text:
Charles Sheeler to William Macbeth, 1910 Sept. 26

Philadelphia

September 26th 1910

My dear Mr. Macbeth

I found your note awaiting me on my return to town last Wednesday - the pictures I received Saturday.

I was surprised and sorry that you failed to recognize the merits of my pictures. It was not possible to continue to repeat the things one has done - there must always be elimination of the essentials and the striving after greater qualities, and to more forcefully present the essentialism or stagnation must result.

You say you hope it is only an experiment — every one who is sincerely trying to solve the enormous difficulties of artistic expression is an experimenter and remains so, as long as he is "artistically alive." I regret that you do not care to show my pictures at this time.

Very truly yours,

C. R. Sheeler

1626 Chestnut St.


text:
Author:Charles Sheeler

Works

 * Charles Sheeler to William Macbeth, 1910 Sept. 26 (1910)

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

title: Author:Charles Sheeler


text: Talk:Charles Sheeler to William Macbeth, 1910 Sept. 26


text:
Author:Johan Amos Comenius

Works

 * The Labyrinth of the World and the Paradise of the Heart (1631); translated by Count Lützow (1901)
 * Janua linguarum reserata (1631); The Gate Of Languages (1643) translated by Thomas Horn and John Robotham
 * School of Infancy (1632); translated by Will Seymour Monroe (1893)
 * The History of the Bohemian Persecution (1632); translated by anonymous (1650)
 * Rules of Life (1645, English translation 1865)
 * The Last Will and Testament of the Dying Mother The Unity of Brethern (1650)
 * Naturall philosophie reformed by divine light, or, A synopsis of physicks, 1651
 * Orbis Pictus, "The Visible World in Pictures" (1658); translated by Charles Holland Hoole (1705) ; edited by Charles William Bardeen (1887)
 * The Great Didactic of John Amos Comenius (1657), translated by Maurice Walter Keatinge (1896)
 * Church constitution of the Bohemian and Moravian Brethren: the original Latin, with a translation, notes, and introduction (1660); translated by Benjamin Seifferth (1866),

Works about Comenius and his works

 * John Amos Comenius: his life and educational works by Simon Somerville Laurie, 1884
 * Comenius (1592-1671) in Essays on educational reformers by Robert Hebert Quick, 1890
 * Comenius: his life and principles of education by Ossian Herbert Lang, 1891
 * Comenius and the Beginnings of Educational Reform by Will Seymour Monroe, 1900
 * Pioneers of modern education 1600-1700 by John William Adamson, 1905
 * John Amos Comenius (1592–1670) in Modern educators and their ideals by Tadasu Misawa, 1909
 * Comenius and his Great didactic in Great educators of three centuries; their work and its influence on modern education by Frank Pierrepont Graves, 1912

Poetry

 * Jan Amos Komenský (Comenius) in Bohemian legends and other poems by Flora Pauline Wilson Kopta

title: Author:Johan Amos Comenius


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/The Home of the Great Auk


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/The Ethics of Kant


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Mosses and their Water-Supply


text:
User talk:SarahStierch

Welcome
Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * Help pages
 * Style guide
 * Inclusion policy

You may be interested in participating in Add the code active projects, PotM or CotW to your page for current wikisource projects.
 * Proofread of the Month
 * Collaboration of the Week
 * Requested texts

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click  [ edit] ) and place  before your question.

Again, welcome! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Teahouse
(From your post on Help talk:Contents) I'm happy to serve as a point person for new editors. I don't have the world's best people skills but I think I can help with this. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Great Adam! Thanks! It probably won't be too complex, just pointing folks in the right direction or where their skills might be of use (or they might have interest). I appreciate you stepping up =) SarahStierch (talk) 18:22, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * in re walters, pax vobiscum. there is also http://scripto.org/ Slowking4 (talk) 13:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

la.ws
Sarah, can you login and set up your e-mail for Latin Wikisource then people can communicate with you from there as that's where I hope most of the discussion will take place?--Doug.(talk • contribs) 16:25, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:SarahStierch


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Injurious Influences of City Life


text: Talk:Carver v. Jackson/Opinion of the Court


text: Talk:Ex parte Bradstreet

title: Talk:Ex parte Bradstreet


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Something About Snakes


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Ainu Houses and their Furnishing


text:
Page:The Boy Travellers in Australasia.djvu/67

Rh So much for the commercial condition of the kingdom of Hawaii. Let us now turn to other matters.

