text:
Workers' Commissions

The Workers' Commissions (Comisiones Obreras, CCOO) since the 1970s has become the largest trade union in Spain. It has more than one million members, and is the most successful union in labor elections, competing with the Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT), which is historically affiliated with the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE), and with the anarcho-syndicalist Confederación General del Trabajo (CGT), which is usually a distant third.

The CCOO were organized in the 1960s by the Communist Party of Spain (PCE) and workers' Roman Catholic groups to fight against Francoist Spain, and for labor rights (in opposition to the non-representative "vertical unions" in the Spanish Labour Organization). The various organizations formed a single entity after a 1976 Congress in Barcelona.

Along with other unions like the Unión Sindical Obrera (USO) and the UGT, it called a general strike in 1976, and carried out protests against the conditions in the country. Marcelino Camacho, a major figure of Spanish trade unionism and a PCE member, was CCOO's General Secretary from its foundation to 1985 - he was elected to the Congress of Deputies in the 1977 election. However, CCOO disassociated from the PCE in the early 1990s and is nowadays a non-partisan, negotiation-prone union.

Birth and role in Francoist Spain
Taking as reference the clandestine union Oposición Sindical Obrera (OSO) the first workers' commissions were organized during 1960 in Asturies, Catalonia, Madrid and the Basque provinces of Gipuzkoa and Bizkaia as labor disputes emerged outside the Francoist national-syndical movement. Originally the "commissions" were representative bodies of workers elected in assemblies. The first "comisiones" were boosted by the Communist Party of Spain (PCE), Christian labor movements (JOC and Workers' Fraternity of Catholic Action) and other groups opposed to the Spanish State. Gradually the ad hoc commissions started to become permanent, creating a stable and well organized movement.

For many historians, one of the first places where the Workers' Commissions were formed was the valley of Laciana (province of León), within the Minero Siderurgica de Ponferrada (MSP) industry. Another place that sometimes is also cited as the first is La Camocha mine (Gijón) in 1957, during a strike. The Asturian miners' strike of 1962 ("La Huelgona") was the first massive action of the union and one of the first massive popular mobilizations against Francoist Spain.

The union was heavily repressed in Spain. In 1972 all the leadership of CCOO was jailed, being judged in the infamous Proceso 1001. They remained imprisoned until the trial, more than a year later. This finally took place on 20 (day that coincided with the assassination of Prime Minister Luis Carrero Blanco, which led to the suspension of the trial for a few hours), 21 and 22 December 1973. The defendants faced the accusation of belonging to an illegal and subversive organization, and of having links with the Communist Party of Spain (PCE). On December 30 convictions were announced, which coincided with requests of the prosecutor and whose severity was considered related to the murder of Carrero Blanco. The convictions were the following: Marcelino Camacho, 20 years of jail; Nicolás Sartorius, 19; Miguel Ángel Zamora Antón, 12; Pedro Santiesteban, 12; Eduardo Saborido, 20; Francisco García Salve, 19; Luis Fernández, 12; Francisco Acosta, 12; Juan Muñiz Zapico Juanín, 18; and Fernando Soto Martín, 17. They were amnestied on 25 November 1975.

The tactic of CCOO was entryism, i.e.: infiltration in the Vertical Unions of Francoism. This tactic culminated in the union elections of 1975, where CCOO got the overwhelming majority of the delegates elected in the major companies in the country. CCOO led numerous strikes and labor mobilizations in late Francoism and the Spanish Transition.

Transition and 1980's
Since the democratic transition until 1987 its secretary general was the historic union leader Marcelino Camacho, also a prominent leader of the PCE and deputy between 1977 and 1981. In 1976 CCOO held the Assembly of Barcelona, where the modern class trade union confederation was formed. CCOO was legalized on 27 April 1977. The murder of 5 labor lawyers in 1977 (members of the union and the PCE) in Madrid that year was followed by a massive funeral, more than 250,000 people participated, and the strikes that followed helped the legalization of the organization. In those years the union is growing rapidly in membership, like the rest of unions and leftist parties. From 1976 to 1978, CCOO went from 30,000 to 1,823,907 members. However, after the signing of the Moncloa Pacts, this figure gradually begun to descend, passing to 702,367 in 1981 and 332,019 in 1986. This negative trend in membership started to change since 1987. In those years CCOO also suffered various splits. In 1976 the Confederación de Sindicatos Unitarios de Trabajadores (CSUT), a group of CCOO members affiliated with the Party of Labour of Spain (PTE) split from the organization. In May 1977 CCOO suffered another split, this time from supporters of the maoist Workers' Revolutionary Organisation (ORT), that formed the Sindicato Unitario.

The year after legalization in 1978, CCOO held its I Confederal Congress, where Marcelino Camacho was reelected, what would happen again in the Second (1981) and III (1984) congresses. CCOO also was the most voted union (37.8% of the representatives) in the workers representative elections of 1978, the first democratic ones in the history of Spain. In this last congress, different factions emerged, including a majority linked to PCE (led by Marcelino Camacho) and three minorities, respectively linked to the Workers' Party of Spain – Communist Unity (PTE-UC) (called carrillistas and led by Julián Ariza); the Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain (PCPE); and the Revolutionary Communist League and the Communist Movement (known as Izquierda Sindical). In 1980, CCOO received an important part of the USO members, that belonged to the socialist self-management current. In 1986 the union participated in the historical mobilizations against the permanence of Spain in NATO. CCOO asked for a "NO" vote in the NATO referendum.

CCOO called 4 general strikes in the government of Felipe González: 1985, 1988, 1992 and 1994; against the economic and employment policy of the PSOE government. Especially massive and historic was the 1988 Spanish general strike, organized jointly with the UGT, which had a 95% of following, and forced the government to totally withdraw the Youth Employment Plan.

90s to today
Since the Fourth Congress (1987), the union's general secretary was Antonio Gutiérrez, reelected in the V Congress (1991). During his mandate CCOO distanced itself from the PCE and a preference for negotiations and the social pacts over strikes and conflictivity was promoted. This was criticized by a faction known as the Critical Sector of CCOO, supported by Marcelino Camacho and Agustin Moreno, in the sixth Congress (1996). The Critical Sector of CCOO has continued to organize the most pro-PCE sector of CCOO since then.

In the VII Congress (2000) José Maria Fidalgo was chosen as the new secretary general, being re-elected at the Eighth Congress in April 2004. In 2002 CCOO and UGT called for a general strike against a decree of the government of José María Aznar that made firings cheaper, eliminated agricultural subsidies and encouraged job insecurity, known as the decretazo. After protests the measure was withdrawn almost entirely. In this cycle CCOO reached again over one million members. CCOO also opposed the Iraq War and participated in the massive protests against it.

CCOO held its IX Confederal Congress in December 2008, with 1.2 million members and 120,000 elected delegates in the workplaces of Spain at the time. At the Ninth Congress Ignacio Fernández Toxo was elected general secretary, surpassing by 28 votes José María Fidalgo.

General Secretary
Between 1987 and 2000, the union's general secretary was Antonio Gutiérrez; he was followed by José María Fidalgo (1997–2009), often criticized by the left wing of the union. The CCOO and the UGT, summoned three general strikes (1988, 1992 and 1994) against the economic policy of the Felipe González government, and one on June 20, 2002, against the government of José María Aznar and its plan to change the unemployment insurance system.

The current General Secretary is Ignacio Fernández Toxo. On September 29, 2010, the CCOO called a general strike to protest the José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero government's plans to raise the retirement age and cut spending.

Organization
CCOO is organized territorially in local, provincial, regional/nationality levels (in regional unions or in nationality confederations) and in a Spain-wide level. Equally and in a parallel way CCOO is organized at the sectoral level, from local unions in a company to the federal branch. The decision-making bodies at the federal level are the Confederal Congress, the Confederal Council and the Confederal Executive Committee.

Current affiliates
Branch federations are:

Confederal Executive Committee

 * Secretary of Social Protection and Public Policy: Carlos Bravo Fernández
 * Secretary of Institutional Participation: Francisco Carbonero Cantador
 * Secretary of Finance, Administration & Services Mary Cardeñosa Peñas
 * Secretary of Trade Union Action: Mercedes Gonzalez Calvo
 * Secretary of Women and Equality: Elena Blasco Martín
 * Secretary of Organization: Fernando Lezcano López
 * Secretary of Occupational Health: Pedro Jose Linares Rodríguez
 * Secretary of Training for Trade Union Education and Labour Culture: José Luis Gonzalez
 * Secretary of Communication: Empar Pablo Martínez
 * Secretary of Environment and Mocility: Mariano Sanz Lubeiro
 * Secretary of Membership, Services and Counseling: Francisca Goméz Sanchez
 * International and Cooperation Secretariat: Cristina Faciaben Lacorte
 * Social movements and networks Secretariat: Paula Guisande Boronat
 * Youth and new labour realities Secretariat: Carlos Gutiérrez Calderón

Internal currents
There are 3 internal currents in CCOO:
 * Confederal Majority: sector linked to the latest confederal directions. Has a clear majority in 19 organizations: Citizen Services, Industry, Health, Trade and Hospitality, Financial and Administrative Services, Education, Textile and Chemical Industries; and territorial organizations of Cantabria, Ceuta, Basque Autonomous Community, Navarra, Catalonia, Galiza, Castilla y León, Valencian Country, Andalusia, Extremadura and Región de Murcia. In the last Congress it was divided among supporters of José María Fidalgo, prone to continuity, and Ignacio Fernández Toxo, supporters of understanding with the opposition currents.
 * Critical sector of CCOO: current formed in 1996 by the left wing of CCOO and linked to the Communist Party of Spain (PCE). It was led by Agustín Moreno and supported by Marcelino Camacho. Currently its main spokesperson is Salce Elvira. It has a majority in the Federation of Pensioners and Retirees, and in the territorial federations of Asturies, the Balearic Islands and La Rioja.
 * Confederal Alternative: a split of the Confederal Majority, headed by former secretary of organization Rodolfo Benito. They have clear majority in the Federations of Construction and Wood, Agrifood, and in the regional unions of Madrid, Aragón, the Canary Islands and Melilla. They are known in the union as the rodolfos or benitos.

title: Workers' Commissions


text:
Weber–Fechner law

[[File:Weber-Fechner law demo - dots.svg|thumb|An illustration of the Weber–Fechner law. On each side, the lower square contains 10 more dots than the upper one. However the perception is different:

On the left side, the difference between upper and lower square is clearly visible. On the right side, the two squares look almost the same.]]

