text:
Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/10

114 merely suggests a compensation to meet an apparent residual effect, and would be of no significance if it were impossible to incorporate such a condition into a consistent theory of ethereal action. This has been done by Lorentz and by Larmor in their theories of moving systems. Lorentz, who was the first to develop a satisfactory theory of a quiescent ether, assumes that, in all electrical and optical phenomena taking place in ponderable matter, we have to deal with charged particles, free to move in conductors, but confined in dielectrics to definite positions of equilibrium. These particles are perfectly permeable to the ether, so that they can move while the ether remains at rest.

If now we apply the ordinary electromagnetic equations of a system of bodies at rest to a system having a constant velocity of translation in addition to the velocities of its elements, the ether remaining at rest, the displacements of the electrons arising from the electric vibrations in the ether and the electric and magnetic forces are the same functions of the new system of parameters as for the case of rest, if we neglect quantities of the second order of the aberration. This theorem assumes that the distance of molecular action is confined to such excessively small distances that the difference in their local times would have no effect. An exception to this may be found in a rotary substance like quartz which, as mentioned above, has been examined by Mascart and Rayleigh to the first order with negative results, which seems to warrant the conclusion that the molecular forces are themselves altered by translation. This theory of Lorentz seems capable, then, of explaining the uniformly negative results of all the first order tests which have been described previously, without, however, necessarily establishing it finally, since we have not yet studied its adaptability to second and higher orders of the aberration.

The suggestion of a contraction, as stated above, lends itself in a similar manner and under like restrictions to that for the first order transformation. This requires the introduction of a second coefficient differing from unity by a quantity of the second order as did the coefficient used in the first transformation, but differing from the latter in that it is left indeterminate from the fact that there are no means as yet for giving it a definite value. Introducing these new parameters we again obtain a set of equations in which the velocity of translation does not explicitly appear. Such a moving system has therefore its correlate in a system at rest, the former having changed into the latter through the assumed contraction the moment motion begins. The occurrence of these coefficients as factors in the electric forces and the accelerations arising from the electric vibrations in the ether in the expression for the corresponding system at rest, necessitates that if the degree of similarity required is to exist

title: Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/10


text:
Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/11

Rh in the two systems, the electrons must have different masses depending on whether their vibrations are parallel or perpendicular to the velocity of translation. This startling conclusion of Lorentz is borne out by what we now know of the dependence of the effective mass of an electron upon what is taking place in the ether. Such an hypothesis as this would require that Michelson and Morley's experiment should always give a negative result.

Of electrical experiments on the drift of the ether we have one second order test carried out very recently by Trouton at the suggestion of the late Professor Fitzgerald. The latter, reasoning on the condition of a magnetic field produced by a charged condenser moving edgewise to the drift of the ether, and the consequent additional supply of energy of such a system on charging, thought that this might produce a mechanical drag on charging and an opposite impulse on discharging, just as might occur if the mass of earth were to become suddenly greater. This experiment was carried out in the form of a condenser mounted upon an arm carried by a delicate suspension, with negative results. A second and more sensitive test was made later in a modified form by Trouton and Noble. Since, edge on to the drift, we have a magnetic field, while at right angles it vanishes, the energy will vary with the azimuth, and we shall have a maximum in an azimuth of 45°. A delicate suspension carrying the armature of a condenser showed no movement, although the calculated effect was ten times the limit of observation. The negative results of these experiments may be accounted for on like assumptions with that of the Michelson and Morley experiment, namely a contraction or change in the dimensions of the condenser producing corresponding changes in density and potential difference of the charge.

The assumption of a contraction suggests at once, from what we know of transparent media, the anisotropic state which such media are thrown into under dimensional strain. Rayleigh has examined this question in the case of water, carbon disulphide, and glass without result. In the case of glass his sensibility was several times the calculated second order effect, and much more in case of liquids.

The degree of refinement to which the polariscopic test lends itself is perhaps beyond that of any other instance in physical application. Here then is an opportunity to examine the question beyond what theory has anticipated, and the test has been carried so as to reach safely a third order effect, with negative results. The experiments as performed by the writer consisted in sending a beam of sunlight plane polarized at 45° to the horizon, through 28.56 meters of water in a horizontal direction and examining the same by a sensitive elliptic analyzer. On rotating the entire system from the meridian, where the one component of vibration to the drift was parallel

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

title: Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/11


text:
Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/12

116 and the other perpendicular, into a plane at right angles to the meridian where both components would be at right angles to the drift, and therefore where no differential effect would be produced, no change in the field of view could be detected. Had there been a total difference of 7.8 x 10-13 of the whole velocity between the components, the effect would have been manifest. We may, therefore, conclude that there is no third order effect. How well the various theories of a quiescent ether will lend themselves to this further adaptation remains to be seen, but undoubtedly by properly choosing the coefficients it may be done; however, any theory which does not contain explicitly the exact and complete adaptation to all orders of the aberration must certainly impress itself as highly artificial in its successive auxiliary hypotheses and approximations.

Larmor, in reference to his theory, says, "It is, in fact, found that the Maxwellian circuital equations of sethereal activity, in the ambient aether referred to axes moving along with the uniform velocity of convection, v, can be reduced to the same form as for axes at rest up to and including $$\left(\tfrac{v}{V}\right)^{2}$$ but not $$\left(\tfrac{v}{V}\right)^{3}$$ by adopting certain coefficients." "If, then, matter is for physical purposes a purely ethereal system, if it is constituted of simple polar singularities or electrons, positive and negative, in the Maxwellian aether, the nuclei of which may be either practically points or else small regions of aether with internal connections of pure constraint, the propositions above stated v for the first order are extended to the second order of $$\tfrac{v}{V}$$ with the single addition of the Fitzgerald-Lorentz shrinkage in the scale of space and an equal one in the scale of time, which, being isotropic, is unrecognizable." "On such a theory as this the criticism presents itself, and was in fact at once made, that one hypothesis is needed to annul optical effects to the first order; that when these were found to be actually null to the second order, another hypothesis had to be added: and that another hypothesis would be required for the third order, while in fact there was no reason to believe that they were not exactly null to all orders. Such a train of remarks indicates that the nature of the hypothesis has been overlooked. And if indeed it could be proved that the optical effect is null up to the third order, that circumstance would not demolish the theory, but would rather point to some finer adjustment than it provides for; needless to say the attempt would indefinitely transcend existing experimental possibilities." And further, "up to the first order the electron hypothesis, that electricity is atomic, suffices by itself, as Lorentz was first to show." "Up to the second order, the hypothesis that matter is constituted electrically—of electrons—is required in addition."

The necessity in view of the present experimental data for leaving

title: Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/12


text:
Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/13

Rh indeterminate the units of transformation is here illustrated in the theory of Larmor.

In the most recent discussion by Lorentz, the necessity of a general treatment is shown for not only the second but also the higher orders. In a consideration of transparent media, his theory attempts to show that translation would not alter interference, diffraction, or polarization. He would thus, by means of the assumption of so-called "Heaviside ellipsoids" as the shape of electrons, explain the negative results of optical experiments, as well as the observations of Kaufmann on Becquerel rays.

Attention should also be called to the recent theory of Abraham, who gives as the ratio of the axes of the moving electron $$1-\tfrac{4}{5}\left(\tfrac{v}{V}\right)^{3}:1$$, omitting fourth and higher orders. This would give a residual in double refraction of $$\tfrac{1}{5}\left(\tfrac{v}{V}\right)^{2}=2\times10^{-9}$$ for transparent media, which he acknowledges is difficult to reconcile with the experimental results which show no double refraction to the first order beyond this.

title: Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/13


title: Page:BraceStLouis1904.djvu/14


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/319

 THE COLLECTION OF ENGLISH FOLK-LORE.

O much has of late been said, and done, and projected, in the matter of the systematic study and scientific arrangement of the folk-lore already recorded, that there seems to be some little danger lest an impression should gain ground that the day of collecting folk-lore is over, and the day of counting the gains has come. I speak more particularly of England. Savage folk-lore still comes pouring in from all quarters, but new collections of English folk-lore are comparatively rare. That this is not from lack of material, recent “finds” give sufficient evidence. Within the last three years we have had the discovery of a hitherto unnoticed instrument of sorcery—the Witches’ Ladder—in Somersetshire, of several variants of a curious and obscure rhyming formula collected and published in Longman’s Magazine by our President, and of at least four folk-tales viz.: “Cap o’ Rushes” and “Tom-Tit-Tot”, from Suffolk; “Coat o’ Clay”, a noodle story from Lincolnshire; and “The Golden Ball” (a romantic story, for which Mr. Nutt inquired in the Folk-Lore Journal in 1888, p. 144, and of which I have obtained fragmentary versions from Lancashire, Staffordshire, and Shropshire), appears in a complete form (so I am told) in the Gentleman’s Magazine for January last—as related to the Rev. S. Baring-Gould by some Yorkshire “mill-lasses”. These examples are surely enough to prove that the day of collecting English folk-lore is not yet over.

But the need for more collection would still be urgent even if no absolutely novel items should remain to be


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/320

 314 discovered. Hitherto, the likenesses of the folk-lore of the different localities have been the chief object of study—its differences have yet to be examined. The theory of “survivals” has been established; it has been proved that sundry stories, customs, and ideas prevalent among savage peoples are to be found also among civilised nations. But folk-lore has a great deal more to teach us than simply the phenomenon of “survival in culture”, and I will venture to say that the study of its variations in England (what they are, where they are found, and, so far as possible, how they came to pass) will throw such a light, not only on English history, but on early history in general, and on the nature and history of folk-lore itself, as was hardly guessed at even so lately as the period when our Society was founded.