Our friends took a day, or rather two nights and a day, for a visit to the famous Leper Hospital on Molokai Island. Leaving Honolulu late one evening, they were landed the next morning on Molokai for their strange excursion. We will let Frank tell the story of the visit.

"The leper settlement is on a plain, which is surrounded by mountains on three sides and the sea on the fourth. The mountains are so rugged as to be impassable except at a few points, which are always carefully guarded. The sea-front is also watched, so that escape from the settlement is practically impossible.


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Teaching Physiology in the Public Schools


text:
Page:The Boy Travellers in Australasia.djvu/68

44 "Any person in the Hawaiian kingdom suspected of leprosy is arrested by the authorities, and if a medical examination shows that he is afflicted with the disease he is sent to Molokai. The sentence isperpetual, leprosy being considered incurable except in its earliest stages. A man sent to Molokai is considered dead. His wife may obtain a decree of divorce and marry again if she likes, and his estate is handed over to the courts and administered upon as though he had ceased to exist. Great care is exercised to prevent the banishment of


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/The Unity of Science


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/The Parlor-Game Cure


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Drift-Sands and their Formations


text:
Page:The Boy Travellers in Australasia.djvu/69

Rh any one about whose case there is any doubt. There is a hospital near Honolulu where all doubtful cases are sent, and the physician in charge keeps them there until the certainty of the presence or absence of the disease is settled beyond question.

"The doctor who accompanied us through the settlement assured us that leprosy is neither epidemic nor contagious in the ordinary sense of the latter word. It can only be communicated by an abraded surface coming in contact with a leprous sore; and he said that the practice among the natives of many persons smoking the same pipe had done much to spread the disease. He shook hands freely with the victims of leprosy during our visit, and did not take the trouble to wear gloves, even when the hands of the others were covered with sores.

"He told us that the disease first showed itself by a slight swelling under the eyes and in the lobes of the ears; then the fingers contracted like birds' claws, the face swelled into ridges that were smooth and shiny, and later these ridges broke into festering sores. Sometimes these symptoms on the face do not appear, the attacks being principally on the hands and feet. The fingers and toes wither and decay; they seem to dry up and shrink, as we saw several persons whose finger-nails were on their knuckles, the fingers having shrunk away and disappeared.

"It is a curious circumstance that the victims of leprosy rarely suffer pain. The decay of the extremities is gradual, and the shiny ridges on the face may be pinched with the fingers or punctured with a pin without giving any sensation. Among the nine hundred and odd persons in the leper settlement we saw very few sad faces. The people were enjoying themselves very much as they would in Honolulu—talking and laughing, walking or lounging about, or riding horses, and in one place they were playing a game that evoked a good deal of shouting and hilarity. Many were at work in the fields and gardens, or making salt along the shore. There is a leper governor for the settlement, and the usual number of subordinates that such a place requires. There is a store where goods are sold at cost, and many of the lepers


text:
Page:The Boy Travellers in Australasia.djvu/70

46 money from their friends and spend it at the store. The Government provides the lepers with clothes and lodging, and gives them sufficient food for their subsistence. Those who can work are encouraged to do so, and all that they produce is bought by the Board of Health and paid for out of the store.

"Then they have two churches—one Catholic and the other Protestant. The latter has a native pastor, and the former a white priest, who has volunteered to seclude himself among these unfortunate people for their religious good. There are three white men and eight Chinese who have been sent here as lepers. It has been charged that the Chinese brought leprosy to the islands, but the doctor says this is not so, the disease having existed here before the Chinese came; and besides, it is quite unlike the malady of that name in China. There it principally attacks the skin, while the Hawaiian form belongs to the blood.

"The location of the settlement is an excellent one, as it is on the windward side of the island, and constantly swept by the pure breezes from the ocean. For those who are unable to move about there are large and well-kept hospitals, where the patients are waited upon by other lepers that have not reached the disabled stage. Access and escape are alike difficult, and everything seems to have been done to make life as comfortable as possible to the unfortunate victims who are sent here."


text:
User talk:67.6.56.118

Welcome
Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * Help pages
 * Style Guide
 * Inclusion policy

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to  [ create an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. For one thing, if you continue to edit without a username, your IP address is used to publicly identify you.

