer, to whom he owed much important aid in his bibliographical pursuits. The rich library at Althorp was thrown open to him; he spent much of his time in it, and in 1814–1815 published his Bibliotheca Spenceriana. As the library was not open to the general public, the information given in the Bibliotheca was found very useful, but since its author was unable even to read the characters in which the books he described were written, the work was marred by the errors which more or less characterize all his productions. This fault of inaccuracy however was less obtrusive in his series of playful, discursive works in the form of dialogues on his favourite subject, the first of which, Bibliomania (1809), was republished with large additions in 1811, and was very popular, passing through numerous editions. To the same class belonged the Bibliographical Decameron, a larger work, which appeared in 1817. In 1810 he began the publication of a new and much extended edition of Ames’s Typographical Antiquities. The first volume was a great success, but the publication was checked by the failure of the fourth volume, and was

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 08.djvu/192


text:
Page:The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law (Terrill, 1999).djvu/35

 just discussion of the general issue but that a convention might be placed on the agenda at the upcoming ICAO world assembly. The Air Force representative at the ACC, Assistant Secretary for Materiel Dudley C. Sharp, responded to Cooper’s proposal by writing ACC Chairman Rothschild. Noting that the proposal entered an “uncharted area of thinking [and] cut across certain high-level policies…such as the President’s mutual inspection proposal, the recent Air Force weather balloon problem, earth satellite projects, and guided missile testing projects,” Sharp  recommended that the ACC postpone consideration of the proposal. He argued that until higher-level policies had been developed, the Air Coordinating Committee consider only “appropriate means whereby such higher-level policy considerations can be isolated and promptly considered.” Finally, Sharp proposed that the United States adopt a position at the ICAO seeking to have the matter postponed as being premature. Sharp argued that Cooper’s proposition posed a “number of problems which should properly be disposed of at the National Security Council or Presidential level” before being considered by the ACC. Once such national security issues were resolved, Sharp indicated he felt comfortable with the ACC dealing with the issue and allowing legal experts to “attack the problem of drafting a United States position on any proposed international convention.” At the same time, Secretary Sharp asked Air Force chief of staff Gen Nathan F. Twining for Air Staff “views on the military implications of an international convention regarding the use of outer air space.” Sharp encouraged the other services to also review the issue.


text: Portal:Science

title: Portal:Science


text:
Page:The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law (Terrill, 1999).djvu/36

 In letters dated 9 and 10 April 1956 to Chairman Rothschild, Cooper encouraged the ACC to reject the position of its own Legal Division. Given Eisenhower’s July 1955 statement that the United States would include a satellite as part of its IGY effort, Cooper argued that the US had precipitated the need to resolve the issue of sovereignty by announcing its intention to launch a satellite into outer space. Cooper felt that if the US was prepared to launch such a satellite, it ought also to be prepared to state its position on the sovereignty issue. In a second letter, Cooper reiterated his earlier position. He reasoned that the United States, by announcing its intention to launch a satellite, had accepted the proposition that it did not retain sovereignty of the outer space above its territory and thereby waived any legitimate grounds on which to object to foreign satellites passing over its territory. Cooper’s argument was clearly in accord with President Eisenhower’s position of espousing a freedom of passage in outer space, but the president’s position and its implications had apparently not yet been communicated outside a small circle of advisors. Given Professor Cooper’s efforts, ACC Chairman Rothschild quickly responded to Secretary Sharp’s request. Rothschild reiterated the positions taken by Kinsey and the Legal Division and welcomed Air Force and other DOD input when the studies Sharp had initiated were completed.


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/O'Curry, Eugene

O'CURRY, ō-kŭr'ĭ, Eugene, Irish scholar: b. Dunaha, County Clare, 1796; d. Dublin, July 1862. He was son of a rather gifted farmer. Though lame he worked on the farm until 1834. He was for three years employed on the Ordnance Survey; and after several years spent in copying Gaelic manuscripts and writing translations for the Royal Irish Academy, Trinity College (Dublin), the British Museum and other learned institutions, he was called, in 1855, by John Henry Newman to the chair of Irish history and archæology in the Catholic University of Ireland, then just founded. There he displayed a wonderful knowledge of all the sources of Irish history,

literature and civilization from the earliest times. His lectures, published in 1860, as ‘Manuscript Materials of Irish History,’ are accounted the best single work on mediæval Irish literature. A second series of his lectures, ‘The Manners and Customs of the Ancient Irish People,’ made up of his later lectures, appeared in 1873. O'Curry prepared the catalogue of the Irish manuscripts in the British Museum, and with John O'Donovan (q.v.) worked on the compilation of the ancient laws and institutions of Ireland. Consult Hyde, Douglas, ‘Literary History of Ireland’ (London 1906); Webb, ‘Compendium of Irish Biography’ (Dublin 1878).


text:
Page:The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law (Terrill, 1999).djvu/37

 Cooper was not about to let the issue die based on the ACC’s actions. In an address to the annual convention of the American Society of International Law (ASIL), he discussed the issues associated with outer space sovereignty and urged that outer space law issues be resolved through an international convention. Also at the ASIL convention, Professor Cooper proposed, among other things, a convention providing that all space above “contiguous space,” that is, three hundred miles above the earth’s surface, be free for the passage of all devices. Perhaps because of its premature nature, but for reasons unknown, Cooper’s proposal did not pass. In the meantime, by memorandum dated 9 May 1956, Col Paul W. Norton, director of civil law, Office of the Judge Advocate General, responded to the request by Sharp and General Twining for an Air Force position. Colonel Norton informed Maj Gen Richard C. Lindsay, acting assistant deputy chief of staff for operations, that any international convention was “premature and contrary to the best interests of the Air Force.” Noting that the United States had “assumed the lead in the research and development of long-range guided missiles, rockets, and satellite programs,” Norton advised  that “any codification of formal, intergovernmental rules at this  time would operate to fetter the unbounded use of outer space for military research and development.” He based this conclusion on the fact that current US programs were military sponsored and that past international conventions regarding airspace allowed military over flights only with special authorization of the subjacent nation. Norton concluded that a like provision would be included in any convention dealing with outer space. Colonel Norton argued that, given that the United States was more advanced than any other nation, the effect of such a convention would have a more profound effect on the US than on anyone else, including the USSR. He cited case law stating that any nation can take any reasonable and necessary measures to protect its national security even outside its territory and airspace. Based on these legal precedents, he concluded that should foreign use of outer space jeopardize its security then the United States, for its self-defense, could undertake reasonable and necessary unilateral restrictions on the use of space by other nations. Norton argued that other nations would accept such moves and that the US should be prepared to accept similar restrictions if imposed by other nations. He contended that so long as other nations did not raise objection to US programs and no other nation’s program presented a threat to the United


text:
Page:The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law (Terrill, 1999).djvu/38

 States, any international convention would hamper Air Force missions and research. Finally, he advised:  In this formative stage, we believe the practice of nations will create a more realistic precedent for future conduct in outer space than formulation at this time of international rules which could not possibly be grounded in actual practices and experience, but only on the abstract theories of each country’s statesmen and jurists. The value of actual practice is especially important so long as the United  States has the capability of leading the way in establishing the precedent. Colonel Norton’s early pronouncement of an Air Force position opposing Cooper’s efforts had been analyzed and written by Maj


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 22.djvu/152

 Goodwin Stratagems; or the Devil's Cabinet-Councel discovered,' with recommendatory epistles by himself and (1596–1680) [q. v.] Acontius, whose broad tolerance recommended him to the earlier puritans (see, preface to Puritanismus Anglicanus, 1610), was now stigmatised by such writers as [q. v.] as a 'sneaking Socinian.' Cheynell sought in vain in the Westminster Assembly to obtain a condemnation of Goodwin's book, but printed (1650) his thoughts about it by request. There was a fresh sale for the translation, which was reissued with a new title, 'Darkness Discovered; or the Devil's secret Stratagems laid open' (1651).