But to accomplish this we must have a great deal more collecting. A good deal of matter has been recorded, it is true, but it is unsystematic, patchy, incomplete. Much of it is scattered up and down the volumes of Notes and Queries, of the Transactions of Archæological Societies, of local glossaries and handbooks, and is practically inaccessible to anyone who wants to know whether a given item occurs in a given locality. Few even of our best local collections cover the whole range of folk-lore subjects, and many counties, including some of the most interesting—Somerset, Kent, Norfolk, Derbyshire, Cumberland—are scarcely represented at all.

I.—To begin with, then, we need a careful geographical examination of the habitats and boundaries of the various items of English folk-lore, such as the English Dialect Society has made and is making of dialectal boundaries. The results which may be expected from the comparison of such a record of English folk-lore with the evidence obtained from other lines of study, seem to open a vista of possible discovery which I can but glance at, and on which I will not speculate.

There is nothing like speaking from experience, so, at


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/321

 Rh the risk of appearing egotistical, I will illustrate my meaning from my personal knowledge.

It is generally customary in England to hire farmservants by the year, but the hiring-time varies in different places. In North-east Shropshire the hiring-time is Christmas; in South-west Shropshire it is May. I took great pains to pick out the boundary-line, between these two customs, market-town by market-town, and almost village by village, and I found it coincide almost exactly with the boundary-line of the change of dialect between North-east and South-west, which is very marked; and very fairly also with the boundary between the diocese of Lichfield (the ancient Bishopric of the Mercians) on the North-east, and the Welsh diocese of St. Asaph and the diocese of Hereford (the old kingdom of the Hecanas or Magesætas) on the South-west. Moreover, the South-western custom of hiring prevails, I have ascertained, over a considerable part of North Wales, while hiring at Christmas prevails in Cheshire and North Staffordshire. But the exact conclusions to be drawn from these facts are to me still a mystery, especially as Christmas hiring does not extend beyond Staffordshire eastwards, so that it can hardly be an old Anglian agricultural custom. In Derbyshire, hirings are made at Martinmas, as I believe they are also in Yorkshire. In Northamptonshire, Michaelmas is the hiring time.

Again, “souling”, or begging for apples on the Eve of All Souls’ Day (Nov. 1st), is a common custom in that part of Shropshire where Christmas hirings occur, and in North Staffordshire; but in South Staffordshire I believe the same custom is, or was, observed, not on All Souls’, but on St. Clement’s Eve (Nov. 21st). Once more; in South Staffordshire and in South Shropshire, as far north as Shrewsbury, Mothering Sunday is known, if not much observed; but I have never met with anyone in the north of either county who had heard of it.

Isolated instances of customs which are general in other


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/322

 316 counties are still more stimulating to curiosity. For instance, amongst the hills in the far west of Shropshire I found three instances, and three only, of well-dressing, a custom claimed as “peculiar to” Derbyshire and North Staffordshire.

I do not attempt to form any theory about these boundaries. I only say that if they, and such as they, were mapped out over the whole of England, and compared with other evidence, they would almost certainly yield valuable historical and ethnological results. Especially, would this be the case where it is known from other evidence that there has been a definite settlement of one tribe or nation within the country occupied by another tribe or nation: as, for instance, the settlement of the Jutes in the Meon Valley in Hampshire, of the Normans and Flemings in “Little England beyond Wales”, and of the Dutchmen in the Fenland, in almost modern times.

It is comparatively easy to pick out the boundaries of a custom, but very difficult to discover those of a superstitious opinion. Some ideas, of course, are really general and visibly acted on, in a given district; but curious bits of superstition and “luck” may be carried about the country in so many ways, to so many unexpected places, in a manner that would be impossible to a popular custom. You, perhaps, come across some old woman who strongly objects to your bringing, it may be, snowdrops or catkins, or perhaps hawthorn, into her house, while her neighbours are not in the least offended by it. Now she may be the sole surviving depositary of a genuine piece of local folklore, or she may be following the instructions of a grandmother who came from the other end of England, and she may be quite unable to tell you how she acquired her views on the subject. The bits of superstitious observance in the matter of cuckoos, magpies, the new moon, and so on, in which my own family have grown up, have come to us, some from our Lancashire mother, some from our Staffordshire father and his family, some from our Shropshire neighbours; but we cannot trace every item to its


title: Index:BraceNegative1905.djvu


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/1

 PROFESSOR LARMOR in his analysis for a system moving through the aether has shown how first and second order effects may be annulled in certain optical and electrical tests of the aether drift. He has not shown, however, how to annul third and higher order effects: but he states, "if indeed it could be proved that the optical effect is null up to the third order, that circumstance would not demolish the theory, but would rather point to some finer adjustment than it provides for: needless to say the attempt would indefinitely transcend existing experimental possibilities".

Attention should therefore be called to the results in my experiment on the double refraction of water moving through the aether. The sensibility attained was such that the greatest difference in velocity or in index between the two components which could exist, referred to that of water for green light, $$\lambda=.00005$$ cm, was less than $$7.8\times10^{-13}$$ of the whole. If ($$10^{-4}$$) be taken as the third order magnitude, this result is then easily within the limit. It was not possible to attain this sensibility with a solid—glass; but, since the physical state of the substance does not enter into the theory under consideration, the results for a liquid should be equally valid.

The conclusion as to the amount of double refraction as deduced from what might be expected in comparison with accidental double refraction in a solid—glass, should not be considered as defining the mode and the amount of any double refraction arising from molecular reactions due to a system moving through the aether.

Granting the FitzGerald-Lorentz "contraction-hypothesis," we should have for this experiment a complete correspondence as regards molecular activities between the moving system thus shrunk and the same at rest, up to and including second order quantities, as the analysis of Larmor shows. But the negative results of such a third order test, showing as it does the absence of any difference between the moving and the fixed system, up to and including third order quantities, may

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/1


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/323

 Rh source. In many cases, I think, the collector can do no more than set down the name of the place where, or the informant from whom, he obtained the several items, without committing himself to any statement as to how far they are universal or not.

Negative evidence, again, is most difficult to obtain, but valuable in proportion to the difficulty of proving the negative. In fact, it only can be proved (as it has been remarked to me) “if a collector gets hold of a thorough believer in the superstitions of his locality, and can find out if there are any other superstitions of other localities which he decidedly does not believe in, any that he laughs at, any that he looks upon as stupid or ‘superstitious’, while his own belief, of course, is not superstitious!”

For myself, I have not found the English poor laugh at superstitions they are not acquainted with, unless they are, as many are, superior to superstition in general. They do not get farther than a slow, grave remark: “No, I niver heered that. I shouldna think as there can be annything in that. Now, as to (so and so), that’s true, that is. For my gronfayther knowed a mon. . .” et cetera! But it is beyond question that to ascertain what a superstitious man does not know, is quite as valuable for our purpose as to learn what he does know. Even then the collector should not be too hasty in drawing conclusions. The information he fails again and again to obtain, may some day crop up quite unexpectedly at his very doors.

The ideal of geographical collection would be reached if a number of collectors would undertake definite areas adjoining each other—say, for instance, the several hundreds of a county—would set down what is known, and what, after every possible inquiry, is not known there, and would then compare results.

II.—Then there is the question of the relations between Folk-lore and History. The early history of every nation is dependent on oral tradition, not on written records, and so is open to doubt. But the questions, how much dependence may be placed upon tradition, and how long the


text:
Page:Life and Adventures of William Buckley.djvu/13

VI ,—and then, goes to work, running his ideas—as the sailors would say—"right off the reel:" his great object being to express himself sufficiently correctly, and intelligibly, so that "all who run may read;" and that HE, running a race against time, may have no part of his establishment for a moment at a stand still. The very close, careful, pointing of sentences—or portions of them—he does not, and cannot attend to, as the least delay may occasion confusion. He cares very little about it in fact, because he has—or ought to have—sense enough to know, that in a very few hours—comparatively speaking—all his labours will be scattered to the winds, as old gossip, old stories, or old information.

This may be wrong; I do not say the contrary, but, merely offer an opinion; and that the book writer goes to his work very differently, because he may be permitted to hope the labours of his mind will live a few years, even if it be only in a first edition. With this feeling, so gratifying to the author, he will be careful as to what he puts before the world, knowing how many there are in it who cannot praise, but, on the contrary, delight to censure.

I allude to these matters, because it may be said by some of the readers of this narrative, that many of the sentences are crude, and unnecessarily short: that they might have been made more interesting by adopting a different style of relation. I beg those who may think this, to understand, that the Hero of these adventures can neither read nor write, and, that consequently, I


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/2

72 indicate a complete correspondence, to all orders, of the molecular phases in the moving and in the fixed systems.

On the other hand, Lorentz has shown in his analysis for "electromagnetic phenomena in a system moving with any velocity smaller than that of light that, with the aid of the contraction-hypothesis, many electrical and optical effects will be independent of the motion of the system for all orders. This assumption of a shrinkage, although bold and thus far entirely hypothetical, is not impossible, and is the only suggestion yet made which is capable of reconciling the negative results of second and third order experiments with a quiescent æther. Poincaré has raised objection to the electromagnetic theory for moving bodies, that each time new facts are brought to light a new hypothesis has to be introduced. This criticism seems to have been fairly met by Lorentz in his latest treatment of the subject. The deductions, however, from his theory make it untenable without further development. The physical consequences, at least, seem at present to be beyond experimental examination. So far no valid reasons have been brought forward which necessitate the shrinkage hypothesis in the electromagnetic theory. In this connexion, reference should be made to the proof which Hasenöhrl, reasoning from a cyclic process in a moving radiating system, has given, that the second law of thermodynamics is contradicted unless either a second order contraction takes place in the direction of drift or the emission varies with the velocity, which latter he considers impossible.