In any case, I hope you enjoy donating your time to grow the Wikisource library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click  [ edit] ) and place  before your question. Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 04:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:67.6.56.118


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/The Future of the Negro


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Sketch of Spencer F. Baird


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Correspondence


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Editor's Table


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Literary Notices


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Popular Miscellany


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/August 1888/Notes


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/The Growth of Jelly-Fishes I


text: The Boy Travellers in Australasia/Chapter 2


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Some Chinese Mortuary Customs


text: Talk:O'Callahan v. Parker (395 U.S. 258)/Opinion of the Court


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Eye-Mindedness and Ear-Mindedness


text: Talk:O'Callahan v. Parker (395 U.S. 258)/Dissent Harlan


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Antagonism


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Mental Traits in the Poultry-Yard


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Underground Waters and Mineral Veins


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Writing-Machines for the Blind


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Expert Testimony


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Animal and Plant Lore II


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/How the Opium-Habit Is Acquired


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Stigmatization


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Heliotropism: The Turning Motions of Plants


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/A Fossil Continent


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Sketch of Carl Friedrich Gauss


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Correspondence


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Editor's Table


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Literary Notices


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Popular Miscellany


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/September 1888/Notes


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/The Relation of the Sexes to Government


text:
Translation:Imperial Decree on Day Twenty First of June (lunar calendar)

Decree one
This war was started because of conflict between christian converts and Righteous boxer, also because of Taigu Fort was being occupied by foreigners. Diplomatic relation is important, Imperial Court will not terminate it lightly, several decrees with clear instruction of offering protection towards diplomatic legation had been issued, priests in all provinces are also to be protected. Now that the war has not ended, there are many foreigners doing business in China, all these people must be protected. It is the responsibility of all military commanders, viceroys, and ministers to have a clear list of all the foreign merchants and priests in every trading cities and towns and county, protection must be offered according to diplomatic treaty, all conditions must be strictly adhered to.

Last month Japanese diplomatic clerk was killed under strange circumstances, not long after that a German diplomat was murdered. The German diplomat was on official duty, his murder was regrettable. The murderer must be arrested and charged. All the foreigners and priests that had been murdered and property lost, Peking Government and Hebei Viceroy are to conduct thorough investigation, and report to the Imperial Court. Recently many bandits rioters burning and looting, disturbing peace, is not to be repeated. All viceroys and military commanders are to conduct investigations, to suppress and prosecute, to prevent future disturbances. This decree is to be distributed widely. Guangxu Emperor signed here.

Decree Two
Since the war between China and the Foreign Powers has begun, Empress Dowager has several times been awarding Righteous Boxer Groups with cash from the Royal coffers. The kind rewards from the benevolent Empress will only increase, it shall not cease. In this difficult times, the boxers commanders and soldiers should be thankful of these awards, and to be worthy of these rewards, and aim for great achievement on the battle fronts. Any of you who are brave and powerful during combats, have killed some enemies and achieve good results, there will be substantial awards. If anyone retreat from the battle front, too afraid to charge forward, will be executed on the spot, the commander will be charged with military laws. Taigu Fort had been captured by the foreign soldiers, Yulu, Lo Yongquang and troops, plus Righteous Boxer Groups to go and try to recapture it from the foreign soldiers, no delay shall be tolerated. Strict discipline is of first priority for soldiers, any soldiers who are into looting and disturb the local county, soldiers involved shall be executed immediately, their commanders shall be charged with military laws. If the superior officials and ministers cannot controlled the soldiers, all of them will be severely charged. This is a formal warning. Guangxu Emperor signed.

 * Original Chinese text:西巡迴鑾始末/卷1


text:
Ex Parte Curtis/Dissent Bradley

BRADLEY, J., dissenting.

