text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 16.djvu/472

 newcomer. The pope, indeed, is said to have been delighted with Leonardo’s minor experiments and ingenuities in science, and especially by a kind of zoological toys which he had invented by way of pastime, as well as mechanical tricks played upon living animals. But for the master’s graver researches and projects he cared little, and was far more interested in the dreams of astrologers and alchemists. When Leonardo, having received a commission for a picture, was found distilling for himself a new medium of oils and herbs before he had begun the design, the pope was convinced, not quite unreasonably, that nothing serious would come of it. The only paintings positively recorded as done by him at Rome are two small panels for an official of the papal court, one of a child, the other of a Madonna, both now lost or unrecognized. To this time may also belong a lost Leda, standing upright with the god in swan’s guise at her side and the four children near their feet. This picture was at Fontainebleau in the 16th century and is known from several copies, the finest of them at the Borghese gallery, as well as from one or two preliminary sketches by the master himself and a small sketch copy by Raphael. A portrait of a Florentine lady, said to have been painted for Giuliano de’ Medici and seen afterwards in France, may also have been done at Rome; or may what we learn of this be only a confused account of the Monna Lisa? Tradition ascribes to Leonardo an attractive fresco of a Madonna with a donor in the convent of St Onofrio, but this seems to be clearly the work of Boltraffio. The only engineering works we hear of at this time are some on the harbour and defences of Cività Vecchia. On the whole the master in these Roman days found himself slighted for the first and only time in his life. He was, moreover, plagued by insubordination and malignity on the part of two German assistant craftsmen lodged in his apartments. Charges of impiety and body-snatching laid by these men in connexion with his anatomical studies caused the favour of the pope to be for a time withdrawn. After a stay of less than two years, Leonardo left Rome under the following circumstances. Louis XII. of France had died in the last days of 1514. His young and brilliant successor, Francis I., surprised Europe by making a sudden dash at the head of an army across the Alps to vindicate his rights in Italy. After much hesitation Leo X. in the summer of 1515 ordered Giuliano de’ Medici, as gonfalonier of the Church, to lead a papal force into the Emilia and watch the movements of the invader. Leonardo accompanied his protector on the march, and remained with the headquarters of the papal army at Piacenza when Giuliano fell ill and retired to Florence. After the battle of Marignano it was arranged that Francis and the pope should meet in December at Bologna. The pope, travelling by way of Florence and discussing there the great new scheme of the Laurentian library, entertained the idea of giving the commission to Leonardo; but Michelangelo came in hot haste from Rome and succeeded in securing it for himself. As the time for the meeting of the potentates at Bologna drew near, Leonardo proceeded thither from Piacenza, and in due course was presented to the king. Between the brilliant young sovereign and the grand old sage an immediate and strong sympathy sprang up; Leonardo accompanied Francis on his homeward march as far as Milan, and there determined to accept the royal invitation to France, where a new home was offered him with every assurance of honour and regard.

The remaining two and a half years of Leonardo’s life were spent at the Castle of Cloux near Amboise, which was assigned, with a handsome pension, to his use. The court came often to Amboise, and the king delighted in his company, declaring his knowledge both of the fine arts and of philosophy to be beyond those of all mortal men. In the spring of 1518 Leonardo had occasion to exercise his old talents as a festival-master when the dauphin was christened and a Medici-Bourbon marriage celebrated. He drew the designs for a new palace at Amboise, and was much engaged with the project of a great canal to connect the Loire and Saône. An ingenious attempt has been made to prove, in the absence of records, that the famous spiral staircase at Blois was also of his designing.

Among his visitors was a fellow-countryman, Cardinal Louis of Aragon, whose secretary has left an account of the day. Leonardo, it seems, was suffering from some form of slight paralysis which impaired his power of hand. But he showed the cardinal three pictures, the portrait of a Florentine lady done for Giuliano de’ Medici (the Gioconda?), the Virgin in the lap of St Anne (the Louvre picture; finished at Florence or Milan 1507–1513?), and a youthful John the Baptist. The last, which may have been done since he settled in France, is the darkened and partly repainted, but still powerful and haunting half-length figure in the Louvre, with the smile of inward ravishment and the prophetic finger beckoning skyward like that of St Anne in the Academy cartoon. Of the “Pomona” mentioned by Lomazzo as a work of the Amboise time his visitor says nothing, nor yet of the Louvre “Bacchus,” which tradition ascribes to Leonardo but which is clearly pupil’s work. Besides pictures, the master seems also to have shown and explained to his visitors some of his vast store of notes and observations on anatomy and physics. He kept hoping to get some order among his papers, the accumulation of more than forty years, and perhaps to give the world some portion of the studies they contained. But his strength was nearly exhausted. On Easter Eve 1519, feeling that the end was near, he made his will. It made provision, as became a great servant of the most Christian king, for masses to be said and candles to be offered in three different churches of Amboise, first among them that of St Florentin, where he desired to be buried, as well as for sixty poor men to serve as torch-bearers at his funeral. Vasari babbles of a death-bed conversion and repentance. But Leonardo had never been either a friend or an enemy of the Church. Sometimes, indeed, he denounces fiercely enough the arts and pretensions of priests; but no one has embodied with such profound spiritual insight some of the most vital moments of the Christian story. His insatiable researches into natural fact brought upon him among the vulgar some suspicion of practising those magic arts which of all things he scouted and despised. The bent of his mind was all towards the teachings of experience and against those of authority, and laws of nature certainly occupied far more of his thoughts than dogmas of religion; but when he mentions these it is with respect as throwing light on the truth of things from a side which was not his own. His conformity at the end had in it nothing contradictory of his past. He received the sacraments of the Church and died on the 2nd of May 1519. King Francis, then at his court of St Germain-en-Laye, is said to have wept for the loss of such a servant; that he was present beside the death-bed and held the dying painter in his arms is a familiar but an untrue tale. After a temporary sepulture elsewhere his remains were transported on the 12th of August to the cloister of St Florentin according to his wish. He left all his MSS. and apparently all the contents of his studio, with other gifts, to the devoted Melzi, whom he named executor; to Salai and to his servant Battista Villanis a half each of his vineyard outside Milan; gifts of money and clothes to his maid Maturina; one of money to the poor of the hospital in Amboise; and to his unbrotherly half-brothers a sum of four hundred ducats lying to his credit at Florence.

History tells of no man gifted in the same degree as Leonardo was at once for art and science. In art he was an inheritor and perfecter, born in a day of great and many-sided endeavours on which he put the crown, surpassing both predecessors and contemporaries. In science, on the other hand, he was a pioneer, working wholly for the future, and in great part alone. That the two stupendous gifts should in some degree neutralize each other was inevitable. No imaginable strength of any single man would have sufficed to carry out a hundredth part of what Leonardo essayed. The mere attempt to conquer the kingdom of light and shade for the art of painting was destined to tax the skill of generations, and is perhaps not wholly and finally accomplished yet. Leonardo sought to achieve that conquest and at the same time to carry the old Florentine excellences of linear drawing and psychological expression to a perfection of which other men

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 16.djvu/472


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 16.djvu/473

 had not dreamed. The result, though marvellous in quality, is in quantity lamentably meagre. Knowing and doing allured him equally, and in art, which consists in doing, his efforts were often paralysed by his strained desire to know. The thirst for knowledge had first been aroused in him by the desire of perfecting the images of beauty and power which it was his business to create.

Thence there grew upon him the passion of knowledge for its own sake. In the splendid balance of his nature the Virgilian longing, rerum cognoscere causas, could never indeed wholly silence the call to exercise his active powers. But the powers he cared most to exercise ceased by degree to be those of imaginative creation, and came to be those of turning to practical human use the mastery which his studies had taught him over the forces of nature. In science he was the first among modern men to set himself most of those problems which unnumbered searchers of later generations have laboured severally or in concert to solve. Florence had had other sons of comprehensive genius, artistic and mechanical, Leon Battista Alberti perhaps the chief. But the more the range and character of Leonardo’s studies becomes ascertained the more his greatness dwarfs them all. A hundred years before Bacon, say those who can judge best, he showed a firmer grasp of the principles of experimental science than Bacon showed, fortified by a far wider range of actual experiment and observation. Not in his actual conclusions, though many of these point with surprising accuracy in the direction of truths established by later generations, but in the soundness, the wisdom, the tenacity of his methods lies his great title to glory. Had the Catholic reaction not fatally discouraged the pursuit of the natural sciences in Italy, had Leonardo even left behind him any one with zeal and knowledge enough to extract from the mass of his MSS. some portion of his labours in those sciences and give them to the world, an incalculable impulse would have been given to all those enquiries by which mankind has since been striving to understand the laws of its being and control the conditions of its environment,—to mathematics and astronomy, to mechanics, hydraulics, and physics generally, to geology, geography, and cosmology, to anatomy and the sciences of life. As it was, these studies of Leonardo—“studies intense of strong and stern delight”—seemed to his trivial followers and biographers merely his whims and fancies, ghiribizzi, things to be spoken of slightingly and with apology. The MSS., with the single exception of some of those relating to painting, lay unheeded and undivulged until the present generation; and it is only now that the true range of Leonardo’s powers is beginning to be fully discerned.

So much for the intellectual side of Leonardo’s character and career. As a moral being we are less able to discern what he was like. The man who carried in his brain so many images of subtle beauty, as well as so much of the hidden science of the future, must have lived spiritually, in the main, alone. Of things communicable he was at the same time, as we have said, communicative—a genial companion, a generous and loyal friend, ready and eloquent of discourse, impressing all with whom he was brought in contact by the power and the charm of genius, and inspiring fervent devotion and attachment in friends and pupils. We see him living on terms of constant affection with his father, and in disputes with his brothers not the aggressor but the sufferer from aggression. We see him full of tenderness to animals, a virtue not common in Italy in spite of the example of St Francis; open-handed in giving, not eager in getting—“poor,” he says, “is the man of many wants”; not prone to resentment—“the best shield against injustice is to double the cloak of long-suffering”; zealous in labour above all men—“as a day well spent gives joyful sleep, so does a life well spent give joyful death.” With these instincts and maxims, and with his strength, granting it almost more than human, spent ever tunnelling in abstruse mines of knowledge, his moral experience is not likely to have been deeply troubled. In religion, he regarded the faith of his age and country at least with imaginative sympathy and intellectual acquiescence, if no more. On the political storms which shook his country and drove him from one employment to another, he seems to have looked not with the passionate participation of a Dante or a Michelangelo but rather with the serene detachment of a Goethe. In matters of the heart, if any consoling or any disturbing passion played a great part in his life, we do not know it; we know only (apart from a few passing shadows cast by calumny and envy) of affectionate and dignified relations with friends, patrons and pupils, of public and private regard mixed in the days of his youth with dazzled admiration, and in those of his age with something of reverential awe.