On the other hand, Abraham finds, neglecting fourth and higher order quantities, the ratio of the transverse to the longitudinal mass of the moving electrons to be

$$1+\frac{2}{5}\left(\frac{v}{V}\right)^{2}:1+\frac{6}{5}\left(\frac{v}{V}\right)^{2}=1-\frac{4}{5}\left(\frac{v}{V}\right)^{2}$$,

while Lorentz requires the ratio to be

$$\left(1+\left(\frac{v}{V}\right)^{2}\right)^{-\frac{1}{2}}:\left(1-\left(\frac{v}{V}\right)^{2}\right)^{-\frac{3}{2}}=1-\left(\frac{v}{V}\right)^{2}$$,

for perfect compensation: thus leaving a double refraction of the order $$\frac{1}{5}\left(\frac{v}{V}\right)^{2}$$ to be accounted for, which would have been detected several thousand times over in my experiment. The

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/2


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/3

Rh analysis of both Lorentz and Abraham seems to be equally consistent with Kaufmann's results on the deflexion of Becquerel rays, Lorentz conforms Abraham's theory to his own, by shrinking the undeformable spherical electrons of the latter into flattened ellipsoids in the line of drift; while Abraham himself shows that these will be unstable unless the greatest axis is in this direction. The latter writer shows that work must be done against the electrical forces to produce this deformation, so that the total energy in any acceleration is greater than that furnished by the outside forces.

Hence there must be inner forces as well which determine the form of the electron. Thus the hypothesis of Lorentz is incomplete without defining the law of forces further. Hence we must either abandon the contraction hypothesis or modify it. The assumption that the quasi-elastic forces, which maintain the electrons in their positions of equilibrium, experience the same changes as the electrical forces, may possibly be varied, and, together with a modification of the previous hypothesis, be adapted so as to agree with all observations.

While the negative results of the first order experiments involving a study of phase relations between periodic disturbances from the same radiant, optical or electrical, moving with the system, are quite as consistent with a mobile—if we neglect second and higher orders—as with a fixed aether, the explanations of the negative results of second and third order tests are still not in full harmony or free from criticisms, notwithstanding the bold assumption in the premises.

It becomes then a serious question, whether to seek still for decisive results with experiments involving the higher order tests, on the one hand, or direct entrainment tests on the other, in order to settle the question.

The recent repetition by Morley and Miller of the original Michelson-Morley interference experiment, with a sensibility one hundred times the calculated effect, leaves perhaps no question as to the absence of any such second order optical effect. Lorentz's analysis requires a negative result, likewise, if the rays pass through a transparent substance instead of a vacuum: and it seems desirable therefore that this point should be tested for water, say.

The interferometer method might also be used to test for double refraction if the light were polarized so as to make the electric displacements perpendicular to the plane of the interfering rays, i. e. respectively parallel and perpendicular to the

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/3


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/4

Rh greatest axes of the ellipsoidal electrons of the equivalent system at rest. Otherwise the effect would be masked in using natural light, since, with this type of interferometer, the above components may be as low as 25 per cent, of the total interfering light, as Mills has shown.

The remaining second order tests first proposed by FitzGerald and developed and carried out by Trouton, by examining the couple on a suspended condenser, gave negative results. This is completely explained on the assumption of a shrinkage.

Direct experiments on the entrainment of the aether have also given negative results. Thus Lodge sent two interfering rays in opposite directions several times around a rectangle between two rotating steel disks, without being able to detect any displacement of the interference-bands. He estimates that if the disks had communicated one eight-hundredth part of their velocity to the aether, he would have been able to detect it.

Zehnder, using a different method, attempted to detect any dragging of the aether by a metal plug moving within a cylinder whose ends were circuited together by parallel branching tubes through which two interfering rays could be sent in opposite directions. I£ the aether had moved entirely with the plug, the effect would have been a thousand times larger than this sensibility. Fizeau's well-known experiment on the entrainment of the aether, repeated by Michelson and Morley, showed no effect after allowing for the reaction of the moving water itself upon the interfering waves. Had the aether been carried along completely, the displacement would have been nearly two and a half bands, instead of approximately the single band actually observed, due to the reaction of the water alone. We may conclude from these experiments that the aether was not entrained in any way in the experiments of Morley and Miller, and that their results are therefore valid, although performed within an enclosure.

Nordmeyer, carrying out the experiment first proposed by Fizeau on the change in intensity of a radiant due to the earth's motion, found that this variation could not have been

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/4


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/5

Rh as great as 1/300000. This agrees with the analytical theory of a quiescent æther, which shows there should be no effect if second order quantities be neglected.

Mascart and Rayleigh's negative results on the difference in rotation in quartz with and against the drift are not decisive, since the calculated effect, although not of the second order, is the difference between two first-order effects. A reexamination of the problem with greater experimental refinements should give important results.

With the present uncertainty on both the analytical and the experimental sides, decisive results, which will be free from any hypothetical explanation, seem only possible in the direct comparison of the velocities of light with and against the æther-drift. (Of course if a negative result were obtained, it might be open to such a hypothetical explanation by saying that the group velocity, relative to the medium itself, was a function of the absolute motion of this medium.) Thus Wien proposes to use two synchronized Foucault mirrors or two Fizeau toothed wheels. This plan is of course of long standing, but has been recently revived. The mechanical difficulties in the way do not give much encouragement to hope for success; but with present refinements the test is not beyond possibility. The objection which Newcomb and Michelson have raised to this mode of comparison, that the phases of the synchronizing systems would be affected by the earth's motion in the same way as the propagation of the light, does not seem to be well taken. For granting a certain phase difference in the rotating-mirror or wheel systems, this difference in phase of the two systems can still be so changed as to give an eclipse, say, along the drift. If now we observe simultaneously the light propagated over the identical path in the opposite direction, there should not be a complete eclipse if the æther were at rest. Any method, therefore, which allows a comparison of two rays, propagated over the same path in opposite directions, is a valid test of the problem. It remains then to devise a method which will certainly show a difference between these two intervals of time equal to one part in ten thousand. The method proposed by Michelson, of

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/5


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/6

76 determining the difference of time required by two interfering rays to traverse circuits in opposite directions, would require a path one kilometre square in a horizontal plane to give a displacement equal to .7 of a band for latitude 45°. This would necessitate a very high degree of refinement indeed over any previous attempts at interference. The method of determining the velocity of light which I devised us far back as 1889, and tried a number of years ago, and which consisted of an eclipsing system made up of a rotating double mirror and a grating, thus combining the principles of the toothed wheel and rotating mirror methods of Fizeau and Foucault, would be delicate enough to show a variation of one part in ten thousand, providing synchronism could be maintained during a short interval of time. With a suitable system of mirrors and observing telescopes, a single observer would be able to bring into his field of view both beams of light after their passage through the eclipsing systems. If now one of the rotating mirrors were either gaining or losing on the other, the observer would see, alternately, eclipses of one ray and the other, if their times of transit were different. If their times of transit were the same, then the two fields would maintain a constant relative intensity, each going through its maximum and minimum simultaneously as the relative phases of the eclipsing systems varied. The latter would correspond to the condition of a moving, the former to that of a quiescent æther. Thus the experiment would be possible, even if perfect synchronism were not attainable, but only sufficiently so to make the frequency of the successive maxima in the field of view less than a few times a second, or slow enough for the eye to resolve the fluctuations of intensity. If, by means of mirrors, a common source of light were employed, the half-shade principle in the field of view could be used which would be very sensitive in showing any difference in intensity (even if rapidly fluctuating) between the two portions of the field due to any slight difference in the time of propagation of the two rays with and against the æther drift. If we take the conditions in the experiment referred to, namely, an aperture of 2.5 cm. and a distance of .02 cm. between the lines of the reflecting grating, with a radius of 1 m. and 250 revolutions per second, 10,000,000 eclipses per second could be obtained; and, if we carried this to the limit in speed and resolving power, four times as many

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/6


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/7

Rh would be possible. With the former conditions, and allowing a frequency in fluctuation of 10 per second for good resolution to the eye, a difference in speed not greater than one part in a million of the two eclipsing systems would be requisite. While this seems extremely small, experience shows that such an approximation is entirely practicable. Thus Newcomb records a "run" in his measurement of the velocity of light, in which his micrometer showed "beautiful bisection" during the greater portion of the duration (2 minutes) of such a "run." Allowing this setting to one part in ten of his unit, which was 2".4, out of a total deviation of 7500" of arc for a period of 90 seconds, we have a fluctuation in the speed of only one part in 27,000,000. If the two mirrors could be regulated to this degree, we should still have less than one-tenth the fluctuation of our limit, from the two mirrors combined. Hence, so far as speed regulation is concerned, a much higher eclipse frequency, say the forty-million limit, is possible. The other disturbances would be of the same order as encountered by Newcomb over his total "go" and "return" distance of 5000 in. Supposing the eye could detect a difference in intensity of two per cent, between the two fields (under very favourable conditions this sensibility is one-half of one percent.), we should need an interval corresponding to one hundred eclipses to detect a change in velocity equal to the aberration constant, since we have to add the effects from each ray. This would mean a distance between the mirrors of 3000 m. for the lower and 750 m. for the higher eclipse frequency referred to, which is much within the distance given above in Newcomb's experiment.

Of the other methods proposed, several do not require a return of the ray in the determination of the velocity constant. Thus the rotation of a polarizing system, such as a half-shade nicol or tourmaline system, could be carried up to 3000 revolutions per second. Polishing machines are now run up to 2000 revolutions per second. Allowing a sensibility of 0°.01, a distance of 15 kilometres would give a variation in velocity of one part in ten thousand.

The objection to the above methods and other similar ones, is the great distance required. If we could increase the eclipse frequency, the distance could be reduced accordingly. This can be attained by the use of electric oscillations in conjunction with suitable optical systems. Two methods proposed

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/7


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/8

78 in the article referred to for measuring the velocity of light can be readily adapted to the problem before us. The first depends on the Faraday "effect," the second on the Kerr electrostatic "effect". The second method, in conjunction with a half-shade elliptical polarizer which I devised several years ago, has given preliminary results indicating a superiority over those described above, quite beyond my expectations, in the arrangement as originally planned for determining the velocity of light a number of years ago.