Goodwin defended the most extreme measures of the army leaders. In his ' Might and Right Well Met' (1648), which was answered by [q. v.], he applauded the purging of the parliament. He was one of the puritan divines who, in the interval between the sentence and execution of the king, proffered to him their spiritual services. Goodwin tells us in his 'Ύβριστοδίκαι. The Obstrvctovrs of Justice,' pp. 96-7 (30 May 1649), that he had an 'houres discourse or more with' Charles, but was not impressed by his visit. He firmly contended in the same tract for the sovereign rights of the people, quoted approvingly Milton's ' Tenure of Kings and Magistrates' (13 Feb. 1649), and maintained that the proceedings against Charles followed the spirit of the law if not the letter. The pamphlet was cast into the shade by the splendour of Milton's 'Eἰκονοκλάστης' (October 1649). 'Two Hyms or Spiritual Songs' (1651) from his pen, sung in his congregation on 24 Oct. 1651, the thanksgiving day for the victory at Worcester, further illustrate his republican zeal.

Meanwhile he pursued his theological controversies. His magnum opus in defence of general redemption, ' 'ATroAvrpoxrts cmov- rpaxretas, or Redemption Redeemed,' appeared in 1651 (reprinted 1 840) ; his ' Water-Dipping no Firm Footing' (1653) and ' Cata-Baptism ' (1655) were polemics against baptists. The circumstance that Cromwell's ' Triers ' were mostly independents did not reconcile him to the new ecclesiastical despotism ; he arraigned it in his 'Βασανισταί'. Or the Triers [or Tormenters] Tried' (1657).

Calamy remarks that Goodwin ' was a man by himself, was against every man, and had every man against him.' Goodwin speaks of himself as having ' to contend in a manner with the whole earth ' (dedication to Cata-Baptism). His ideas were often ahead of his day. In his ' Divine Authority of the Scriptures Assorted ' (1648), which won the commendation of Baxter, he maintains, anticipating Fox and Barclay, that the word of God ; was extant in the world, nay in the hearts and consciences of men, before there was any copy of the word extant in writing.' In his 'Pagans Debt and Dowry' (1651; 1671, a reply to Barlow), which led to a controversy with [q. v.], he argues that without the letter of the gospel heathens may be saved. His rational temper made him the opponent of seekers and quakers, and gave him some affinity with the Cambridge Platonists. He rejected the distinction allowed by Acontius, between tolerance of error in fundamentals and in other points. Error in fundamentals may be innocent. Toleration he bases on the difficulty of arriving at truth. He would have men 'call more for light and less for fire from heaven' (epistle in Satan's Stratagems, 1648). Even the denial of the Holy Trinity he will not treat as a 'damnable heresy,' for orthodoxy is a doctrine of inference. [q. v.], afterwards bishop of Lincoln, wrote to him (September 1651), 'I always find in the prosecution of your arguments that perspicuity and acuteness, which I often seek and seldom find in the writings of others.'

At the Restoration Goodwin, with Milton, was ordered into custody on 16 June 1660. He kept out of the way, and at length was placed in the indemnity, among eighteen persons perpetually incapacitated for any public trust. His ' 'Ύβριστοδίκαι' was burned (27 Aug.) by the hangman at the Old Bailey. According to Burnet his comparative immunity was due to his Arminian repute. He soon returned to his Coleman Street congregation, though not to the emoluments of St. Stephen's, of which he was deprived and Theophilus Alford admitted as his successor, on 29 May 1661. He wrote strenuously against the Fifth-monarchy enthusiasts in 1654 and 1655 (see passages collected in, p. 210 sq.) But Venner's meeting house, whence the insurrection of 1661 proceeded, was in Swan Alley, Coleman Street, and here also, in 1653, was Goodwin's study (dedication to Exposition of Romans). Hence, doubtless, arose Burnet's fable that Goodwin was one of these enthusiasts. Immediately on Venner's rising, Goodwin's church issued a 'Declaration' (1660, i.e. January 1661) disclaiming all sympathy with this or any attempt 'to propagate religion by the sword,' Jackson ascribes to Goodwin an anonymous publication (which he wrongly describes) entitled 'Prelatique Preachers None of Christ's Teachers,' 1663; internal evidence is strongly against his authorship. He died in the plague year, 1665. From the burial


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Odd Fellows, The Independent Order of

ODD FELLOWS, The Independent Order of, a secret, fraternal benefit society. The general administration of its laws is designated by the generic term Odd Fellowship. The origin of the society and the source of its peculiar name cannot now be historically traced. Until near the close of the 19th century it had been asserted for years that Defoe — the English novelist — mentioned “Odd Fellow” as early as 1745 A.D., but modern research has relegated this, as well as many other alleged incidents of the order's early days, to the realm of tradition. It is known, however, that a society grew up in England during the 18th century, almost rivaling in numbers and influence the Masonic Fraternity, and that this Antient and Most Noble Order of Bucks began to decline about the year 1773 and passed out of existence. A reasonable supposition attains among antiquaries that these lodges furnished the nucleus of the Odd Fellows, into one lodge of which George IV of England, while Prince of Wales, was quite unceremoniously admitted one night and became a member thereof at a date subsequent to 1780. This is the first authentic reference to the society of Odd Fellows by name. The earliest ritual extant is dated in 1797 and was used by the Patriotic Order. It appears from English contemporary history that an Improved Order existed prior to this, and the title, Most Noble Grand, for the presiding officer of the “Antient,” as well as the subsequent Orders of Odd Fellows, would imply a common bond or succession. The Patriotic Order was followed by the Union, or United Orders and the Loyal Order. In 1813 various lodges of the Union Order met and organized the Manchester Unity of Odd Fellows, now the principal Friendly society in Great Britain. In 1819 the American Order was founded and was afterward affiliated with the Manchester Unity. This continued until 23 Sept. 1842, when the Odd Fellows of the United States resumed their original independence, reaffirming the resolution in 1843 and adopting a distinctively American ritual in 1845. In 1919 the Order celebrated the 100th anniversary of its American foundation with appropriate ceremonies and parades in all the chief centres of population in the United States.

