text:
School of Salamanca

The School of Salamanca (Escuela de Salamanca) is an intellectual movement of 16th-century and 17th-century Iberian Scholastic theologians rooted in the intellectual and pedagogical work of Francisco de Vitoria. From the beginning of the 16th the traditional Catholic conception of man and of his relation to God and to the world had been assaulted by the rise of humanism, by the Protestant Reformation and by the new geographical discoveries and their consequences. These new problems were addressed by the School of Salamanca. The name is derived from the University of Salamanca, where de Vitoria and other members of the school were based.

Scope of the term
Most properly, the term applies merely to the intellectual movement of the early 16th century at the university of Salamanca led by Francisco de Vitoria. More broadly, it comprises the bulk of Iberian Renaissance-Scholastic philosophy. In its broadest application, the notion is sometimes applied to the entirety of Second scholasticism, of which Vitoria's career and legacy are but an early, albeit formative part. This, however, is highly misleading, as there are important strands of Second scholasticism, such as the Baroque Scotism, of which connexion to the Salamancan legacy is rather tenuous.

The term most often connotes developments specifically in the fields of philosophy of law and economics associated with Vitoria's legacy; for Scholastic philosophy and theology of the 16th century in general the term "Renaissance Scholasticism" is now preferred by scholars.

History and leading figures
The intellectual movement started with Francisco de Vitoria (1483–1546) and Domingo de Soto (1494–1560), both Dominican Thomists. The Thomist line was continued by the Carmelites Complutenses and Salmanticenses. In the latter part of the 16th century, the newly founded Jesuits rose to intellectual prominence, with authors such as the Conimbricenses, Pedro da Fonseca (1528–1599), Luis de Molina (1535–1600), Gabriel Vásquez (†1604), and Francisco Suárez (1548–1617). With Suárez, however, the intellectual movement had already vastly surpassed its roots and Suárez's legacy defines the transition from Renaissance to Baroque scholasticism of the 17th and 18th centuries, for which the term "School of Salamanca" is no longer appropriate.

Philosophy of law
Many leading figures of the school, such as Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto, Martín de Azpilcueta (or Azpilicueta), Tomás de Mercado, or Francisco Suárez, were not just philosohers and theologians but also jurists and scholars of natural law and of morality. They undertook the adaptation of the teachings of Thomas Aquinas to the then new political-economic order.

The juridical doctrine of the School of Salamanca represented a profound transformation of medieval concepts of law, with a revindication of liberty not habitual in Europe of that time. The natural rights of man came to be, in one form or another, the center of attention, including rights as a corporeal being (right to life, economic rights such as the right to own property) and spiritual rights (the right to freedom of thought and to human dignity).

The School of Salamanca reformulated the concept of natural law: law originating in nature itself, with all that exists in the natural order sharing in this law. Their conclusion was, given that all humans share the same nature, they also share the same rights to life and liberty. Such views constituted a novelty in European thought and went counter to those then predominant in Spain, and Europe that people indigenous to the Americas had no such rights.

Sovereignty
The School of Salamanca distinguished two realms of power, the natural or civil realm and the realm of the supernatural, which were often conflated in the Middle Ages through granting royal control of investiture of bishops, or the temporal powers of the pope. One direct consequence of the separation of realms of power is that the king or emperor does not legitimately have jurisdiction over souls, nor does the pope have legitimate temporal power. This included the idea that there are limits on the legitimate powers of government. Thus, according to Luis de Molina a nation is analogous to the mercantile corporations of his time, in that those who govern are holders of power (effectively sovereigns) but a collective power, to which they are subject, derives from them jointly. Nonetheless, in de Molina's view, the power of society over the individual is greater than that of a mercantile corporation over its members, because the power of the government of a nation emanates from God's divine power (as against merely from the power of individuals sovereign over themselves in their business dealings).

At this time, the monarchy of England was extending the theory of the divine right of kings—under which the monarch is the unique legatee of God's power—asserting that subjects must follow the monarch's orders, in order not to contravene God's design. Counter to this, several adherents of the School sustained that the people are the vehicle of divine sovereignty, which they, in turn, pass to a prince under various conditions. In this, the late scholastics were instrumental in the development of early modern theories of political representation.

Possibly the one who went furthest in this direction was Francisco Suárez, whose work Defensio Fidei Catholicae adversus Anglicanae sectae errores (The Defense of the Catholic Faith against the errors of the Anglican sect 1613) was the strongest contemporary defense of popular sovereignty. Men are born free by their nature and not as slaves of another man, and can disobey even to the point of deposing an unjust government. As with de Molina, he affirms that political power does not reside in any individual, but he differs subtly in that he considers that the recipient of that power is the people as a whole, not a collection of sovereign individuals—in the same way, Jean-Jacques Rousseau's theory of popular sovereignty would consider the people as a collective group superior to the sum that composes it.