In fig. 1, k, k'  are two condensers containing, say, the dielectric, carbon disulphide or nitrobenzol, giving the Kerr "effect," and placed with their azimuths so as to give a "crossed" system. p, c, a and p', c', a'  are the polarizer, elliptical half-shade compensator, and analyser of the two respective optical systems placed in juxtaposition. g is the spark-gap and in a half-silvered mirror system for sending identical beams in opposite directions through the optical systems p' k k' c' a'  and p k' k c a.

A and A' represent the azimuths of the various elements as seen from the one side or the other. Thus at $$A, p_{1}$$ and $$a_{1}$$ are the azimuths of the polarizer and analyser, k and k'  the traces of the

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/8


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/9

Rh planes of the condenser, and c the principal axis of the sensitive strip. Similarly at $$A',k_{1},p_{1},a_{1},c_{1}$$ are new positions of these elements due to any constant rotation of all of the elements of the second system except k' . If now there be any damping of the electric oscillations, the effect of the one condenser on the polarized ray for, say, the first oscillation, may be made equal to that of the other condenser for the second oscillation by such a rotation, and so on. Thus these two condensers become an equivalent "crossed" system, the one compensating completely the effect of the other, even if the electric stresses in each are not the same. This would hold for electric oscillations which produce successive stresses that are in a constant ratio to each other. If now the interval of passage of the beam of light between k and k'  is any multiple of a half period of the vibration, we may obtain compensation, and hence retain the settings for a match in the two half-shade systems c and c' . If there should be any difference in the interval of passage in the two opposite directions, we should not obtain a match in the one if we set for the same in the other, after the frequency had been varied so as to give this exact multiple of the half period in this latter system. This would be determined by noting when the intensity of the field approximated a minimum intensity.

For low frequencies sunlight has been used; but for the higher frequencies this source has not given satisfactory results on account of the very brief duration of the spark in the exciter, and, consequently, the integral time of the electric stresses due to such a discharge. In this case the spark itself may be used to advantage, since here we have a very much greater intensity during the period of the electric stresses. The greater uniformity and intensity of a vapour spark-gap, e. g. of mercury, recommend its use in connexion with the half-shade system. To maintain greater uniformity in the amplitude of the oscillations, and hence in the Kerr "effect," a secondary or resonance circuit itself, with its condenser system, may be used, as this will give sufficient double refraction in the dielectric to make accurate settings. Such a half-shade system, where the photometric sensibility is as low, say, as 2 per cent., will show a change of phase of $$0.3\times10^{-4}\lambda$$. Since now the maxima of the Kerr "effect" occur every half oscillation, the distance between the condenser k and k'  needs only to be equal to the space traversed by the ray in half an oscillation, or $$d=\tfrac{1}{2}L$$, where L is the wavelength of an electric oscillation. This would give us a change of phase in the one direction of $$0.3\times10^{-4}\lambda$$ and an

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/9


text:
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/10

80 opposite amount for the reverse direction; or, if we set for a match in the one system, the other system would show a change in phase of $$0.3\times10^{-4}\lambda\div2$$, which is seven times the required effect $$10^{-4}$$, the aberration constant. With condensers larger than needed for the optical condition, 50,000,000 oscillations have been obtained. Thus

a distance small enough to allow a rotating mount for the system. Higher frequencies are undoubtedly possible; so that, if the above optical sensibility is not attainable, we can still use a rotating support, with a reduction in this factor of, say, ten times. This method thus contains the requisite conditions, if all the experimental difficulties in connexion with the uniformity of the oscillation and the source of light can be overcome. The present stage of the work seems to warrant this conclusion.

Physical Laboratory,
 * University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
 * April 26, 1905.

title: Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/10


text:
Cheff v. Mathes

P. T. CHEFF, KATHARINE N. CHEFF, EDGAR P. LANDWEHR, Defendants Below, Appellants,

v.

ANNE J. MATHES and HARRY LEWIS, Plaintiffs Below, Appellees, v. ROBERT H. TRENKAMP, GEORGE SPATTA, RALPH C. BOALT, JOHN D. AMES, MOTOR PRODUCTS CORPORATION and HOLLAND FURNACE COMPANY, Defendants Below.

ROBERT H. TRENKAMP, Defendant Below, Appellant,

v.

ANNE J. MATHES and HARRY LEWIS, Plaintiffs Below, Appellees, and HOLLAND FURNACE COMPANY, Defendant Below, Appellee

[NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL]

Supreme Court of Delaware

199 A.2d 548; 41 Del. Ch. 494

March 17, 1964, Decided

James M. Tunnell, Jr., and David A. Drexler, of Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, Wilmington (Hathaway, Latimer, Clink & Robb, Muskegon, Mich., of counsel), for P. T. Cheff, Katharine N. Cheff and Edgar P. Landwehr.

David F. Anderson and Richard L. McMahon, of Berl, Potter & Anderson, Wilmington (Robert H. Trenkamp and Malcolm C. Douglas, Trenkamp & Bovington, Cleveland, Ohio, of counsel), for Robert H. Trenkamp.

Irving Morris, of Cohen & Morris, Wilmington (Charles Trynin, New York City, of counsel), for Holland Furnace Co.

William E. Taylor, Jr., Wilmington, Sidney L. Garwin, New York City (Samuel M. Koenigsberg, Newark, N.J., of counsel), for Anne J. Mathes and Harry Lewis.

TERRY, C. J., and WOLCOTT and CAREY, JJ., sitting.

title: Cheff v. Mathes


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/324

 318 remembrance of an event may be preserved among unlettered people, are by no means unimportant, and much light, it seems to me, may be thrown on them by observing how ascertained historical events are represented in the folk-lore of civilised countries, and how long they are remembered. Let me give a few examples from my own knowledge.

We have in this neighbourhood a traditional account of some incidents connected with the flight of the Royalists from the battle of Worcester in 1652. It is a fact, recorded in Blount’s Boscobel, that the Duke of Buckingham and three companions were in hiding for some days in the woods and cottages near Blore Pipe in Staffordshire, about five miles from where I am now writing. The poor folk, mostly “squatters” on what was, and is still to some extent, a tract of woodland, are unanimous in pointing out Buckingham’s Cave in the garden of a cottage, where they say the Duke was concealed for two or three days. (I am bound to say, though, that the old owner of the cottage himself can give no more account of it than: “There was a many kings and head-men and such like, about in all countries then; and it was one of these ’ere kings as they were arter, to cut his yed off or summat, and he come and hid i’ the hole yonder for a good bit. But it’s a many years back. I reckon some ’un mun ha’ takken him his meat up, for it’s a desper’t awk’ard plaze to get at.”)

At a little distance is a wild sort of field, always known as Buckingham’s Field, where they sat the Duke fell and broke his arm, and (here the inevitable bit of folk-etymology comes in!) the valley is therefore called Armsdale to this day. One elderly man (the village innkeeper) points out the very spot where the accident happened, as his great-grandfather showed him, from the information he had received from a very old man, a sort of bailiff or wood-ranger, who (so he believed) was living at the time; which is, of course, not absolutely impossible.

Not far from Blore Pipe is the site of the battle of


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Schurz, Carl

SCHURZ, shoorts, Carl, German-American publicist, editor and author: b. Liblar, near Cologne, Prussia, 2 March 1829; d. New York City, 14 May 1906. He studied at the University of Bonn, in 1848 with others published a revolutionary journal, in 1849 escaped to the Palatinate upon the failure of an insurrection which he promoted at Bonn, took part in the defense of Rastadt and upon its surrender fled to Switzerland. In 1850 he returned to Germany, going thence to Scotland and to Paris, where he was a correspondent for the German press, and, after a year in London, came to the United States (1852), where until 1855 he resided in Philadelphia. Having then removed to Madison, Wis., he identified himself with the Republican party, and by his speeches made himself an important factor in determining the German element of the State against slavery. He participated in the Lincoln-Douglas senatorial canvass in Illinois, entered legal practice at Milwaukee, was a member of the National Republican Convention of 1860 and assisted largely in the framing of its platform. During the ensuing campaign he spoke much in both German and English. He was appointed by Lincoln Minister to Spain, but in December 1861 resigned to enter the army, receiving a commission as brigadier-general of volunteers. He distinguished himself at the second Bull Run (Manassas), was promoted major-general, 14 March 1863, commanded a division at Chancellorsville, held temporary command of the 11th corps at Gettysburg and took part at Chattanooga. After the war he returned to professional practice, in 1865-66 was Washington correspondent of the New York Tribune, and was made by President Johnson a special commissioner to report on the workings of the Freedmen's Bureau. In 1868 he was temporary chairman of the convention that nominated Grant, whom he actively supported in campaign. In 1869-75 he was senator from Missouri. He vigorously opposed many of the leading measures of the Grant administration, in 1872 helped to organize the “Liberal” party and presided over the Cincinnati convention which nominated Greeley, but in 1876 supported Hayes, by whom he was made Secretary of the Interior. He introduced competitive examinations for posts

in the civil service, and provided for forest protection on public domains. From the close of the administration to 1884 he was editor of the New York Evening Post. In the canvasses of 1884, 1888 and 1892 he supported Cleveland. He had been prominently identified with the Civil Service Reform League and later with the Anti-Imperialist League. His speeches and contributions to periodicals were numerous and able. Among his many publications are a volume of ‘Speeches’ (1861), a ‘Life of Clay’ (1887), and ‘Abraham Lincoln: An Essay’ (1891). A statue of him has been erected on Moringside drive at 116th street, New York City.


text:
Cheff v. Mathes/Opinion of the Court

[D496] [A549] CAREY, Justice:

This is an appeal from the decision of the Vice-Chancellor in a derivative suit holding certain directors of Holland [D497]  Furnace Company liable for loss allegedly resulting  [A550]  from improper use of corporate funds to purchase shares of the company. Because a meaningful decision upon review turns upon a complete understanding of the factual background, a somewhat detailed summary of the evidence is required.