The Drawings of Leonardo.—These are among the greatest treasures ever given to the world by the human spirit expressing itself in pen and pencil. Apart from the many hundreds of illustrative pen-sketches scattered through his autobiographic and scientific MSS., the principal collection is at Windsor Castle (partly derived from the Arundel collection); others of importance are in the British Museum; at Christ Church, Oxford; in the Louvre, at Chantilly, in the Uffizi, the Venice Academy, the Royal Library at Turin, the Museum of Budapest, and in the collections of M. Bonnat, Mrs Mond, and Captain Holford. Leonardo’s chief implements were pen, silver-point, and red and black chalk (red chalk especially). In silver-point there are many beautiful drawings of his earlier time, and some of his later; but of the charming heads of women and young men in this material attributed to him in various collections, comparatively few are his own work, the majority being drawings in his spirit by his pupils Ambrogio Preda or Boltraffio. Leonardo appears to have been left-handed. There is some doubt on the point; but a contemporary and intimate friend, Luca Pacioli, speaks of his “ineffable left hand”; all the best of his drawings are shaded downward from left to right, which would be the readiest way for a left-handed man; and his habitual eccentric practice of writing from right to left is much more likely to have been due to natural left-handedness than to any desire of mystery or concealment. A full critical discussion and catalogue of the extant drawings of Leonardo are to be found in Berenson’s Drawings of the Florentine Painters.

The Writings of Leonardo.—The only printed book bearing Leonardo’s name until the recent issues of transcripts from his MSS. was the celebrated Treatise on Painting (Trattato della pittura, Traité de la peinture). This consists of brief didactic chapters, or more properly paragraphs, of practical direction or critical remark on all the branches and conditions of a painter’s practice. The original MS. draft of Leonardo has been lost, though a great number of notes for it are scattered through the various extant volumes of his MSS. The work has been printed in two different forms; one of these is an abridged version consisting of 365 sections; the first edition of it was published in Paris in 1551, by Raphael Dufresne, from a MS. which he found in the Barberini library; the last, translated into English by J. F. Rigaud, in London, 1877. The other is a more extended version, in 912 sections, divided into eight books; this was printed in 1817 by Guglielmo Manzi at Rome, from two MSS. which he had discovered in the Vatican library; a German translation from the same MS. has been edited by G. H. Ludwig in Eitelberger’s series of Quellenschriften für Kunstgeschichte (Vienna, 1882; Stuttgart, 1885). On the history of the book in general see Max Jordan, Das Malerbuch des Leonardo da Vinci (Leipzig, 1873). The unknown compilers of the Vatican MSS. must have had before them much more of Leonardo’s original text than is now extant. Only about a quarter of the total number of paragraphs are identical with passages to be found in the master’s existing autograph note-books. It is indeed doubtful whether Leonardo himself ever completed the MS. treatise (or treatises) on painting and kindred subjects mentioned by Fra Luca Pacioli and by Vasari, and probable that the form and order, and perhaps some of the substance, of the Trattato as we have it was due to compilers and not to the master himself.

In recent years a whole body of scholars and editors have been engaged in giving to the world the texts of Leonardo’s existing MSS. The history of these is too complicated to be told here in any detail. Francesco Melzi (d. 1570) kept the greater part of his master’s bequest together as a sacred trust as long as he lived, though even in his time some MSS. on the art of painting seem to have passed into other hands. But his descendants suffered the treasure to be recklessly dispersed. The chief agents in their dispersal were the Doctor Orazio Melzi who possessed them in the last quarter of the 16th century; the members of a Milanese family called Mazzenta, into whose hands they passed in Orazio Melzi’s lifetime; and the sculptor Pompeo Leoni, who at one time entertained the design of procuring their presentation to Philip II. of Spain, and who cut up a number of the note-books to form the great miscellaneous single volume called the Codice Atlantico, now at Milan. This volume, with a large proportion of the total number of other Leonardo MSS. then existing, passed into the hands of a Count Arconati, who presented them to the Ambrosian library at Milan in 1636. In the meantime the earl of Arundel had made a vain attempt to purchase one of these volumes (the Codice Atlantico?) at a great price for the king of England. Some stray parts of the collection, including the MSS. now at Windsor, did evidently come into Lord Arundel’s possession, and the history of some other parts can be

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

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 16.djvu/473


text:
Page:EB1911 - Volume 16.djvu/474

 followed; while much, it is evident, was lost for good. In 1796 Napoleon swept away to Paris, along with the other art treasures of Italy, the whole of the Leonardo MSS. at the Ambrosiana: only the Codice Atlantico was afterwards restored, the other volumes remaining the property of the Institut de France. These also have had their adventures, two of them having been stolen by Count Libri and passed temporarily into the collection of Lord Ashburnham, whence they were in recent years made over again to the Institute. The first important step towards a better knowledge of the MSS. was made by the beginning, in 1880, of the great series of publications from the MSS. of the Institut de France undertaken by C. Ravaisson-Mollien; the next by the publication in 1883 of Dr J. P. Richter’s Literary Works of Leonardo da Vinci (see Bibliography): this work included, besides a history and analytical index of the MSS., facsimiles of a number of selected pages containing matter of autobiographical, artistic, or literary interest, with transcripts and translations of their MS. contexts. Since then much progress has been made in the publication of the complete MSS., scientific and other, whether with adequate critical apparatus or in the form of mere facsimile without transliteration or comment.

A brief statement follows of the present distribution of the several MSS. and of the form in which they are severally published:—

England.—Windsor: Nine MSS., chiefly on anatomy, published entire in simple facsimile by Rouveyre (Paris, 1901); partially, with transliterations and introduction by Piumati and Sabachnikoff (Paris, 1898, foll.); British Museum: one MS., miscellaneous, unpublished; Victoria and Albert Museum: ten note-books bound in 3 vols.; facsimile by Rouveyre, Holkham (collection of Lord Leicester), 1 vol., on hydraulics and the action of water; published in facsimile with transliteration and notes by Gerolamo Calvi. France.—Institut de France: seventeen MSS., all published with transliteration and notes by C. Ravaisson-Mollien (6 vols., Paris, 1880–1891). Italy.—Milan, Ambrosiana: the Codice Atlantico, the huge miscellany, of vital importance for the study of the master, put together by Pompeo Leoni; published in facsimile, with transliteration, by the Accademia dei Lincei (1894, foll.); Milan: collection of Count Trivulzio; 1 vol., miscellaneous; published and edited by L. Beltrami (1892); Rome: collection of Count Marszolini; Treatise on the Flight of Birds, published and edited by Piumati and Sabachnikoff (Paris, 1492).

—The principal authorities are:—“Il libro di Antonio Billi,” edited from MS. by G. de Fabriazy in Archivio Storico Ital. ser. v. vol. 7; “Breve vita di Leonardo da Vinci, scritto da un adnonimo del 1500” (known as the Anonimo Gaddiano), printed by G. Milanesi in Archivio Storico Ital. t. xvi. (1872), translated with notes by H. P. Horne in series published by the Unicorn Library (1903); Paolo Giovio, “Leonardi Vincii vita,” in his Elogia, printed in Tiraboschi, ''Storia della Lett. Ital.'' t. vii. pt. 4, and in Classici Italiani, vol. 314; Vasari, in his celebrated Lives of the Painters (1st ed., Florence, 1550; 2nd ed. ibid. 1568; ed. Milanesi, with notes and supplements, 1878–1885); Sabba da Castiglione, Ricordi (Venice, 1565); G. P. Lomazzo, Trattato dell’ arte della pittura, &c. (Milan, 1584–1585); Id., Idea del tempio della pittura (Milan, 1591); Le Père Dan, ''Le Trésor. . . de Fontainebleau'' (1642); J. B. Venturi, Essai sur les ouvrages physico-mathématiques de L. da V. (Paris, 1797); C. Amoretti, Memorie storiche ''sulla vita, &c. di L. da V.'' (Milan, 1804), a work which laid the foundation of all future researches; Giuseppe Bossi, Del Cenacolo di L. da V. (Milan, 1810); C. Fumagalli, Scuola di Leonardo da Vinci (1811); Gaye, Carteggio d’artisti (1839–1841); G. Uzielli, Ricerche intorno a L. da V., series 1, 2 (Florence, 1872; Rome, 1884; series 1 revised, Turin, 1896), documentary researches of the first importance for the study; C. L. Calvi, Notizie dei principali professori di belle arti (Milan, 1869); Arsène Houssaye, Histoire de L. de V. (Paris, 1869 and 1876, an agreeable literary biography of the pre-critical kind); Mrs Heaton, Life of L. da V. (London, 1872), a work also made obsolete by recent research; Hermann Grothe, L. da V. als Ingenieur und Philosoph (Berlin, 1874); A. Marks, the S. Anne of L. da V. (London, 1882); J. P. Richter, The Literary Works of L. da V. (2 vols., London, 1883), this is the very important and valuable history of and selection from the texts mentioned above under MSS.; Ch. Ravaisson-Mollien, Les Écrits de L. da V. (Paris, 1881); Paul Müller Walde, L. da V., Lebensskizze und Forschungen (Munich, 1889–1890); Id., “Beiträge zur Kenntniss des L. da V.,” in Jahrbuch der k. Preussischen Kunstsammlungen (1897–1899), the first immature and incomplete, the second of high value: the whole life of this writer has been devoted to the study of L. da V., but it is uncertain whether the vast mass of material collected by him will ever take shape or see the light; G. Gronau, L. da V. (London, 1902); Bernhard Berenson, The Drawings of the Florentine Painters (London, 1903); Edmondo Solmi, Studi sulla filosofia naturale di L. da V. (Modena, 1898); Id., Leonardo (Florence, 1st ed. 1900, 2nd ed. 1907; this last edition of Solmi’s work is by far the most complete and satisfactory critical biography of the master which yet exists); A. Rosenberg, L. da V., in Knackfuss’s series of art biographies (Leipzig, 1898); Gabriel Séailles, L. da V. l’artiste et le savant (1st ed. 1892, 2nd ed. 1906), a lucid and careful general estimate of great value, especially in reference to Leonardo’s relations to modern science; Edward McCurdy, L. da V., in Bell’s “Great Masters” series (1904 and 1907), a very sound and trustworthy

summary of the master’s career as an artist; Id., L. da V.’s Note-Books (1908), a selection from the passages of chief general interest in the master’s MSS., very well chosen, arranged, and translated, with a useful history of the MSS. prefixed, Le Vicende del Cenacolo di L. da V. nel secolo XIX. (Milan, 1906), an official account of the later history and vicissitudes of the “Last Supper” previous to its final repair; Luca Beltrami, Il Castello di Milano (1894); Id., L. da V. et la Sala dell’ Asse (1902); Id., “Il Cenacolo di Leonardo,” in Raccolta Vinciana (Milan, 1908), the official account of the successful work of repair carried out by Signor Cavenaghi in the preceding years; Woldemar von Seidlitz, Leonardo da Vinci, der Wendepunkt der Renaissance (2 vols., 1909), a comprehensive and careful work by an accomplished and veteran critic, inclined to give perhaps an excessive share in the reputed works of Leonardo to a single pupil, Ambrogio Preda. It seems needless to give references to the voluminous discussion in newspapers and periodicals concerning the authenticity of a wax bust of Flora acquired in 1909 for the Berlin Museum and unfortunately ascribed to Leonardo da Vinci, its real author having been proved by external and internal evidence to be the Englishman Richard Cockle Lucas, and its date 1846.