Gabriel Vásquez (1549–1604) held that natural law is not limited to the individual, but obliges societies to respect natural rights and justice.

For Suárez, the political power of society is contractual in origin because the community forms by consensus of free wills. The consequence of this contractualist theory is that the natural form of government is either a democracy or a republic, while oligarchy or monarchy arise as secondary institutions, whose claim to justice is based on consent of the governed organized in a political body.

The law of peoples and international law
Francisco de Vitoria played an important role in the early modern comprehension of ius gentium (the rights of nations). He extrapolated his ideas of legitimate sovereign power to relations between nations, concluding that international society as well ought to be ruled by just forms respecting the rights of all. The common good of the world is of a category superior to the good of each state. This meant that relations between states ought to pass from being justified by force to being justified by law and right. Vitoria has been referred to, along with Grotius, as the “father of international law.”

Francisco Suárez subdivided the concept of ius gentium. Working with already well-formed categories, he carefully distinguished ius inter gentes from ius intra gentes. Ius inter gentes (which corresponds to modern international law) was a just agreement among the majority of countries, although being positive law, not natural law, it was not necessarily universal. On the other hand, ius intra gentes, or civil law, is specific to each nation.

Many scholars have argued for the importance of Vitoria and Suárez as the forerunners and founders of the International law field, and the precursors of the seminal text De iure belli ac pacis by Grotius. Others, such as Koskenniemi, have argued that none of these humanist and scholastic thinkers can be understood to have founded international law in the modern sense, instead placing its origins in the post-1870 period.

Just war
Given that war is one of the worst evils suffered by mankind, the adherents of the School reasoned that it ought to be resorted to only when it was necessary to prevent an even greater evil. A diplomatic agreement is preferable, even for the more powerful party, before a war is started. Examples of "just war" are:
 * In self-defense, as long as there is a reasonable possibility of success. If failure is a foregone conclusion, then it is just a wasteful spilling of blood.
 * Preventive war against a tyrant who is about to attack.
 * War to punish a guilty enemy.

A war is not legitimate or illegitimate simply based on its original motivation: it must comply with a series of additional requirements:
 * It is necessary that the response be commensurate with the evil; use of more violence than is strictly necessary would constitute an unjust war.
 * Governing authorities declare war, but their decision is not sufficient cause to begin a war. If the people oppose a war, then it is illegitimate. The people have a right to depose a government that is waging, or is about to wage, an unjust war.
 * Once war has begun, there remain moral limits to action. For example, one may not attack innocents or kill hostages.
 * War is only legitimate as a last resort, after vigorous attempts at negotiation and diplomacy have failed.

Under this doctrine, expansionist wars, wars of pillage, wars to convert infidels or pagans, and wars for glory are all inherently unjust.

The conquest of America
In the 16th century, the School of Salamanca was the first to use the natural law's principle that rights reside in the individual to question the Spanish colonization on the indigenous people of the Americas.

Francisco de Vitoria began his analysis of conquest by rejecting "illegitimate titles," or illegitimate reasons for conquest. He was the first to dare to question whether the bulls of Alexander VI known collectively as the Bulls of Donation were a valid title of dominion over the newly discovered territories. In this matter he did not accept the universal primacy of the emperor, the authority of the pope (because the pope, according to him, lacked temporal power), nor the claim of voluntary submission or conversion of the Native Americans. One could not dismiss them as sinners or ignorant savages: they were free people by nature, with legitimate property rights. When the Spanish arrived in America they brought no legitimate title to occupy and rule those lands.

Vitoria also analyzed whether there were legitimate claims of title over discovered lands. He elaborated up to eight legitimate titles of dominion. The first and perhaps most fundamental relates to communication between people, who jointly constitute a universal society. Ius peregrinandi et degendi is the universal right to travel and do commerce in all parts of the earth, independently of who governs or what is the religion of the territory. For him, if the "Indians" of the Americas would not permit free transit, the hindered parties had the right to defend themselves and to remain in land obtained in such a war of self-defense.

The second form of legitimate title over discovered lands referred to the right of the Spanish to preach and proselytize. The Indians could voluntarily refuse conversion, but forbidding missionaries would make the matter analogous to the first case. Nonetheless, Vitoria noted that although this can be grounds for a just war, it is not necessarily prudent because of the resulting death and destruction.