I cannot concur in the opinion of the court in this case. The law under which the petitioner is imprisoned makes it a penal offense for any executive officer or employe of the United States, not appointed by advice of the senate, [an unimportant distinction, so far as the power to make the law is concerned,] to request, give to, or receive from, any other officer or employe of the government any money, or property, or other thing of value, for political purposes; thus, in effect, making it a condition of accepting any employment under the government, that a man shall not, even voluntarily and of his own free will, contribute in any way through or by the hands of any other employe of the government to the political cause which he desires to aid and promote. I do not believe that congress has any right to impose such a condition upon any citizen of the United States. The offices of the government do not belong to the legislative department to dispose of on any conditions it may choose to impose. The legislature creates most of the offices, it is true, and provides compensation for the discharge of their duties; but that is its duty to do, in order to establish a complete organization of the functions of government. When established, the offices are, or ought to be, open to all. They belong to the United States, and not to congress, and every citizen having the proper qualifications has the right to accept office, and to be a candidate therefor. This is a fundamental right of which the legislature cannot deprive the citizen, nor clog its exercise with conditions that are repugnant to his other fundamental rights. Such a condition I regard that imposed by the law in question to be. It prevents the citizen from co-operating with other citizens of his own choice in the promotion of his political views. To take an interest in public affairs, and to further and promote those principles which are believed to be vital or important to the general welfare is every citizen's duty. It is a just complaint that so many good men abstain from taking such an interest.

Among the necessary and proper means for promoting political views, or any other views, are association and contribution of money for that purpose, both to aid discussion and to disseminate information and sound doctrine. To deny to a man the privilege of associating and making joint contributions with such other citizens as he may choose, is an unjust restraint of his right to propagate and promote his views on public affaris. The freedom of speech and of the press, and that of assembling together to consult upon and discuss matters of public interest, and to join in petitioning for a redress of grievances, are expressly secured by the constitution. The spirit of this clause covers and embraces the right of every citizen to engage in such discussions, and to promote the views of himself and his associates freely, without being trammeled by inconvenient restrictions. Such restrictions, in my judgment, are imposed by the law in question. Every person accepting any, the most insignificant, employment under the government must withdraw himself from all societies and associations having for object the promotion of political information or opinions. For if one officer may continue his connection, others may do the same, and thus it can hardly fail to happen that some of them will give and some receive funds mutually contributed for the purposes of the association. Congress might just as well, so far as the power is concerned, impose as a condition of taking any employment under the government, entire silence on political subjects, and a prohibition of all conversation thereon between government employes. Nay, it might as well prohibit the discussion of religious questions, or the mutual contribution of funds for missionary or other religious purposes. In former times, when the slavery question was agitated, this would have been a very convenient law to repress all discussion of the subject on either side of Mason and Dixon's line. At the present time any efficient connection with an association in favor of a prohibitory liquor law, or of a protective tariff, or of greenback currency, or even for the repression of political assessments, would render any government official obnoxious to the penalties of the law under consideration. For all these questions have become political in their character, and any contributions in aid of the cause would be contributions for political purposes.

The whole thing seems to me absurd. Neither men's mouths nor their purses can be constitutionally tied up in that way. The truth is that public opinion is oftentimes like a pendulum, swinging backward and forward to extreme lengths. We are not unfrequently in danger of becoming purists, instead of wise reformers, in particular directions, and hastily pass inconsiderate laws which overreach the mark they are aimed at, or conflict with rights and privileges that a sober mind would regard as indisputable. It seems to me that the present law, taken in all its breadth, is one of this kind. The legislature may, undoubtedly, pass laws excluding from particular offices those who are engaged in pursuits incompatible with the faithful discharge of the duties of such offices. That is quite another thing. The legislature may make laws ever so stringent to prevent the corrupt use of money in elections, or in political matters generally, or to prevent what are called political assessments on government employes, or any other exercise of undue influence over them by government officials and others. That would be all right. That would clearly be within the province of legislation. It is urged that the law in question is intended, so far as it goes, to effect this very thing. Probably it is. But the end does not always sanctify the means. What I contend is that in adopting this particular mode of restraining an acknowledged evil, congress has overstepped its legitimate powers, and interfered with the substantial rights of the citizen. It is not lawful to do evil that good may come. There are plenty of ways in which wrong may be suppressed without resorting to wrongful measures to do it. No doubt it would often greatly tend to prevent the spread of a contagious and deadly epedimic, if those first taken should be immediately sacrificed to the public good. But such a mode of preventing the evil would hardly be regarded as legitimate in a Christian country.

I have no wish to discuss the subject at length, but simply to express the general grounds on which I think the legislation in question is ultra vires. Though as much opposed as any one to the evil sought to be remedied, I do not think the mode adopted is a legitimate or constitutional one, because it interferes too much with the freedom of the citizen in the pursuit of lawful and proper ends. If similar laws have been passed before, that does not make it right. The question is whether the present law, with its sweeping provisions, is within the just powers of congress. As I do not think it is, I dissent from the opinion of the majority of the court.

title: Ex Parte Curtis/Dissent Bradley


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/A Living Mystery


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/The Growth of Jelly-Fishes II


text:
United States v. Erie Railway/Dissent Field

FIELD, J., dissenting.