Rise of the American Order. — The first lodge established on this continent was Shakspere, No. 1, New York city, 26 Dec. 1806. The five Odd Fellows composing this lodge were of the Loyal Independent Order and the moving spirits were Solomon Chambers and his son John C., English mechanics from the south of London. The early members were zealous workers and other lodges were soon organized.

In 1809 the roll of membership, in the six New York City lodges, comprised 36 prominent citizens and business men, as well as many others of less influence. In 1819 George Pope Morris was admitted and at once became a leader in the councils of the Order in the Empire State. Attempts had then been made to plant Odd Fellowship in other parts of North America. In 1815 there were two lodges in Halifax, Nova Scotia. In Boston, during 1818, James B. Barnes — who had emigrated to the United States from England the previous year, and four others instituted Massachusetts Lodge, No. 1, and held regular meetings, the method being, like New York, ancient usage and self-institution. The records extant, however, date only from 20 March 1820. Washington Lodge, No. 1, of Baltimore, was organized 26 April 1819 under the leadership of Thomas Wildey, now recognized as the founder of American Odd Fellowship. Wildey came to the United States from England in 1818. He had been affiliated with one of the branches abroad since 1804 — had “passed the chairs,” and was known as a leading Odd Fellow. The “Unity” became fully organized 21 Jan. 1814. Wildey began his search for Odd Fellows as early as 13 Feb. 1819, when he advertised in the Baltimore American; and, again, 27 March 1819, before the required “five for a quorum” had been obtained. The minutes state that the manner of institution was “ancient usage.” This ceremony consisted of Wildey's obligation of himself in the presence of the others, and, in turn, the obligation of his companions. Subsequent events would indicate that the Manchester Unity ceremonies of 1816 were used by Wildey and his four associates: John Welch, John Duncan, John Cheatham and Richard Rushworth. On 26 Dec. 1821 Pennsylvania Lodge, No. 1, Philadelphia, was formed, like those in New York, Boston and Baltimore, on the self-institution principle, John Pearce being the leader and his associates were, likewise, English mechanics. While the Order had been planted in four States and the chief cities thereof according to ancient usage, an effort was soon made to frame constitutions and to obtain charters from the so-called regular bodies of Odd Fellows in England. Meantime the pioneers exercised the functions of Grand Lodges — instituting other lodges and assuming sovereignty over them. The Order in Baltimore secured a charter, under date of 1 Feb. 1820, from the Duke of York Lodge, Preston; and this charter not only recognized the regularity of Washington, No. 1, and its associate lodges, but created the Grand Lodge of Maryland and of the United States of America, of the Independent Order of Odd Fellowship. In Brooklyn, Columbia Lodge, No. 1, obtained a charter from Loyal Beneficent Duke of Sussex Lodge of Independent Odd Fellows, Liverpool. This document was delayed in transmission and did not reach its destination until late in January 1823, although dated 4 Nov. 1822. Meantime Columbia Lodge had removed to New York. It at once assumed sovereign jurisdiction and this led to contention; and the attempt of Morris and others to establish a supreme government with headquarters in New York. At this juncture Pennsylvania applied to the Order in New York and Maryland for recognition. It is recorded that the evidence of regularity received from New York City was more satisfactory to the Odd Fellows of Philadelphia than that of Baltimore; and it is also stated the lodges in Boston, New York and Baltimore were not aware of one another's existence before this event. The Order made history rapidly during the succeeding six months. Each locality was dominated by a master mind: Wildey, in Maryland; Morris, in New York; Barnes, in Massachusetts; Pearce, in Pennsylvania. The question of supremacy, however, was soon settled. Massachusetts readily surrendered its claims to priority and accepted a charter from the Grand Lodge of Maryland and the United States on 9 June 1823; and the Grand Lodge of that commonwealth was duly opened 11 June 1823, all the lodges participating. The Order in that State accepted a like charter dated 4 June 1823 and the Grand Lodge was duly instituted 24 June 1823. It having become known that Wildey had endeavored to unite the Odd Fellows of Massachusetts and New York, overtures were also made to Pennsylvania and these were immediately accepted. The charter is dated 13 June 1823 and the Grand Lodge of the Keystone State was organized 27 June 1823. The consolidated Order became at once homogeneous and prosperous. As a prelude to these momentous events, coincident with the actual foundation of the American Order, the managers in Maryland had organized, under the Duke of York Lodge charter, the Grand Lodge of Maryland and of the United States, 22 Feb. 1821, which relegated Washington and others, in Maryland, to the condition of subordinate lodges. Following the centralization of the government of the four pioneer commonwealths, the “Grand Lodge of the United States” was evolved, on 15 Jan. 1825, by the representatives of the Grand Lodges of Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland, the last-named taking her place with the State Grand bodies, subordinate to the sovereign head. This theory of a government composed of one head, the source and repository of all true Odd Fellowship, with subordinate State bodies and lodges subordinate, in contradistinction to the English system of a governing movable committee, was due to the genius of John Pawson Entwistle, who had joined the Order in 1820, becoming the brains of the young organization; Entwistle, the first Deputy Grand Master, was afterward Grand Secretary, but his career as a “builder” was cut short by his early decease. The last link in the chain of regularity was forged 15 May 1826, when the American body was chartered by the Manchester Unity. Significant of this, the early charters were issued to the Order of Independent Odd Fellows and the branches originating in the United States were organized irrespective of the consent of the English body even prior to 1842-43, the date of official separation.

Government and Degrees. — Between 1826 and 1885 the government of the Order had been evolutionary in its nature. The inheritance from England in ritualistic matters was the merest outline of a possible utility. The degrees were crude in structure and unsuited to the genius of a modern fraternal society, being copies from orders of other origin — notably from Masonry. When the foundations of government had become settled, attention began to