 LEONARDO OF PISA ( or ), Italian mathematician of the 13th century. Of his personal history few particulars are known. His father was called Bonaccio, most probably a nickname with the ironical meaning of “a good, stupid fellow,” while to Leonardo himself another nickname, Bigollone (dunce, blockhead), seems to have been given. The father was secretary in one of the numerous factories erected on the southern and eastern coasts of the Mediterranean by the warlike and enterprising merchants of Pisa. Leonardo was educated at Bugia, and afterwards toured the Mediterranean. In 1202 he was again in Italy and published his great work, Liber abaci, which probably procured him access to the learned and refined court of the emperor Frederick II. Leonardo certainly was in relation with some persons belonging to that circle when he published in 1220 another more extensive work, De practica geometriae, which he dedicated to the imperial astronomer Dominicus Hispanus. Some years afterwards (perhaps in 1228) Leonardo dedicated to the well-known astrologer Michael Scott the second edition of his Liber abaci, which was printed with Leonardo’s other works by Prince Bald. Boncompagni (Rome, 1857–1862, 2 vols.). The other works consist of the Practica geometriae and some most striking papers of the greatest scientific importance, amongst which the Liber quadratorum may be specially signalized. It bears the notice that the author wrote it in 1225, and in the introduction Leonardo tells us the occasion of its being written. Dominicus had presented Leonardo to Frederick II. The presentation was accompanied by a kind of mathematical performance, in which Leonardo solved several hard problems proposed to him by John of Palermo, an imperial notary, whose name is met with in several documents dated between 1221 and 1240. The methods which Leonardo made use of in solving those problems fill the Liber quadratorum, the Flos, and a Letter to Magister Theodore. All these treatises seem to have been written nearly at the same period, and certainly before the publication of the second edition of the Liber abaci, in which the Liber quadratorum is expressly mentioned. We know nothing of Leonardo’s fate after he issued that second edition.

Leonardo’s works are mainly developments of the results obtained by his predecessors; the influences of Greek, Arabian, and Indian mathematicians may be clearly discerned in his methods. In his Practica geometriae plain traces of the use of the Roman agrimensores are met with; in his Liber abaci old Egyptian problems reveal their origin by the reappearance of the very numbers in which the problem is given, though one cannot guess through what channel they came to Leonardo’s knowledge. Leonardo cannot be regarded as the inventor of that very great variety of truths for which he mentions no earlier source.

The Liber abaci, which fills 459 printed pages, contains the most perfect methods of calculating with whole numbers and with fractions, practice, extraction of the square and cube roots, proportion, chain rule, finding of proportional parts, averages, progressions, even compound interest, just as in the completest mercantile arithmetics of our days. They teach further the solution of problems leading to equations of the first and second degree, to determinate and indeterminate equations, not by single and double position only, but by real algebra, proved by means of geometric constructions, and including the use of letters as symbols for known numbers, the unknown quantity being called res and its square census.

title: Page:EB1911 - Volume 16.djvu/474


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Leonardo da Vinci


text:
Portal:Classes

General

 * What Social Classes Owe to Each Other, 1883 by William Graham Sumner
 * The National Question and the Class Struggle, 1903 by Ber Borochov, translated by Poale Zion
 * War of the Classes, 1905 by Jack London
 * The Class War, 1907 by Max Beer
 * Analysis of the Classes in Chinese Society, 1926) by Mao Zedong, translated by Foreign Language Press
 * Oppose Book Worship, 1930 by Mao Zedong, translated by Foreign Language Press
 * Dialectical Materialism, 1938 by Mao Zedong, translated by Foreign Languages Press

 * The Empire of the Ignorant by Gilbert Keith Chesterton
 * Castes and Tribes of Southern India (1909) by Edgar Thurston

Upper class

 * Aristocracy from English Traits, 1856 by Ralph Waldo Emerson
 * Science, Education, and Aristocracy, as it appeared in the February 1874 Popular Science Monthly
 * The Lie of a Monarchy and Aristocracy from Conventional Lies of our Civilization, 1883 by Max Simon Nordau

Middle class

 * The Middle Classes, 1854 by Honoré de Balzac, translated by Katharine Prescott Wormeley
 * House Democrats approve tax relief for middle-class Hawaii taxpayers, November 9, 2007 by the office of Representative Abercrombie
 * Green jobs are a way to aid the middle class, February 27, 2009 by Joe Biden
 * Remarks at the First Meeting of the Middle Class Task Force, Panel One, February 27, 2009 by Joe Biden
 * Middle Class Task Force Staff Report - Green Jobs: A Pathway to a Strong Middle Class, February 27, 2009 by Joe Biden
 * Middle Class Working Families Task Force, January 30, 2009 by Barack Obama
 * Middle Class Working Families Task Force, January 30, 2009 by Joe Biden
 * Time to put middle class front and center, January 30, 2009 by Joe Biden
 * Economic Recovery and Middle-Class Tax Relief Act of 2009 by the United States Congress

 * The Middle-Class Gentleman by Molière, translated by Philip Dwight Jones

Working class

 * The working classes and the corn laws, 1842 by Richard Cobden
 * On the Successes of The International in Germany and France, July 25, 1868 from The Bee-Hive
 * The Progress of the Working-Classes in the Last Half-Century, as it appeared in the May 1884 Popular Science Monthly
 * Political Appeal to American Workers, 1912 by Eugene V. Debs
 * The Rise of the Lower Classes from Economic Development in Denmark Before and During the World War, 1922 by Harald Westergaard

title: Portal:Classes


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/77

 tion was accepted, and the control of the revenue of the crown lands was vested in the assembly on condition of establishing a permanent civil list out of it.

In 1838 Wilmot was made a queen's counsel. In 1844 he accepted a seat in the executive council without a portfolio; but when the lieutenant-governor, Sir William Colebrooke, without consulting his advisers, appointed his son-in-law to the office of provincial secretary, Wilmot, with three colleagues, resigned his place in the cabinet.

In 1847 Earl Grey, the colonial secretary, declared that members of the executive council should hold office only while they possessed the confidence of the majority of the people. In 1848 the New Brunswick house of assembly passed a resolution approving of Earl Grey's despatch, and Wilmot, who made a great speech on the occasion, was called on to form a government. He accepted the task, and his cabinet became a coalition ministry with liberal tendencies. He himself held office as attorney-general, a post which he first filled on 24 May 1848. In this capacity and as premier he took an active part in the consolidation of criminal and municipal law. In 1850 he attended the international railway convention at Portland in Maine. In the same year he took part in negotiations in Washington on the subject of commercial reciprocity. A treaty was concluded four years later by Lord Elgin.

In January 1851 Wilmot was appointed a judge of the supreme court. While holding this office he received the honorary degree of D.C.L. from the university of King's College. When the question of federation became prominent in 1865 he espoused the cause of union, and after federation was accomplished he was nominated to the post of lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick on 27 July 1868. He held office till 14 Nov. 1873, when he received a pension as a retired judge. In 1875 he became second commissioner under the Prince Edward Island Purchase Act, passed in that year, and he was also nominated one of the arbitrators in the Ontario and north-west boundary commission, but death prevented him serving. He died at Fredericton on 20 May 1878, and was buried near the town. Wilmot was twice married: first, to a daughter of the Rev. J. Balloch; and, secondly, to a daughter of William A. Black of Halifax, a member of the legislative council.

[Lathern's Hon. Judge Wilmot, 1881; Dominion Annual Register, 1878, p. 371; Appleton's Cycl. of American Biogr.; Withrow's Hist. of Canada, 1888, p. 506.]

WILMOT, ROBERT (fl. 1568–1608), dramatist, was presented by Gabriel Poyntz on 28 Nov. 1582 to the rectory of North Okendon, now Ockendon, about six miles from Romford in Essex, and by the dean and chapter of St. Paul's Cathedral, on 2 Dec. 1585, to the vicarage of Horndon-on-the-Hill, a few miles away from Ockendon. He is described in 1585 as M.A. (, Repertorium, ii. 447, 343). It does not appear when the vicarage at Horndon was vacated, but in 1608 the crown, by lapse of the patron's right, appointed to Ockendon another Robert Wilmot, whose death took place in 1619.