Holland Furnace Company, a corporation of the State of Delaware, manufactures warm air furnaces, air conditioning equipment, and other home heating equipment. At the time of the relevant transactions, the board of directors was composed of the seven individual defendants. Mr. Cheff had been Holland's Chief Executive Officer since 1933, received an annual salary of $ 77,400, and personally owned 6,000 shares of the company. He was also a director. Mrs. Cheff, the wife of Mr. Cheff, was a daughter of the founder of Holland and had served as a director since 1922.She personally owned 5,804 shares of Holland and owned 47.9 percent of Hazelbank United Interest, Inc. Hazelbank is an investment vehicle for Mrs. Cheff and members of the Cheff-Landwehr family group, which owned 164,950 shares of the 883,585 outstanding shares of Holland. As a director, Mrs. Cheff received a compensation of $ 200.00 for each monthly board meeting, whether or not she attended the meeting.

The third director, Edgar P. Landwehr, is the nephew of Mrs. Cheff and personally owned 24,010 shares of Holland and 8.6 percent of the outstanding shares of Hazelbank. He received no compensation from Holland other than the monthly director's fee.

Robert H. Trenkamp is an attorney who first represented Holland in 1946. In May 1953, he became a director of Holland and acted as general counsel for the company. During the period in question, he received no retainer from the company, but did receive substantial sums for legal services rendered the company. Apart from the above-described payments, he received no compensation from Holland other than the monthly director's fee. He owned 200 shares of Holland Furnace stock. Although he owned no shares of Hazelbank, at the time relevant to this controversy, he was serving as a director and counsel of Hazelbank.

[D498] John D. Ames was then a partner in the Chicago investment firm of Bacon, Whipple & Co. and joined the board at the request of Mr. Cheff. During the periods in question, his stock ownership varied between ownership of no shares to ownership of 300 shares. He was considered by the other members of the Holland board to be the financial advisor to the board. He received no compensation from Holland other than the normal director's fee.

Mr. Ralph G. Boalt was the Vice President of J. R. Watkins Company, a manufacturer and distributor of cosmetics. In 1953, at the request of Mr. Cheff, he became a member of the board of directors. Apart from the normal director's fee, he received no compensation from Holland for his services.

Mr. George Spatta was the President of Clark Equipment Company, a large manufacturer of earth moving equipment. In 1951, at the request of Mr. Cheff, he joined the board of directors of Holland. Apart from the normal director's fee, he received no compensation from the company.

The board of directors of Hazelbank included the five principal shareholders: Mrs. Cheff; Leona Kolb, who was Mrs. Cheff's daughter; Mr. Landwehr; Mrs. Bowles, who was Mr. Landwehr's sister; Mrs. Putnam, who was also Mr. Landwehr's sister; Mr. Trenkamp; and Mr. William DeLong, an accountant.

Prior to the events in question, Holland employed approximately 8500 persons and maintained 400 branch sales offices located in 43 states. The volume of sales had declined from over $ 41,000,000 in 1948 to less than $ 32,000,000 in 1956. Defendants contend that the decline in earnings is attributable to the artificial post-war demand generated in the 1946-1948 period. In order to stabilize the condition of the [A551] company, the sales department apparently was reorganized and certain unprofitable branch offices were closed. By 1957 this reorganization had been completed and the management was convinced that the changes were manifesting beneficial results. The practice of the company was to directly employ the retail salesman, and the management considered that practice -- unique in the furnace business -- to be a vital factor in the company's success.

[D499] During the first five months of 1957, the monthly trading volume of Holland's stock on the New York Stock Exchange ranged between 10,300 shares to 24,200 shares. In the last week of June 1957, however, the trading increased to 37,800 shares, with a corresponding increase in the market price. In June of 1957, Mr. Cheff met with Mr. Arnold H. Maremont, who was President of Maremont Automotive Products, Inc. and Chairman of the boards of Motor Products Corporation and Allied Paper Corporation. Mr. Cheff testified, on deposition, that Maremont generally inquired about the feasibility of merger between Motor Products and Holland. Mr. Cheff testified that, in view of the difference in sales practices between the two companies, he informed Mr. Maremont that a merger did not seem feasible. In reply, Mr. Maremont stated that, in the light of Mr. Cheff's decision, he had no further interest in Holland nor did he wish to buy any of the stock of Holland.

None of the members of the board apparently connected the interest of Mr. Maremont with the increased activity of Holland stock. However, Mr. Trenkamp and Mr. Staal, the Treasurer of Holland, unsuccessfully made an informal investigation in order to ascertain the identity of the purchaser or purchasers. The mystery was resolved, however, when Maremont called Ames in July of 1957 to inform the latter that Maremont then owned 55,000 shares of Holland stock. At this juncture, no requests for change in corporate policy were made, and Maremont made no demand to be made a member of the board of Holland.

Ames reported the above information to the board at its July 30, 1957 meeting. Because of the position now occupied by Maremont, the board elected to investigate the financial and business history of Maremont and corporations controlled by him. Apart from the documentary evidence produced by this investigation, which will be considered infra, Staal testified, on deposition, that "leading bank officials" had indicated that Maremont "had been a participant, or had attempted to be, in the liquidation of a number of companies." Staal specifically mentioned only one individual giving such advice, the Vice President of the First National Bank of Chicago. Mr. Cheff testified, at trial, of Maremont's alleged participation in liquidation [D500]  activities. Mr. Cheff testified that: "Throughout the whole of the Kalamazoo-Battle Creek area, and Detroit too, where I spent considerable time, he is well known and not highly regarded by any stretch." This information was communicated to the board.

On August 23, 1957, at the request of Maremont, a meeting was held between Mr. Maremont and Cheff. At this meeting, Cheff was informed that Motor Products then owned approximately 100,000 shares of Holland stock. Maremont then made a demand that he be named to the board of directors, but Cheff refused to consider it. Since considerable controversy has been generated by Maremont's alleged threat to liquidate the company or substantially alter the sales force of Holland, we believe it desirable to set forth the testimony of Cheff on this point: "Now we have 8500 men, direct employees, so the problem is entirely different. He indicated immediately that he had no interest in that type of distribution, that he didn't think it was modern, that he felt furnaces could be sold as he sold mufflers, through half a dozen salesmen in a wholesale way."

Testimony was introduced by the defendants tending to show that substantial unrest [A552]  was present among the employees of Holland as a result of the threat of Maremont to seek control of Holland. Thus, Mr. Cheff testified that the field organization was considering leaving in large numbers because of a fear of the consequences of a Maremont acquisition; he further testified that approximately "25 of our key men" were lost as the result of the unrest engendered by the Maremont proposal. Staal, corroborating Cheff's version, stated that a number of branch managers approached him for reassurances that Maremont was not going to be allowed to successfully gain control. Moreover, at approximately this time, the company was furnished with a Dun and Bradstreet report, which indicated the practice of Maremont to achieve quick profits by sales or liquidations of companies acquired by him. The defendants were also supplied with an income statement of Motor Products, Inc., showing a loss of $ 336,121.00 for the period in 1957.

On August 30, 1957, the board was informed by Cheff of Maremont's demand to be placed upon the board and of Maremont's belief that the retail sales organization of Holland was obsolete. The board [D501]  was also informed of the results of the investigation by Cheff and Staal. Predicated upon this information, the board authorized the purchase of company stock on the market with corporate funds, ostensibly for use in a stock option plan.

Subsequent to this meeting, substantial numbers of shares were purchased and, in addition, Mrs. Cheff made alternate personal purchases of Holland stock. As a result of purchases by Maremont, Holland and Mrs. Cheff, the market price rose. On September 13, 1957, Maremont wrote to each of the directors of Holland and requested a broad engineering survey to be made for the benefit of all stockholders. During September, Motor Products released its annual report, which indicated that the investment in Holland was "special situation" as opposed to the normal policy of placing the funds of Motor Products into "an active company". On September 4th, Maremont proposed to sell his current holdings of Holland to the corporation for $ 14.00 a share. However, because of delay in responding to this offer, Maremont withdrew the offer. At this time, Mrs. Cheff was obviously quite concerned over the prospect of a Maremont acquisition, and had stated her willingness to expend her personal resources to prevent it.

On September 30, 1957, Motor Products Corporation, by letter to Mrs. Bowles, made a buy-sell offer to Hazelbank. At the Hazelbank meeting of October 3, 1957, Mrs. Bowles presented the letter to the board. The board took no action, but referred the proposal to its finance committee. Although Mrs. Bowles and Mrs. Putnam were opposed to any acquisition of Holland stock by Hazelbank, Mr. Landwehr conceded that a majority of the board were in favor of the purchase. Despite this fact, the finance committee elected to refer the offer to the Holland board on the grounds that it was the primary concern of Holland.

Thereafter, Mr. Trenkamp arranged for a meeting with Maremont, which occurred on October 14 -- 15, 1957, in Chicago. Prior to this meeting, Trenkamp was aware of the intentions of Hazelbank and Mrs. Cheff to purchase all or portions of the stock then owned by Motor Products if Holland did not so act. As a result of the meeting, there was a tentative agreement on the part of Motor Products to sell [D502]  its 155,000 shares at $ 14.40 per share. On October 23, 1957, at a special meeting of the Holland board, the purchase was considered. All directors, except Spatta, were present. The dangers allegedly posed by Maremont were again reviewed by the board. Trenkamp and Mrs. Cheff agree that the latter informed the board that either she or Hazelbank would purchase part or all of the block of Holland stock owned by Motor Products if the Holland board did not so act. The board was also informed that in order for the corporation to finance the purchase, substantial sums would have to be borrowed from commercial lending institutions. A [A553]  resolution authorizing the purchase of 155,000 shares from Motor Products was adopted by the board. The price paid was in excess of the market price prevailing at the time, and the book value of the stock was approximately $ 20.00 as compared to approximately $ 14.00 for the net quick asset value. The transaction was subsequently consummated. The stock option plan mentioned in the minutes has never been implemented. In 1959, Holland stock reached a high of $ 15.25 a share.