The other cases of this casuistry are:
 * If the pagan sovereigns force converts to return to idolatry.
 * If there come to be a sufficient number of Christians in the newly discovered land that they wish to receive from the Pope a Christian government.
 * In the case of overthrowing a tyranny or a government that is harming innocents (e.g. human sacrifice)
 * If associates and friends have been attacked—as were the Tlaxcaltecas, allied with the Spanish but subjected, like many other people, to the Aztecs—once again, this could justify a war, with the ensuing possibility of legitimate conquest as in the first case.
 * The final "legitimate title" although qualified by Vitoria himself as doubtful, is the alleged mental incapacity of the foreign population resulting in lack of just laws, magistrates, agricultural techniques, etc. In any case, title taken according to this principle must be exercised with Christian charity and only for the advantage of the Indians.

Emperor Charles V, then ruler of Spain, took offense to this doctrine of "legitimate" and "illegitimate" titles purporting to limit his prerogatives, and he tried without success to stop its promulgation.

Economics
The School of Salamanca has been described as the "first economic tradition" in the field of economics. This put the origins of economic theory on Europe's mainland, prompting a reassessment of the entire history of the discipline. Much attention has been drawn to the economic thought of the School of Salamanca by Joseph Schumpeter's History of Economic Analysis (1954). It did not coin, but certainly consolidated, the use of the term School of Salamanca in economics. Schumpeter studied scholastic doctrine in general and Spanish scholastic doctrine in particular, and praised the high level of economic science in Spain in the 16th century. He argued that the School of Salamanca most deserves to be considered the founders of economics as a science. The School did not elaborate a complete doctrine of economics, but they established the first modern economic theories to address the new economic problems that had arisen with the end of the medieval order. Unfortunately, there was no continuation of their work until the end of the 17th century and many of their contributions were forgotten, only to be rediscovered later by others.

The thinking of the School was defined as "pro-market, pro-hard money, anti-state in many ways, pro-property, and pro-merchant to a surprising extent."

The English historian of economic thought Marjorie Grice-Hutchinson and Belgian legal historian Wim Decock have published numerous articles and monographs on the School of Salamanca.

Although there does not appear to be any direct influence, the economic thought of the School of Salamanca is in many ways similar to that of the Austrian School. Murray Rothbard referred to them as proto-Austrians.

Antecedents
In 1517, de Vitoria, then at the Sorbonne, was consulted by Spanish merchants based in Antwerp about the moral legitimacy of engaging in commerce to increase one's personal wealth. From today's point of view, one would say they were asking for a consultation about the entrepreneurial spirit. Beginning at that time, Vitoria and other theologians looked at economic matters. They moved away from views that they found to be obsolete, adopting instead new ideas based on principles of natural law.

According to these views, the natural order is based in the "freedom of circulation" of people, goods, and ideas, allowing people to know one another and increase their sentiments of brotherhood. This implies that merchantry is not merely not reprehensible, but that it actually serves the general good.

Private property
The adherents of the School of Salamanca all agreed that property has the beneficial effect of stimulating economic activity, which, in turn, contributed to the general well being. Diego de Covarrubias y Leyva (1512–1577) considered that people had not only the right to own property but—again, a specifically modern idea—they had the exclusive right to the benefit from that property, although the community might also benefit. Nonetheless, in times of great necessity, there, all goods become a commons.

Luis de Molina argued that individual owners take better care of their goods than is taken of common property, a form of the tragedy of the commons.

Money, value, and price
The most complete and methodical developments of a Salamancan theory of value were by Martín de Azpilcueta (1493–1586) and Luis de Molina. Interested in the effect of precious metals arriving from the Americas, de Azpilcueta proved that in the countries where precious metals were scarce, prices for them were higher than in those where they were abundant. Precious metals, like any other mercantile good, gained at least some of their value from their scarcity. This scarcity theory of value was a precursor of the quantitative theory of money put forward slightly later by Jean Bodin (1530–1596).

Up until that time, the predominant theory of value had been the medieval theory based on the cost of production as the sole determinant of a just price (a variant of the cost-of-production theory of value, most recently manifested in the labor theory of value). Diego de Covarrubias and Luis de Molina developed a subjective theory of value and prices, which asserted that the usefulness of a good varied from person to person, so just prices would arise from mutual decisions in free commerce, barring the distorting effects of monopoly, fraud, or government intervention. Expressing this in today's terms, the adherents of the School defended the free market, where the fair price of a good would be determined by supply and demand.