be paid to degrees of higher significance than the lodge system. Entwistle gave the first impulse to this part of the fabric of Odd Fellowship. After his death the work was continued by a long line of distinguished Odd Fellows, including such American citizens as James L. Ridgely, Grand Secretary from 1838 to 1881; James B. Nicholson, Isaac McKendree Veitch, Schuyler Colfax, who may be said to have been the “builders” of the Order; Rev. Edwin H. Chapin, D.D., Rev. James D. McCabe, D.D., Tal. P. Shaffner, who, together with Entwistle and Ridgely, were largely the authors of the present American ritual. Two English degrees and one American, finally, made up the encampment series. As early as 1821-25 these were conferred in connection with the lodge department. The final separation of the encampments into a distinct branch, higher than the lodge and governed by Grand Encampments, did not occur until 1841. In 1851-52 the Rebekah degree was adopted, its author being Schuyer Colfax. This is a branch to which both sexes are admitted, but was made with a view to admitting women to the Order. The sequence of degrees was completed in 1885 by the adoption of the Patriarchs Militant and organization of the uniform or display branch. The Grand bodies followed the sequences of the degrees. In 1879 the name of the supreme body was changed to the Sovereign Grand Lodge, a title more in consonance with its inherent powers, especially in its jurisdiction without the United States of America. The Sovereign Grand Lodge is made up of Grand Representatives from the Grand Lodges and Grand Encampments of the United States and Canada. Grand Lodges possess jurisdiction over State and Provincial Rebekah Assemblies and Rebekah lodges, as well as in the government of subordinate lodges. The Patriarchs Militant, with the local unit, called Canton, is organized like the United States Army, with Department Councils, all under the immediate government of the Sovereign Grand Lodge. In Australasia, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland, Quasi-Independent Grand Lodges govern the Order. These hold an allegiance to the Sovereign Grand Lodge, use the American ritual modified, and a common bond exists in connection therewith; but they do not enjoy a representation in the sovereign head. They, however, govern the Order in the countries named and conform to the laws and usages of the civil governments thereof. The development of this dual system was the labor of many years and varied experiments. The dates of the introduction of American Odd Fellowship without the United States were these: Canada, 1843; Australasia, 1868; Denmark, 1878; Germany, 1870; the Netherlands, 1877; Sweden, 1884; Switzerland, 1871. As early as 1846 lodges were instituted in the Hawaiian Islands; in Cuba, in 1883; in Mexico, in 1882; and the Order has followed the flag into the Orient, having been established, including South America, in 22 nationalities, provinces and territories, in 18 of which Grand Lodges have been chartered. In 1914, however, of the entire lodge membership of 1,672,658, only 63,562 were enrolled outside of North America. In that year there were 1,508,791 Odd Fellows in the United States; Pennsylvania led with 157,751, followed by New

York with 126,294; Illinois with 105,062; Ohio, 87,788; Indiana, 84,044; Missouri, 63,657; Michigan, 62,200; Massachusetts, 60,436; etc., etc. Canada and Maritime Provinces had 100,305 lodge members and Australia 45,300.

Other Organizations of Odd Fellows. — The largest body is the Manchester Unity, numbering 950,000 members. It has lodges throughout Great Britain and its colonies — a few in the United States — and is, in effect, a chartered benefit society. Annual reports are made to the government, under the laws regulating Friendly societies and actuaries determine the solvency or insolvency of the Order and license lodges accordingly. In ritual matters, likewise, it has nothing in common with American Odd Fellowship. The Grand United Order ranks next in relative importance. This body is the parent of the colored lodges in the United States and elsewhere and is of English origin. Other Friendly societies exist in Great Britain and are of more or less importance as health insurance associations.

Beneficent Features. — The American Order has not incorporated into its polity any features of health or life insurance; indeed, it has, on the contrary refused to recognize voluntary associations of Odd Fellows, the object of which was to enlarge the benefit systems of regular relief. Nevertheless, the Order has always insisted upon “stated weekly and funeral benefits,” distinct from voluntary charity — these payments to members who are ill, or in affliction, being of “right,” not a donation. This characteristic is a distinguishing trait of the American Odd Fellow. On the great seal is emblazoned: “We command you to visit the sick, relieve the distressed, bury the dead and educate the orphan.” Correlatively the attention of the Order was early attracted to the founding of institutions of learning, several of which have survived. The dual motive of fraternity and stated relief led to the establishment of homes for the aged, the indigent, the widow and the orphan. Pennsylvania had six of these homes, New York has four, Illinois two, California two and several other States possess two, with more in prospect. Every Grand Lodge in the United States and Canada has one or more of these homes or has taken measures to found such an institution. This beneficence has been fostered in foreign jurisdictions as well; and the Order in Denmark has purchased the palace of the Crown Prince for this purpose, going into the “home idea” on a scale that eclipses all previous efforts. Other nationalities are in no wise behind their fellows in this beneficence.

The Reunion of 1865. — During the Civil War of 1861-65 the roll of the Southern jurisdictions was regularly called during the annual sessions of the Sovereign Grand Lodge. At the close of hostilities the officers and members in the South were welcomed to the chairs and seats which had been held for them during the four years of strife and separation. The roll-call at Baltimore, 18 Sept. 1865, by the venerable Grand Secretary Ridgely, was notable even in fraternal circles. Every survivor answered to his name and appointments had been made to fill vacancies so that the representation was complete. Attempts had been made throughout the States composing the Southern

Confederacy, with varying success, to keep up the organizations of the Order; but, at this reunion, measures were unanimously adopted whereby fraternal hands and hearts assisted in rebuilding the waste places. This was the first fraternization of the Blue and the Gray. The procession in the streets of Baltimore the next day, occupying more than one hour in passing any given point, attracted national attention. The marshals were Joseph Kidder of New Hampshire and John Q. A. Herring of Maryland.

Bibliography. — ‘Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,’ London; publications of Early English Text Society; ‘History of Signboards,’ London; Ridgely and Spry, histories of Odd Fellowship; ‘Official History of Odd Fellowship, the Three-Link Fraternity’ (Boston); Rituals of 1797, 1816, 1845 and 1880; Proceedings, G. L. U. S. and S. G. L. (Vols. I to XX); Ford, ‘Symbolism of Odd Fellowship’ (Providence 1904); Fuller, G. H, ‘Directory of Subordinate Lodges of the I. O. O. F. on the Continent of North America’ (Boston 1913); Stevens, A. C. (ed.), ‘Cyclopædia of Fraternities’ (2d ed., New York 1907); Annual Proceedings of the Sovereign Grand Lodge, I. O. O. F. (Baltimore).

THOMAS WILDEY

Founder of the American Independent Order of Odd Fellows


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 08.djvu/191

 (A. Hantzsch). The potassium salt of the iso-diazo hydroxide yields on methylation a nitrogen ether, R·N(CH3)·NO, whilst the silver salt yields an oxygen ether, R·N:N·OCH3. These results point to the conclusion that the iso-diazo hydroxide is a tautomeric substance. The same oxygen ether is formed by the methylation of the silver salt of the normal diazo hydroxide; this points to the conclusion that the isomeric hydroxides, corresponding with the silver derivatives, have the same structural formulae, namely, R·N:N·OH. These oxygen ethers contain the grouping -N:N-, since they couple very readily with the phenols in alkaline solution to form (q.v.) (E. Bamberger, Ber., 1895, 28, p. 225); they are also explosive.

By oxidizing potassium benzene iso-diazotate with alkaline potassium ferricyanide, E. Bamberger (Ber., 1894, 27, p. 914) obtained the diazoic acids, R·NH·NO2, substances which he had previously prepared by similarly oxidizing the diazonium salts, by dehydrating the nitrates of primary amines with acetic anhydride, and by the action of nitric anhydride on the primary amines. Concentrated acids convert them into the isomeric nitro-amines, the -NO2 group going into the nucleus in the ortho- or para- position to the amine nitrogen; this appears to indicate that the compounds are nitramines. They behave, however, as tautomeric substances, since their alkali salts on methylation give nitrogen ethers, whilst their silver salts yield oxygen ethers:

Phenyl nitramine, C6H5NH·NO2, is a colourless crystalline solid, which melts at 46° C. Sodium amalgam in alkaline solution reduces it to phenylhydrazine.