On February 6, 1958, plaintiffs, owners of 60 shares of Holland stock, filed a derivative suit in the court below naming all of the individual directors of Holland, Holland itself and Motor Products Corporation as defendants. The complaint alleged that all of the purchases of stock by Holland in 1957 were for the purpose of insuring the perpetuation of control by the incumbent directors. The complaint requested that the transaction between Motor Products and Holland be rescinded and, secondly, that the individual defendants account to Holland for the alleged damages. Since Motor Products was never served with process, the initial remedy became inapplicable. Ames was never served nor did he enter an appearance.

After trial, the Vice Chancellor found the following facts: (a) Holland directly sells to retail consumers by means of numerous branch offices. There were no intermediate dealers. (b) Immediately prior to the complained-of transactions, the sales and earnings of Holland had declined and its marketing practices were under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission. (c) Mr. Cheff and Trenkamp had received substantial sums as Chief Executive and attorney of the company, [D503]  respectively. (d) Maremont, on August 23rd, 1957, demanded a place on the board. (e) At the October 14th meeting between Trenkamp, Staal and Maremont, Trenkamp and Staal were authorized to speak for Hazelbank and Mrs. Cheff as well as Holland. Only Mr. Cheff, Mrs. Cheff, Mr. Landwehr, and Mr. Trenkamp clearly understood, prior to the October 23rd meeting, that either Hazelbank or Mrs. Cheff would have utilized their funds to purchase the Holland stock if Holland had not acted. (g) There was no real threat posed by Maremont and no substantial evidence of intention by Maremont to liquidate Holland. (h) Any employee unrest could have been caused by factors other than Maremont's intrusion and "only one important employee was shown to have left, and his motive for leaving is not clear." (1) The Court rejected the stock option plan as a meaningful rationale for the purchase from Maremont or the prior open market purchases.

The Court then found that the actual purpose behind the purchase was the desire to perpetuate control, but because of its finding that only the four above-named directors knew of the "alternative", the remaining directors were exonerated. No appeal was taken by plaintiffs from that decision.

An examination of the record indicates that a substantial portion of the evidence presented to the Vice Chancellor consisted of deposition testimony and documentary evidence. The only individuals who testified personally (aside from a financial expert) were Mr. Cheff, Trenkamp and Staal. Depositions of the other directors were introduced, but no deposition was taken from Maremont. The standard of review governing this court in such cases was established in Blish v. Thompson Automatic Arms Corp., 30 Del. Ch. 538, 64 A.2d 581, wherein we stated:

"'* * * regardless of the state of the evidence below, if there be sufficient oral testimony in the record to support the findings of fact below, such findings should not be disturbed by this Court.' (30 Del. Ch. at page 604, 64 A.2d at page 604)."

[A554] Under the provisions of 8 Del. C. § 160, a corporation is granted statutory power to purchase and sell shares of its own stock. [D504] Such a right, as embodied in the statute, has long been recognized in this State. See In re International Radiator Co., 10 Del. Ch. 358, 92 A. 255. The charge here is not one of violation of statute, but the allegation is that the true motives behind such purchases were improperly centered upon perpetuation of control. In an analogous field courts have sustained the use of proxy funds to inform stockholders of management's views upon the policy questions inherent in an election to a board of directors, but have not sanctioned the use of corporate funds to advance the selfish desires of directors to perpetuate themselves in office. See Hall v. Trans-Lux Daylight Picture Screen Corp., 20 Del. Ch. 78, 171 A. 226. Similarly, if the actions of the board were motivated by a sincere belief that the buying out of the dissident stockholder was necessary to maintain what the board believed to be proper business practices, the board will not be held liable for such decision, even though hindsight indicates the decision was not the wisest course. See Kors v. Carey, 39 Del. Ch. 47, 158 A.2d 136. On the other hand, if the board has acted solely or primarily because of the desire to perpetuate themselves in office, the use of corporate funds for such purposes is improper. See Bennett v. Propp, 41 Del. Ch. 14, 187 A.2d 405, and Yasik v. Wachtel, 25 Del. Ch. 247, 17 A.2d 309.

Our first problem is the allocation of the burden of proof to show the presence or lack of good faith on the part of the board in authorizing the purchase of shares. Initially, the decision of the board of directors in authorizing a purchase was presumed to be in good faith and could be overturned only by a conclusive showing by plaintiffs of fraud or other misconduct. See Bankers Securities Corp. v. Kresge Department Stores, Inc., D.C., 54 F. Supp. 378. In Kors, cited supra, the court merely indicated that the directors are presumed to act in good faith and the burden of proof to show to the contrary falls upon the plaintiff. However, in Bennett v. Propp, supra, we stated:

"'We must bear in mind the inherent danger in the purchase of shares with corporate funds to remove a threat to corporate policy when a threat to control is involved. The directors are of necessity confronted with a conflict of interest, and an objective decision is difficult. * * * Hence, in our opinion, the burden should [D505] be on the directors to justify such a purchase as one primarily in the corporate interest.' ( 41 Del. Ch. 14, 187 A.2d 405, at page 409)."

The case of Martin v. American Potash and Chemical Corp., 33 Del. Ch. 234, 92 A.2d 295, 35 A.L.R.2d 1140, relied upon by defendants to support their contention that the burden of proof should be on plaintiffs, is inapposite. As noted in Bennett, Martin was concerned with a statutory reduction of capital, which has the additional safeguards of notice to stockholders and shareholder approval.

To say that the burden of proof is upon the defendants is not to indicate, however, that the directors have the same "self-dealing interest" as is present, for example, when a director sells property to the corporation. The only clear pecuniary interest shown on the record was held by Mr. Cheff, as an executive of the corporation, and Trenkamp, as its attorney. The mere fact that some of the other directors were substantial shareholders does not create a personal pecuniary interest in the decisions made by the board of directors, since all shareholders would presumably share the benefit flowing to the substantial shareholder. See Smith v. Good Music Station, Inc., 36 Del. Ch. 262, 129 A.2d 242. Accordingly, these directors other than Trenkamp and Cheff, while called upon to justify their [A555]  actions, will not be held to the same standard of proof required of those directors having personal and pecuniary interest in the transaction.

As noted above, the Vice Chancellor found that the stock option plan, mentioned in the minutes as a justification for the purchases, was not a motivating reason for the purchases. This finding we accept, since there is evidence to support it; in fact, Trenkamp admitted that the stock option plan was not the motivating reason. The minutes of October 23, 1957 dealing with the purchase from Maremont do not, in fact, mention the option plan as a reason for the purchase. While the minutes of the October 1, 1957 meeting only indicated the stock option plan as the motivating reason, the defendants are not bound by such statements and may supplement the minutes by oral [D506]  testimony to show that the motivating reason was genuine fear of an acquisition by Maremont. See Bennett v. Propp, cited supra.

Plaintiffs urge that the sale price was unfair in view of the fact that the price was in excess of that prevailing on the open market. However, as conceded by all parties, a substantial block of stock will normally sell at a higher price than that prevailing on the open market, the increment being attributable to a "control premium". Plaintiffs argue that it is inappropriate to require the defendant corporation to pay a control premium, since control is meaningless to an acquisition by a corporation of its own shares. However, it is elementary that a holder of a substantial number of shares would expect to receive the control premium as part of his selling price, and if the corporation desired to obtain the stock, it is unreasonable to expect that the corporation could avoid paying what any other purchaser would be required to pay for the stock. In any event, the financial expert produced by defendant at trial indicated that the price paid was fair and there was no rebuttal. Ames, the financial man on the board, was strongly of the opinion that the purchase was a good deal for the corporation. The Vice Chancellor made no finding as to the fairness of the price other than to indicate the obvious fact that the market price was increasing as a result of open market purchases by Maremont, Mrs. Cheff and Holland.

The question then presented is whether or not defendants satisfied the burdenof proof of showing reasonable grounds to believe a danger to corporate policy and effectiveness existed by the presence of the Maremont stock ownership. It is important to remember that the directors satisfy their burden by showing good faith and reasonable investigation; the directors will not be penalized for an honest mistake of judgment, if the judgment appeared reasonable at the time the decision was made. See Karasik v. Pacific Eastern Corp., 21 Del. Ch. 81, 180 A. 604.

In holding that employee unrest could as well be attributed to a condition of Holland's business affairs as to the possibility of Maremont's intrusion, the Vice Chancellor must have had in mind one or both of two matters: (1) the pending proceedings before the Federal Trade Commission concerning certain sales practices of Holland; [D507]  (2) the decrease in sales and profits during the preceding several years. Any other possible reason would be pure speculation. In the first place, the adverse decision of the F.T.C. was not announced until after the complained-of transaction. Secondly, the evidence clearly shows that the downward trend of sales and profits had reversed itself, presumably because of the reorganization which had then been completed. Thirdly, everyone who testified on the point said that the unrest was due to the possible threat presented by Maremont's purchases of stock. There was, in fact, no testimony whatever of any connection between the unrest and either the F.T.C. proceedings or the business picture.