On this Luis Saravia de la Calle wrote in 1544:

"Those who measure the just price by the labour, costs, and risk incurred by the person who deals in the merchandise or produces it, or by the cost of transport or the expense of traveling...or by what he has to pay the factors for their industry, risk, and labour, are greatly in error.... For the just price arises from the abundance or scarcity of goods, merchants, and money...and not from costs, labour, and risk.... Why should a bale of linen brought overland from Brittany at great expense be worth more than one which is transported cheaply by sea?... Why should a book written out by hand be worth more than one which is printed, when the latter is better though it costs less to produce?... The just price is found not by counting the cost but by the common estimation."

However the school rarely followed this idea through systematically, and, as Friedrich Hayek has written, "never to the point of realizing that what was relevant was not merely man's relation to a particular thing or a class of things but the position of the thing in the whole...scheme by which men decide how to allocate the resources at their disposal among their different endeavors."

Interest on money
Usury (which in that period meant any charging of interest on a loan) has always been viewed negatively by the Catholic Church. The Third Lateran Council condemned any repayment of a debt with more money than was originally loaned; the Council of Vienne explicitly prohibited usury and declared any legislation tolerant of usury to be heretical; the first scholastics reproved the charging of interest. In the medieval economy, loans were entirely a consequence of necessity (bad harvests, fire in a workplace) and, under those conditions, it was considered morally reproachable to charge interest.

In the Renaissance era, greater mobility of people facilitated an increase in commerce and the appearance of appropriate conditions for entrepreneurs to start new, lucrative businesses. Given that borrowed money was no longer strictly for consumption but for production as well, it could not be viewed in the same manner. The School of Salamanca elaborated various reasons that justified the charging of interest. The person who received a loan benefited; one could consider interest as a premium paid for the risk taken by the loaning party. There was also the question of opportunity cost, in that the loaning party lost other possibilities of utilizing the loaned money. Finally, and perhaps most originally, was the consideration of money itself as a merchandise, and the use of one's money as something for which one should receive a benefit in the form of interest.

Martín de Azpilcueta also considered the effect of time, formulating the time value of money. All things being equal, one would prefer to receive a given good now rather than in the future. This preference indicates greater value. Interest, under this theory, is the payment for the time the loaning individual is deprived of the money.

Theology
Under Francisco de Vitoria, the University of Salamanca led a period of intense activity in theology, especially a renaissance of Thomism, whose influence extended to European culture in general, but especially to other European universities. Perhaps the fundamental contribution of the School of Salamanca to theology is the study of problems much closer to humanity, which had previously been ignored, and the opening of questions that had previously not been posed. The term positive theology is sometimes used to distinguish this new, more practical, theology from the earlier scholastic theology.

Morality
To analyze the morality of the acts was considered the most practical and useful study one could undertake to serve society. The novel contributions of the School in law and economics were rooted in concrete challenges and moral problems which confronted society under new conditions.

Over the years a casuistry, a fixed set of answers to moral dilemmas, had been developed. However, by its nature, a casuistry can never be complete, leading to a search for more general rules or principles. From this developed probabilism, where the ultimate criterion was not truth, but the certainty of not choosing evil. Developed principally by Bartolomé de Medina and continued by Gabriel Vázquez and Francisco Suárez, Probabilism became the most important school of moral thought in the coming centuries.

The De auxiliis controversy
The De auxiliis controversy was a dispute between Jesuits and Dominicans which occurred at the end of the 16th century. The topic of the controversy was grace and predestination, that is to say how one could reconcile the liberty or free will of humans with divine omniscience. In 1582 the Jesuit Prudencio Montemayor and Fray Luis de León spoke publicly about human liberty. Domingo Báñez considered that they gave free will too great a weight and that they used terminology that sounded heretical; he denounced them to the Spanish Inquisition, accusing them of Pelagianism, a belief in human free will to the detriment of the doctrine of original sin and the grace granted by God. Montemayor and de León were banned from teaching and prohibited from defending such ideas.

Báñez was then denounced to the Holy Office by Leon, who accused him of "committing the error of Lutheranism", that is of following the doctrines of Martin Luther. According to Lutheran doctrine, man is "dead in his trespasses" (Ephesians 2:1) as a consequence of original sin and cannot save himself by his own merit; only God can save man, "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." (Ephesians 2:8–9) Báñez was acquitted.

Nonetheless, this did not end the dispute, which Luis de Molina continued with his Concordia liberi arbitrii cum gratiae donis (1588). This is considered the best expression of the Jesuit position. The polemic continued over the course of years, including an attempt by the Dominicans to get Pope Clement VIII to condemn the Concordia of de Molina. Finally Paul V in 1607 recognized the liberty of Dominicans and Jesuits to defend their ideas, prohibiting that either side of this disagreement be characterized as heresy.