I am not able to agree with the majority of the court in the decision of this case. The tax which is sustained is, in my judgment, a tax upon the income of non-resident aliens and nothing else. The 122d section of the revenue act of 1864, as amended by that of 1866, subjects the interest on the bonds of the company to a tax of 5 per cent., and authorizes the company to deduct it from the amount payable to the coupon-holder, whether he be a non-resident alien or a citizen of the United States. The company is thus made the agent of the government for the collection of the tax. It pays nothing itself; the tax is exacted from the creditor-the party who holds the coupons for interest. No collocation of words can change this fact. And so it was expressly adjudged with reference to a similar tax in the case of U.S. v. Railroad Co. 17 Wall. 322. There a tax, under the same statute, was claimed upon the interest of bonds held by the city of Baltimore. And it was decided that the tax was upon the bondholder and not upon the corporation which had issued the bonds; that the corporation was only a convenient means of collecting it; and that no pecuniary burden was cast upon the corporation. This was the precise question upon which the decision of that case turned.

A paragraph from the opinion of the court will show this beyond controversy.

'It is not taxation,' said the court, 'that government should     take from one the profits and gains of another. That is     taxation which compels one to pay for the support of the      government from his own gains and of his own property. In the     cases we are considering, the corporation parts not with a      farthing of its own property. Whatever sum it pays to the     government is the property of another. Whether the tax is 5     per cent. on the dividend or interest, or whether it be 50     per cent., the corporation is neither richer nor poorer. Whatever it thus pays to the government, it by law withholds     from the creditor. If no tax exists, it pays 7 per cent., or     whatever be its rate of interest, to its creditor in one      unbroken sum. If there be a tax, it pays exactly the same sum     to its creditors, less 5 per cent. thereof, and this 5 per     cent. it pays to the government. The receivers may be two, or     the receiver may be one, but the payer pays the same amount      in either event. It is no pecuniary burden upon the     corporation, and no taxation of the corporation. The burden     falls on the creditor. He is the party taxed. In the case     before us, this question controls its decision. If the tax     were upon the railroad, there is no defense; it must be paid. But we hold that the tax imposed by the 122d section is in     substance and in law a tax upon the income of the creditor or stockholder, and not a tax upon the      corporation.

See, also, Haight v. Railroad Co. 6 Wall. 15, and Railroad Co. v. Jackson, 7 Wall. 262, 269.

The bonds, upon the interest of which the tax in this case was laid, are held in Europe, principally in England; they were negotiated there; the principal and interest are payable there; they are held by aliens there; and the interest on them has always been paid there. The money which paid the interest was, until paid, the property of the company; when it became the property of the bondholders it was outside of the jurisdiction of the United States.

Where is the authority for this tax? It was said by counsel on the argument of the case-somewhat facetiously, I thought at the time-that congress might impose a tax upon property anywhere in the world, and this court could not question the validity of the law, though the collection of the tax might be impossible, unless, perchance, the owner of the property should at some time visit this country or have means in it which could be reached. This court will, of course, never in terms announce or accept any such doctrine as this. And yet it is not perceived wherein the substantial difference lies between that doctrine and the one which asserts a power to tax, in any case, aliens who are beyond the limits of the country. The debts of the company, owing for interest, are not property of the company, although counsel contended they were, and would thus make the wealth of the country increase by the augmentation of the debts of its corporations. Debts, being obligations of the debtors, are the property of the creditors, so far as they have any commercial value, and it is a misuse of terms to call them anything else; they accompany the creditors wherever the latter go; their situs is with the latter. I have supposed heretofore that this was common learning, requiring no argument for its support, being, in fact, a self-evident truth, a recognition of which followed its statement. Nor is this the less so because the interest may be called in the statute a part of the gains and profits of the company. Words cannot change the fact, though they may mislead and bewilder. The thing remains through all disguises of terms. If the company makes no gains or profits on its business and borrows the money to meet its interest, though it be in the markets abroad, it is still required under the statute to withhold from it the amount of the taxes. If it pays the interest, though it be with funds which were never in the United States, it must deduct the taxes. The government thus lays a tax, through the instrumentality of the company, upon the income of a non-resident alien over whom it cannot justly exercise any control, nor upon whom can it justly lay any burden.