The Weber–Fechner laws are two related scientific laws in the field of psychophysics, known as Weber's law and Fechner's law. Both relate to human perception, more specifically the relation between the actual change in a physical stimulus and the perceived change. This includes stimuli to all senses: vision, hearing, taste, touch, and smell.

Ernst Heinrich Weber states that "the minimum increase of stimulus which will produce a perceptible increase of sensation is proportional to the pre-existent stimulus," while Gustav Fechner's law is an inference from Weber's law (with additional assumptions) which states that the intensity of our sensation increases as the logarithm of an increase in energy rather than as rapidly as the increase.

History and formulation of the laws
Both Weber's law and Fechner's law were formulated by Gustav Theodor Fechner (1801–1887). They were first published in 1860 in the work Elemente der Psychophysik (Elements of Psychophysics). This publication was the first work ever in this field, and where Fechner coined the term psychophysics to describe the interdisciplinary study of how humans perceive physical magnitudes. He made the claim that "...psycho-physics is an exact doctrine of the relation of function or dependence between body and soul."

Weber's law
Ernst Heinrich Weber (1795–1878) was one of the first persons to approach the study of the human response to a physical stimulus in a quantitative fashion. Fechner was a student of Weber and named his first law in honor of his mentor, since it was Weber who had conducted the experiments needed to formulate the law.

Fechner formulated several versions of the law, all communicating the same idea. One formulation states: "Simple differential sensitivity is inversely proportional to the size of the components of the difference; relative differential sensitivity remains the same regardless of size."

What this means is that the perceived change in stimuli is proportional to the initial stimuli.

Weber's law also incorporates the just-noticeable difference (JND). This is the smallest change in stimuli that can be perceived. As stated above, the JND $dS$ is proportional to the initial stimuli intensity $S$. Mathematically, it can be described as $$dS = K\cdot S$$ where $$S$$ is the reference stimulus and $$K$$ is a constant. It may be written as $Ψ = k logS$, with $Ψ$ being the sensation, $$k$$ being a constant, and $$S$$ being the physical intensity of the stimulus.

Weber's law always fails at low intensities, near and below the absolute detection threshold, and often also at high intensities, but may be approximately true across a wide middle range of intensities.

Weber contrast
Although Weber's law includes a statement of the proportionality of a perceived change to initial stimuli, Weber only refers to this as a rule of thumb regarding human perception. It was Fechner who formulated this statement as a mathematical expression referred to as Weber contrast.

$$ dp = \frac{dS}{S} \,\!$$ Weber contrast is not part of Weber's law.

Fechner's law
Fechner noticed in his own studies that different individuals have different sensitivity to certain stimuli. For example, the ability to perceive differences in light intensity could be related to how good that individual's vision is. He also noted that how the human sensitivity to stimuli changes depends on which sense is affected. He used this to formulate another version of Weber's law that he named die Maßformel, the "measurement formula". Fechner's law states that the subjective sensation is proportional to the logarithm of the stimulus intensity. According to this law, human perceptions of sight and sound work as follows: Perceived loudness/brightness is proportional to logarithm of the actual intensity measured with an accurate nonhuman instrument.

$$ p = k \ln{\frac{S}{S_0}} \,\!$$

The relationship between stimulus and perception is logarithmic. This logarithmic relationship means that if a stimulus varies as a geometric progression (i.e., multiplied by a fixed factor), the corresponding perception is altered in an arithmetic progression (i.e., in additive constant amounts). For example, if a stimulus is tripled in strength (i.e., 3 × 1), the corresponding perception may be two times as strong as its original value (i.e., 1 + 1). If the stimulus is again tripled in strength (i.e., 3 × 3 × 1), the corresponding perception will be three times as strong as its original value (i.e., 1 + 1 + 1). Hence, for multiplications in stimulus strength, the strength of perception only adds. The mathematical derivations of the torques on a simple beam balance produce a description that is strictly compatible with Weber's law.

Since Weber's law fails at low intensity, so does Fechner's law.

An early reference to "Fechner's ... law" was in 1875 by Ludimar Hermann in Elements of Human Physiology.

Deriving Fechner's law
Fechner's law is a mathematical derivation of Weber contrast.

$$ dp = k \frac{dS}{S} $$

Integrating the mathematical expression for Weber contrast gives:

$$ p = k \ln{S} + C $$

where $$C$$ is a constant of integration and ln is the natural logarithm.

To solve for $$C$$, assume that the perceived stimulus becomes zero at some threshold stimulus $$S_0$$. Using this as a constraint, set $$p = 0$$ and $$S = S_0$$. This gives:

$$ C = -k\ln{S_0} $$

Substituting $$C$$ in the integrated expression for Weber's law, the expression can be written as:

$$ p = k \ln{\frac{S}{S_0}} $$

The constant k is sense-specific and must be determined depending on the sense and type of stimulus.

Types of perception
Weber and Fechner conducted research on differences in light intensity and the perceived difference in weight. Other sense modalities provide only mixed support for either Weber's law or Fechner's law.

Weight perception
Weber found that the just noticeable difference (JND) between two weights was approximately proportional to the weights. Thus, if the weight of 105 g can (only just) be distinguished from that of 100 g, the JND (or differential threshold) is 5 g. If the mass is doubled, the differential threshold also doubles to 10 g, so that 210 g can be distinguished from 200 g. In this example, a weight (any weight) seems to have to increase by 5% for someone to be able to reliably detect the increase, and this minimum required fractional increase (of 5/100 of the original weight) is referred to as the "Weber fraction" for detecting changes in weight. Other discrimination tasks, such as detecting changes in brightness, or in tone height (pure tone frequency), or in the length of a line shown on a screen, may have different Weber fractions, but they all obey Weber's law in that observed values need to change by at least some small but constant proportion of the current value to ensure human observers will reliably be able to detect that change.

Fechner did not conduct any experiments on how perceived heaviness increased with the mass of the stimulus. Instead, he assumed that all JNDs are subjectively equal, and argued mathematically that this would produce a logarithmic relation between the stimulus intensity and the sensation. These assumptions have both been questioned. Following the work of S. S. Stevens, many researchers came to believe in the 1960s that the Stevens's power law was a more general psychophysical principle than Fechner's logarithmic law.

Sound
Weber's law does not quite hold for loudness. It is a fair approximation for higher intensities, but not for lower amplitudes.

Limitation of Weber's law in the auditory system
Weber's law does not hold at perception of higher intensities. Intensity discrimination improves at higher intensities. The first demonstration of the phenomena was presented by Riesz in 1928, in Physical Review. This deviation of the Weber's law is known as the "near miss" of the Weber's law. This term was coined by McGill and Goldberg in their paper of 1968 in Perception & Psychophysics. Their study consisted of intensity discrimination in pure tones. Further studies have shown that the near miss is observed in noise stimuli as well. Jesteadt et al. (1977) demonstrated that the near miss holds across all the frequencies, and that the intensity discrimination is not a function of frequency, and that the change in discrimination with level can be represented by a single function across all frequencies: $$\Delta I / I = 0.463 {(I/I_0)}^{-0.072}$$.

Vision
The eye senses brightness approximately logarithmically over a moderate range and stellar magnitude is measured on a logarithmic scale. This magnitude scale was invented by the ancient Greek astronomer Hipparchus in about 150 B.C. He ranked the stars he could see in terms of their brightness, with 1 representing the brightest down to 6 representing the faintest, though now the scale has been extended beyond these limits; an increase in 5 magnitudes corresponds to a decrease in brightness by a factor of 100. Modern researchers have attempted to incorporate such perceptual effects into mathematical models of vision.

Limitations of Weber's law in visual regularity perception
Perception of Glass patterns and mirror symmetries in the presence of noise follows Weber's law in the middle range of regularity-to-noise ratios (S), but in both outer ranges, sensitivity to variations is disproportionally lower. As Maloney, Mitchison, & Barlow (1987) showed for Glass patterns, and as van der Helm (2010) showed for mirror symmetries, perception of these visual regularities in the whole range of regularity-to-noise ratios follows the law p = g/(2+1/S) with parameter g to be estimated using experimental data.

Limitation of Weber's law at low light levels
For vision, Weber's law implies constancy of luminance contrast. Suppose a target object is set against a background luminance $$B$$. In order to be just visible, the target must be brighter or fainter than the background by some small amount $$\Delta B$$. The Weber contrast is defined as $$C=\Delta B / B$$, and Weber's law says that $$C$$ should be constant for all $$B$$.

Human vision follows Weber's law closely at normal daylight levels (i.e. in the photopic range) but begins to break down at twilight levels (the mesopic range) and is completely inapplicable at low light levels (scotopic vision). This can be seen in data collected by Blackwell and plotted by Crumey, showing threshold increment $log$$$\Delta B$$ versus background luminance $log$$$B$$ for various targets sizes. At daylight levels, the curves are approximately straight with slope 1, i.e. $log$$$\Delta B$$ = $log$$$B + const.$$, implying $$C=\Delta B / B$$ is constant. At the very darkest background levels ($$B$$ ≲ 10− 5 cd m−2, approximately 25 mag arcsec−2) the curves are flat - this is where the only visual perception is the observer's own neural noise ('dark light'). In the intermediate range, a portion can be approximated by the De Vries - Rose law, related to Ricco's law.