The existence of evil in the world
The existence of evil in a world created and ruled by an infinitely good and powerful God has long been viewed as paradoxical. (See Problem of evil). Vitoria reconciled the paradox by arguing first that free will is a gift from God to each person. It is impossible that each person will always freely choose only the good. Thus, evil results from man's ability not to choose good, by virtue of his free will.

Members
There is discussion about which authors can be assigned to the name of the School of Salamanca, or if one can speak of a School of Salamanca in the first place, but the consensus revolves around the name of Francisco de Vitoria, considered a central figure of the movement. From him, authors refer to three stages, counting in the first the pupils of Vitoria and their pupils, in the second Salamanca contemporaries who had no direct relationship with him and in the third external figures influenced by this current of thought.

First group
 * Arias Piñel (1512-1563)
 * Antonio de Padilla y Meneses (-1580)
 * Bartolomé de Albornoz (1519-1573)
 * Bartolomé de Medina (1527-1581)
 * Diego de Chaves (1507-1592)
 * Diego de Covarrubias (1512-1577)
 * Diego Pérez de Mesa (1563-1632)
 * Domingo Báñez (1528-1604)
 * Domingo de Soto (1494-1560)
 * Fernán Pérez de Oliva (1494-1531)
 * Francisco de Vitoria (1492-1546)
 * Francisco Sarmiento de Mendoza (1525-1595)
 * Francisco Suárez (1548-1617)
 * Gregorio de Valencia (1549-1603)
 * Jerónimo Muñoz (1520-1591)
 * Juan de Horozco y Covarrubias (1540-1610)
 * Juan de la Peña (1513-1565)
 * Juan de Matienzo (1520-1579)
 * Juan de Ribera (1532-1611)
 * Juan Gil de la Nava (-1551)
 * Leonardus Lessius (1554-1623)
 * Luis de León (1527-1591)
 * Martín de Azpilcueta (1492-1586)
 * Martín de Ledesma (1509-1574)
 * Melchor Cano (1509-1560)
 * Pedro de Sotomayor (1511-1564)
 * Tomás de Mercado (1523-1575)

Second group
 * Alonso de la Vera Cruz (1507-1584)
 * Cristóbal de Villalón (-1588)
 * Fernando Vázquez de Menchaca (1512-1569)
 * Francisco Cervantes de Salazar (-1575)
 * Juan de Lugo y Quiroga (1583-1660)
 * Juan de Salas (1553-1612)
 * Luis de Molina (1535-1600)
 * Pedro de Aragón (1545-1546)
 * Pedro de Valencia (1555-1620)

Third group
 * Antonio de Hervías (-1590)
 * Bartolomé de Carranza (1503-1576)
 * Bartolomé de las Casas (1484-1566)
 * Cristóbal de Fonseca (1550-1621)
 * Domingo de Salazar (1512-1594)
 * Domingo de Santo Tomás (1499-1570)
 * Gabriel Vásquez (1549-1604)
 * Gómez Pereira (1500–1567)
 * Juan de Mariana (1536-1624)
 * Juan de Medina (1489-1545)
 * Juan Pérez de Menacho (1565-1626)
 * Luis de Alcalá (1490-1549)
 * Luis Saravia de la Calle (?)
 * Miguel Bartolomé Salón (1539-1621)
 * Pedro de Fonseca (1528-1599)
 * Pedro de Oñate (1567-1646)
 * Rodrigo de Arriaga (1592-1667)

title: School of Salamanca


text:
Toad Lake (Minnesota)

Toad Lake is a lake in Toad Lake Township, Becker County, Minnesota, in the United States.

Toad Lake is the English translation of the Native American name.

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

title: Toad Lake (Minnesota)


text: Category:Big Country albums

title: Category:Big Country albums


text: User talk:24.9.83.152

title: User talk:24.9.83.152


text: Category:Catalogues

title: Category:Catalogues


text: Category:Adams County, Colorado

title: Category:Adams County, Colorado


text:
Brooklyn, Portland, Oregon

Brooklyn is a mostly residential neighborhood in southeast Portland, Oregon. It sits along the east side of the Willamette River in the vicinity of Reed College. Founded as a neighborhood in the late 1860s, the neighborhood today is a middle-class area comprising mainly single family homes, interspersed with remaining industrial sites along the river and a large railyard. This railyard was home to Southern Pacific 4449 as well as several other large antique steam and diesel-electric locomotives.