Constitution of the Diazo Compounds.—P. Griess (Ann., 1866, 137, p. 39) considered that the diazo compounds were formed by the addition of complex groupings of the type C6H4N2- to the inorganic acids; whilst A. Kekulé (Zeit. f. Chemie, 1866, 2, p. 308), on account of their ready condensation to form azo compounds and their easy reduction to hydrazines, assumed that they were substances of the type R·N:N·Cl. The constitution of the diazonium group -N2·X, may be inferred from the following facts:—The group C6H5N2- behaves in many respects similarly to an alkali metal, and even more so to the ammonium group, since it is capable of forming colourless neutral salts with mineral acids, which in dilute aqueous solution are strongly ionized, but do not show any trace of hydrolytic dissociation (A. Hantzsch, Ber., 1895, 28, p. 1734). Again, the diazonium chlorides combine with platinic chloride to form difficultly soluble double platinum salts, such as (C6H5N2Cl)2·PtCl4; similar gold salts, C6H5N2Cl·AuCl3, are known. Determinations of the electrical conductivity of the diazonium chloride and nitrate also show that the diazonium radical is strictly comparable with other quaternary ammonium ions. For these reasons, one must assume the existence of pentavalent nitrogen in the diazonium salts, in order to account for their basic properties.

The constitution of the isomeric diazo hydroxides has given rise to much discussion. E. Bamberger (Ber., 1895, 28, pp. 444 et seq.) and C. W. Blomstrand (Journ. prakt. Chem., 1896, 53, pp. 169 et seq.) hold that the compounds are structurally different, the normal diazo-hydroxide being a diazonium derivative of the type R·N(∶N)·OH. The recent work of A. Hantzsch and his pupils seems to invalidate this view (Ber., 1894, 27, pp. 1702 et seq.; see also A. Hantzsch, Die Diazoverbindungen). According to Hantzsch the isomeric diazo hydroxides are structurally identical, and the differences in behaviour are due to stereo-chemical relations, the isomerism being comparable with that of the (q.v.). On such a hypothesis, the relatively unstable normal diazo hydroxides would be the syn-compounds, since here the nitrogen atoms would be more easily eliminated, whilst the stable iso-diazo derivatives would be the anti-compounds, thus:

In support of this theory, Hantzsch has succeeded in isolating a series of syn- and anti-diazo-cyanides and -sulphonates (Ber., 1895, 28, p. 666; 1900, 33, p. 2161; 1901, 34, p. 4166). By diazotizing para-chloraniline and adding a cold solution of potassium cyanide, a salt (melting at 29° C.) is obtained, which readily loses nitrogen, and forms para-chlorbenzonitrile on the addition of copper powder. By dissolving this diazocyanide in alcohol and reprecipitating it by water, it is converted into the isomeric diazocyanide (melting at 105-106° C.), which does not yield para-chlorbenzonitrile when treated with copper powder. Similar results have been obtained by using diazotized para-anisidine, a syn- and an anti- compound being formed, as well as a third isomeric cyanide, obtained by evaporating para-methoxy-benzenediazonium hydroxide in the presence of an excess of hydrocyanic acid at ordinary temperatures. This salt is a colourless crystalline substance of composition CH3O·C6H4·N2·CN·HCN·2H2O, and has the properties of a metallic salt; it is very soluble in water and its solution is an electrolyte, whereas the solutions of the syn- and anti- compounds are not electrolytes. The isolation of these compounds is a powerful argument in favour of the Hantzsch hypothesis which requires the existence of these three different types, whilst the Bamberger-Blomstrand view only accounts for the formation of two isomeric cyanides, namely, one of the normal diazonium type and one of the iso-diazocyanide type.

Benzene diazonium hydroxide, although a strong base, reacts with the alkaline hydroxides to form salts with the evolution of heat, and generally behaves as a weak acid. On mixing dilute solutions of the diazonium hydroxide and the alkali together, it is found that the molecular conductivity of the mixture is much less than the sum of the two electrical conductivities of the solutions separately, from which it follows that a portion of the ions present have changed to the non-ionized condition. This behaviour is explained by considering the non-ionized part of the diazonium hydroxide to exist in solution in a hydrated form, the equation of equilibrium being: On adding the alkaline hydroxide to the solution, this hydrate is supposed to lose water, yielding the syn-diazo hydroxide, which then gives rise to a certain amount of the sodium salt (A. Hantzsch, Ber., 1898, 31, p. 1612), This assumption also shows the relationship of the diazonium hydroxides to other quaternary ammonium compounds, for most of the quaternary ammonium hydroxides (except such as have the nitrogen atom attached to four saturated hydrocarbon radicals) are unstable, and readily pass over into compounds in which the hydroxyl group is no longer attached to the amine nitrogen; thus the syn-diazo hydroxides are to be regarded as pseudo-diazonium derivatives. (A. Hantzsch, Ber., 1899, 32, p. 3109; 1900, 33, p. 278.) It is generally accepted that the iso-diazo hydroxides possess the oxime structure R·N:N·OH.

Hantzsch explains the characteristic reactions of the diazonium compounds by the assumption that an addition compound is first formed, which breaks down with the elimination of the hydride of the acid radical, and the formation of an unstable syn-diazo compound, which, in its turn, decomposes with evolution of nitrogen (Ber., 1897, 30, p. 2548; 1898, 31, p. 2053).

J. Cain (Jour. Chem. Soc., 1907, 91, p. 1049) suggested a quinonoid formula for diazonium salts, which has been combated by Hantzsch (Ber., 1908, 41, pp. 3532 et seq.). G. T. Morgan and F. M. G. Micklethwaite (Jour. Chem. Soc., 1908, 93, p. 617; 1909, 95, p. 1319) have pointed out that the salts may possess a dynamic formula, Cain’s representing the middle stage, thus:

Diazoamines.—The diazoamines, R·N2·NHR, may be prepared by the action of the primary and secondary amines on the diazonium salts, or by the action of nitrous acid on the free primary amine. In the latter reaction it is assumed that the isodiazohydroxide first formed is immediately attacked by a second molecule of the amine. They are yellow crystalline solids, which do not unite with acids. Nitrous acid converts them, in acid solution, into diazonium salts.

C6H5N2·NHC6H5 + 2HCl + HNO2＝2C6H5N2Cl + 2H2O.