Lognormal distributions
Activation of neurons by sensory stimuli in many parts of the brain is by a proportional law: neurons change their spike rate by about 10–30%, when a stimulus (e.g. a natural scene for vision) has been applied. However, as Scheler (2017) showed, the population distribution of the intrinsic excitability or gain of a neuron is a heavy tail distribution, more precisely a lognormal shape, which is equivalent to a logarithmic coding scheme. Neurons may therefore spike with 5–10 fold different mean rates. Obviously, this increases the dynamic range of a neuronal population, while stimulus-derived changes remain small and linear proportional.

An analysis of the length of comments in internet discussion boards across several languages shows that comment lengths obey the lognormal distribution with great precision. The authors explain the distribution as a manifestation of the Weber–Fechner law.

Other applications
The Weber–Fechner law has been applied in other fields of research than just the human senses.

Numerical cognition
Psychological studies show that it becomes increasingly difficult to discriminate between two numbers as the difference between them decreases. This is called the distance effect. This is important in areas of magnitude estimation, such as dealing with large scales and estimating distances. It may also play a role in explaining why consumers neglect to shop around to save a small percentage on a large purchase, but will shop around to save a large percentage on a small purchase which represents a much smaller absolute dollar amount.

Pharmacology
It has been hypothesized that dose-response relationships can follow Weber's Law which suggests this law – which is often applied at the sensory level – originates from underlying chemoreceptor responses to cellular signaling dose relationships within the body. Dose response can be related to the Hill equation, which is closer to a power law.

Public finance
There is a new branch of the literature on public finance hypothesizing that the Weber–Fechner law can explain the increasing levels of public expenditures in mature democracies. Election after election, voters demand more public goods to be effectively impressed; therefore, politicians try to increase the magnitude of this "signal" of competence – the size and composition of public expenditures – in order to collect more votes.

Emotion
Preliminary research has found that pleasant emotions adhere to Weber’s Law, with accuracy in judging their intensity decreasing as pleasantness increases. However, this pattern wasn't observed for unpleasant emotions, suggesting a survival-related need for accurately discerning high-intensity negative emotions.

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

title: Weber–Fechner law


text:
User:Silvonen

I am Mikko Silvonen from Käpylä, Helsinki, Finland. I studied computer science, mathematics and computational linguistics at the University of Helsinki and graduated in 1998. I have worked in the fields of software engineering, performance improvement and language technology.

I am more active on the Finnish side.

Articles I started

 * Aalto University
 * Raseborg (in its new meaning)
 * Ville Vallgren

Disclosure
My employer is a neuroscience technology company called MEGIN. I may update incorrect or outdated information in articles related to my employer, but this is not part of my job description.

de:Benutzer:Silvonen hu:User:Silvonen pt:Usuário:Silvonen ru:Участник:Silvonen fi:Käyttäjä:Silvonen sv:Användare:Silvonen

title: User:Silvonen


text:
Henry Wheaton

Henry Wheaton (November 27, 1785 – March 11, 1848) was an American lawyer, jurist and diplomat. He was the third reporter of decisions for the United States Supreme Court, the first U.S. minister to Denmark, and the second U.S. minister to Prussia.

Biography
He was born at Providence, Rhode Island. He graduated from Rhode Island College (now Brown University) in 1802, was admitted to the bar in 1805, and, after two years' study abroad in Poitiers and London, practiced law at Providence (1807-1812) and at New York City (1812-1827). From 1812 to 1815, he edited National Advocate, the organ of the administration party. There he published notable articles on the question of neutral rights in connection with the then-existing war with England. On October 26, 1814, he became division judge advocate of the army. He was a justice of the Marine Court of New York City from 1815 to 1819.

From 1816 to 1827, he edited reports of the Supreme Court, as the third Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. Aided by Justice Joseph Story, his reports were known for their comprehensive notes and summaries of the arguments presented by each side. However, the volumes were slow in appearing and costly. Wheaton's successor Richard Peters condensed his work, and Wheaton sued him, claiming infringement of his common-law copyright. The Supreme Court rejected his claim in Wheaton v. Peters in 1834, which was the Court's first copyright case.

He was elected a member of the American Antiquarian Society in 1820. He was elected a member of the convention to form a new constitution for New York in 1821, was a member of the New York State Assembly (New York Co.) in 1824, and in 1825 was associated with John Duer and Benjamin F. Butler in a commission to revise the statute law of New York. He also took part in important cases, and was the sole associate of Daniel Webster in that which settled the limits of the state and federal legislation in reference to bankruptcy and insolvency. In 1825, he aided in the revision of the laws of New York.

His diplomatic career began in 1827, with an appointment to Denmark as chargé d'affaires. He served until 1835, displaying skill in the settlement of the sound dues that were imposed by Denmark on the vessels of all countries, and obtained modifications of the quarantine regulations. He was noted for his research into the Scandinavian language and literature, and was elected a member of Scandinavian and Icelandic societies. In 1829, he was elected to the American Philosophical Society.

In 1835 he was appointed minister to Prussia, being promoted to minister plenipotentiary in 1837. He soon received full power to conclude a treaty with the Zollverein, which he pursued for the next six years. On March 25, 1844, he signed a treaty with Germany, for which he received high commendation from President Tyler and John C. Calhoun, the secretary of state. This was rejected by the U.S. Senate but served as the basis for subsequent treaties. He was made a corresponding member of the French Institute in 1843, and a member of the Royal Academy of Berlin in 1846.

Other issues Wheaton dealt with during his diplomatic career were Scheldt dues, the tolls on the Elbe, and the rights of naturalized citizens. In 1846 Wheaton was requested to resign as Prussian minister by the new president, Polk, who needed his place for another appointment. The request provoked general condemnation, but Wheaton resigned and returned to the United States.

He was called at once to Harvard Law School as lecturer on international law, but illness prevented his acceptance. He died at Dorchester, Massachusetts, on March 11, 1848.

Philosophy
Wheaton's general theory is that international law consists of "those rules of conduct which reason deduces, as consonant to justice, from the nature of the society existing among independent nations, with such definitions and modifications as may be established by general consent."

Family connections
Wheaton's niece, Ellen Smith Tupper, became a noted beekeeper. Ellen Tupper's daughters included Unitarian Universalist ministers Eliza Tupper Wilkes and Mila Tupper Maynard, and educator Kate Tupper Galpin. Her grandson was artist Allen Tupper True.

Works

 * Digest of the Law of Maritime Captures (1815)
 * Supreme Court Reports (12 vols., New York, 1826–27)
 * A Digest of the Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States from Its Establishment in 1789 to 1820 (1820–29)
 * Life of William Pinkney, which he also abridged for publication in Sparks's "American Biography" series (1826)
 * History of the Northmen, or Danes and Normans, from the Earliest Times to the Conquest of England by William of Normandy London: J. Murray, 1831 at Internet Archive, which Washington Irving said "evinced throughout the enthusiasm of an antiquarian, the liberality of a scholar, and the enlightened toleration of a citizen of the world" (French translation by Paul Guillot, Paris, 1844)
 * Elements of International Law (1836). This is his most important work, of which a 6th edition with the last corrections of the author and a memoir was prepared by William Beach Lawrence (Boston, 1855) and an 8th by Richard Henry Dana Jr. (Boston, 1866).  The contents of the 8th edition were the source of controversy between Lawrence (who claimed his notes from earlier editions had been improperly copied) and Dana.
 * History of Scandinavia, with Andrew Crichton (1838) A sequel to History of the Northmen.
 * Histoire du progrès des gens en Europe depuis la paix de Westphalie jusqu'au congres de Vienne, avec un précis historique du droit des gens européens avant la paix de Westphalie, written in 1838 for a prize offered by the French Academy of Moral and Political Science, and translated in 1845 by W. B. Lawrence as A History of the Law of Nations in Europe and America, New York: Gould, Banks & Co.. The History took rank at once as one of the leading works on the subject of which it treats.
 * An Enquiry into the Validity of the British Claim to a Right of Visitation and Search of American Vessels suspected to be engaged in the Slave Trade (Philadelphia and London, 1842; 2d ed., 1858)

Wheaton translated the Code of Napoleon, but the manuscript was destroyed by fire. He also contributed numerous political, historical, and literary articles to the North American Review and other periodicals.

title: Henry Wheaton


text:
User talk:Rk~enwiki

Greetings! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you have questions or doubts of any sort, do not hesitate to post them on the Village Pump, somebody will respond ASAP. Other helpful pages include: Have fun! --Jiang 19:42 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Welcome, newcomers
 * How does one edit a page
 * Manual of style
 * Naming conventions

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Rk. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Rk~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:10, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rk~enwiki


text:
Postage stamps and postal history of the Indian states

The native states of India, also known as feudatory or princely states, were typically vassals under a local or regional ruler who owed allegiance to the British Raj. There were about 675 native states in all but many were not parts of British India proper because they never become possessions of the British Crown; rather, they were tied to it in a system of subsidiary alliances. Following the Partition of India in 1947, the suzerainty of the Raj was terminated and native states had to choose between independence or formal accession by either India or Pakistan. In practice, all of the native states had acceded or been annexed by the end of 1949.

For postal purposes, many native states ran their own services and their stamp issues have been termed feudatory by the main catalogues such as Stanley Gibbons Ltd. There were exceptions in the form of six convention states who made separate postal arrangements with the Raj and used British India stamps that were overprinted with the state's name.

Stamp-issuing native states
The native states which issued postage stamps have been categorised as either convention states or feudatory states. The words 'convention' and 'feudatory' in this sense referred solely to postal arrangements with or in relation to British India.

In all, there were some 675 feudatory states at various times, but not all issued postal stamps and/or stationery. Many of the first issues were printed locally, using primitive methods such as typography and so they can be very rare. There was low quality of printing and design in many cases and collectors sometimes informally refer to them as "Uglies". All remaining feudatory issues were replaced by stamps of the Republic of India on 1 April 1950 and most were declared obsolete from 1 May 1950 – there was one exception in the Anchal stamps of Travancore-Cochin which remained current until 1 July 1951.