Wilmot published, in 1591, ‘The Tragedie of Tancred and Gismund, compiled by the Gentlemen of the Inner Temple, and by them presented before her Majestie. Newly revived and polished according to the decorum of these daies. By R. W. London,’ 1591 (1592 in some copies), 4to. The play is dedicated by ‘Robert Wilmot’ to ‘Lady Marie Peter and the Lady Annie Graie;’ the latter was the wife of Henry Grey, esq., of Pirgo. After the dedication comes a letter to the author from Guil. Webbe [see ], dated ‘from Pyrgo in Essex, August the Eight, 1591.’ Webbe claims from Wilmot the performance of an ‘old intention’ of publishing this play. He refers to the gentlemen of the Inner Temple, and says that the play was ‘by them most pithily framed and no less curiously acted in view of her Majestie, by whom it was then as princely accepted as of the whole honorable audience notably applauded.’ After this letter follows an address by Wilmot to the ‘Gentlement students of the Inner Temple and Gentlemen of the Middle Temple,’ in which he mentions his doubt ‘whether it were convenient for the commonwealth, with the indecorum of my calling (as some thinke it), that the memorie of Tancred's Tragedie should be againe by my meanes revived.’ This seems a reference to his clerical profession. He speaks of his acquaintance with the Temple as having lasted twenty-four years. Before the play there are complimentary sonnets to ‘the Queenes Maidens of Honor.’ The play was acted before Queen Elizabeth in 1568. In Wilmot's version the initials of five composers are given at the end of the five acts as follows: Rod. Staf.; Hen. No (Henry Noel?); G. Al.; Ch. Hat. (Christopher Hatton); R. W. (Robert Wilmot). The play is taken from Boccaccio. It ‘may still claim to be designated the oldest known English play of which the plot is certainly taken from an Italian novel.’ The story is told in Painter's ‘Palace of


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/78

 Pleasure,’ tale 39. The original version is extant in several manuscripts, of which Lansdowne MS. 786 is the best. From this it appears that originally the play was in decasyllabic rhyming quatrains. Wilmot in 1591 made it into blank verse, by that time fashionable; but the play must be classed along with early plays like ‘Gorboduc’ and other imitations of Seneca. It has dumb shows to commence and choruses to terminate the acts. It ‘possesses no mean literary merit’. The 1591 edition was reprinted in Dodsley's ‘Collection,’ vol. ii., in 1780 (4th edit. by Hazlitt, 1874, vol. vii.). Hunter mentions a second work by Wilmot, ‘Syrophenisia, or the Canaanitish Woman; conflicts at Horndon-on-the-Hill in the County of Essex,’ 1598.

 WILMOT, ROBERT (d. 1695), commodore, is first mentioned in July 1689 as second lieutenant of the 70-gun ship Exeter, then fitting out in the Medway. In the following March he was promoted to command the Cygnet fireship, in which he was present at the battle of Beachy Head on 30 June. On 19 Aug. he was moved to the newly named fireship Hopewell, and shortly afterwards to the Dreadnought, to take that vessel round from Portsmouth to the river. The Dreadnought, an old 62-gun ship, built in 1654, was no longer seaworthy, and ‘foundered by her leakiness in her passage,’ off the South Foreland. By the court-martial held on 8 Dec. 1690 Wilmot was fully acquitted, and on 6 Jan. 1690–1 he was appointed to command the Crown of 48 guns for cruising service in the Channel. In 1692 he commanded the Wolf, hired ship, also of 48 guns, and convoyed the trade to Virginia and home. Early in 1693 he was appointed to the 70-gun ship Elizabeth, one of the grand fleet which, after accompanying Sir George Rooke [q. v.] past Ushant, returned to Torbay on 21 June, and remained there for a couple of months. During this time Wilmot quarrelled with Ensign Roydon of Ingoldsby's regiment, a detachment of which was serving on board the Elizabeth as marines. The quarrel resulted in a duel fought on shore, and Roydon was killed. Wilmot was charged with manslaughter, arrested by the marshal of the admiralty, tried at the assizes in Devonshire in the following March, and acquitted. On 25 April 1694 he was reappointed to the Elizabeth (, History of the Royal Marines, i. 387; Admiralty Minute Books, 30 Aug., 4 Sept. 1693, 5 March 1693–4).

In the following October he was appointed to the 60-gun ship Dunkirk, and the command of an expedition sent to the West Indies, where it was to co-operate with the Spaniards against the French settlements in Hispaniola. The squadron appointed for this service, consisting, besides the Dunkirk, of three 50-gun ships and some smaller vessels, together with transports carrying twelve hundred soldiers commanded by Colonel Luke Lillingston [q. v.], sailed from Plymouth on 22 Jan. 1695. In March it was at St. Christopher's, and after some correspondence with the Spanish governor of St. Domingo it sailed for Savana on the 28th. At Savana, however, it was found that, contrary to the hopes the governor had held out, the Spaniards were not ready, and it was the end of April before Cape Français could be attacked. This the French evacuated after setting on fire, and it was some weeks before the different elements of the assailing force could agree on what was next to be done and how it was to be done. At length they attacked and on 3 July took Port de la Paix, out of which they collected a booty estimated as worth about 200,000l. This seems to have been the cause of the bitter quarrel which broke out between Wilmot and Lillingston, though the particulars are unknown. Wilmot was anxious, late as the season was, to go on and capture Petit Goave and Leogane; but the sickly state of the troops, and probably also Lillingston's ill will, rendered this impossible, and leaving the 50-gun ships behind for the protection of Jamaica, Wilmot sailed for England on 3 Sept. But the fever, which had killed so many of the soldiers, had now spread to the ships, and very many of the seamen died, Wilmot himself among the first, on 15 Sept. Lillingston afterwards published a pamphlet accusing Wilmot of several irregularities, none of which, however, he could substantiate by any evidence except his own assertion; and Wilmot was dead. In the account of the expedition published by Burchett, who, as secretary of the admiralty, was in a better position for learning the truth than any other man could possibly be, the accusations of Lillingston are passed over with contempt.


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 29, 1918.djvu/222

 212 mothers?" Tubinh took a pin. "No, Xubinh, don't you remember pins were used as nails in the casket of our mothers?" Tubinh took a straw. "No, Xubinh, don't you remember it was a straw that choked our mothers to death } Why don't you take it out with your fingers?" Tubinh went to take it out with his fingers, Lob closed his teeth on his fingers. "Xubinh, you are a smart fellow, but I am smarter than you. Remember I am your uncle. I won't let you go until you tell me the truth about where you eat." " Ti Lob, I eat at Ti Ganga. I was afraid to take you there. You are very cowardly, you might perish. If Ti Ganga catches us there she'll kill us." "Xubinh, you take me there." "Well, when we go take a bag with you, when you eat one egg, put fifty in the bag." They go, Tubinh puts a hundred eggs in the bag, he eats one, Lob when he eats two hundred, he puts one in the bag. "Time to leave, Ti Lob," says Tubinh. "I have still an empty place in my stomach," says Lob. "I have still to eat for my grandfather, for my father, for my mother, for my wife and for my children." Tubinh leaves him there, he tells Lob when he is ready to come out to say, "Port' tohoc tobac." When he is out, to say, "Port' burnec'." When Lob is ready to come out he says, "Port burnec,' port' burnec'and the door shuts tight. He can't get out, he sits down by the door. Tubinh is outside, he sees Ti' Ganga coming, near by on a little hill, he sings.

Inside the door Lob sings,


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 29, 1918.djvu/223

Rh Outside, Ti' Ganga sings,

Tubinh sings,

Lob sings,

Now Ti' Ganga comes up with her bundle of wood. She puts it on the ground, she says, "Port' tohoc' tobac'." Inside the door Lob sings, "Port' burnec'." Again Ti Ganga says, "Port' toboc tobac'." Again Lob says, "Port' burnec'." Ti' Ganga sits down, she says, " Door, every day when I say, port' toboc' tobac',' you open, why don't you open to-day?" Then the door flew open, and Lob ran under the bed. Ti' Ganga made coffee, she drank, she lay down in bed. She broke wind. "You stinking pig!" exclaimed Lob under the bed. Ti' Ganga looks around everywhere. She sees nobody. She goes back to bed. She breaks wind again. " You stinking pig to break wind with me under the bed! " This time Ti' Ganga sees Lob under the bed. He came out, he jumped up, he caught hold of the roof truss. Ti' Ganga began to beat him. "Ti' Ganga, my hand is tired. My whole body is tired!" "Come down then and let me kill you." Lob dropped, he fell into a pile of ashes, he was lost. Just then Tubinh passed by. "Oh Subrinh', come here, come here!" called Ti' Ganga, "Lob was here, he disappeared from sight." Tubinh said, "The Barela race never die without breaking wind." Lob heard, he


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 29, 1918.djvu/224

214 broke wind like a blast, he discovered himself. Then Ti' Ganga killed him.

The central tale in this group of tales is familiar to and very popular among all the Cape Verde islanders. Were they to give it a name it would probably be, Ti' Ganga. One has only to mention Ti' Ganga to prompt the tale. A close variant to it is the following tale from the Bahamas.

Now this day b'o' Rabby came to b'o' Boukee, and said, "Man, you know I could carry you to a house where plenty food." Anyhow, next day they start. When they got there, they said, "Open, ca-banger, open!" The door open. When they got in, "Shut, ca-banger." The door shut. Now they start to steal. Now some tamaring (tamborine?) was there. Now when they had their bag half full, b'o' Rabby gone to the tamaring, took it up an' beat.

He gone now. Bo'o Boukee gone, take up one and start.

He throw that down, he pick another.

So he start to get again. So when he listen, he heard, "Open, ca-banger, open." The door open, an' b'o' Boukee


text:
Author:Herbert Appold Grueber

Works

 * Medallic Illustrations of the History of Great Britain and Ireland with Augustus Wollaston Franks and Edward Hawkins (1885)
 * (in part)

title: Author:Herbert Appold Grueber


text:
Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/11

 Type species.—Dolichopterus stylonuroides Clarke and Ruedemann, 1912.

Derivation of name.—Named in honor of Rudolf Ruedemann whose many contributions to our knowledge of the Chelicerata are basic and well known to all who work in this group.

Distribution.—Eastern New York.

Stratigraphic range.—Ordovician.

Remarks.—Ruedemannipterus seems to be an interesting connecting genus between the Dolichopteridae and Stylonuridae. The distinctly elongated carapace and narrow mesosoma, as well as the narrow sixth leg, resemble features of some of the Stylonuridae. However, the development of a paddle, although narrow, with numerous supplementary lobes, probably should designate this genus as one of the Dolichopteridae. As it is obviously a connecting genus, good arguments for it being a stylonurid can also be advanced. Brachyopterus Størmer, 1951, has a carapace which in general shape resembles Ruedemannipterus, although the position of the eyes and the stylonurid type of legs make further comparison unnecessary.

A number of other eurypterids which have aroused uncertainty as to their generic affinities can now be referred to the genus Ruedemannipterus. These include Dolichopterus latifrons Clarke and Ruedemann, 1912, from the Ordovician Schenectady shales of Schenectady, New York, and Dolichopterus breviceps Clarke and Ruedemann, 1912, from the Ordovician Normanskill shale of Catskill, New York.

Diagnosis.—Medium-to-large dolichopterids, outer surface with strongly developed knobs and scales; prosoma broadly subrectangular, slightly concave in front; lateral eyes small; opisthosoma with pronounced epimers; prosomal legs unknown, except fragments of last leg which indicate presence of a wide paddle, possibly dolichopteroid (diagnosis modified from Størmer, 1955, pp. 38–39).