[A556] The Vice Chancellor found that there was no substantial evidence of a liquidation posed by Maremont. This holding overlooks an important contention. The fear of the defendants, according to their testimony, was not limited to the possibility of liquidation; it included the alternate possibility of a material change in Holland's sales policies, which the board considered vital to its future success. The unrebutted testimony before the court indicated: (1) Maremont had deceived Cheff as to his original intentions, since his open market purchases were contemporaneous with his disclaimer of interest in Holland; (2) Maremont had given Cheff some reason to believe that he intended to eliminate the retail sales force of Holland; (3) Maremont demanded a place on the board; (4) Maremont substantially increased his purchases after having been refused a place on the board; (5) the directors had good reason to believe that unrest among key employees had been engendered by the Maremont threat; (6) the board had received advice from Dun and Bradstreet indicating the past liquidation or quick sale activities of Motor Products; (7) the board had received professional advice from the firm of Merril Lynch, Fenner & Beane, who recommended that the purchase from Motor Products be carried out; (8) the board had received competent advice that the corporation was over-capitalized; (9) Staal and Cheff had made informal personal investigations from contacts in the business and financial community and had reported to the board of the alleged poor reputation of Maremont. The board was within its rights in relying upon that investigation, since 8 Del. C. § 141 (f) allows the directors to reasonably rely upon a report provided by corporate officers. See Graham v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co., 41 Del. Ch. 78, 188 A.2d 125.

[D508] Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the evidence presented in the court below leads inevitably to the conclusion that the board of directors, based upon direct investigation, receipt of professional advice, and personal observations of the contradictory action of Maremont and his explanation of corporate purpose, believed, with justification, that there was a reasonable threat to the continued existence of Holland, or at least existence in its present form, by the plan of Maremont to continue building up his stock holdings. We find no evidence in the record sufficient to justify a contrary conclusion. The opinion of the Vice Chancellor that employee unrest may have been engendered by other factors or that the board had no grounds to suspect Maremont is not supported in any manner by the evidence.

As noted above, the Vice-Chancellor found that the purpose of the acquisition was the improper desire to maintain control, but, at the same time, he exonerated those individual directors whom he believed to be unaware of the possibility of using non-corporate funds to accomplish this purpose. Such a decision is inconsistent with his finding that the motive was improper, within the rule enunciated in Bennett. If the actions were in fact improper because of a desire to maintain control, then the presence or absence of a non-corporate alternative is irrelevant, as corporate funds may not be used to advance an improper purpose even if there is no non-corporate alternative available. Conversely, if the actions were proper because of a decision by the board made in good faith that the corporate interest was served thereby, they are not rendered improper by the fact that some individual directors were willing to advance personal funds if the corporation did not. It is conceivable that the Vice Chancellor considered this feature of the case to be of significance because of his apparent belief that any excess corporate funds should have been used to finance a subsidiary corporation. That action would not have solved the problem of Holland's over-capitalization. In any event, this question was a matter of business judgment, which furnishes no justification for holding [A557]  the directors personally responsible in this case.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed and remanded with instruction to enter judgment for the defendants.

title: Cheff v. Mathes/Opinion of the Court


text:
Page:Life and Adventures of William Buckley.djvu/48

Rh native women, who watched me unperceived. At length I threw myself down at the foot of a large tree to rest. On observing me thus prostrate, and helpless, these women went in search of their husbands with the intelligence that they had seen a very tall white man. Presently they all came upon me unawares, and seizing me by the arms and hands, began beating their breasts, and mine, in the manner the others had done. After a short time, they lifted me up, and they made the same sign, giving me to understand by it, that I was in want of food. The women assisted me to walk, the men shouting hideous noises, and tearing their hair. When we arrived at their huts, they brought a kind of bucket, made of dry bark, into which they put gum and water, converting it by that means into a sort of pulp. This they offered me to eat, and I did so very greedily. They called me Murrangurk, which I afterwards learnt, was the name of a man formerly belonging to their tribe, who had been buried at the spot where I had found the piece of spear I still carried with me. They have a belief, that when they die, they go to some place or other, and are there made white men, and that they then return to this world again for another existence. They think all the white people previous to death were belonging to their own tribes, thus returned to life in a different colour. In cases where they have killed white men, it has generally been because they imagined them to have been originally enemies, or belonging to tribes with whom they were hostile. In accordance with this belief, they fancied me to be one of their tribe who had


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/325

 Rh Blore Heath in 1459, where the traditional spot where the Lancastrian leader, Lord Audley, fell, is marked by a small obelisk set up in 1764 by the then lord of the manor. This, and one or two pieces of armour dug up in the neighbouring fields, have doubtless helped to keep alive the memory of the battle: but be this as it may, the people tell how the brook ran red with blood for three days and three nights after the fight, and that when the Lancastrians were worsted, Queen Margaret hurried down from Muckleston church-tower, where she was watching the fray, made the village blacksmith reverse the shoes of her horse to mislead her pursuers, and so fled in all haste to the Bishop of Lichfield’s castle at Eccleshall.

The same story of a queen watching a lost battle, and fleeing away with reversed horseshoes, is told, with less foundation, on the site of the battle of Shrewsbury.

One more example of a different kind. An unlettered old cottager, at High Offley in Staffordshire, startled me one day by observing that the village wake would be held on the Monday after the 15th of August, “the ’Sumption o’ Mary.” Now the festival of the Assumption of the Virgin has, we know, been removed from the calendar of the English Church since 1549. I knew the old body well, and I do not think she can have come in contact with anyone likely to inform her of the festival as a matter of scholarly learning. I cannot but think that it was the importance of fixing the right date for the village wake that has caused the disused Saint’s day to be remembered for over 300 years.

So far as such examples as these go, they would tend to show that the folk, even in England, do preserve some memory of historical events for three or even four centuries, and that it would be rash to assert that such an event never happened, or such a character never lived, because the popular tradition concerning it or him is mixed with fiction. But collectors have hitherto given very little attention to this subject, and till they have done so, one dare


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/326

 320 not speak too positively. Still, it may be allowable to observe that the battle of Waterloo really was fought, although the Duke of Wellington did not cry, “Up, Guards, and at them!”

III.—The consideration of the influence of Folk-lore on History naturally leads to the subject of the influence of History on Folk-lore.

Surely, in spite of the proverbial “toughness” of “popular tradition”, it cannot fail to have been affected by the changes, the revolutions—political, social, religious—of an indefinite number of centuries. How a struggle, which was at once political, social, and religious, could and did affect old customs, we may learn from Aubrey, who notes over and over again, that things, laid aside when he wrote, had been in use “before the warres”. If we take some complicated piece of folk-lore and examine it closely, we shall find that it bears the marks of many different epochs and influences. Take, for instance, the common Mummers’ Play. There is first the kernel—the world-old story of a dead warrior restored to life by a magic elixir. Then comes the influence of the mediæval Church, adopting the original incident into the legend of the warrior, Saint George. Next, the disuse of popular amusements under Puritan rule, and the revival of them under the Restoration, doubtless account for the fact that the style of the piece, as we now have it, savours of the 17th century. The consecutive reigns of the four Georges have turned Saint George into King George. His antagonist has in some places become Bonaparte, and the conqueror himself is, in a Gloucestershire version, “Duke Wellington”. So our play comes to us like a traveller from a journey, laden with curiosities collected by the way.

I would venture, then, to urge on all collectors the importance of recording not only the custom (or what not), as they see it practised now, but also all that they can discover about the history of the custom in the past. In Wales, I would compare present-day folk-lore with


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/327

 Rh Pennant’s Tour; in Wiltshire, with Aubrey’s Remains; and would note the variations in each case. The Scouring of the White Horse, though in the dress of fiction, is almost a model example of the historical method of collecting folk-lore.

Anything that can be ascertained about the reasons of the differences between past and present is specially precious; for the same sort of things which are affecting folk-lore now are probably the sort of things which have been affecting it from all time. Since I came to my present home in 1877, I have seen one custom die out in the parish, and another take a new lease of life. “Souling”, or begging for apples on All Saints’ Day, was suddenly checked by a new Vicar forbidding it to the National School children; while begging by women on St. Thomas’s Day, a disagreeable custom which was on the wane ten years ago, has risen to extraordinary proportions since the arrival in the neighbourhood of a very rich and very benevolent family, who give to all comers without distinction. But these two events have little or no influence on neighbouring parishes; and so variations are set up.

Physical features and surroundings also cause variations of folk-lore. The variant of the story of the Elfin-maid who marries a mortal, which is current in the Faroe Islands, makes the heroine a transformed seal. Giant-legends, again, cling to hilly countries. We do not (so I understand) find them in Norfolk; we do find them in Cornwall, in Shropshire, and in Yorkshire. So incomplete is the record of English folk-lore, that I hesitate to say they are not found in other hilly counties where they have not yet been noted.

Again, there is the question whether the folk-lore of any given nation—composite as modern nations mostly are—represents the lore of the governing race, the lore of the bulk of the population, or the lore of some inferior or enslaved race; whether, in fact, a nation can adopt a new folk-lore as it can a new language, and how far, therefore,


text: Talk:Cheff v. Mathes

title: Talk:Cheff v. Mathes


text:
Page:Life and Adventures of William Buckley.djvu/49

26 been recently killed in a fight, in which his daughters had been speared also. As I have before said, he was buried at the mound I saw, and my having the remains of his spear with me, confirmed them in this opinion. To this providential superstition, I was indebted for all the kindnesses afterwards shown me. In a short time they went away, making signs for me to remain; and on returning, they brought with them several large fat grubs, which are found buried in decayed trees, and more particularly about the roots. These grubs they gave me to eat, and by this time, so changed was my palate, that I did so, thinking them delicious.

I remained with them all that night, but in great anxiety, not knowing their intentions. I thought several times of endeavouring to make my escape, but in my weak state it was impossible. The women were all the time making frightful lamentations and wailings—lacerating their faces in a dreadful manner. All this increased my anxiety and horror, which was added to in the morning, when I saw the frightful looking demons they had made themselves. They were covered with blood from the wounds they had inflicted, having cut their faces and legs into ridges, and burnt the edges with fire sticks. I understood by their signs, and manner, that they wished me to accompany them to the tribe they had left to procure gum, which was in great abundance at the spot where they discovered me. I consented, and after journeying for some time through the scrub, and over plains, we


text:
User:Dav-FL-IN-AZ-id

Hello.

title: User:Dav-FL-IN-AZ-id


text:
User talk:Dav-FL-IN-AZ-id

Hello.

title: User talk:Dav-FL-IN-AZ-id


text:
Page:Life and Works of Abraham Lincoln, v3.djvu/239

1854] hope for the rod. And yet perhaps it does not occur to you that to the extent of your gain in the case, you have given up the slave system and adopted the free system of labor.