The chief justice, in his opinion in this case, when affirming the judgment of the district court, happily condensed the whole matter into a few words. 'The tax,' he says, 'for which the suit was brought was the tax upon the owner of the bond, and not upon the defendant. It was not a tax in the nature of a tax in rem upon the bond itself, but upon the income of the owner of the bond, derived from that particular piece of property. The foreign owner of these bonds was not in any respect subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; neither was this portion of his income. His debtor was, and so was the money of his debtor; but the money of his debtor did not become a part of his income until it was paid to him, and in this case the payment was outside of the United States, in accordance with the obligations of the contract which he held. The power of the United States to tax is limited to persons, property, and business within their jurisdiction, as much as that of a state is limited to the same subjects within its jurisdiction.' State Tax on Foreign-held Bonds, 15 Wall. 300.

'A personal tax,' says the supreme court of New Jersey, 'is the burden imposed by government on its own citizens for the benefits which that government affords by its protection and its laws, and any government which would attempt to impose such a tax on citizens of other states would justly incur the rebuke of the intelligent sentiment of the civilized world.' State v. Ross, 3 Zab. 521.

In imposing a tax, says Chief Justice MARSHALL, the legislature acts upon its constitutents. 'All subjects,' he adds, 'over which the power of a state extends are objects of taxation, but those over which it does not extend are, upon the soundest principles, exampt from taxation. This proposition may almost be pronounced self-evident.' McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 428-429.

There are limitations upon the powers of all governments without any express designation of them in their organic law limitations which inhere in their very nature and structure, and this is one of them: that no rightful authority can be exercised by them over alien subjects, or citizens resident abroad, or over their property there situated. This doctrine may be said to be axiomatic, and courts in England have felt it so obligatory upon them that where general terms, used in acts of parliament, seem to contravene it, they have narrowed the construction to avoid that conclusion. In a memorable case, decided by Lord STOWELL, which involved the legality of the seizure and condemnation of a French vessel engaged in the slave trade, which was in terms within an act of parliament, that distinguished judge said: 'That neither this British act of parliament, nor any commission founded on it, can affect any right or interest of foreigners unless they are founded upon principles and impose regulations that are consistent with the law of nations. That is the only law which Great Britain can apply to them, and the generality of any terms employed in an act of parliament must be narrowed in construction by a religious adherence thereto.' Le Louis, 2 Dodson, 239.

Similar language was used by Mr. Justice BAILEY, of the King's Bench, in Madrazo v. Willes, 3 Barn. & Ald. 353, where the question was whether the act of parliament, which declared the slave trade and all dealings therewith unlawful, justified the seizure of a Spanish vessel, with a cargo of slaves on board, by the captain of an English naval vessel, and it was held that it did not. The odiousness of the trade would have carried the justice to another conclusion if the public law would have permitted it, but he said, 'that, although the language used by the legislature in the statute referred to is undoubtedly very strong, yet it can only apply to British subjects, and can only render the slave trade unlawful if carried on by them; it cannot apply in any way to a foreigner. It is true that if this were a trade contrary to the law of nations a foreigner could not maintain this action. But it is not; and as a Spaniard could not be considered as bound by the acts of the British legislature prohibiting this trade, it would be unjust to deprive him of a remedy for the heavy damage he has sustained.'

In the case of The Appollon, 9 Wheat. 362, a libel was filed against the collector of the district of St. Mary's for damages occasioned by the seizure of the ship and cargo while lying in a river within the territory of the king of Spain, and Mr. Justice STORY said, speaking for the court, that 'the laws of no nation can justly extend beyond its own jurisdiction, except so far as regards its own citizens. They can have no force to control the sovereignty or rights of any other nation within its own jurisdiction. And however general and comprehensive the phraseology used in our municipal laws may be, they must always be restricted in construction to places and persons upon whom the legislatures have authority and jurisdiction.'

When the United States became a separate and independent nation they became, as said by Chancellor KENT, 'subject to that system of rules which reason, morality, and custom had established among the enlightened nations of Europe as their public law,' and by the light of that law must their dealings with persons of a foreign jurisdiction be considered; and according to that law there could be no debatable question that the jurisdiction of the United States over persons and property ends where the foreign jurisdiction begins.