Type species.—Stylonurus scoticus Woodward, 1864.

Distribution.—Scotland and Germany.

Stratigraphic range.—Devonian.

Remarks.—The two podomeres preserved on the left side of the holotype are flat structures indicating the presence of a paddle. On the other hand, Størmer (1955, p. 39) believes that the legs were probably stylonuroid. The overall aspect of the eurypterid could


text:
Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/12

176 that it is either a dolichopterid or one of the stylonuroids. The ornamentation is more typical of such stylonuroids as Hallipterus. Nevertheless, the flattened podomeres indicate that if Tarsopterella is a stylonuracean, it should probably be referred to the Dolichopteridae. This is done here with considerable misgivings until the ventral side is known or some more prosomal appendages are found of this highly spectacular eurypterid. It is not precluded that Tarsopterella may not belong among the Eurypteracea.

The following species are recognized:

Diagnosis.—Ventral shield and metastoma unknown; eyes located in posterior half of carapace, opisthosoma undifferentiated, trilobation present; last two legs very long.

The above family diagnosis is based on the type species of Stylonurus as restricted here. However, if genera such as Stylonuroides, Stylonurella, Parastylonurus, Brachyopterus and Brachyopterella are used in the diagnosis, then a much better and more complete diagnosis can be made. I suspect, however, that some of these genera will be found eventually to have no significant affinities with the type genus. It is almost certain that further revisions in the diagnosis of the family will be forthcoming with discovery of additional material. With these reservations in mind, the diagnosis of the family may further include:

Diagnosis.—Ventral shield with epistoma; metastoma very narrow, with deep triangular notch or deeply cordate anteriorly, and with base truncated.

It should be noted that when the underside of Stylonurus powriensis Page, the genotype, is known, genera such as Parastylonurus, Stylonuroides, Stylonurella, Brachyopterus, Brachyopterella, and others here included in the Stylonuridae, may well be found to belong to other and distinct families.

The following genera are recognized for this family:

Stylonurus Page, 1856

Stylonurella, new genus

Stylonuroides, new genus

Parastylonurus, new genus


text:
User:Target for Today/1913 Gettysburg reunion flag ceremony

"The ceremonies incident to the 'hand-shake over the Stone Wall at [the] "Bloody Angle" ' ''on the afternoon of July 3rd, in which one hundred and eighty survivors of the Philadelphia Brigade Association (Webb's Brigade) … and one hundred and twenty survivors of Pickett's Division Association … participated, were of intense interest. The two lines were formed one hundred feet apart, the Philadelphia Brigade on the North [sic] and Pickett's Division on the South [sic] side of the Stone Wall, over which they had fought with such desperate valor just fifty years ago to the hour--the former with their Division Battle Flag and the latter with their "Stars and Bars" they had carried over the wall behind their brigade commander… Standing on the wall between the two lines the Honorable J. Hampton Moore … presented on behalf of the Philadelphia Brigade Association to the Pickett's Division Association a beautiful silk flag of the United States, in the following eloquent words:[p. 167-8]… During the address, the standard bearers of the two flags first mentioned advanced midways between the two lines, crossing their flag staffs, and at its conclusion the standard bearer of the silken emblem of our United country, unfurling it on the Stone Wall, ran forward and held it above the two battle flags, while Comrade Bentley [accepted it] on behalf of the Pickett's Division Association, immediately after which the two lines were advanced to the stone fence, … clasped hands and buried their faces on each other's shoulders, while a mighty shout of praise burst forth from the thousands of interested spectators''"[p. 171s] (Report of the Pennsylvania Commission, December 31, 1913).


text:
Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/13

 Brachyopterus, Størmer, 1951

Brachyopterella, new genus

Clarkeipterus, new genus

Melbournopterus, Caster and Kjellesvig-Waering, 1953

(?) Dorfopterus, Kjellesvig-Waering, 1955

Diagnosis.—Stylonuridae of medium size, prosoma subquadrate, lateral margins slightly rounded outward to reach greatest width at midsection, anterolateral angles rounded; eyes arcuate, located in posterior half of prosoma; podomere-count unknown, but the last two legs are greatly elongated, the last one extending to at least the twelfth tergite; opisthosoma wide, short, trilobated, and without differentiation into a pre- and post-abdomen; metasoma grades into the long telson without differentation; underside unknown.

Type species.—Stylonurus powriensis Page, 1856.

Distribution.—Scotland, Pennsylvania (?) and New York (?).

Stratigraphic range.—Devonian.

Remarks.—The above diagnosis is an emendation, but based only on the type species. However, it is necessary because Stylonurus, as was the case with the genus Eurypterus (Kjellesvig-Waering, 1948, p. 4; 1958, p. 1107), has become a convenient entity to which to refer practically any eurypterid with stylonuroid legs. Species have been referred to this genus on the basis of characters conforming to those of the type species in only the most general way, serving to place them in the superfamily Stylonuracea. This criticism is not aimed at any particular worker in the eurypterids, and it includes myself as much as anyone else.

Page, in his original description (1856, p. 135), described the genotype as "quaint-looking," and indeed it is, remaining as unique and enigmatic today as it did over one hundred years ago. The characters distinguishing Stylonurus from other stylonurids are not only the position of the eyes in the rear of the carapace, and the shape of the carapace, but more importantly the distinct trilobation, not only of the mesosoma as in some other eurypterids (Megalograptus, Mixopterus), but also of the metasoma, a feature not found elsewhere except in the recently described Pagea of Waterston (1962), and the Woodwardopteridae, both considerably different eurypterids. Even without the presence of trilobation, the short, wide opisthosoma, without the slightest trace of differentiation, is a significant feature. The


text:
Page:The Folk-Lore Journal Volume 3 1885.djvu/283

 Rh they are firmly believed in, they show what a hold superstition still has on the popular mind; and, although modernised, have the general character of similar Irish superstition, especially the second in which hobgoblins guard hidden treasure and try to frighten the seekers away; cats and bulls are favourite guardians of such treasures. I have not, however, previously heard of a choice being given between midnight and high noon.

At Gartan Lake, co. Donegal, St, Columbkills of Donegal is said to have been born A.D. 521. His birthplace, as pointed out, is a rude beehive cell (claghaun), while in its vicinity are the ruins of a small church and abbey said to have been subsequently built by him.

Formerly, in the vicinity of these ecclesiastical structures, there was found a clay that had the virtue of bestowing on any one who carried a portion of it on their persons indemnification against drowning; or if it was in a house, that house could not be burned; also having other virtues of a similar sort. But these virtues belonged to the clay solely on the condition that it was dug up by a member of a family of the name of Freel. A good many years ago a stranger conceived the idea that he had as good a right to the clay as any Freel, and he went to dig for it, but could find none, nor could any Freel afterwards find it near the abbey. After a time, however, a Freel learned in a dream that it would show itself, and so it did, as a snake was seen in a valley about a mile to the northeast, which came up from the clay. Now all the Freels except one family has died out or left the country; and when the tenants of Derryveih about the year 1861 were evicted and had to emigrate to Australia this Freel had to raise the clay for them to carry to a far distant land.

In the townland of Famagh between Ramelton and Fort Stewart there is a hawthorn now called "The Fairy Bush," near which is said to be buried a crock of gold willed to the family or heir of John


text:
Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/14

178 underside of the genotype would likely be of great interest and perhaps as surprising as the dorsal.

Basing the generic differences on the carapace, position of the eyes and type of opisthosoma, I recognize several genera which previously had been included in the genus Stylonurus. These are Brachyopterella, Parastylonurus, Stylonuroides and Stylonurella. Unfortunately, the genus Stylonurus remains with only one species, the genotype. Other fragmentary specimens are questionably assigned.

It is significant to recall that Clarke and Ruedemann, in their division of the stylonuroids in 1912, recognized the dilemma of the holotype and wrote, "Only a single specimen, not very favorably preserved in sandstone, has been recorded and although Page's not very correct figure and explanation have been followed by Woodward's elaborate description and careful illustration, this genotype is still incompletely known. Indeed, when the investigation of a considerable number of species revealed to us the presence of divisions of undoubted subgeneric rank, it remained doubtful with which of these the genotype belongs and which of the divisions therefore represents Stylonurus sensu stricto." (1912, p. 278). The divisions given here should help to alleviate this confusion, although problems still remain.

The species recognized for this genus are:

Diagnosis.—Stylonuridae of small size; carapace elongated-parabolic, longer than wide, surrounded by conspicuous wide marginal rim; eyes elongated-reniform, with axes parallel, and located so that their posterior borders are in the anterior half of the carapace; ocelli situated approximately midway between the eyes; third walking leg (IV) short, and with single opposable spines; fourth and fifth walking legs (V, VI) devoid of spines, except at the terminal end of the last leg which has either two flat spines or structures that might be interpreted as narrow supplementary lobes; podomere-count: ?–?–?–8–?–9.

Type species.—Stylonurus dolichopteroides Størmer, 1934.

Distribution.—Norway and New York.

Stratigraphic range.—Ordovician and Siluro-Devonian.


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Colvin, Sidney


text:
Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/15

 Remarks.—Stylonuroides can easily be distinguished from all other stylonurids by the very long carapace and reniform eyes, as well as the details of the termination of the last walking leg. It is, as the species name of the genotype indicates, and as Størmer (1934, p. 103) has pointed out, another link between the Dolichopteridae and the Stylonuridae, a further step in the transition from species such as Ruedemannipterus stylonuroides (Clarke and Ruedemann). However, the long carapace and reniform eyes, a considerable departure from the usual greatly arcuate eyes of the stylonurids, may well reveal some affinities with the family Rhenopteridae.

The following species are recognized for the genus:

Diagnosis.—Stylonuridae of small size; subquadrate prosoma, approximately as long as wide, slightly constricted at midsection; eyes parallel, arcuate, anteriorly located, intramarginally, about midway in the anterior half of the carapace; ventral shield with epistoma, but metastoma unknown; first two appendages also unknown, third and fourth prosomal legs very short, last two walking legs very long; podomere-count: ?–?–7?–8–9–9?; metasoma very narrow, non-trilobed, tapering.

Type species.—Stylonurus spinipes Page, 1859 (=Stylonurus logani Woodward).

Distribution.—Scotland, Norway, New York and Pennsylvania.

Stratigraphic range.—Ordovician, Silurian and Devonian.