If A can prove, however conclusively, that he may of right enslave B, why may not B snatch the same argument and prove equally that he may enslave A? You say A is white and B is black. It is color, then; the lighter having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule you are to be slave to the first man you meet with a fairer skin than your own. You do not mean color exactly? You mean the whites are intellectually the superiors of the blacks, and therefore have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule you are to be slave to the first man you meet with an intellect superior to your own. But, say you, it is a question of interest, and if you make it your interest you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his interest he has the right to enslave you.

The ant who has toiled and dragged a crumb to his nest will furiously defend the fruit of his labor against whatever robber assails him. So plain that the most dumb and stupid slave that ever toiled for a master does constantly know that he is wronged. So plain that no one, high or low, ever does mistake it, except in a plainly selfish way; for although volume upon volume is written to prove slavery a very good thing, we never hear of the man who wishes to take the good of it by being a slave himself.

Most governments have been based,


text:
Page:Life and Works of Abraham Lincoln, v3.djvu/240

218, on the denial of the equal rights of men, as I have, in part, stated them; ours began by affirming those rights. They said, some men are too ignorant and vicious to share in government. Possibly so, said we; and, by your system, you would always keep them ignorant and vicious. We proposed to give all a chance; and we expected the weak to grow stronger, the ignorant wiser, and all better and happier together.

We made the experiment, and the fruit is before us. Look at it, think of it. Look at it in its aggregate grandeur, of extent of country, and numbers of population—of ship, and steamboat, and railroad.

On Monday, October 16, Senator Douglas, by appointment, addressed a large audience at Peoria. When he closed he was greeted with six hearty cheers, and the band in attendance played a stirring air. The crowd then began to call for Lincoln, who, as Judge Douglas had announced, was by agreement to answer him. Mr. Lincoln took the stand and said:

I do not rise to speak now, if I can stipulate with the audience to meet me here at half-past six or at seven o'clock. It is now several minutes past five, and Judge Douglas has spoken over three hours. If you hear me at all, I wish you to hear me through. It will take me as long as it has taken him. That will carry us beyond eight o'clock at night. Now, every one of you who can


text:
Page:Poems, Volume 1, Coates, 1916.djvu/28

HE oriole sang in the apple tree;

The sick girl lay on her bed, and heard

The tremulous note of the glad wild bird;

And, "Ah!" she sighed, "to share with thee

Life's rapture exquisite and strong:

Its hope, its eager energy,

Its fragrance and its song!"

The oriole swayed in the apple tree,

And he sang: "I will build, with my love, a nest,

Fine as e'er welcomed a birdling guest:

Like a pendant blossom, secure yet free,

It shall hang from the bough above me there,

Bright, bright with the gold that is combed for me

From the sick girl's auburn hair!"

So he built the nest in the apple tree;

And, burnished over, a ball of light,

It gleamed and shone in the sick girl's sight,

And she gazed upon it wonderingly:


text:
Page:Life and Works of Abraham Lincoln, v3.djvu/178

156

The question of a national bank is at rest. Were I President, I should not urge its reagitation upon Congress; but should Congress see fit to pass an act to establish such an institution, I should not arrest it by the veto, unless I should consider it subject to some constitutional objection from which I believe the two former banks to have been free.

It appears to me that the national debt created by the war renders a modification of the existing tariff indispensable; and when it shall be modified I should be pleased to see it adjusted with a due reference to the protection of our home industry. The particulars, it appears to me, must and should be left to the untrammeled discretion of Congress.

As to the Mexican war, I still think the defensive line policy the best to terminate it. In a final treaty of peace, we shall probably be under a sort of necessity of taking some territory; but it is my desire that we shall not acquire any extending so far south as to enlarge and aggravate the distracting question of slavery. Should I come into the presidency before these questions shall be settled, I should act in relation to them in accordance with the views here expressed.

Finally, were I President, I should desire the legislation of the country to rest with Congress, uninfluenced by the executive in its origin or


text:
Delaware Code

Table of Contents

 * TITLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
 * TITLE 2. TRANSPORTATION
 * TITLE 3. AGRICULTURE
 * TITLE 4. ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS
 * TITLE 5. BANKING
 * TITLE 6. COMMERCE AND TRADE
 * TITLE 7. CONSERVATION
 * TITLE 8. CORPORATIONS
 * TITLE 9. COUNTIES
 * TITLE 10. COURTS AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
 * TITLE 11. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
 * TITLE 12. DECEDENTS' ESTATES AND FIDUCIARY RELATIONS
 * TITLE 13. DOMESTIC RELATIONS
 * TITLE 14. EDUCATION
 * TITLE 15. ELECTIONS
 * TITLE 16. HEALTH AND SAFETY
 * TITLE 17. HIGHWAYS
 * TITLE 18. INSURANCE CODE
 * TITLE 19. LABOR
 * TITLE 20. MILITARY AND CIVIL DEFENSE
 * TITLE 21. MOTOR VEHICLES
 * TITLE 22. MUNICIPALITIES
 * TITLE 23. NAVIGATION AND WATERS
 * TITLE 24. PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS
 * TITLE 25. PROPERTY
 * TITLE 26. PUBLIC UTILITIES
 * TITLE 27. RELIGION
 * TITLE 28. SPORTS AND AMUSEMENTS
 * TITLE 29. STATE GOVERNMENT
 * TITLE 30. STATE TAXES
 * TITLE 31. WELFARE

title: Delaware Code


text:
Page:Life and Works of Abraham Lincoln, v3.djvu/179

1848] progress, and undisturbed by the veto unless in very special and clear cases.

Mr. Speaker, our Democratic friends seem to be in great distress because they think our candidate for the presidency don't suit us. Most of them cannot find out that General Taylor has any principles at all; some, however, have discovered that he has one, but that one is entirely wrong. This one principle is his position on the veto power. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Stanton] who has just taken his seat, indeed, has said there is very little, if any, difference on this question between General Taylor and all the presidents; and he seems to think it sufficient detraction from General Taylor's position on it that it has nothing new in it. But all others whom I have heard speak assail it furiously. A new member from Kentucky [Mr. Clark], of very considerable ability, was in particular concerned about it. He thought it altogether novel and unprecedented for a president or a presidential candidate to think of approving bills whose constitutionality may not be entirely clear to his own mind. He thinks the ark of our safety is gone


text: Category:Delaware Code

title: Category:Delaware Code


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/328

 322 its folk-lore can be taken as evidence of the stock from which it has sprung. This question can only, so it seems to me, be solved by watching what goes on nowadays when two races come in contact. The negroes in the United States have adopted many of the little superstitions of their masters, and have discarded their own; but one cannot rest an argument upon a solitary example; and the folk-lore of the Irish and Welsh inhabitants of English towns, compared with the folk-lore of Ireland or Wales on the one hand, and with the local English folk-lore on the other, might furnish further evidence.

IV.—But there is yet another ground on which I would wish to press the importance of the personal collection of English folk-lore, and that is, the benefit of the students themselves. For if you wish to understand folk-lore, you must learn to understand the folk. You must study the pearls in the oyster-beds, and not only after they have been gathered, and polished, and set—though it be in gold—for the public eye. You must know what the folk think, and how they act, on subjects such as folk-lore touches, and observe how their minds form the natural background to the superstitions they act on, the customs they practise, the tales they tell.

I remember being greatly struck with this idea when a country cottager’s wife one day detailed to me her contrivances for replenishing her slender wardrobe before going to visit her daughter and son-in-law at Liverpool. “For you see, ma’am”, she wound up, “his mother” [the son-in-law’s] “is very respectable, and I shouldn’t like him to cast it up to Mary when I was gone that her mother wasn’t the same. For men will do such things, you know, ma’am.” One half-expected her to point her remarks by the story of some elfin bride who left her husband because (like Diarmaid of the Feen) he reminded her how she “came to him ragged and dirty, and her hair was down to her heels”.

Moreover, you will observe that my friend spoke of her


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 1, 1890.djvu/329

 Rh son-in-law without mentioning him by name. I do not pretend to say whether or not there ever was a time when Englishmen dared not let their wives know or use their names, for fear that, if they did, the “missis would be master”, as our folk say. But, as a matter of fact, an old-fashioned cottager’s wife rarely speaks of her husband, or of any other married man with reference to his position as a husband, by name. The pronoun he, supplemented sometimes by “my man”, or “my master”, is found sufficient distinction, and (unconsciously to themselves, as I think) their taboo on names is nearly as strong as that of the House of Commons. I never did hear any old labourer tell the story of the careless woman who betrayed her husband’s name to his enemy as she sang her baby to sleep, but it would fit in well with the habits of our village wives, in this county, at least.

Another folk-tale which agrees exactly with the ideas of our people is that of King Lear. I have seen a local deed of the fifteenth century, by which a father and mother surrendered all their property to their son and daughter, on condition of receiving maintenance for life; but now our people are strongly convinced of the imprudence of such an arrangement; and I have known an old woman, to whom such a proposal was made, reply by the proverbial saying, coined to express the popular disapprobation of it, “No, no, I winna doff off my shoon afore I go to bed!”

On many other matters our folk have their own ways of thinking and acting, their own code of morals. They cannot be trusted to keep a promise; their word is not “as good as their bond”. “Promises are like pie-crust, made to be broken,” says their proverb—an opinion which, I believe, lies at the root of all pledges, tokens, and ceremonial compacts whatsoever. But if a bargain be “struck”, or “wetted”, or if a shilling “earnest” be given to bind it, then “the case is altered”, and your man will be true to his engagement. A lie, again, is reckoned a very venial