What urgent reasons press upon us to hold that this doctrine of public law may be set aside, and that the United States, in disregard of it, may lawfully treat as subject to their taxing power the income of non-resident aliens, derived from the interest received abroad on bonds of corporations of this country negotiable and payable there? If, in the form of taxes, the United States may authorize the withholding of a portion of such interest, the amount will be a matter in their discretion; they may authorize the whole to be withheld. And if they can do this, why may not the states do the same thing with reference to the bonds issued by corporations created under their laws. They will not be slow to act upon the example set. If such a tax may be levied by the United States in the rightful exercise of their taxing power, why may not a similar tax be levied upon the interest on bonds of the same corporations by the states within their respective jurisdictions in the rightful EXERCISE OF THeir taxing power? what is sound laW for one sovereignty ought to be sound law for another.

It is said, in answer to these views, that the governments of Europe-or at least some of them, where a tax is laid on incomes deduct from the interest on their public debts the tax due on the amount as income, whether payable to a non-resident alien or a subject of the country. This is true in some instances, and it has been suggested in justification of it that the interest, being payable at their treasuries, is under their control, the money designated for it being within their jurisdiction when set apart for the debtor, who must in person or by agent enter the country to receive it. That presents a case different from the one before us in this-that here the interest is payable abroad, and the money never becomes the property of the debtor until actually paid to him there. So, whether we speak of the obligation of the company to the holder of the coupons, or the money paid in its fulfillment, it is held abroad, not being, in either case, within the jurisdiction of the United States. And with reference to the taxation of the interest on public debts, Mr. Phillimore, in his Treatise on International Laws, says:

'It may be quite right that a person having an income     accruing from money lent to a foreign state should be taxed      by his own country on his income derived from this source;      and if his own country impose an income tax it is, of course,      a convenience to all parties that the government which is to      receive the tax should deduct it from the debt which, in this      instance, that government owes to the payer of the tax, and      thus avoid a double process; but a foreigner, not resident in      the state, is not liable to be trxed by the state; and it      seems unjust to a foreign creditor to make use of the      machinery which, on the ground of convenience, is applied in      the cases of domestic creditors, in order to subject him to a      tax to which he is not on principle liable.' Vol. 2. pp. 14,      15.

Here, also, is a further difference: the tax here is laid upon the interest due on private contracts. As observed by counsel, no other government has ever undertaken to tax the income of subjects of another nation accruing to them at their own domicile upon property held there, and arising out of ordinary business, or contracts between individuals.

This case is decided upon the authority of Railroad Co. v. Collector, 100 U.S. 595, and the doctrines from which I dissent necessarily flow from that decision. When that decision was announced I was apprehensive that the conclusions would follow which I now see to be inevitable. It matters not what the interest may be called, whether classed among gains and profits, or covered up by other forms of expression, the fact remains, the tax is laid upon it, and that is a tax which comes from the party entitled to the interest-here, a non-resident alien in England, who is not, and never has been, subject to the jurisdiction of this country. In that case the tax is called an excise on the business of the class of corporations mentioned, and is held to be laid, not on the bondholder who receives the interest, but upon the earnings of the corporations which pay it. How can a tax on the interest to be paid be called a tax on the earnings of the corporation if it earns nothing-if it borrows the money to pay the interest? How can it be said not to be a tax upon the income of the bondholder when out of his interest the tax is deducted? That case was not treated as one, the disposition of which was considered important, as settling a rule of action. The opening language of the opinion is: 'As the sum in this suit is small and the law under which the tax in question has long since been repealed, the case is of little consequence as regards any principle involved in it as a future rule of action.' But now it is invoked in a case of great magnitude, and many other similar cases, as we are informed, are likely soon to be before us; and, though it overrules repeated and solemn adjudications rendered after full argument and mature deliberation; though it is opposed to one of the most important and salutary principles of public law, it is to be received as conclusive, and no further word from the court, either in explanation or justification of it, is to be heard. I cannot believe that a principle so important as the one announced here, and so injurious in its tendencies, so well calculated to elicit unfavorable comment from the enlightened sentiment of the civilized world, will be allowed to pass unchallenged, though the court is silent upon it.

I think the judgment should be affirmed.