History
The area of the neighborhood was inhabited by Clackamas people before settlement by colonizers. The first documented colonizer of the area was Giddeon Tibbets, who was granted the stolen land in the Donation Land Claim Act of 1850. He arived in the area in 1851, building a family home and grist mill. Tibbets renamed the area "Brookland" due to the river, creeks, and lakes on his property. In 1868 Tibbets subdivided the property into smaller lots and allowed the Oregon Central Railroad to cross the property. The rail line and the subdivision quickly brought in a large number of residents to the neighborhood, which acquired its current name of "Brooklyn". The influx led to the construction of a town square at the corner of Powell Boulevard and Milwaukie Avenue. In the 1890s, the neighborhood received an influx of largely Roman Catholic German-Americans. While many of the German street/landmark names were changed during World War I, the neighborhood continues to bear the traces of this period today, with several older German-American businesses, as well as the Sacred Heart Catholic Church and the 1891 Johan Poulsen House. In 1908, The contracting firm Geibisch and Joplin built this neighborhood's original sewer system. In the 1920s, the neighborhood changed drastically as a part of a citywide construction effort. The construction of the Ross Island Bridge over the Willamette destroyed the town square. At the same time, many of the streams and ponds in the neighborhood were filled in. The construction of McLoughlin Boulevard (Oregon Route 99E) severed the neighborhood's connection to the Willamette waterfront. The construction of an overpass on 17th avenue also divided the neighborhood in two.

By the 1960s, the neighborhood had acquired the reputation as being poverty-stricken. During this time, future Portland mayor Tom Potter began his police career in Portland as a beat officer in the neighborhood, as well as nearby Sellwood to the south. According to Potter, he acquired many of the basic tenets of his philosophy of community policing while as a young officer in the neighborhood. Potter became involved in the Brooklyn Action Corps (BAC), a community organization that was founded during this time to combat the poverty, crime, and drugs that were afflicting the neighborhood.

By the 1980s, the neighborhood had undergone a nearly complete turnaround. Today it is regarded as among southeast Portland's most desirable residential neighborhoods. The construction of the Eastbank Esplanade in Portland allowed the neighborhood to regain its connection to the Willamette River, and the opening of the Orange Line light rail, completed in September 2015, has created easier mass-transit access to downtown.

title: Brooklyn, Portland, Oregon


text:
Talk:Rick Davies

Redirect: Supertramp?
I wonder if this wouldn't be better as a redirect to Supertramp, where there is more information on Rick Davies already. Joyous 01:21, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

Nationality
Well well, I always thought Supertramp were American. You learn something new every day.

Redundancy
I find it amazing that Davies actually married his wife :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.232.204.48 (talk) 22:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Restructured that sentence somewhat; at least now the redundancy isn't as obvious. Anyone know his wife's maiden name so it can be fully corrected?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.0.54.36 (talk) 22:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Age
This article doesn't mention his age, but he's 64. So he'll be 65 next year. Rick is becoming an old man. --Tony Feld (talk) 11:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Barry Gibb range
Barry Gibb is absolutely not alto-anything, he's a common barytone and he just use his falsetto. --Donkey (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Additional citations
Why, what, where, and how does this article need additional citations for verification? Hyacinth (talk) 04:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The article only has one citation, and three 'citation needed' tags, more than enough of a discrepancy to warrant the additional citations needed tag. Furthermore, numerous claims in the article are not tagged as needing a citation, but do indeed need them.  I spot at least two unqualified claims in each paragraph of the article.  Colinclarksmith (talk) 06:53, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Weasel words
Why, what, where, and how does this article contain weasel words? Hyacinth (talk) 04:29, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Examples of weasel words and phrasing - 1.) "Davies' voice is more of a....", 2.) "Roger Hodgson solely wrote, composed and sang Supertramp's hits.... and so many more", 3.) "Unfortunately, this agreement was broken very quickly". Example 1 lacks precision.  Example 2 is puffery.  Example 3 is editorializing.  Colinclarksmith (talk) 06:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Rick, ty for Goodbye Stranger.
Lyrical profundity + the musical power of R n R...reading the lyrics today brought me to tears again. -- Johnny Yank. 74.60.161.158 (talk) 14:52, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Rick and copyrights
I don't think it's correct to say that Rick Davies owns the copyrights to the Supertramp catalog. He owns the Supertramp trademark and brand name (as Roger Hodgson has said) and has control over how the band's material is used, but that's not the same as owning the copyrights. I'm sure Hodgson, as songwriting partner, still gets paid every time a copy of Breakfast in America is sold. Either way, there's not a cite for this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.76.177 (talk) 18:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Lead not in line with article
The lead claims certain songs were written by Davies, but has been unsourced for some while now. The article states that Davies and Hodgson were jointly credited for much of Supertramp's output, and while it may be possible to best guess who wrote what, it is not Wikipedia's responsibility to determine who should be solely credited for these songs. Unless there is a cite to support these claims they should be removed. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:26, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia policy is to WP:PRESERVE any verifiable information, whether or not it has a source right at the moment. This is why we have "citation needed" tags. Sources verifying the individual songwriters of many Supertramp songs have already been found, and it is highly unlikely that two such popular songs as "Bloody Well Right" and "Goodbye Stranger" do not similarly have information on them out there. These two songs are also so distinctively Davies in style and tone that it doesn't really make sense to pretend that we have no idea who could have wrote them. I'd be a lot more comfortable with sources for those songs' authorship too, but there really is very little doubt that we will eventually find sources confirming that Davies wrote those songs.--NukeofEarl (talk) 18:02, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I feel I should speak up here, as though I haven't been getting to the Supertramp-related articles of late, I am the one who added most of the references for who wrote what. I generally remove unsourced songwriting attributions where I find them, but in the case of the lead sections for this article and Roger Hodgson, I've had to make an exception. First of all, like NukeofEarl already stated, those attributions are almost certainly verifiable. Second, the authorship of those songs is a key part of Davies and Hodgson's importance, so by removing those attributions, I'd in effect be making the articles much more inaccurate, which is the opposite of what I'm trying to do when I remove unsourced claims.
 * I'll have a look around the net to see if I can dig up any good sources for who wrote those songs; it's been a while since I last did that.--Martin IIIa (talk) 21:40, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Found a source. Not a particularly good one - just a brief mention in a news article - but it's certainly better than nothing, and hopefully it will discourage people from deleting that statement from the article until I can find a better source.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, Martin.--NukeofEarl (talk) 19:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Rick Davies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110825082620/http://alextsu.narod.ru:80/borderlinebooks/us6070s/index.html to http://alextsu.narod.ru/borderlinebooks/us6070s/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rick Davies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110217162315/http://www.theofficialcharts.com/artist/_/supertramp/ to http://www.theofficialcharts.com/artist/_/supertramp/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:21, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rick Davies