There were six convention states: Chamba, Faridkot, Gwalior, Jind, Nabha and Patiala. They all used stamps of British India which were overprinted with the name of the state in Latin or Hindi/Urdu letters, or both. The Gibbons catalogue omits minor varieties of these stamps which had printing errors such as smaller letters, broken letters, unequal inking and unequal spacing. The convention issues were replaced by those of the Republic of India on 1 April 1950 but remained current until 31 December of that year, becoming obsolete from 1 January 1951.

The native states which issued stamps were as follows. Unless otherwise stated, the currency in use was 12 pies = 1 anna; 16 annas = 1 rupee. The dates are the starting and ending dates of stamp issue validity:


text:
Charles Sumner

Charles Sumner (January 6, 1811 –March 11, 1874) was an American lawyer, politician, and statesman who represented Massachusetts in the United States Senate from 1851 until his death in 1874. Before and during the American Civil War, he was a leading American advocate for the abolition of slavery. He chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee from 1861 to 1871, until he lost the position following a dispute with President Ulysses S. Grant over the attempted annexation of Santo Domingo. After breaking with Grant, he joined the Liberal Republican Party, spending his final two years in the Senate alienated from his party. Sumner had a controversial and divisive legacy for many years after his death, but in recent decades, his historical reputation has improved in recognition of his early support for racial equality.

Sumner began his political activism as a member of various anti-slavery groups, leading to his election to the U.S. Senate in 1851 as a member of the Free Soil Party; he soon became a founding member of the Republican Party. In the Senate, he devoted his efforts to opposing the "Slave Power," which in 1856 culminated in a vicious beating, almost to the point of death, by Representative Preston Brooks on the Senate floor. Sumner's severe injuries and extended absence from the Senate made him a symbol of the anti-slavery cause. Though he did not return to the Senate until 1859, Massachusetts reelected him in 1857, leaving his empty desk as a reminder of the incident, which polarized the nation as the Civil War approached.

During the war, Sumner led the Radical Republican faction, which was critical of President Abraham Lincoln for being too moderate toward the South. As chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, Sumner worked to ensure that the United Kingdom and France did not intervene on behalf of the Confederate States. After the Union won the war and Lincoln was assassinated, Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens led congressional efforts to grant equal civil and voting rights to freedmen and to block ex-Confederates from power so they would not reverse the gains derived from the Union's victory in the war. President Andrew Johnson's persistent opposition to these efforts played a role in his impeachment in 1868.

During the Grant administration, Sumner fell out of favor with his party. He supported the annexation of Alaska but opposed Grant's proposal to annex Santo Domingo. After leading senators to defeat the Santo Domingo Treaty in 1870, Sumner denounced him in such terms that reconciliation was impossible, and Senate Republicans stripped him of his power. Sumner opposed Grant's 1872 reelection and supported Liberal Republican Horace Greeley. He died in office less than two years later.

Early life, education, and law career
Charles Sumner was born on Irving Street in Boston on January 6, 1811. His father, Charles Pinckney Sumner, was a Harvard-educated lawyer, abolitionist, and early proponent of racial integration of schools, who shocked 19th-century Boston by opposing anti-miscegenation laws. His mother, Relief Jacob, worked as a seamstress before marrying Charles.

Both of Sumner's parents were born in poverty and were described as exceedingly formal and undemonstrative. His father served as Clerk of the Massachusetts House of Representatives from 1806 to 1807 and from 1810 to 1811, and he had a moderately successful legal practice. Throughout Sumner's childhood, his family teetered on the edge of the middle class. Charles Pinckney Sumner hated slavery and told his son that freeing the slaves would "do us no good" unless society treated them equally. He was a close associate of Unitarian leader William Ellery Channing. Expanding on Channing's argument that human beings had infinite potential to improve themselves, Sumner concluded that environment had "an important, if not controlling influence" in shaping people. Thus, if society gave precedence to "knowledge, virtue and religion", then "the most forlorn shall grow into forms of unimagined strength and beauty." Moral law, he believed, was as important for governments as it was for individuals, and legal institutions that inhibited personal progress—like slavery or segregation—were evil.

The family's fortunes improved in 1825, when Charles Pinckney Sumner became Sheriff of Suffolk County; he held the position until his death in 1838. The family attended Trinity Church, but after 1825, they occupied a pew in King's Chapel. Sumner's father was also able to provide higher education for his children; the young Charles attended Boston Latin School, where he befriended Robert Charles Winthrop, James Freeman Clarke, Samuel Francis Smith, and Wendell Phillips. In 1830, he graduated from Harvard College, where he lived in Hollis Hall and was a member of the Porcellian Club. He then attended Harvard Law School, where he became a protégé of Joseph Story and an enthusiastic student of jurisprudence.

After graduating in 1834, Sumner was admitted to the bar and entered private practice in Boston in partnership with George Stillman Hillard. A visit to Washington decided him against a political career, and he returned to Boston resolved to practice law. He contributed to the quarterly American Jurist and edited Story's court decisions as well as some law texts. From 1836 to 1837, Sumner lectured at Harvard Law School.

Travels in Europe
In 1837, Sumner visited Europe with financial support from benefactors, including Story and Congressman Richard Fletcher. He landed at Le Havre and found the cathedral at Rouen striking: "The great lion of the north of France … transcending all that my imagination had pictured." He reached Paris in December, studied French, and visited the Louvre. He mastered French within six months and attended lectures at the Sorbonne on subjects ranging from geology to Greek history to criminal law.

In his journal for January 20, 1838, Sumner noted that one lecturer "had quite a large audience among whom I noticed two or three blacks, or rather mulattos—two-thirds black perhaps—dressed quite à la mode and having the easy, jaunty air of young men of fashion...." They were "well received" by the other students after the lecture. He continued:

"They were standing in the midst of a knot of young men and their color seemed to be no objection to them. I was glad to see this, though with American impressions, it seemed very strange. It must be then that the distance between free blacks and whites among us is derived from education, and does not exist in the nature of things."

Sumner decided that Americans' predisposition to see blacks as inferior was a learned viewpoint, and he determined to become an abolitionist upon returning to America.

Over the next three years, Sumner became fluent in Spanish, German, and Italian, and met with many leading European statesmen. In 1838, he visited Britain, where Lord Brougham declared that he "had never met with any man of Sumner's age of such extensive legal knowledge and natural legal intellect". Though he often praised British society as more refined than American, Sumner published a fierce defense of the American position in the dispute over the Maine-Canada boundary, circulated by Minister to France Lewis Cass.

In 1840, at age 29, Sumner returned to Boston to practice law but devoted more time to lecturing at Harvard Law, editing court reports, and contributing to law journals, especially on historical and biographical themes.

Sumner developed friendships with several prominent Bostonians, particularly Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, whose house he visited regularly in the 1840s. Longfellow's daughters found his stateliness amusing; he would ceremoniously open doors for the children while saying "In presequas" ("after you") in a sonorous tone.

Early political activism
Sumner embarked on a public political career in 1845, when he emerged as one of the most prominent critics of slavery in the city of Boston and the state of Massachusetts, a hotbed of abolitionist sentiment.

In July, Sumner delivered the Boston Independence Day oration, on the subject The True Grandeur of Nations. His speech was critical of the move toward war with Mexico and an impassioned appeal for freedom and peace. Sumner considered the conflict a war of aggression but was primarily concerned that captured territories would expand slavery westward. He soon became a sought-after orator for formal occasions throughout Boston. His lofty themes and stately eloquence made a profound impression. His platform presence was imposing. He stood 6ft 4in tall, with a massive frame. His voice was clear and powerful. His gestures were unconventional and individual, but vigorous and impressive. His literary style was florid, with much detail, allusion, and quotation, often from the Bible as well as the Greeks and Romans. Longfellow wrote that he delivered speeches "like a cannoneer ramming down cartridges", while Sumner himself said that "you might as well look for a joke in the Book of Revelation."

Following the annexation of Texas as a slave state in December, Sumner took an active role in the anti-slavery movement. In 1847, he denounced the declaration of war against Mexico with such vigor that he was recognized as a leader of the "Conscience" faction of the Massachusetts Whig Party. He declined the Whig nomination for the United States House of Representatives in 1848, instead helping organize the Free Soil Party and becoming chairman of the state party's executive committee, a position he used to advocate for abolition and build a coalition that included anti-slavery Whigs and Democrats.

Sumner also took an active role in other social causes. He worked with Horace Mann to improve Massachusetts's system of public education, advocated prison reform, and represented the plaintiffs in Roberts v. City of Boston, which challenged the legality of racial segregation in public schools. Arguing before the Massachusetts Supreme Court, Sumner noted that schools for blacks were physically inferior and that segregation bred harmful psychological and sociological effects—arguments made in Brown v. Board of Education over a century later. Sumner lost the case, but the Massachusetts General Court abolished school segregation in 1855.

United States Senate (1851–1874)
In 1851, a coalition of Democratic and Free Soil legislators gained control of the Massachusetts General Court. In exchange for Free Soil support for Democratic governor George Boutwell, the Free Soil Party named Sumner its choice for U.S. Senate. Despite the private agreement, conservative Democrats opposed his candidacy and called for a less radical candidate. The impasse was broken after three months and Sumner was elected on a parliamentary technicality by a one-vote majority on April 24, 1851, in part thanks to the support of Senate President Henry Wilson. His election marked a sharp break in Massachusetts politics, as his abolitionist politics contrasted sharply those of his best-known predecessor in the seat, Daniel Webster, one of the foremost supporters of the Compromise of 1850 and its Fugitive Slave Act.

For the first few sessions, Sumner did not promote any of his controversial causes. On August 26, 1852, he delivered his maiden speech, despite strenuous efforts to dissuade him. This oratorical effort incorporated a popular abolitionist motto, "Freedom National; Slavery Sectional," as its title. In it, Sumner attacked the Fugitive Slave Act. Though both major party platforms affirmed every provision of the Compromise of 1850 as final, including the Fugitive Slave Act, Sumner called for its repeal. For more than three hours, he denounced it as a violation of the Constitution, an affront to the public conscience, and an offence against divine law. After his speech, a senator from Alabama urged that there be no reply: "The ravings of a maniac may sometimes be dangerous, but the barking of a puppy never did any harm." Sumner's outspoken opposition to slavery made him few friends in the Senate.