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/Man in Relation to the Lower Animals


text:
Page:A Compendium of Irish Biography.djvu/91

 Grafton, "he rode in euery streete lyke a lordly captayne." At first he restrained the excesses of his followers, and protected life and property. On the 3rd July, however, he had Lord Say and others executed, and the citizens being subjected to wanton outrages, banded themselves together, and with the co-operation of Lord Scales, keeper of the Tower, drove Cade and his following, after a desperate encounter, across the bridge into Southwark. In the fighting many houses were burned, and numbers of women and children perished in the flames or by drowning. Cade's discomfiture was completed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and Bishop of Winchester secretly crossing the river, and disseminating among his followers the King's pardon to all who would peaceably return to their homes. Grafton, the chronicler, remarks: "Lord, howe glad the people were of this pardon … and how they accepted the same, in so much that the whole multitude, without bydding farewell to their Capitane, retired the same night, euery man to his own home, as men amazed and striken with feare." Cade fled disguised into Sussex—"but all his metamorphosis or transfiguration little prevayled, for after a proclamation made, that whoesoeuer could apprehend the sayed Iack Cade should haue for his paine a thousande markes, many sought for hym, but fewe espied hym, till one Alexander Iden, Esquire, of Kent, founde hym in a garden, and there in his defence, manfully slue the caytife Cade, and brought his dead bodie to London, whose head was set on London bridge."

Cahill, Daniel William, D.D., a pulpit orator, and lecturer upon chemistry and astronomy, was born in the Queen's County, in 1796. After studying at Maynooth, he was ordained, and for a time was a professor in Carlow College. He is well remembered as a lecturer, was the author of many pamphlets, and for a time edited a newspaper in Dublin. Removing to the United States, he died in Boston, 27th October 1864, aged about 68.

Cailte MacRonain, one of the heroes of Fenian romance in the 3rd century, the beloved friend and follower of Finn MacCumhaill. His name appears on almost every page of many of the Fenian tales; yet we are told little definite concerning him. He was one of the "ancient men," fabled to have survived until the time of St. Patrick, and to have communicated to the Saint particulars concerning the heroes of Irish romance, and to have complained bitterly of the change from the glories of the past; as in "the Lamentation of Oisin after the Fenians," in The Transactions of the Ossianic Society:

Caimin, Saint, abbot of Inishcaltra, Lough Derg, was a brother of Guaire, King of Connaught. He chose the life of an anchorite, and attracted large numbers to his island retreat by his piety and learning. A commentary on the 119th Psalm in his own hand is said to have been in the Franciscan convent of Donegal in Ware's days. His greatest desire was "that if the church were thronged with sick and infirm, he would wish, were he able, to take all their infirmities on himself, and bear them for the love of God and his neighbour." He died about 653. His festival is the 24th of March.

Cairbre Lifeachair, King of Ireland, 254 to 281. He fell at the famous battle of Gabhra (Gowra), fought in contiguity to the Hill of Skreen, near Tara. This engagement, which took place, according to Keating, in 281, was fought between Cairbre at the head of one tribe of the old Fenian warriors, and Mogh Corb, King of Munster, and Oscar, grandson of Finn MacCumhaill, at the head of another. The rival military tribes were almost exterminated in the battle. Oscar fell in single combat with Cairbre; but Cairbre, returning from the combat, was met by his own relative Simeon, who fell upon him, severely with Oscar, and despatched him at a single blow. The combat is referred to by Ferguson in his beautiful lay "Aideen's Grave."

Cairnes, David, one of the most prominent defenders of Derry, was born in the north of Ireland in 1645. He became a lawyer, and in 1688 was owner of considerable property in land. On the approach of Tirconnell's troops, to occupy Derry, early in December 1688, he advised the citizens to take the defence into their own hands; and on the 11th he set out for London, carrying letters to William III. and the Irish Society, imploring assistance in men, provisions, arms, and ammunition. He did not return until the 11th of April, 1689, in time to help to counteract Lundy's design of delivering up the city. Appointed Lieutenant-Colonel of a regiment, he distinguished himself all through the heroic and successful defence. After the war was over, he was returned M.P. for Derry, a trust he 67


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/Hypnotism: What it Is and What it Is Not


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/Ethics and Economics


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/Curiosities of Evolution


text: Popular Science Monthly/Volume 33/October 1888/Spiders and their Ways