Remarks.—Although this was one of the earliest described stylonuroids, made known not long after the description of the genotype of Stylonurus, it bears no close (generic) affinities to that genus. The differences between this genus and Stylonurus are numerous and outstanding. Stylonurus has eyes placed on the posterior half of the carapace whereas Stylonurella has them anteriorly located. Perhaps of even greater importance is the wide opisthosoma with trilobation of stylonurus as against the narrow terete mesosoma without any trace of trilobation in Stylonurella. The differences of Parastylonurus also are numerous and obvious. The quadrate form of the carapace


text:
Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/16

180 of Stylonurella differs greatly from the subrounded, wider than long, carapace of Parastylonurus.

In the shape of the carapace and position of the eyes, Stylonurella has a resemblance to Kokomopterus, however the altogether different type of prosomal appendages is a difference that precludes the necessity for further comparison.

Recognized species for this genus are:

Diagnosis.—Stylonuridae of small to medium size; prosoma rounded-quadrate; wider than long, with lateral eyes, arcuate and located on anterior half of the carapace; metastoma very long, with deep triangular notch or deeply cordate and with base truncated; first three walking legs very short with single opposable spines on each joint; last two walking legs very long, reaching to the last tergite; podomere-count: ?–?–7?–8–9–9; ornamentation consists of scales; opisthosoma narrow, undifferentiated; telson spike-like.

Type species.—Stylonurus ornatus Laurie, 1892.

Distribution.—Scotland, England, New York and Pennsylvania.

Stratigraphic range.—Ordovician, Silurian and Devonian.

Remarks.—Parastylonurus includes more forms previously included in the genus Stylonurus than do the other genera described here. However, in my opinion, the development of distinct trilobation in the genus Stylonurus sets that genus irrevocably apart from the species that are here referred to Parastylonurus. The position of the eyes is also a major generic difference.

The following species are recognized:


text: Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/34


text: Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/35


text: Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/36


text: Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/37


text: Page:A Revision of the Families and Genera of the Stylonuracea (Eurypterida).djvu/38


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Colvin, John Russell


text:
The New International Encyclopædia/Colvin, Sidney

COLVIN, kŏl'vĭn, (1845—). An English author, born at Norwood, Surrey. He graduated in 1867 at Trinity College, Cambridge, was elected a fellow, of the college in 1868, and, having become Slade professor of fine arts at Cambridge, in 1873, held that post by successive reëlections until 1885. In 1876-84 he was also director of the Fitzwilliam Museum of the university. He was appointed keeper of prints and drawings in the British Museum in 1884. His contributions to periodicals on the history and criticism of literature, and more largely of the fine arts, are numerous and valuable. His published works include the volumes on Walter Savage Landor (1881) and John Keats (1887) in the “English Men of Letters” series; A Florentine Picture and Chronicle (1898); The Early History of Engraving in England (1901); and editions of Selections from the Writings of Walter Savage Landor (1882; in the “Golden Treasury” series), of the Letters of Keats (1887), and of the Papers of Fleeming Jenkin (1887; with J. A. Ewing). His labors in connection with the preparation of the standard Edinburgh edition (27 volumes, 1894-98) of the works, and the edition of the collected Letters (2 volumes, London, 1900; preceded in 1895 by Vailima Letters) of his friend, Robert Louis Stevenson, made him an authority on that author. He also wrote the sketch of Stevenson for the Dictionary of National Biography (vol. liv.), and was to have written the authoritative Life, intended for publication simultaneously with the Letters, but was obliged to relinquish the task to Graham Balfour.


text:
United States Code/Title 18/Part I/Chapter 113/Section 2319

CITE

18 USC Sec. 2319                                           01/05/2009

EXPCITE

TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I - CRIMES CHAPTER 113 - STOLEN PROPERTY

HEAD

Sec. 2319. Criminal infringement of a copyright

STATUTE

(a) Any person who violates section 506(a) (relating to criminal   offenses) of title 17 shall be punished as provided in subsections (b), (c), and (d) and such penalties shall be in addition to any other provisions of title 17 or any other law. (b) Any person who commits an offense under section 506(a)(1)(A) of title 17 - (1) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of at least 10 copies or     phonorecords, of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $2,500; (2) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense is a     felony and is a second or subsequent offense under subsection (a); and (3) shall be imprisoned not more than 1 year, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, in any other case. (c) Any person who commits an offense under section 506(a)(1)(B) of title 17 - (1) shall be imprisoned not more than 3 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution of 10 or more copies or     phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of $2,500 or more; (2) shall be imprisoned not more than 6 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense is a     felony and is a second or subsequent offense under subsection (a); and (3) shall be imprisoned not more than 1 year, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution of 1 or more copies or     phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000. (d) Any person who commits an offense under section 506(a)(1)(C) of title 17 - (1) shall be imprisoned not more than 3 years, fined under this title, or both; (2) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, fined under this title, or both, if the offense was committed for purposes of     commercial advantage or private financial gain; (3) shall be imprisoned not more than 6 years, fined under this title, or both, if the offense is a felony and is a second or     subsequent offense under subsection (a); and (4) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined under this title, or both, if the offense is a felony and is a second or subsequent offense under paragraph (2). (e)(1) During preparation of the presentence report pursuant to   Rule 32(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, victims of    the offense shall be permitted to submit, and the probation officer shall receive, a victim impact statement that identifies the victim of the offense and the extent and scope of the injury and loss suffered by the victim, including the estimated economic impact of   the offense on that victim. (2) Persons permitted to submit victim impact statements shall include - (A) producers and sellers of legitimate works affected by     conduct involved in the offense; (B) holders of intellectual property rights in such works; and (C) the legal representatives of such producers, sellers, and holders. (f) As used in this section - (1) the terms "phonorecord" and "copies" have, respectively, the meanings set forth in section 101 (relating to definitions) of title 17; (2) the terms "reproduction" and "distribution" refer to the exclusive rights of a copyright owner under clauses (1) and (3) respectively of section 106 (relating to exclusive rights in     copyrighted works), as limited by sections 107 through 122, of      title 17; (3) the term "financial gain" has the meaning given the term in     section 101 of title 17; and (4) the term "work being prepared for commercial distribution" has the meaning given the term in section 506(a) of title 17.

SOURCE

(Added Pub. L. 97-180, Sec. 3, May 24, 1982, 96 Stat. 92; amended   Pub. L. 102-561, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 4233; Pub. L. 105-80,    Sec. 12(b)(2), Nov. 13, 1997, 111 Stat. 1536; Pub. L. 105-147, Sec.    2(d), Dec. 16, 1997, 111 Stat. 2678; Pub. L. 107-273, div. C, title    III, Sec. 13211(a), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1910; Pub. L. 109-9,    title I, Sec. 103(b), Apr. 27, 2005, 119 Stat. 220; Pub. L. 110-    403, title II, Sec. 208, Oct. 13, 2008, 122 Stat. 4263.)

REFERENCES IN TEXT

The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, referred to in subsec. (e)(1), are set out in the Appendix to this title.

AMENDMENTS

2008 - Subsecs. (b)(2), (c)(2). Pub. L. 110-403, Sec. 208(1), (2), inserted "is a felony and" after "the offense" and substituted "subsection (a)" for "paragraph (1)". Subsec. (d)(3). Pub. L. 110-403, Sec. 208(3), inserted "is a   felony and" after "the offense" and "under subsection (a)" before the semicolon. Subsec. (d)(4). Pub. L. 110-403, Sec. 208(4), inserted "is a   felony and" after "the offense". 2005 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 109-9, Sec. 103(b)(1), substituted "Any person who" for "Whoever" and ", (c), and (d)" for "and (c) of   this section". Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109-9, Sec. 103(b)(2), substituted "section   506(a)(1)(A)" for "section 506(a)(1)" in introductory provisions. Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 109-9, Sec. 103(b)(3), substituted "section   506(a)(1)(B) of title 17" for "section 506(a)(2) of title 17,    United States Code" in introductory provisions. Subsecs. (d), (e). Pub. L. 109-9, Sec. 103(b)(4), (5), added subsec. (d) and redesignated former subsec. (d) as (e). Former subsec. (e) redesignated (f). Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 109-9, Sec. 103(b)(4), (6), redesignated subsec. (e) as (f) and added pars. (3) and (4). 2002 - Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 107-273 substituted "107 through   122" for "107 through 120". 1997 - Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105-147, Sec. 2(d)(1), substituted "subsections (b) and (c)" for "subsection (b)". Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 105-147, Sec. 2(d)(2)(A), substituted "section 506(a)(1) of title 17" for "subsection (a) of this   section" in introductory provisions. Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 105-147, Sec. 2(d)(2)(B), inserted "including by electronic means," after "if the offense consists of   the reproduction or distribution," and substituted "which have a    total retail value of more than $2,500" for "with a retail value of    more than $2,500". Pub. L. 105-80, substituted "at least 10 copies" for "at last 10   copies". Subsecs. (c) to (e). Pub. L. 105-147, Sec. 2(d)(3), added subsecs. (c) and (d) and redesignated former subsec. (c) as (e). 1992 - Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 102-561, Sec. 1, amended subsec. (b) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (b) read as follows: "Any   person who commits an offense under subsection (a) of this section -        "(1) shall be fined not more than $250,000 or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both, if the offense - "(A) involves the reproduction or distribution, during any       one-hundred-and-eighty-day period, of at least one thousand        phonorecords or copies infringing the copyright in one or more        sound recordings;          "(B) involves the reproduction or distribution, during any one-hundred-and-eighty-day period, of at least sixty-five copies infringing the copyright in one or more motion pictures or other audiovisual works; or         "(C) is a second or subsequent offense under either of        subsection (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, where a prior        offense involved a sound recording, or a motion picture or        other audiovisual work;        "(2) shall be fined not more than $250,000 or imprisoned for not more than two years, or both, if the offense - "(A) involves the reproduction or distribution, during any       one-hundred-and-eighty-day period, of more than one hundred but        less than one thousand phonorecords or copies infringing the        copyright in one or more sound recordings; or          "(B) involves the reproduction or distribution, during any one-hundred-and-eighty-day period, of more than seven but less than sixty-five copies infringing the copyright in one or more motion pictures or other audiovisual works; and "(3) shall be fined not more than $25,000 or imprisoned for not     more than one year, or both, in any other case." Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 102-561, Sec. 2, substituted " 'phonorecord'   " for " 'sound recording', 'motion picture', 'audiovisual work',    'phonorecord'," in par. (1) and "120" for "118" in par. (2).