They are readily converted into the isomeric aminoazo compounds, either by standing in alcoholic solution, or by warming with a mixture of the parent base and its hydrochloride; the diazo group preferably going into the para-position to the amino group. When the para-position is occupied, the diazo group takes the ortho-position. H. Goldschmidt and R. U. Reinders (Ber., 1896, 29, p. 1369, 1899) have shown that the transformation is a monomolecular reaction, the velocity of transformation in moderately dilute solution being independent of the concentration, but proportional to the amount of the catalyst present (amine hydrochloride) and to the temperature. It has also been shown that when different salts of the amine are used, their catalytic influence varies in amount and is almost proportional to their degree of ionization in aqueous solution. Diazoaminobenzene, C6H5N2·NHC6H5, crystallizes in golden yellow laminae, which melt at 96° C. and explode at a slightly higher temperature. It is readily soluble in alcohol, ether and benzene. Concentrated hydrochloric acid converts it into chlorbenzene, aniline and nitrogen. Zinc dust and alcoholic acetic acid reduce it to aniline and phenylhydrazine.

Diazoimino compounds, R·N3, may be regarded as derivatives of (q.v.); they are formed by the action of ammonia on the diazoperbromides, or by the action of hydroxylamine on the diazonium sulphates (J. Mai, Ber., 1892, 25, p. 372; T. Curtius, Ber., 1893, 26, p. 1271). Diazobenzeneimide, C6H5N3, is a yellowish oil of stupefying odour. It boils at 59° C. (12 mm.), and explodes when heated. Concentrated hydrochloric acid decomposes it with formation of

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 08.djvu/191


text:
Page:American Archives, Series 4, Volume 1.djvu/521

913 Monday, October 17, 1774.

The Congress met according to adjournment.

Mr. John Dickinson appeared in Congress as a Deputy for the Province of Pennsylvania, and produced his credentials, as follows:

In Assembly, October 15, 1774, A. M.

"Upon motion by Mr. Ross,

"Ordered, That Mr. J. Dickinson be, and he is hereby added to the Committee of Deputies appointed by the late Assembly of this Province, to attend the General Congress now sitting in the City of Philadelphia on American Grievances. By order of the House, 2em

The same being approved, Mr. J. Dickinson took his seat as one of the Deputies for the Province of Pennsylvania.

The Congress then resumed the consideration of the Plan of Association, &c., and after spending the remainder of that day on that subject, adjourned till to-morrow.

Tuesday, October 18, 1774.

The Congress resumed the consideration of the Plan of Association, &c., and after sundry amendments, the same was agreed to, and ordered to be transcribed, that it may be signed by the several Members.

The Committee appointed to prepare an Address to the People of Great Britain, brought in a draught, which was read and ordered to lie on the table, for the perusal of the Members, and to be taken into consideration to-morrow.

Wednesday, October 19, 1774.

The Congress met and resumed the consideration of the Address to the People of Great Britain, and the same being debated by paragraphs, and sundry amendments made, the same was re-committed, in order that the amendments may be taken in.

The Committee appointed to prepare a Memorial to the Inhabitants of these Colonies, reported a draught, which was read, and ordered to lie on the table.

Ordered, That this Memorial be taken into consideration to-morrow.

Thursday, October 20, 1774.

The Association being copied, was read, and signed at the table, and is as follows:

We, his Majesty's most loyal subjects, the Delegates of the several Colonies of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode-Island, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, the three Lower Counties of New-Castle, Kent, and Sussex, on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, deputed to represent them in a Continental Congress, held in the City of Philadelphia, on the fifth day of September, 1774, avowing our allegiance to his Majesty; our affection and regard for our fellow-subjects in Great Britain and elsewhere; affected with the deepest anxiety and most alarming apprehensions at those grievances and distresses with which his Majesty's American subjects are oppressed; and having taken under our most serious deliberation the state of the whole Continent, find that the present unhappy situation of our affairs is occasioned by a ruinous system of Colony Administration, adopted by the British Ministry about the year 1763, evidently calculated for enslaving these Colonies, and, with them, the British Empire. In prosecution of which system, various Acts of Parliament have been passed for raising a Revenue in America, for depriving the American subjects, in many instances, of the constitutional Trial by Jury, exposing their lives to danger by directing a new and illegal trial beyond the seas for crimes alleged to have been committed in America; and in prosecution of the same system, several late, cruel, and oppressive Acts have been passed respecting the Town of Boston and the Massachusetts Bay, and also an Act for extending the Province of Quebec, so as to border on the Western Frontiers of these Colonies, establishing an arbitrary Government therein, and discouraging the settlement of British subjects in that wide extended country; thus, by the influence of civil principles and ancient prejudices, to dispose the inhabitants to act with hostility against the free Protestant Colonies, whenever a wicked Ministry shall choose so to direct them.

To obtain redress of these Grievances, which threaten destruction to the Lives, Liberty, and Property of his Majesty's subjects in North America, we are of opinion that a Non-Importation, Non-Consumption, and Non-Exportation Agreement, faithfully adhered to, will prove the most speedy, effectual, and peaceable measure; and, therefore, we do, for ourselves, and the inhabitants of the several Colonies whom we represent, firmly agree and associate, under the sacred ties of Virtue, Honour, and Love of our Country, as follows:

1. That from and after the first day of December next, we will not import into British America, from Great Britain or Ireland, any Goods, Wares, or Merchandises whatsoever, or from any other place, any such Goods, Wares, or Merchandises as shall have been exported from Great Britain or Ireland; nor will we, after that day, import any East India Tea from any part of the World; nor any Molasses, Syrups, Paneles, Coffee, or Pimento, from the British Plantations or from Dominica; nor Wines from Madeira, or the Western Islands; nor Foreign Indigo.

2. That we will neither import nor purchase any Slave imported after the first day of December next; after which time we will wholly discontinue the Slave Trade, and will neither be concerned in it ourselves, nor will we hire our vessels, nor sell our Commodities or Manufactures to those who are concerned in it.

3. As a Non-Consumption Agreement, strictly adhered to, will be an effectual security for the observation of the Non-Importation, we, as above, solemnly agree and associate, that from this day we will not purchase or use any Tea imported on account of the East India Company, or any on which a Duty hath been or shall be paid; and from and after the first day of March next we will not purchase or use any East India Tea whatsoever; nor will we, nor shall any person for or under us, purchase or use any of those Goods, Wares, or Merchandises we have agreed not to import, which we shall know, or have cause to suspect, were imported after the first day of December, except such as come under the rules and directions of the tenth Article hereafter mentioned.

4. The earnest desire we have not to injure our fellow-subjects in Great Britain, Ireland, or the West Indies, induces us to suspend a Non-Exportation until the tenth day of September, 1775; at which time, if the said Acts and parts of Acts of the British Parliament herein after mentioned, are not repealed, we will not, directly or indirectly, export any Merchandise or Commodity whatsoever to Great Britain, Ireland, or the West Indies, except Rice to Europe.

5. Such as are Merchants, and use the British and Irish Trade, will give orders as soon as possible to their Factors, Agents, and Correspondents, in Great Britain and Ireland, not to ship any Goods to them, on any pretence whatsoever, as they cannot be received in America; and if any Merchant residing in Great Britain or Ireland, shall directly or indirectly ship any Goods, Wares, or Merchandises for America, in order to break the said Non-Importation Agreement, or in any manner contravene the same, on such unworthy conduct being well attested, it ought to be made publick; and, on the same being so done, we will not from thenceforth have any commercial connection with such Merchant.