text:
William Kidston

William Kidston (17 August 1849 – 25 October 1919) was an Australian bookseller, politician and Premier of Queensland, from January 1906 to November 1907 and again from February 1908 to February 1911.

Early life
William Kidston was born in Falkirk, Scotland on 17 August 1849, the son of an ironworker. He became an apprentice ironmoulder at age 13. He married Margaret Scott in 1874. Dissatisfied with ironmoulding, he emigrated to New South Wales with his family in 1882, and moved again to Queensland, arriving in Rockhampton at 1883.

In Rockhampton, Kidston started a new career as a bookseller. During the early 1890s, growing industrial unrest pitted the newly formed trade union movement against the conservative colonial government led by Thomas McIlwraith in a series of strikes. The 1891 Australian shearers' strike led to the government deploying military forces. Kidston, a member of the local militia, was in strong support of the strikers, and received a court martial when he refused enrolment as a special constable in the anti-strike force.

Ascent into Parliament
The unionists' defeat at the hands of the government prompted the labour movement to aim for political representation in the Parliament of Queensland. The Australian Labour Federation (ALF) sought to repeal the antiquated anti-striking laws that had been used against the strikers. Kidston wrote a poem, entitled The Ballot is the Thing, in support of the unionists' goals. Kidston became the main ALF figure in Rockhampton and campaigned for electoral reform – abolition of plural voting, and extension of the franchise. In addition to the cause of the labour movement, Kidston also supported the separatist organisations in Rockhampton that sought to make Central Queensland a separate colony. Kidston stood unsuccessfully as a separatist candidate for Rockhampton in 1893. In the elections of 1896 he was elected as an endorsed Labor candidate.

In Parliament, Kidston began agitating for a broad coalition of progressive elements to defeat the conservative "Continuous Ministry" now led by Hugh Nelson and achieve electoral reform. Such overtures met with little enthusiasm from either the Labor or Liberal elements. In 1899 he was re-elected and campaigned against Federation of the Australian colonies, believing that the proposed Constitution would disadvantage Queensland financially and disappointed by the provision leaving the creation of new states in the hands of the existing state parliaments. He was again re-elected in 1902, by which stage the separatist movement was dying down.

The faltering Ministerialists were beginning to fracture, and when Robert Philp resigned as premier following a narrow win on an important vote, Kidston briefly found himself Treasurer in 1899 in the world's first parliamentary labour government under Anderson Dawson. The government lasted only a week before it was defeated on the floor of parliament, an experience which convinced Kidston of the necessity of seeking support outside of the ALF proper.