text:
Collier's New Encyclopedia (1921)/Colvin, Sir Sidney

COLVIN, SIR SIDNEY, an English critic; born in Norwood, England, June 18, 1845. He became professor of fine arts at Cambridge in 1873. He was keeper of prints and drawings, British Museum (1884-1912). He wrote “Life of Landor” (1881); “Keats” (1887); “Early History of English Engraving” (1905); and edited Edinburgh edition of Stevenson's works; “John Keats, His Life and Poetry” (1917). He was knighted in 1911.


text:
The Encyclopedia Americana (1920)/Colvin, Sidney

COLVIN, Sidney, English critic: b. Norwood, England, 18 June 1845. He was Slade professor of fine arts at Cambridge 1873-85 and keeper of prints and drawings at the British Museum 1884-1912. His writings include ‘Children in Italian and English Design’ (1872); ‘Life of Walter Savage Landor’ (1881); ‘Life of Keats’ (1887); ‘A Florentine Picture-Chronicle’ (1898); ‘Early History of Engraving in England’ (1905). He edited the Edinburgh edition of the works of Robert Louis Stevenson (1894-97), and also his letters. He was knighted in 1911.


text:
The New International Encyclopædia/Colville

COLVILLE, kōl'vĭl (from the town of Colville, Wash.). A former important Salishan people, calling themselves Shwoyelpi, originally occupying the country on Columbia River about Colville and Kettle rivers, northeastern Washington. The great salmon-fishing resort of Kettle Falls was within their territory, and here, in 1846, was established the Jesuit mission of St. Paul, through the influence of which nearly all the upper Columbia tribes are now Christianized. They were put upon a reservation (Colville) in 1872, and have since rapidly decreased, having dwindled from 616, in 1870, to 298, in 1900.


text:
Page:The Life of Michael Angelo.djvu/211

 have been easier to die with him, because of the love I bore him. And well did he merit that love. For he was a worthy, loyal and faithful man. His death seems to have taken all life out of me, and I cannot recover my tranquillity."

His sorrow was so profound that three months afterwards he wrote this celebrated letter to Vasari:

"Messer, my dear Friend,—

"I find it hard to write, but, in answer to your letter, I must send you a few hues. You know that Urbino is dead, to my great loss and unspeakable grief, for he was a great favour from God to me. The favour is that whereas when living he kept me alive, in dying he has taught me not to fear death, but to desire it. I had him twenty-six years, and ever found him devoted and faithful. I made him rich, and hoped for his support in my old age, but he has been taken away, and I can only hope to see him again in Paradise, where God, by the very happy death which He granted him, has shown he must be. He was more grieved for leaving me a prey to the vexations of the world than at death itself. The better part of me has gone with him, and nothing is left to me but infinite sorrow."

In his confusion he begged his nephew to come to see him in Rome. Leonardo and Cassandra, uneasy over his sorrow, came and found him in a very weak state.


text:
Page:The Life of Michael Angelo.djvu/212

 But he gained fresh strength in the obligation which Urbino had imposed upon him—that of undertaking the guardianship of his sons, one of whom was his godson and bore his name.

He made other friendships—strange ones. Through a desire for reaction (so strong in the case of men of robust nature) against all the constraints imposed by society, he loved to surround himself with simple-minded men, who were given to uttering unexpected flashes of wit and had free manners—men who were not made like all the world. There was Topolino, a stonecutter of Carrara, "who thought himself a good sculptor, and who never loaded a boat for Rome without sending three or four little figures of his own, at which Michael Angelo died of laughing." Menighella, a clumsy painter of Valdarno, was another. "He came to see Michael Angelo from time to time and got him to draw St. Roch or St. Anthony to paint and sell to the peasants. Michael Angelo, whom it was hard to persuade to work for kings, put aside everything to make simple designs suitable to his friend's style and requirements as Menighella said. Among other things he did a model of a Crucifix of great beauty." For a barber, who dabbled in painting, he designed a cartoon representing the "Stigmatisation of St. Francis." Other friends of his were: one of his


text:
User talk:Stockleave~enwikisource

JeepdaySock (talk) 16:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

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 Stockleave. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Stockleave~enwikisource 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.

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 23:34, 17 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) 06:49, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Stockleave~enwikisource


text: Index:The Phoenix Vol3 No1.djvu

title: Index:The Phoenix Vol3 No1.djvu


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/107

 Classes of the Community,’ came out in the spring of 1839, and its third edition was issued in the next year. Its object was to show that the duty on corn did not benefit the agricultural interest any more than that of the manufacturers. The argument was clearly threshed out, and he followed it up by frequent speeches in the same sense. His reasoning had considerable influence over the mind of Cobden, and, by removing from the agitation the stigma that its object was to promote the interests of one class at the expense of another, had much effect on the success of the anti-cornlaw movement.

In the second of these pamphlets, that on the ‘Fluctuations of Currency, Commerce, and Manufactures’ (1840), Wilson traced their rise and fall to the artificial operation of the corn laws. The third of them, ‘The Revenue, or what shall the Chancellor do?’ 1841, was all but written in a ‘single night,’ and it contained an outline of the changes subsequently introduced by Sir Robert Peel and his follower in finance, Gladstone. He urged the increase of direct taxation through the medium of the assessed taxes and the reduction of the tariff regulating the custom and excise duties, as these had largely diminished in yield from the decreased resources of the mass of the people. He showed in detail how the consumption of coffee and sugar had been augmented by the diminution of the duties thereon.

Wilson about 1843 wrote the city article and occasional leaders for the ‘Morning Chronicle.’ For several years he contributed letters and articles to the ‘Examiner,’ and he was desirous of increasing his papers in its columns, but the space was denied him. He thereupon, after consultation with Cobden and Villiers, as the spokesmen of the Anti-Cornlaw League (, Cobden, i. 291–2), determined on establishing a weekly paper for financial and commercial men. He invested in it most of his capital and obtained some help from Lord Radnor, an ardent free-trader. ‘The Economist,’ which appeared for the first time on 2 Sept. 1843, at once became a recognised power in the newspaper world, and has maintained its position ever since. It advocated the repeal of the corn laws, and strenuously upheld the principles of free trade. In the early stages of its existence Wilson wrote nearly the whole of the paper. It was as a practical man, writing for those engaged in the daily routine of business life, that he primarily expounded his views, but the effect of his opinions was not limited to any single section in society. Under the title of ‘Capital Currency and Banking’ he published in 1847 a volume containing ‘his articles in “The Economist” in 1845 on the Bank Act of 1844, and in 1847 on the crisis. With a plan for a secure and economical currency.’ A second edition came out in 1859; it was issued in 1857 in the ‘Biblioteca dell' Economista’ (2nd ser. vi. 455–662); and a translation was published at Rio de Janeiro in 1860. It embodied his criticisms on the currency acts of Peel, with an analysis of the panic of 1847 and of the railway mania which preceded it. He was a strenuous advocate for the sure convertibility of the banknote, but ‘opposed to the technical restrictions of the act of 1844.’ He also advocated the repeal of the navigation laws, regarding them as ‘restrictions on our commerce.’ A pamphlet by him on the ‘Cause of the present Commercial Distress, and its Bearings on Shipowners,’ was printed at Liverpool in 1843, and he printed in 1849 a speech on ‘The Navigation Laws.’

A chance conversation at Lord Radnor's table induced Wilson to become a candidate for parliament at the general election of 1847 for the borough of Westbury in Wiltshire. He was returned by 170 votes against 149 given to his tory opponent, Matthew James Higgins [q. v.], well known as ‘Jacob Omnium.’ He was re-elected in 1852, when he won by six votes only. From 1857 until his departure for India he represented Devonport. Wilson's first speech in parliament was on the motion for a committee to inquire into the commercial depression which then existed, and he soon obtained considerable influence as a speaker. Within six months of the date on which he took his seat office was offered to him, and from 16 May 1848 to the dissolution of Lord John Russell's ministry he was one of the joint secretaries to the board of control.

On the formation of the Aberdeen ministry Wilson was offered the important post of financial secretary to the treasury, and he remained in this place, dealing ably with the vexed questions daily referred to the holder of that position, from January 1853 until the defeat of Lord Palmerston's administration in 1858. During his tenure of this office he was offered, but declined, first the vice-presidency of the board of trade in 1855, secondly the chairmanship of inland revenue in 1856. This was ‘a good pillow,’ he said, ‘but he did not wish to lie down.’

Lord Palmerston returned to power in June 1859, when Wilson accepted the vice-presidency of the board of trade, coupled with that of paymaster-general, and was created a privy councillor. He had scarcely been seated in office when he was offered the


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/108

 post of financial member of the council of India, which had just been created. He hesitated about accepting it, for he appreciated his influence in the House of Commons, recognised the ‘gigantic difficulties’ which awaited him in India, and was not tempted by the high salary, as through the success of his paper, aided by some prudent investments, he was possessed of affluence. On public grounds, however, he determined upon going thither, and on 20 Oct. 1859 he left England for his new position. Through a ‘fortunate accident’ he visited immediately after his arrival the upper provinces of Hindustan. He travelled from Calcutta to Lahore, and back again, visiting every city and town of importance within that area, and returned much impressed with the undeveloped resources of the country. The principles of his budget were explained by him on 18 Feb. 1860. He found himself face to face with a great deficiency of revenue and an enormous increase in public debt. He proposed certain increased import duties with a tax on home-grown tobacco, a small and uniform license duty upon traders of every class, and the imposition of an income-tax on all incomes above 200 rupees a year, but with a reduction for those not exceeding 500 rupees per annum. These propositions met with considerable opposition, mainly through the action of Sir Charles Edward Trevelyan [q. v.], but that official was promptly recalled. Wilson's budget and Trevelyan's recall excited much criticism in England.

Wilson's next act was to establish a paper currency. He set up at Calcutta a government commission charged with the functions exercised in this country by the issue department of the Bank of England. Branch establishments were erected at Madras and Bombay, and the three presidencies were divided for the issue and redemption of notes into convenient districts called currency circles. The notes were to be for 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 500, or 1,000 rupees, and they were to be redeemable with silver. Wilson then commenced a reformation of the system of public accounts. He it was ‘that first evoked order out of the chaos of Indian finance, and rendered it possible for the future to regulate the outlay by the income.’