6. That such as are Owners of vessels will give positive orders to their Captains, or Masters, not to receive on board their vessels any Goods prohibited by the said Non-Importation Agreement, on pain of immediate dismission from their service.

7. We will use our utmost endeavours to improve the breed of Sheep, and increase their number to the greatest extent; and to that end, we will kill them as sparingly as may be, especially those of the most profitable kind; nor will we export any to the West Indies or elsewhere; and those of us who are or may become overstocked with, or can conveniently spare any Sheep, will dispose of them to our neighbours, especially to the poorer sort, upon moderate terms.

8. That we will, in our several stations, encourage Frugality, Economy, and Industry, and promote Agriculture, Arts, and the Manufactures of this Country, especially


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 22.djvu/151

 Goodwin  Religion in Cornwall, p. 313; Southwell's Bibl. Scriptorum Soc. Jesu, p. 395; De Backer's Bibl. des Ecrivains de la Compagnie de Jésus, i. 2206.]

 GOODWIN, JOHN (1594?–1665), republican divine, was born in Norfolk about 1594. He was educated at Queens' College, Cambridge, graduating M.A. and obtaining a fellowship on 10 Nov. 1617. Leaving the university in consequence of his marriage, he took orders, and became popular as a preacher in his native county at Raynham, Lynn, Yarmouth, and Norwich. For a time he seems to have officiated at St. Mary's, Dover. In 1632 he came to London, and on 18 Dec. 1633 was instituted to the vicarage of St. Stephen's, Coleman Street, vacated by the nonconformist secession of [q. v.] He sided with the puritans, and as early as 1633 inclined to independency under the influence of John Cotton (1585-1682). In 1635 he was convened for breach of canons, but on his promise of amendment Bishop Juxon took no further proceedings. In 1638 Goodwin broached from the pulpit of St. Stephen's his opinions on justification (which had given offence at Dover), taking a view which was already regarded as practically Arminian, though he always maintained his independence of the system of Arminius, and cited Calvin as bearing him out on some points. A warm pulpit controversy with other city ministers on this topic was stayed by Juxon's interference, all parties agreeing to desist. Next year (1639) Goodwin angered his opponents anew by insisting on the need of a learned ministry. Juxon reported to Laud that he did not despair of a good issue. Goodwin had a hand in drafting the London clerical petition against the new canons of 30 June 1640. Alderman Isaac Pennington (afterwards closely connected with the quakers) was one of his parishioners, and joined his congregational society.

In 1639 Goodwin wrote a preface to the posthumous sermons of Henry Ramsden. During the next two years he published several sermons, and an exegetical tract (1641) criticising the positions of George Walker, B.D., of St. John's, Watling Street. Walker retorted upon Goodwin and others with a charge of Socinianism in the article of justification. Goodwin defended himself (1642) in ' Christ set forth,' and in a treatise on justification.

On the appeal of the parliament to arms Goodwin was one of the earliest clerical supporters of the democratic puritans. His Anti-Cavalierisme ' (1642) proclaims on its very title-page the need of war to suppress th party 'now hammering England to make an Ireland of it.' The loyalist doctrine of the divine right of kings he assailed in his 'Os Ossorianum, or a Bone for a Bishop,' i.e. Griffith Williams, bishop of Ossory (1643). With equal vigour he attacked the presbyerians as a persecuting party in his 'Θεομαχία, or the grand imprudence of ... fighting against God' (1644, 2 editions). In May 1645 he was ejected from his living for refusing to administer indiscriminately in his parish the baptism and the Lord's Supper. Nothing daunted, Goodwin immediately set up an independent church in Coleman Street, which had a large following. William Taylor, his appointed successor at St. Stephen's, was in his turn ejected in 1649, to be restored in 1657. In the interim Goodwin obtained the use of the church, but with a diminished e venue ; he estimates his loss in 1654 at 1,000l. Among his hearers at this period was [q. v.], who took down his sermons in shorthand.

The 'Gangræna' (16 Feb. 1646) of [q. v.] included Goodwin among the subjects of attack; in the second and third parts, published in the same year, Edwards was provoked into yet more savage onslaughts by Goodwin's anonymous reply, bearing the stinging title 'Cretensis.' Goodwin is 'a monstrous sectary, a compound of Socinianism, Arminianism, antinomianism, independency, popery, yea and of scepticism.' He and several of his church 'go to bowls and other sports on days of public thanksgiving.' Goodwin, by his 'Hagiomastix, or the Scourge of the Saints' (1646; i.e. January 1647), came into collision with William Jenkyn, vicar of Christ Church, Newgate, whose 'Testimony' was endorsed (14 Dec. 1647) by fifty-eight presbyterian divines at Sion College. Sixteen members of Goodwin's church issued (1647) an 'Apologetical Account' of their reasons for standing by him. In answer (1648) to Jenkyn's complaint that presbyterians were put 'under the cross' by the existence of sectaries, Goodwin asks, 'Is not the whole English element of church livings offered up by the state to their service?' Jenkyn was aided by John Vicars, usher in Christ Church Hospital, who published (1648) an amusing description of 'Coleman-street-conclave' and its minister, 'this most huge Garagantua,' the 'schismatics cheater in chief.' This contains a likeness of Goodwin (engraved by W. Richardson) surmounted by a windmill and weathercock, 'pride' and 'error' supplyingthe breeze. Goodwin's career is, however, remarkable for consistency. He translated and printed (March 1648) a part of the 'Stratagemata Satanæ' of [q. v.], under the title 'Satan's


text:
Page:The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law (Terrill, 1999).djvu/39

 Hamilton DeSaussure. Ironically, Major DeSaussure had been Cooper’s student, having been a member of the first class to graduate from McGill University’s Institute of Air and Space Law. At the June 1956 ICAO meeting, as a result of the recommendations of the Air Force and others, the US “took the position that international discussion was at that time premature.” Generally, the US sentiments were shared by other nations and Cooper’s proposal was tabled. However,  the [Legal] Commission [of the ICAO] noted the growing interest among jurists in the problems concerning “Outer space.” [The Commission] considers that these problems fall essentially within the province of the functions of the Organization and that, at a suitable time, they might be included in the general work program of the Legal Committee. In its 1956 Annual Report to the President, the ACC related that its Legal Division had formulated the US position for discussions regarding the legal problems of outer space in preparation for the ICAO meeting in Caracas. The ACC reported: “Among other things in its position, the United States delegation strongly opposed inclusion of the topic ‘Legal Problems beyond Air Space’ in the work program of the ICAO Legal Committee on the ground that there is insufficient knowledge at the present time of the practical problems for which a solution may be necessary.” Air Force Actions before and after Sputnik In January 1957, during his State of the Union message, President Eisenhower expressed a willingness to accept an international agreement to control missile and satellite development for use in outer space. He linked this position to his space-for-peace and disarmament proposals. Later that month, during a disarmament debate, Henry Cabot Lodge, US ambassador to the United Nations (UN), reconfirmed such US willingness. Lodge noted that several nations were proceeding to launch objects into outer space and that some form of international control needed to be established. Shortly after Eisenhower’s State of the Union address, in an air intelligence report entitled “The Legal Status of Outer Space and the


text:
Page:Feilberg.djvu/12

Rh think and who are not satisfied with the present relations between races. We are as glad, therefore, to welcome calm and rational criticism, such as was contained in the letter signed "North Gregory," as the cordial approval of our present correspondent, "Pioneer." Both writers, we may state, are bushmen intimately acquainted with the outside country, and who have had much experience among wild blacks.