The "Crime against Kansas" and beating by Preston Brooks
On May 19 and 20, 1856, during the civil unrest known as "Bleeding Kansas," Sumner denounced the Kansas–Nebraska Act in his "Crime against Kansas" speech. The long speech argued for Kansas's immediate admission as a free state and denounced "Slave Power"—the political power of the slave owners. Their motivation, he alleged, was to spread slavery even to free territories:

"Not in any common lust for power did this uncommon tragedy have its origin. It is the rape of a virgin Territory, compelling it to the hateful embrace of slavery; and it may be clearly traced to a depraved desire for a new Slave State, hideous offspring of such a crime, in the hope of adding to the power of slavery in the National Government."

Sumner verbally attacked authors of the Act, Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois and Andrew Butler of South Carolina:

"The senator from South Carolina has read many books of chivalry, and believes himself a chivalrous knight with sentiments of honor and courage. Of course he has chosen a mistress to whom he has made his vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight—I mean the harlot, slavery. For her his tongue is always profuse in words. Let her be impeached in character, or any proposition made to shut her out from the extension of her wantonness, and no extravagance of manner or hardihood of assertion is then too great for this senator."Two days later, on the afternoon of May 22, Representative Preston Brooks, Butler's first cousin once removed, confronted Sumner in the Senate chamber and beat him severely on the head, using a thick gutta-percha cane with a gold head. Sumner was knocked down and trapped under the heavy desk, which was bolted to the floor. Blinded by his own blood, he staggered up the aisle and collapsed into unconsciousness. Brooks continued to beat the motionless Sumner until his cane broke, at which point he continued to strike Sumner with the remaining piece. Several other senators attempted to help Sumner, but were blocked by Laurence Keitt, who brandished a pistol and shouted, "Let them be!"

The episode became a symbol of polarization in the antebellum period; Sumner became a martyr in the North and Brooks a hero in the South. Thousands attended rallies in support of Sumner throughout the North. Louisa May Alcott described a rally in Boston on November 3 in a letter to Anna Alcott: "Eight hundred gentlemen on horseback escorted him and formed a line up Beacon St. through which he rode smiling and bowing, he looked pale but otherwise as usual. The only time Sumner rose along the route was when he passed the Orphan Asylum and saw all the little blue aproned girls waving their hands to him. I thought it was very sweet in him to do that honor to the fatherless and motherless children. A little child was carried out to give him a great bouquet, which he took and kissed the baby bearer. The streets were lined with wreaths, flags, and loving people to welcome the good man back....and tho I was only a 'love lorn' governess I waved my cotton handkerchief like a meek banner to my hero with honorable wounds on his head and love of little children in his heart. Hurra!! I could not hear the speeches at the State House so I tore down Hancock St. and got a place opposite his house. I saw him go in, and soon after the cheers of the horsemen and crowd brought him smiling to the window, he only bowed, but when the leader of the cavelcade cried out 'Three cheers for the mother of Charles Sumner!' he stepped back and soon appeared leading an old lady who nodded, waved her hand, put down the curtain, and then with a few dozen more cheers the crowd dispersed. I was so excited I pitched about like a mad woman, shouted, waved, hung onto fences, rushed thro crowds, and swarmed about in a state of rapterous insanity till it was all over and then I went home hoarse and worn out."

More than a million copies of Sumner's "Crime against Kansas" speech were distributed. Ralph Waldo Emerson remarked, "I do not see how a barbarous community and a civilised community can constitute one state. I think we must get rid of slavery, or we must get rid of freedom." Conversely, Brooks was praised by Southern newspapers. The Richmond Enquirer editorialized that Sumner should be caned "every morning" and Southerners sent Brooks hundreds of new canes in endorsement of his assault. Southern lawmakers made rings out of the cane's remains, which they wore on neck chains to show solidarity with Brooks.

Historian William Gienapp has concluded that Brooks's "assault was of critical importance in transforming the struggling Republican party into a major political force." Theological and legal scholar William R. Long characterized the speech as "a most rebarbative and vituperative speech on the Senate floor", which "flows with Latin quotations and references to English and Roman history." In his eyes, the speech was "a gauntlet thrown down, a challenge to the 'Slave Power' to admit once and for all that it were encircling the free states with their tentacular grip and gradually siphoning off the breath of democracy-loving citizens." In addition to head trauma, Sumner suffered "psychic wounds," now understood to be post-traumatic stress disorder. When he spent months convalescing, his political enemies ridiculed him and accused him of cowardice for not resuming his duties. The Massachusetts General Court reelected him in November 1856, believing that his vacant chair in the Senate chamber served as a powerful symbol of free speech and resistance to slavery.

When Sumner returned to the Senate in 1857, he was unable to last a day. His doctors advised a sea voyage and "a complete separation from the cares and responsibilities that must beset him at home." He sailed for Europe and immediately found relief. During two months in Paris in the spring of 1857, he renewed friendships, especially with Thomas Gold Appleton, dined out frequently, and attended the opera. His contacts there included Alexis de Tocqueville, poet Alphonse de Lamartine, former French Prime Minister François Guizot, Ivan Turgenev, and Harriet Beecher Stowe. Sumner toured several countries, including Prussia and Scotland, before returning to Washington, where he spent only a few days in the Senate in December. Both then and during several later attempts to return to work, he found himself exhausted just listening to Senate business. He sailed once more for Europe on May 22, 1858, the second anniversary of Brooks's attack.

In Paris, prominent physician Charles-Édouard Brown-Séquard diagnosed Sumner's condition as spinal cord damage that he could treat by burning the skin along the spinal cord. Sumner chose to refuse anaesthesia, which was thought to reduce the effectiveness of the procedure. Observers both at the time and since doubt Brown-Séquard's efforts were of value. After spending weeks recovering from these treatments, Sumner resumed his touring, this time as far east as Dresden and Prague and south to Italy twice. In France he visited Brittany and Normandy, as well as Montpellier. He wrote his brother: "If anyone cares to know how I am doing, you can say better and better."

In 1859, Sumner returned to the Senate permanently. Though fellow Republicans advised a less strident tone, he answered: "When crime and criminals are thrust before us, they are to be met by all the energies that God has given us by argument, scorn, sarcasm and denunciation." He delivered his first return speech, "The Barbarism of Slavery," on June 4, 1860. He attacked attempts to depict slavery as a benevolent institution, said it stifled economic development in the South, and that it left slaveholders reliant on "the bludgeon, the revolver, and the bowie-knife". He addressed an anticipated objection on the part of one of his colleagues: "Say, sir, in your madness, that you own the sun, the stars, the moon; but do not say that you own a man, endowed with a soul that shall live immortal, when sun and moon and stars have passed away." Even allies found his language too strong, one calling it "harsh, vindictive, and slightly brutal". He spent the summer rallying the anti-slavery forces for the election of 1860 and opposing talk of compromise.

Civil War
After the Civil War began, Sumner was among the Radical Republicans who advocated immediate abolition of slavery and the destruction of the Southern planter class. Although like-minded on slavery, the Radicals were loosely organized and disagreed on issues such as the tariff and currency. Other Radicals in the Senate included Zachariah Chandler and Benjamin Wade. After the fall of Fort Sumter in April 1861, Sumner, Chandler and Wade repeatedly visited President Abraham Lincoln at the White House to discuss slavery and the rebellion. Gilbert Osofsky argues that Sumner saw the war as a "death struggle" between "two mutually contradictory civilizations," and his solution was "to 'civilize' and 'Americanize' the South" by conquest, then forcibly mold it into a society defined in Northern terms, as an idealized version of New England.

Throughout the war, Sumner had been the special champion of black Americans, being the most vigorous advocate of emancipation, of enlisting blacks in the Union Army, and of the establishment of the Freedmen's Bureau.

Emancipation
The Radicals desired the immediate emancipation of slaves and persistently lobbied for it as wartime policy, but Lincoln was resistant, since the slave states Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri would be encouraged to join the Confederacy. Lincoln instead adopted a plan for gradual emancipation and compensation to slavers, but consulted Sumner frequently. Despite their disagreements, Lincoln called Sumner "my idea of a bishop" and an embodiment of the American people's conscience.

In May 1861, Sumner counseled Lincoln to make emancipation the war's primary objective. He believed that military necessity would eventually force Lincoln's hand and that emancipation would give the Union higher moral standing, which would keep Britain from entering the Civil War on the Confederacy's side. In October 1861, at the Massachusetts Republican Convention in Worcester, Sumner openly expressed his belief that slavery was the war's sole cause and that the Union government's primary objective was to end it. Sumner argued that Lincoln could command the Union Army to emancipate slaves under color of martial law. In the conservative press, Sumner's speech was denounced as incendiary. Conservative Massachusetts newspapers editorialized that he was mentally ill and a "candidate for the insane asylum," but the Radicals fully endorsed Sumner's speech, and he continued to advance his argument publicly. As an intermediate measure, the Radicals passed two Confiscation Acts in 1861 and 1862 that allowed the military to emancipate confiscated slaves whom the Confederate military had impressed into service.

On January 1, 1863, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, abolishing slavery in all Confederate territory. The Thirteenth Amendment subsequently abolished the practice of chattel slavery.

Foreign relations
After the withdrawal of Southern senators, Sumner became chair of the Committee on Foreign Relations in March 1861. As chair, he renewed his efforts for diplomatic recognition of Haiti. Haiti had sought recognition since winning independence in 1804 but faced opposition from Southern senators. In their absence, the United States recognized Haiti in 1862.