For some time after his arrival in India Wilson remained in good health, but with the advent of wet weather his physical strength declined. Under the pressure of work he neglected his condition, but about the middle of July 1860 he went for a week's change to Barrackpore. He returned to labour with only a slight improvement in his state. The dysentery increased, on 2 Aug. he took to his bed, and on the evening of 11 Aug. he was dead. Mourning for his loss was universal in Calcutta; he was buried in the Circular Road cemetery, where a monument was erected to his memory. His widow died in London in 1886, and was buried in the churchyard of Curry Rivel, Somerset. They had six daughters: the eldest, Elizabeth, married Walter Bagehot [q. v.]; the next, Julia, was the second wife of William Rathbone Greg [q. v.]; the fourth daughter, Zenobia, married Mr. Orby Shipley; the fifth, Sophia Victoria, married Mr. Stirling Halsey of the Indian civil service, private secretary to his father-in-law until his death.

Wilson was very active in his temperament, fertile in ideas, and lucid in exposition. To the last hour of his life he was of a sanguine disposition. His memory was marvellous, his judgment was remarkably even, and an iron constitution enabled him to accomplish a vast amount of work. In society his vivacity of conversation was always conspicuous. He was a foreign associate of the Institute of France.

A full-length statue of Wilson, by Steele of Edinburgh, the cost of which was defrayed by the mercantile community of the city, is in the Dalhousie Institute at Calcutta. A marble bust, by the same sculptor, is in the National Gallery of Edinburgh; it was placed there by the Royal Academy of Scotland, in recognition of his services in obtaining a grant from the treasury for the erection of the buildings in its occupation. That body presented Mrs. Wilson in 1859 with a portrait of him by Sir John Watson Gordon. It is now in Mrs. Bagehot's possession; a copy of it was given by Wilson's children to the gallery of local worthies in Hawick town-hall. A pen-and-ink sketch by Richard Doyle of Wilson, together with Sir William Molesworth, is in the print-room at the British Museum. They are both drawn with flowing hair, and underneath are the words: ‘Is that your own hair, or is it a whig?’ He is also represented in J. R. Herbert's picture of the leading members of the Anti-Cornlaw League.

[Economist, supplement by Walter Bagehot to number for 17 Nov. 1860; it was reprinted as a separate publication in 1861, and included in his Literary Studies (1879), i. 367–406 (1898 edit.), iii. 304–57; Gent. Mag. 1860, ii. 432; Vapereau, 1858 ed.; Encyclop. Brit. 8th ed., also by Mr. Bagehot; information from Mrs. Walter Bagehot of Herds Hill, Langport, Somerset.]


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/109

 WILSON, JAMES ARTHUR (1795–1882), physician, son of James Wilson, the surgeon and teacher of anatomy at the Hunterian school in Great Windmill Street, was born in Great Queen Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, in 1795. His mother was a daughter of John Clarke of Wellingborough, and sister to Sir Charles Mansfield Clarke [q. v.] He was admitted a king's scholar at Westminster school in 1808, and was elected to Christ Church, Oxford, on 9 May 1812. He graduated B.A. on 6 Dec. 1815, and obtained a first class in both classics and mathematics. On leaving Oxford temporarily, he entered his father's school in Great Windmill Street, and during the winter of 1817 he studied at Edinburgh. He proceeded M.A. at Oxford on 13 May 1818, M.B. on 6 May 1819, and M.D. on 17 May 1823. He was elected a Radcliffe travelling fellow in June 1821, and, having been nominated to a ‘faculty studentship,’ remained a student of Christ Church. In 1819 and 1820 he travelled through France and Switzerland to Italy as physician to George John Spencer, second earl Spencer, and his wife, and in the early part of 1822 he left England for the continent, in compliance with the requirements of his Radcliffe fellowship, and, with occasional intervals, was abroad for the five following years. He was admitted a candidate of the College of Physicians on 12 April 1824, a fellow on 28 March 1825, and was censor in 1828 and 1851. He delivered the materia medica lectures at the college in 1829, 1830, 1831, and 1832, the Lumleian lectures in 1847 and 1848 ‘on Pain,’ and the Harveian oration in 1850; the last-named was one of the most original and noteworthy in matter and style of any that have been delivered within the present century. He was elected physician to St. George's Hospital on 29 May 1829, and held the office until 1857, when he was appointed consulting physician. Wilson died at Holmwood, Surrey, on 29 Dec. 1882.

Wilson was author of: 1. ‘On Spasm, Languor, Palsy, and other Disorders termed Nervous of the Muscular System,’ London, 1843, 12mo. 2. ‘Oratio Harveiana in Ædibus Collegii Regalis Medicorum habita die Junii xxix., ,’ London, 1850, 8vo. His contributions to periodical literature were valuable and important. Among them were papers on ‘erysipelas and rheumatic fevers,’ published in the ‘Lancet.’ Under the signature of ‘Maxilla’ he contributed to the ‘London Gazette’ of 1833 a series of characteristic and interesting letters addressed to his friend Vestibulus (Dr. George Hall of Brighton). These letters are memorable in the history of the College of Physicians, for they struck the keynote for its reform.

[Munk's Coll. of Phys.; Roll of Westminster School; Foster's Alumni Oxon. 1715–1886; Cat. Brit. Mus. Libr.]  WILSON, JOHN (1595–1674), musician, born at Faversham in Kent on 5 April 1595, was distinguished as a lutenist, and in 1635 succeeded Alphonso Bales as musician to the king. Personal popularity won for his compositions something more than a just appreciation both at the court of Charles I, when Oxford was the stronghold of the royal cause, and among the young men of the university. Wilson's influence in spreading the love of music has been acknowledged as far-reaching. ‘The best at the lute in all England,’ he sometimes played the lute at the music meetings of Oxford, but more often presided over ‘the consort’ (, Life, p. xxiv). In 1644–5 Wilson graduated Mus. Doc. Oxon.; in 1646, on the surrender of the Oxford garrison, he entered the household of Sir William Walter of Sarsden. On the re-establishment in 1656 of the Oxford professorship of music, Wilson was appointed choragus, the lectureship having by this time been diverted from the intention of its founder. In 1661 he resigned this post for that of chamber musician to Charles II, and in 1662 he was appointed gentleman of the Chapel Royal in the place of Henry Lawes.

He lodged at the Horseferry, Westminster, died there—‘aged 78 yeares, 10 months, and 17 dayes’—on 22 Feb. 1673–4, and was buried in the little cloister of Westminster Abbey. He married his second wife, Anne Peniall, on 31 Jan. 1670–1.

Wilson's portrait is among others belonging to the Oxford Music School. An engraving by Caldwall (1644) was published by Hawkins (Hist. 2nd edit. p. 582; cf., Cat. Engr. Portr. p. 153).

The theory has been raised by Dr. Rimbault, but has never been seriously accepted, that Dr. John Wilson was identical with Shakespeare's Jack Willson, who sang ‘Sigh no more, ladies,’ and other lyrics. The folio of 1623 gives the stage direction, ‘Enter the Prince, Leonato, Claudio, and Jack Willson’ (Much Ado, act ii. sc. 3). That Wilson had frequent intercourse with contemporary composers of Shakespearean lyrics, and himself set to music ‘Take, oh! take those lips away,’ are known facts. That he had a humorous nature and a love of practical joking, such as would better beseem an actor of those days, was commonly reported, and that he was the Willson who, in company with Harry and Will Lawes, raised a tavern


text:
User:Bionecrology

Bionecrology

title: User:Bionecrology


text:
Portal:Criminology

General

 * The Modern Criminal Science Series

Criminal justice

 * Portal:Prison
 * Portal:Torture
 * Criminal Justice in Cleveland
 * An Essay on Crimes and Punishments, 1764 by Cesare Beccaria
 * Law and Authority
 * Our habitual criminals (1882) by Frederick Richard Falkiner
 * Our habitual criminals (1882) by Frederick Richard Falkiner
 * Our habitual criminals (1882) by Frederick Richard Falkiner

Hacking and cybercrime

 * Portal:Anonymous (group)

Murder

 * Charles Whitman police report, August 1966
 * Zodiac Killer letters, 1966-78
 * Mark Essex letter to WWL Television, 1973 by Mark Essex

Jack the Ripper

 * Another London Horror
 * The Diary of Jack the Ripper
 * The Latest Murder
 * The Whitehall Discovery Inquest Today
 * The Whitehall Murder

Organised crime

 * Portal:IRS investigation of Al Capone

Terrorism

 * Portal:Terrorism
 * Portal:September 11th
 * Portal:Global War on Terror
 * 9/11 Search Warrant

Child abuse

 * Investigator's guide to allegations of 'ritual' child abuse, 1992 by Kenneth V. Lanning

Valerie Plame

 * Government's Memorandum in Opposition to Matthew Cooper's Memorandum Regarding the Contempt Sanctions
 * In re: Grand Jury Subpoena, Judith Miller
 * Grant of Executive Clemency to Lewis Libby
 * USDOJ OSC Federal indictment of Lewis Libby
 * Judith Miller v. US, Matthew Cooper and Time Inc. v. US
 * Letter of Deputy Attorney General appointing Patrick Fitzgerald Special Counsel
 * Letter of Deputy Attorney General clarifying powers of Special Counsel
 * Memorandum of Deputy Attorney General delegating authority
 * Order finding Matthew Cooper and Time Inc. in civil contempt of court
 * Scooter Libby Indictment Press Release
 * Statement by the President on Executive Clemency for Lewis Libby
 * Statement of Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald, February 15, 2005
 * Statement of Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald, June 27, 2005

Police files

 * Secret British Police Report Regarding the Situation in Haifa, 26th April 1948 by A. J. Bidmead

title: Portal:Criminology


text:
Page:Democracy and Education.djvu/100

1. .—We now come to a type of theory which denies the existence of faculties and emphasizes the unique rôle of subject matter in the development of mental and moral disposition. According to it, education is neither a process of unfolding from within nor is it a training of faculties resident in mind itself. It is rather the formation of mind by setting up certain associations or connections of content by means of a subject matter presented from without. Education proceeds by instruction taken in a strictly literal sense, a building into the mind from without. That education is formative of mind is not questioned; it is the conception already propounded. But formation here has a technical meaning, dependent upon the idea of something operating from without.

Herbart is the best historical representative of this type of theory. He denies absolutely the existence of innate faculties. The mind is simply endowed with the power of producing various qualities in reaction to the various realities which act upon it. These qualitatively different reactions are called presentations (Vorstellungen). Every presentation once called into being persists; it may be driven below the "threshold" of consciousness by new and stronger presentations, produced by the reaction of the soul to new material, but its activity continues by its own inherent momentum, below the surface of consciousness. What are termed faculties—attention, memory, thinking, perception, even the sentiments, are arrangements, associations, and complications, formed by the interaction of these submerged presentations with one another and with new

title: Page:Democracy and Education.djvu/100