Our correspondent "North Gregory" complains that we make our accusations of cruelty against white settlers and the black police in too sweeping a fashion. The complaint is not a just one. We began by drawing a clear distinction between the small section of settlers who do act with barbarity, the majority who do nothing, and the other minority who actively protest. Our contention is that the second class is equally guilty with the first one. Those who passively tolerate cruelty and murder, committed almost in their presence, condone and share the crime. And we do not exempt the much-quoted townsman "sitting in his arm chair."

Every resident of Brisbane who, becoming aware of what is going on, neglects to do what he can in his capacity as citizen and voter to wipe out the stain which rests on the whole colony, shares the disgrace of it. And this is particularly the case in regard to the Native Police. The officer of that force who does not permit brutality in the execution of his duty must be a man of very exceptional firmness of character. He is sent out in charge of savages, naturally prone to cruelty, who have been trained to disregard the few checks their native customs place upon indiscriminate murder, who have had no moral code of any kind substituted for it, and who are so armed and equipped as to give them absolute mastery over the lives and persons of their victims. His duty is to use these savages to keep the wild blacks quiet by shooting them when they are troublesome to the settlers, or when the latter fear they may become troublesome. This is the simple account of his business. He is not permitted to describe what he does, he knows that he has very doubtful legal sanction for any of his actions, but at the same time he is assured that it he keeps the blacks quiet no questions will be asked, and the authorities will remain obstinately deaf to all reports of his proceedings. He may be ever so anxious to protect the blacks from unprovoked aggression, but he is absolutely powerless to restrain any white brute who chooses to madden a tribe by cruel and unprovoked injury. The officer's duty is simply to shoot the savages down, when in their madness they seem likely to become dangerous, and to save the white aggressor from the consequences of his own acts. When we write in an indignant strain of actions like these, we never forget that the police themselves are only very partly to blame; the deeds are done by the Government and Parliament of Queensland, who set them about their business. When Judge Jefferies held his "bloody assize" in the west of England the blame of the foul deed was not allowed to rest on the hangman who suspended the victims, but on the King and his officers who ordered the legal massacre to be carried out.

Our correspondent further misunderstands us when he supposes that we are seeking to make the blacks moral. Our aim is a much simpler one. We desire to make peace between the races, and stop the sickening conflict going on. Any attempt to ameliorate the moral and mental condition of the savages themselves is quite another question. Let us give them a far chance of life before we talk of civilising them. And we venture to say that he misunderstands the blacks themselves when

title: Page:Feilberg.djvu/12


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ode

ODE, a lyric poem supposed to express the feelings of the poet in the pressure of high excitement, and taking an irregular form from the emotional fervency which seeks spontaneous rhythm for its varied utterance. The Greeks called every lyrical poem adapted to singing — and hence opposed to the elegiac poem — an ode (ōdē, that is, song). The Dorians are said to have been the inventors of the choral ode to be sung by a group of persons; the Spartan, Alcman, is credited with having first divided the chorus into two parts, the strophe (turn), and antistrophe (counterturn). These two names had their origin in the fact that as the one group of the performers answered the other they turned to the right and then to the left. Later on from Sicily came a third addition, the epode, which was sung by the united chorus at the end of the movements to the right and left. The principal ancient writers who employed this form of verse were Pindar, Anacreon, Sappho, Alcæns, among the Greeks, and Catullus and Horace among the Romans. As employed by English writers the ode takes either the Pindaric form of strophe, antistrophe, and epode irregularly arranged and contrasted; or, as in its later development, the form of a regular series of regular stanzas. The former style is found in Dryden's ‘Ode for Saint Cecilia's Day,’ while the latter is seen in Shelley's ‘Ode to a Skylark.’ The masters of English poesy who have carried the ode to its highest achievements are Milton, Marvell, Dryden, Collins, Gray, Coleridge, Wordsworth, Keats and Shelly. Consult Gosse, E. W., ‘English Odes’ (New York 1881); Scollard, Clinton, ‘Odes and Elegies’ (New York 1905); Sharp, William, ‘Great Odes, English and American’ (London 1890).

title: The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Ode


text: Author:Frank George Pope

title: Author:Frank George Pope


text:
Page:The Air Force Role In Developing International Outer Space Law (Terrill, 1999).djvu/40

 Soviet Union” (approved by Col Clifford R. Opper, Air Force director of intelligence), Maj Howard J. Neumann discussed international law and the Soviet interpretation of outer space. Major Neumann noted that while the Soviets claimed unlimited sovereignty to all space (air and outer) over its territory, the was premised on the ’s use of the French words meaning atmospheric space. Accordingly, Major Neumann argued that outer space was governed by no existing law. He pointed out that the USSR, which was not a party to either convention, did not limit its sovereignty to the stratosphere. Major Neumann concluded that “an international convention seems to be necessary at an early stage of mankind’s penetration and exploration of outer space, in order to prevent undesirable interferences which end in loss of human lives and valuable material.” Contrary to the Air Force position at the ACC, Major Neumann concluded that Cooper’s proposal had merit and advised that, since the USSR had projects planned for outer space, it might be possible to conclude an international agreement with the USSR establishing the legal status of outer space. If the issue were not resolved, Major Neumann predicted that it would serve as a “constant source of international complications.” The sovereignty issue was raised again during the summer of 1957. Col T. J. Dayharsh of the Permanent Joint Board of Defense (Canada and the United States), questioned Howard E. Hensleigh, assistant DOD general counsel for international affairs, regarding the legality of proposed flights of US intercontinental ballistic missiles through the “upper air space” over Canada. Hensleigh in turn requested assistance on Colonel Dayharsh’s request from the DOD military departments. In July, responding on behalf of the Air Force, Charles L. Kent, assistant general counsel, provided Hensleigh with substantive comments including references to the 1956 ICAO assembly and the success of the US in stripping outer space issues from the ICAO agenda. Hensleigh incorporated several of Kent’s suggestions including the ICAO reference in a memorandum to Dayharsh indicating that there was no internationally accepted line of demarcation between air and outer space. That fall Dayharsh thanked Hensleigh, noting that his “excellent


text:
Template:T/r2

rowspan=2

title: Template:T/r2