On November 8, 1861, the Union Navy warship USS San Jacinto (1850) intercepted the British steamer RMS Trent. Two Confederate diplomats aboard were placed into port custody. In response to the capture, the British government dispatched 8,000 troops to the Canada–United States border and sought to strengthen the Royal Navy. Secretary of State William Seward believed the diplomats were contraband of war, but Sumner argued the men did not qualify as such because they were unarmed. He favored their release along with an apology from the U.S. government towards Britain. In the Senate, Sumner suppressed open debate in order to save the Lincoln administration from embarrassment. On December 25, 1861, at Lincoln's invitation, Sumner addressed the cabinet. He read letters from prominent British political figures, including Richard Cobden, John Bright, William Ewart Gladstone, and the Duke of Argyll as evidence that political sentiment in Britain supported the envoys' return to the British. Lincoln quietly but reluctantly ordered the captives' release to British custody and apologized. After the Trent affair, Sumner's reputation improved among conservative Northerners.

Reconstruction and Civil rights
As one of the Radical Republican leaders in the post-war Senate, Sumner fought to provide equal civil and voting rights for freedmen on the grounds that "consent of the governed" was a basic principle of American republicanism.

Sumner's radical legal theory of Reconstruction proposed that nothing beyond the confines of the Constitution, read in light of the Declaration of Independence, restricted Congress's treatment of the rebelling states. Though not as radical as Thaddeus Stevens, who considered the Confederate states "conquered provinces," Sumner argued that by declaring secession, the state governments had committed felo de se (state suicide) and could be regulated as territories that should be prepared for statehood, under conditions set by the national government.

Sumner emerged as an idealist and a champion for civil rights through this turbulent and controversial period. He joined fellow Republicans in overriding President Andrew Johnson's vetoes, though his most radical ideas were not implemented. Sumner favored partial male suffrage with a literacy requirement for all southerners in order to vote. Instead, Congress imposed a loyalty requirement the following year; Sumner was strongly supportive.

Sumner was a friend of Samuel Gridley Howe and a guiding force for the American Freedmen's Inquiry Commission, started in 1863. He was one of the most prominent advocates for suffrage for blacks, along with free homesteads and free public schools. His uncompromising attitude did not endear him to moderates and his arrogance and inflexibility often inhibited his effectiveness as a legislator. He was largely excluded from work on the Thirteenth Amendment, in part because he did not get along with Illinois Senator Lyman Trumbull, who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee and did much of the work on it. Sumner introduced an alternative amendment that combined the Thirteenth Amendment with elements of the Fourteenth Amendment. It would have abolished slavery and declared that "all people are equal before the law." During Reconstruction, he often attacked civil rights legislation as inadequate and fought for legislation to give land to freed slaves and to mandate education for all, regardless of race, in the South. He viewed segregation and slavery as two sides of the same coin. He introduced a civil rights bill in 1872 to mandate equal accommodation in all public places and required suits brought under the bill to be argued in the federal courts. The bill failed, but Sumner revived it in the next Congress, and on his deathbed begged visitors to see that it did not fail.

Sumner repeatedly tried to remove the word "white" from naturalization laws. He introduced bills to that effect in 1868 and 1869, but neither came to a vote. On July 2, 1870, Sumner moved to amend a pending bill in a way that would strike the word "white" wherever in all Congressional acts pertaining to naturalization of immigrants. On July 4, 1870, he said: "Senators undertake to disturb us … by reminding us of the possibility of large numbers swarming from China; but the answer to all this is very obvious and very simple. If the Chinese come here, they will come for citizenship or merely for labor. If they come for citizenship, then in this desire do they give a pledge of loyalty to our institutions; and where is the peril in such vows? They are peaceful and industrious; how can their citizenship be the occasion of solicitude?" He accused legislators promoting anti-Chinese legislation of betraying the principles of the Declaration of Independence: "Worse than any heathen or pagan abroad are those in our midst who are false to our institutions." Sumner's bill failed, and from 1870 to 1943, and in some cases as late as 1952, Chinese and other Asians were ineligible for naturalized U.S. citizenship. Sumner remained a champion of civil rights for blacks. He co-authored the Civil Rights Act of 1875 with John Mercer Langston and introduced the bill in the Senate on May 13, 1870. The bill passed a year after his death, in February 1875, and President Grant signed it into law on March 1. It was the last civil rights legislation for 82 years until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. The Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1883 when it decided a group of cases known as the Civil Rights Cases.

When Johnson was impeached, Sumner voted for conviction at his trial. He was only sorry that he had to vote on each article of impeachment, for as he said, he would have rather voted, "Guilty of all, and infinitely more."

Alaska annexation
Throughout March 1867, Secretary William H. Seward and Russian representative Edouard de Stoeckl met in Washington, D.C., and negotiated a treaty for the annexation and sale of the Russian American territory of Alaska to the United States for $7,200,000. President Johnson submitted the treaty to Congress for ratification with Sumner's approval, and on April 9, his foreign relations committee approved and sent the treaty to the Senate. In a three-hour speech, Sumner spoke in favor of the treaty on the Senate floor, describing in detail Alaska's imperial history, natural resources, population, and climate. Sumner wanted to block British expansion from Canada, arguing that Alaska was geographically and financially strategic, especially for the Pacific Coast States. He said Alaska would increase America's borders, spread republican institutions, and represent an act of friendship with Russia. The treaty won its needed two-thirds majority by one vote.

The 1867 treaty neither formally recognized, categorised, nor compensated any native Alaskan Eskimos or Indians, referring to them only as "uncivilized tribes" under the control of Congress. By federal law, Native Alaskan tribes, including the Inuit, the Aleut, and the Athabascan, were entitled only to land that they inhabited. According to treaty, native Alaskan tribes were excluded from U.S. citizenship, but citizenship was available to Russian residents. Creoles, persons of Russian and Indian descent, were considered Russian. Sumner said the new territory should be called by its Aleutian name, Alaska, meaning "great land." He advocated for free public education and equal protection laws for U.S. citizens in Alaska.

Personal achievements in 1867 included his election as a member to the American Philosophical Society.

CSS Alabama claims
Sumner was well regarded in the United Kingdom, but after the war he sacrificed his reputation in the U.K. with his stand on U.S. claims for British breaches of neutrality. The U.S. had claims against Britain for the damage inflicted by Confederate raiding ships fitted out in British ports. Sumner held that since Britain had accorded the rights of belligerents to the Confederacy, it was responsible for extending the duration of the war and consequent losses. In 1869, he asserted that Britain should pay damages for not merely the raiders, but also "that other damage, immense and infinite, caused by the prolongation of the war", specifically the British blockade runners, which were estimated to have given the Confederacy 60% of its weapons, 1/3 of the lead for its bullets, 3/4 ingredients for its powder, and most of the cloth for its uniforms; some historians believe that this may have lengthened the war by two years and cost 400,000 more lives of soldiers and civilians on both sides. He demanded $2,000,000,000 for these "national claims" in addition to $125,000,000 for damages from the raiders. Sumner did not expect that Britain ever would or could pay this sum, but he suggested that Britain turn over Canada as payment. This proposition offended many Britons, but was taken seriously by many Americans, including the Secretary of State, whose support for it nearly derailed the settlement with Great Britain in the months before the arbitration conference met at Geneva. At the Geneva arbitration conference in 1871, which settled U.S. claims against Britain, the panel of arbitrators refused to consider those "national claims."

Sumner had some influence over J. Lothrop Motley, the U.S. ambassador to Britain, causing him to disregard the instructions of Secretary of State Hamilton Fish on the matter. This offended President Grant, but while it would be given as the official reason for Motley's removal, was not really so pressing: the dismissal took place a year after Motley's alleged misbehavior, and the real reason was an act of spite by Grant against Sumner.

Dominican Republic annexation treaty
In 1869, President Grant, in an expansionist plan, looked into the annexation of a Caribbean island country, the Dominican Republic, then known as Santo Domingo. Grant believed that the island's mineral resources would be valuable to the United States, and that African Americans repressed in the South would have a safe haven to which to migrate. A labor shortage in the South would force Southerners to be tolerant toward African Americans. In July and November 1869, under Grant's authority and with the State Department's permission on the second trip, Orville Babcock, Grant's private secretary, secretly negotiated a treaty with President Buenaventura Báez of the Dominican Republic. The initial treaty had not been authorized by the State Department, but the island nation was on the verge of a civil war between Báez and ex-President Marcos A. Cabral. Grant sent in the U.S. Navy to keep the Dominican Republic free from invasion and civil war while the treaty negotiations took place. This military action was controversial since the naval protection was unauthorized by Congress. The official treaty, drafted by Secretary of State Hamilton Fish in October 1869, annexed the Dominican Republic to the United States, gave eventual statehood, the lease of Samaná Bay for $150,000 yearly, and a $1,500,000 payment of the Dominican national debt. In January 1870, in order to gain support for the treaty, Grant visited Sumner's Washington home and mistakenly believed that Sumner had consented to the treaty. Sumner said that he had only promised to give the treaty friendly consideration. This meeting led to bitter contention between Sumner and Grant. The treaty was formally submitted to the United States Senate on January 10, 1870.

Sumner, opposed to American imperialism in the Caribbean and fearful that annexation would lead to the conquest of the neighboring black republic of Haiti, became convinced that corruption lay behind the treaty, and that men close to Grant shared in the corruption. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he initially withheld his opinion on the treaty on January 18, 1870. Sumner had been leaked information from Assistant Secretary of State Bancroft Davis that U.S. Naval ships were being used to protect Báez. Sumner's committee voted against annexation and, at Sumner's suggestion and possibly to save the party from an ugly fight or Grant from embarrassment, the Senate debated the treaty behind closed doors in executive session. Grant persisted and sent messages to Congress in favor of annexation on March 14 and May 31, 1870. In closed session, Sumner spoke out against the treaty, warning that there would be difficulty with the foreign nationals, noting the chronic rebellion on the island and the risk that the independence of Haiti, recognized by the U.S. in 1862, would be lost. He said that Grant's use of the U.S. Navy as a protectorate was a violation of international law and unconstitutional. Finally, on June 30, 1870, the treaty was voted on by the Senate and failed to gain the 2/3 majority required for passage.