In 1903 an alliance of disaffected Ministerialists, Liberals and the ALF brought down Philp's government and replaced him with Arthur Morgan. Kidston, a close friend of Morgan, again became treasurer. He was, along with William Browne, one of two Labor members of the ministry. After Browne's death in 1904, Kidston became the most senior Labor minister. The parliamentary situation, with equal numbers for both the Morgan-Kidston coalition and the ex-Ministerialists, proved unwieldy, and an election was called. Labor became the largest party in the parliament but Kidston was content to let Morgan retain the dominant role in the coalition. Kidston defended Labor's coalition with Morgan, arguing that it had resulted in a public works programme, and fairer taxation and electoral systems.

Premiership
By 1905, Kidston's collaboration with non-Labor elements had provoked criticism from sections of the Labor movement, and when the Labor convention in May endorsed a socialist objective, Kidston protested vigorously. When Hugh Nelson died in January 1906, Morgan took his place as president of the Queensland Legislative Council, which led to Kidston's ascension as premier. In May 1907, he announced the formation of his own political party, to which a majority of the Labor members in parliament declared allegiance.

The early years of Kidston's premiership were dominated by his fight with the conservative Legislative Council, which rejected much of his legislation. In 1908, when Kidston asked the governor, Lord Chelmsford, to appoint more Council members to secure passage of his legislation, Chelmsford refused and Kidston resigned in protest. Robert Philp was commissioned as premier but, without a majority in the Legislative Assembly, could not govern. Chelmsford attempted to dissolve the Assembly, but before he could do so, the Assembly blocked supply. The paralysis was ended when Chelmsford dissolved the Assembly, guaranteed supply in his capacity as governor, and called an election.

Kidston's party won the most seats, and formed a government with Labor's support. Kidston immediately acted to curtail the council's powers. He also proceeded with laws enacting electoral reform and the establishment of Wages Boards. However, he lost Labor's support when he authorised private railway construction in the state, but remained in office, supported by Philp's conservative grouping. In late 1908, presaging the Fusion in the Commonwealth Parliament, Kidston's and Philp's parties merged into one anti-Labor force. After several of his former supporters deserted him, Kidston called another election in October 1909, which his Liberal Party won comfortably.

After lengthy negotiations, Kidston succeeded in ensuring amendments to the Commonwealth Constitution to provide the States with returned customs and excise revenue. He enacted further electoral reform by redistributing electorate boundaries, abolishing dual-member electorates, and entrenching one vote one value, though that would later be undone through malapportionments by subsequent governments. , he remains the last person to make a comeback as Premier of Queensland after losing the position.

In 1911, he resigned to take up a position as President of the Land Court, which he maintained until 1919. He died in October that year in Coorparoo and was buried in South Rockhampton Cemetery.

title: William Kidston


text:
User talk:Johnmorton

Welcome
--Slowking Man 01:23, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Johnmorton


text: Category:Caving

title: Category:Caving


text:
File:KunisadaSpiderweb.jpg

The Kabuki actor Seki Sanjuro II (?); signed Gototei Kunisada; circa 1818.

title: File:KunisadaSpiderweb.jpg


text: Category:Arapahoe County, Colorado

title: Category:Arapahoe County, Colorado


text:
File:KunisadaBox.jpg

The Kabuki actor Onoe Kikugoro III (1784-1849), from the series Tosei Haiyu Kaoribako (Incense Boxes and Actors of the Current Age); signed Kochoro Kunisada; circa 1830.

title: File:KunisadaBox.jpg


text: User talk:68.225.40.150

title: User talk:68.225.40.150


text: Category:Douglas County, Colorado

title: Category:Douglas County, Colorado


text:
Westport, Nova Scotia

Westport, Nova Scotia is a village in Digby County, Nova Scotia and it is located on Brier Island in the Bay of Fundy. As of 2021, the population was 193.

History
The settlement began with the arrival of David Welch and his family in 1769, as well as the Morrells. This was followed by the arrival of several more United Empire Loyalist families in 1783.

The village was incorporated in 1946.

A ferry service connects the village with Freeport, Nova Scotia on Long Island. A second ferry runs from Digby Neck to Long Island.

Joshua Slocum, the first person to sail solo around the world, grew up in Westport, where his mother was born. A monument in his memory was built on the southern end of the village.

Mathematician Roland Richardson was the principal of Westport's high school from 1899 to 1902.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, Westport had a population of 193 living in 94 of its 119 total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of 218. With a land area of 11.68 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

title: Westport, Nova Scotia


text:
Sparda

Sparda may refer to:

 * Sparda, the Old Persian name for Lydia
 * Sparda (Devil May Cry), a video game character
 * Sparda-Bank, a group of German and Austrian cooperative banks

title: Sparda


text: User talk:69.138.230.215

title: User talk:69.138.230.215