The next day, Grant, feeling betrayed by Sumner, retaliated by ordering the dismissal of Sumner's close friend John Lothrop Motley, Ambassador to Britain. By autumn, Sumner's personal hostility to Grant was public knowledge, and he blamed the Secretary of State for failing to resign rather than let Grant have his way. The two men, friends until then, became bitter enemies. In December 1870, still fearful that Grant meant to acquire Santo Domingo somehow, Sumner gave a fiercely critical speech accusing him of usurpation and Babcock of unethical conduct. Already Grant, supported by Fish, had initiated a campaign to depose Sumner from the chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Although Sumner said he was an "Administration man," in addition to having stopped Grant's Dominican Republic treaty attempt, Sumner had defeated Grant's full repeal of the Tenure of Office Act, blocked Grant's nomination of Alexander Stewart as Secretary of Treasury, and been a constant harassing force pushing Reconstruction policies faster than Grant had been willing to go. Grant also resented Sumner's superior manner. Told that Sumner did not believe in the Bible, Grant supposedly said he was not surprised: "He didn't write it." As the rift between Grant and Sumner increased, Sumner's health began to decline. When the 42nd U.S. Congress convened on March 4, 1871, senators affiliated with Grant, known as "New Radicals" voted to oust Sumner from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairmanship.

Liberal Republican revolt
Sumner now turned against Grant. Like many other reformers, he decried the corruption in Grant's administration. Sumner believed that the civil rights program he championed could not be carried through by a corrupt government. In 1872, he joined the Liberal Republican Party, which had been started by reformist Republicans such as Horace Greeley. The Liberal Republicans supported black suffrage, the three Reconstruction amendments, and the basic civil rights already protected by law, but also called for amnesty for ex-Confederates and decried the Republican governments in the South elected with the help of black votes, belittled the terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan, and argued that the time had come to restore "home rule" in the South, which in practical terms meant white Democratic rule. For Sumner's civil rights bill they gave no support at all, but Sumner joined them because he convinced himself that the time had come for reconciliation, and that Democrats were sincere in declaring that they would abide by the Reconstruction settlement.

Conciliation to South
Sumner never saw his support for civil rights as hostile to the South. On the contrary, he had always contended that a guarantee of equality was the one condition essential for true reconciliation. Unlike some other Radical Republicans, he had strongly opposed any hanging or imprisonment of Confederate leaders. In December 1872, he introduced a Senate resolution providing that Civil War battle names should not appear as "battle honors" on the regimental flags of the U.S. Army. The proposal was not new: Sumner had offered a similar resolution on May 8, 1862, and in 1865 he had proposed that no painting hanging in the Capitol portray scenes from the Civil War, because, as he saw it, keeping alive the memories of a war between a people was barbarous. His proposal did not affect the vast majority of battle-flags, as nearly all the regiments that fought had been state regiments, and these were not covered. But Sumner's idea was that any U.S. regiment that would in the future enlist southerners as well as northerners should not carry on its ensigns any insult to those who joined it. His resolution had no chance of passing, but its presentation offended Union army veterans. The Massachusetts legislature censured Sumner for giving "an insult to the loyal soldiery of the nation" and as "meeting the unqualified condemnation of the people of the Commonwealth." Poet John Greenleaf Whittier led an effort to rescind that censure the following year. He succeeded early in 1874 with the help of abolitionist Joshua Bowen Smith, who was serving in the legislature that year. Sumner was able to hear the rescinding resolution presented to the Senate on the last day he was there. He died the next afternoon.

Virginius Affair
On October 30, 1873, the Virginius, a munitions and troop transportation ship supporting the Cuban Rebellion and flying the U.S. flag, was captured by Spanish authorities. After a hasty trial in Santiago, Cuba, Spain executed 53 crew members, including American and British citizens. Sumner sympathized with the Cuban rebels and those executed by Spain, but refused to support U.S. military intervention or the annexation of Cuba. On November 17, 1873, Sumner stated his views in an interview on the Virginius Affair at a local library in Boston. He believed that although the ship was flying a U.S. flag, its mission was illegal. Sumner, who opposed the Cuban insurgent neutrality of the Grant Administration, believed that the United States needed to support the First Spanish Republic. On November 28, 1873, Secretary of State Hamilton Fish, who coolly handled the incident amid national outcries for war, negotiated a peaceful settlement with Spanish President Emilio Castelar, and prevented war with Spain.

Death
Long ailing, Charles Sumner died of a heart attack at his home in Washington, D.C., on March 11, 1874, aged 63, after serving nearly 23 years in the Senate. He lay in state at the United States Capitol rotunda, the second senator (Henry Clay being the first, in 1852) and fourth person so honored. At his March 16 burial in Mount Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge, Massachusetts, the pallbearers included Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and John Greenleaf Whittier.

In the aftermath, Mississippi Senator Lucius Lamar's eulogy for Sumner was controversial enough considering his Southern heritage that the incident resulted in Lamar's inclusion in John F. Kennedy's book Profiles in Courage.

Historical interpretations
Contemporaries and historians have explored Sumner's personality and public career at length. Sumner's reputation among historians in the first half of the 20th century was largely negative—he was particularly blamed by both the Dunning School and anti-Dunning revisionists for the excesses of Radical Reconstruction, which, in the prevailing scholarship, included letting Blacks vote and hold office. But as perceptions of Reconstruction changed in recent years, so too have perceptions of Sumner. Modern scholars have emphasized his role as a foremost champion of Black rights before, during, and after the Civil War; one historian says he was "perhaps the least racist man in America in his day."

Sumner's personality has also divided contemporaries and historians. Sumner's friend Senator Carl Schurz praised Sumner's integrity, his "moral courage," the "sincerity of his convictions," and the "disinterestedness of his motives." But none of his friends at the time doubted his courage, and abolitionist Wendell Phillips, who knew Sumner well, remembered that southerners in the 1850s in Washington wondered, every time Sumner left his house in the morning, whether he would return alive. Just before he died, Sumner turned to his friend Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar. "Judge," he said, "tell Emerson how much I love and revere him." "He said of you once," Hoar replied, "that he never knew so white a soul." Moorfield Storey, Sumner's private secretary for two years and subsequent biographer, wrote of him:

"Charles Sumner was a great man in his absolute fidelity to principle, his clear perception of what his country needed, his unflinching courage, his perfect sincerity, his persistent devotion to duty, his indifference to selfish considerations, his high scorn of anything petty or mean. He was essentially simple to the end, brave, kind, and pure…. Originally modest and not self-confident, the result of his long contest was to make him egotistical and dogmatic. There are few successful men who escape these penalties of success, the common accompaniment of increasing years….Sumner's naively simple nature, his confidence in his fellows, and his lack of humor combined to prevent his concealing what many feel but are better able to hide. From the time he entered public life till he died he was a strong force constantly working for righteousness….To Sumner more than to any single man, except possibly Lincoln, the colored race owes its emancipation and such measure of equal rights as it now enjoys."

Sumner's biographer David Donald, a Southerner, presents Sumner in his Pulitzer Prize-winning first volume, Charles Sumner and the Coming of the Civil War (1960), as an insufferably arrogant moralist; an egoist bloated with pride; pontifical and Olympian, and unable to distinguish between large issues and small ones. Donald concludes that Sumner was a coward who avoided confrontations with his many enemies, whom he routinely insulted in prepared speeches. But in Donald's second volume, Charles Sumner and the Rights of Man (1970), he was much more favorable to Sumner, and though critical, recognized his large contribution to the positive accomplishments of Reconstruction.

Donald notes Sumner's troubles in dealing with his colleagues:

"Distrusted by friends and allies, and reciprocating their distrust, a man of 'ostentatious culture', 'unvarnished egotism', and a specimen of prolonged and morbid juvenility, Sumner combined a passionate conviction in his own moral purity with a command of 19th-century 'rhetorical flourishes' and a 'remarkable talent for rationalization'. Stumbling 'into politics largely by accident', elevated to the United States Senate largely by chance, willing to indulge in 'Jacksonian demagoguery' for the sake of political expediency, Sumner became a bitter and potent agitator of sectional conflict. Carving out a reputation as the South's most hated foe and the Negro's bravest friend, he inflamed sectional differences, advanced his personal fortunes, and helped bring about national tragedy."

Lawyer David O. Stewart said of him: "Much about Sumner was in the abstract. For all his oratorical prowess, he was not an effective legislator."Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote of Sumner:"Mr. Sumner's position is exceptional in its honor…. In Congress, he did not rush into party position. He sat long silent and studious. His friends, I remember, were told that they would find Sumner a man of the world like the rest; 'it is quite impossible to be at Washington and not bend; he will bend as the rest have done.' Well, he did not bend. He took his position and kept it…. I think I may borrow the language which Bishop Burnet applied to Sir Isaac Newton, and say that Charles Sumner 'has the whitest soul I ever knew.'… Let him hear that every man of worth in New England loves his virtues."

In popular culture
In the 2012 film Lincoln, Sumner is portrayed by actor John Hutton.

In the 2013 film Saving Lincoln, Sumner was portrayed by Creed Bratton.

Personal life
Sumner was elected a member of the American Antiquarian Society in 1843. He served on the society's board of councilors from 1852 to 1853, and later in life served as the society's secretary of foreign correspondence from 1867 to 1874.

Marriage
Sumner was a bachelor for most of his life. In 1866, he began courting Alice Mason Hooper, the widowed daughter-in-law of Massachusetts Representative Samuel Hooper, and they married that October. Their marriage was unhappy. Sumner could not respond to his wife's humor, and Alice had a ferocious temper. That winter, Alice began going out to public events with Prussian diplomat Friedrich von Holstein. This caused gossip in Washington, but Alice refused to stop seeing Holstein. When Holstein was recalled to Prussia in the spring of 1867, Alice accused Sumner of engineering the action, which Sumner denied. They separated the following September. Sumner's enemies used the affair to attack Sumner's manhood, calling him "The Great Impotency." The situation depressed and embarrassed Sumner. He obtained an uncontested divorce on the grounds of desertion on May 10, 1873.

Memorials
The following are named after Charles Sumner:
 * Sumner Street in Newton Centre, Massachusetts
 * Charles Sumner Elementary School, Camden, New Jersey
 * Charles Sumner – Junior High School 65 in New York City;
 * Charles Sumner Elementary School in Roslindale, Massachusetts
 * Sumner Avenue in Springfield, Massachusetts
 * Charles Sumner School and museum in Washington, D.C.
 * Sumner Elementary School in Topeka, Kansas, now closed, a school that played a key role in the landmark 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education and is on the National Register of Historic Places
 * Charles Sumner Math & Science Community Academy Elementary School in Chicago, Illinois
 * Sumner Academy of Arts & Science in Kansas City, Kansas
 * Charles Sumner House, Sumner's home in Boston
 * Sumner Library in Minneapolis
 * Sumner County, Kansas
 * Sumner, Iowa
 * Sumner, Nebraska
 * Sumner, Washington
 * Sumner, Oregon
 * Avenida Charles Sumner, Distrito Nacional, Dominican Republic
 * Avenue Charles Sumner, Port-au-Prince, Haiti
 * Sumner Avenue, Eastvale, California
 * Sumner Avenue, Schenectady, New York
 * SS Charles Sumner, a World War II Liberty cargo ship.
 * Sumner Street in Salem, Massachusetts
 * Sumner was sculpted by Edmonia Lewis
 * In Barnum's American Museum, there were wax statues of Brooks attacking Sumner (on the floor).
 * Sumner School, West Virginia
 * Sumner Hill and Sumner Hill Road in Stamford, VT
 * Sumner High School, St. Louis, Missouri

There is a statue of Sumner in Cambridge, Massachusetts by sculptor Anne Whitney and another statue of Sumner in Boston, Massachusetts by sculptor Thomas Ball.

title: Charles Sumner


text:
Strawberries (album)

Strawberries is the fifth studio album by English punk rock band the Damned. It was released in October 1982 by record label Bronze. Limited editions included a strawberry-scented lyric insert. The album reached No. 15 in the UK charts, the band's first to reach the Top 20.

The record was released as the Damned were enjoying a higher public profile, thanks to the solo success of Captain Sensible. Sensible performed lead vocals on "Life Goes On" and "Don't Bother Me". He also introduced new instruments to the band, including sitar, and cello played by his then-girlfriend, Rachael Bor of the pop group Dolly Mixture.

Background
While Strawberries was generally praised for its positive, up-beat melodies, the album marked a time of conflict and division within the band. During the recording, bassist Paul Gray fought with drummer Rat Scabies over management and song-writing responsibilities. Gray would leave the band in February 1983 (later replacing Billy Sheehan in UFO), and Bryn Merrick took over on bass. Keyboard player Roman Jugg officially became the Damned's fifth band member. His arrival led to further experiments with the band's sound, including loops and sampling. Jugg would later move to guitar, replacing Sensible, who left the band after the Strawberries concert tour.

In 1982 Robert Fripp of King Crimson joined the Damned in the studio during the recording of this album. However, the only track they recorded together, "Fun Factory", was left off the album and did not receive any official release until 1990. Robert also joined the band on stage for a few songs on 11 October 1982 at the Hammersmith Odeon. A bootleg of this concert is available but is of low quality.

The album's working title was Strawberries for Pigs, a name inspired by the reception the band's newer music received from some of their older fans. As Vanian explained, "we were playing a lot of new material, and we had an audience that didn't want to hear about anything, they just wanted to hear "Neat Neat Neat" and "New Rose," nothing else. And they wanted to just smash everything. And they weren't interested in hearing music at all. So at one point, I turned around and said, 'It's like giving strawberries to a fucking pig, this gig, you know?' And that stuck in our minds, and we used it".

Vanian said that the song "The Dog" was inspired by Anne Rice's 'Interview With The Vampire", he explained "On reading Anne Rice's 'interview with the Vampire' in 1976, I penned the song which became known as 'The Dog' but was actually about the strange vampire child Claudia, described in Rice's book. The idea of an adult's mind trapped in a child's body was too fascinating to resist."

As an easter egg, the band included various sounds at the end of different tracks, including an egg whisk and a pair of jeans being ripped. At the end of the track "Bad Time for Bonzo", a sound of a flushing toilet was used.

Reception
Critics praised the album's musicianship and 60s influences. Writing in Smash Hits, Fred Dellar gave the album 9 out of 10: "The Damned go totally melodic, offer harmony vocals, employ cellos, sitars and brass sections, and even remember to include a lyric sheet […] This is the kind of pop album Paul McCartney would be pleased to have his moniker on".

In Sounds, Steve Keaton wrote that "Strawberries is the Damned at their most melodic and subversive". He added that the album "manages to indulge both Dave Vanian’s darkly obsessive Gothic vision and the good Captain's psychedelic whims without sacrificing any hard rock sensibilities. 'Strawberries' should be the LP to grant the Damned the recognition they've courted for so long".

Trouser Press described the album as "eclectic and inconsistent but well-produced [...] and boasting some fine tunes [...], [Strawberries] shows Sensible's increasing pop prominence [...] and Vanian's willingness to explore a stylistic Pallette with no debt to punk". Other critics have noted the album's embrace of psychedelic pop, as well as gothic rock.

In a negative contemporary review, NME called Strawberries "a miserable (w)retch of a record, spewing fourth enough nauseous 'nostalgia' to fill a book entitled 'Why The Damned Never Made It', without once touching any spirit. It seems they're doomed to regurgitating their history 'til the aftertaste becomes too bad to bear".

AllMusic's retrospective review was favourable: "Recuperating a bit from The Black Album ' s uneven impact while still aiming to try whatever they want in studio, [...] [Strawberries is] by turns sprightly and cheerful, dark and dramatic, energetic and snarling, or all that and more at once, [...] [and] defies usual expectations to be yet another good rock album from the band".

Reissue
On 7 January 2005, Castle Records re-released Strawberries in the United Kingdom on CD. On October 7, 2022, Iconoclassic Records issued a 40th Anniversary 2 CD Edition of Strawberries remastered by Mark Wilder, including 15 bonus tracks and new liner notes by Jack Rabid of The Big Takeover.

Track listing
Credits adapted from the album's liner notes.

 * Note

Some versions of Strawberries have altered songwriting credits.

2005 deluxe edition

 * The previously untitled 30-second long instrumental harpsichord piece between track 7 ("Pleasure and the Pain") and track 8 ("Life Goes On") on the original album has been titled "The Missing Link" and given its own track number, track 8, on the deluxe edition.

 * Notes
 * Tracks 13 and 14 from the "Lovely Money" single, released June 1982; produced by the Damned and Tony Mansfield; track 13 features spoken word by Viv Stanshall.
 * Tracks 15-17 from the "Dozen Girls" single, released September 1982; produced by the Damned.
 * Tracks 18 and 20 from the "Generals" single, released November 1982; a Bimbeo Production.

2022 40th Anniversary 2 CD Edition

 * Notes
 * Track 1 from the Fun Factory (song) single, released January 1991; produced by Captain Sensible; features guitar by Robert Fripp.
 * Tracks 2-4 from the Lovely Money single, released June 1982; produced by the Damned and Tony Mansfield; tracks 2 & 4 feature spoken word by Viv Stanshall.
 * Tracks 5-8 from the Dozen Girls single, released September 1982; produced by the Damned.
 * Tracks 9 and 10 from the Generals (song) single, released November 1982; a Bimbeo Production.
 * Tracks 11-15 recorded live at The Mayfair, Newcastle Upon Tyne, 14 October 1982. From Live at Newcastle album, released November 1983.

Personnel

 * The Damned

 * Dave Vanian – lead vocals (1-7, 9, 10)
 * Captain Sensible – guitar, backing and lead (8, 11, 15, 17) vocals, keyboards, sitar (10)
 * Paul Gray – bass
 * Rat Scabies – drums, synthesizer
 * Roman Jugg – keyboard solos

 * Additional musicians

 * Simon Lloyd – brass (2)
 * Rachel Bor – cello (7)

 * Technical

 * The Damned – producer (1–11)
 * Hugh Jones – co-producer (1, 4, 6–9, 11), engineer
 * Dave Vanian – album cover design
 * Martin Poole – album cover design
 * Linda Roast – album cover concept
 * Nigel Greerson – sleeve photography

title: Strawberries (album)


text:
Clayman

Clayman is the fifth studio album by Swedish heavy metal band In Flames, released via Nuclear Blast on 3 July 2000. It has a dark theme, with most of the lyrics dealing with depression and internal struggles. Clayman is the final In Flames album to feature their original melodic death metal sound. The band would later start to experiment with other styles on their next release, Reroute to Remain, gradually progressing these more experimental elements across their future releases later into the 2000s. Like on some songs on the previous album Colony the band tuned their guitars to drop A# on the songs Pinball Map and ...As the Future Repeats Today.

The album's cover art is based on Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man drawing. The Jester Head appears in the background, both on the cover, and in the album booklet itself. Music videos were produced for the songs "Pinball Map" (directed by Tamara Jordan) and "Only for the Weak".

Reception
In 2005, Clayman was ranked No. 448 in Rock Hard magazine's book "The 500 Greatest Rock & Metal Albums of All Time". In 2020, it was named one of the 20 best metal albums of 2000 by Metal Hammer magazine.

In 2020, "Bullet Ride", "Pinball Map", "Only for the Weak", and the title track were re-recorded for a 20th-anniversary edition of the album. Fan responses to the re-recordings have been mixed.

Track listing
Apart from remastered versions of the original songs, the 20th Anniversary Edition features the following tracks:

In Flames

 * Anders Fridén – vocals
 * Björn Gelotte – lead guitar
 * Jesper Strömblad – rhythm guitar
 * Peter Iwers – bass
 * Daniel Svensson – drums

Additional personnel

 * Charlie Storm – programming, synthesizer
 * Christopher Amott (Arch Enemy) – guitar solo on "Suburban Me"
 * Fredrik Nordström – additional programming, synthesizer, recording, production
 * In Flames – recording, production
 * Axel Hermann – artwork, layout
 * Tobias Lundgren – photography

title: Clayman