text:
Donald Black (sociologist)

Donald Black (1941 – January 30, 2024) was a university professor of the social sciences at the University of Virginia until his retirement in 2016. Black received his Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Michigan in 1968, and he taught at the law schools of both Yale and Harvard before moving to Virginia in 1985.

Black authored The Behavior of Law, The Manners and Customs of the Police, and Sociological Justice, all of which present various aspects of his theory of law. More recently, The Social Structure of Right and Wrong extended his theory to address conflict management more broadly, focusing on instances where people handle conflicts through means other than the law, such as through gossip, avoidance, suicide, or feuding. Black's latest book, Moral Time, identified the causes of moral conflict in all human relationships.

Black also founded pure sociology, a distinctive theoretical approach that explains human behavior with its social geometry. Since pure sociology is a general sociological paradigm, it may be applied to subjects other than law, conflict, and conflict management—for example, art, religion, and ideas.

Works by Black

 * 1970.	“Production of Crime Rates.” American Sociological Review 35:733-748.
 * 1971.	“The Social Organization of Arrest.” Stanford Law Review 23:1087-1111.
 * 1972.	“The Boundaries of Legal Sociology.” Yale Law Journal 81:1086-1100.
 * 1973.	“The Mobilization of Law.” Journal of Legal Studies 2:125-149.
 * 1973.	“Introduction.” Pages 1–14 in The Social Organization of Law, edited by Donald Black and Maureen Mileski.  New York:  Academic Press.
 * 1976.	The Behavior of Law. New York:  Academic Press.
 * 1979.	“Common Sense in the Sociology of Law.” American Sociological Review 44(1):18-27.
 * 1979.	“A Note on the Measurement of Law.” Informationsbrief für Rechtssoziologie, Sonderheft 2:92-106.
 * 1979. “A Strategy of Pure Sociology.” Pages 149–168 in Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology, edited by Scott G. McNall. New York: St. Martin's Press.
 * 1980.	The Manners and Customs of the Police. New York:  Academic Press.
 * 1981.	“The Relevance of Legal Anthropology.” Contemporary Sociology 10(1):43-46.
 * 1983.	“Crime as Social Control.” American Sociological Review 48:34-45.
 * 1984.	Toward a General Theory of Social Control, Volume 1: Fundamentals.  Orlando:  Academic Press. (editor)
 * 1984.	“Preface.” Toward a General Theory of Social Control, Volume 1: Fundamentals, edited by Donald Black.  Orlando:  Academic Press.
 * 1984.	“Social Control as a Dependent Variable.” In Toward a General Theory of Social Control, Volume 1:  Fundamentals, edited by Donald Black.  Orlando:  Academic Press.  (editor)
 * 1984.	Toward a General Theory of Social Control, Volume 2: Selected Problems.  Orlando:  Academic Press.  (editor)
 * 1984.	“Preface.” Toward a General Theory of Social Control, Volume 2: Selected Problems, edited by Donald Black.  Orlando:  Academic Press.
 * 1984.	“Crime as Social Control.” Pages 1–27 in Toward a General Theory of Social Control, Volume 2:  Selected Problems, edited by Donald Black.  Orlando:  Academic Press.
 * 1984.	“Jurocracy in America.” The Tocqueville Review – La Revue Tocquevelle 6:273-281.
 * 1987.	“Compensation and the Social Structure of Misfortune.” Law & Society Review 21(4):563-584.
 * 1987.	“A Note on the Sociology of Islamic Law.” Pages 47–62 in Perspectives on Islamic Law, Justice and Society, edited by Ravindra S. Khare.  Working Papers, Number 3.  Charlottesville:  Center for Advanced Studies University of Virginia.
 * 1989.	Sociological Justice. New York:  Oxford University Press.
 * 1990.	“The Elementary Forms of Conflict Management.” In New Direction in the Study of Justice, Law, and Social Control, prepared by the School of Justice Studies, Arizona State University.  New York:  Plenum Press.
 * 1991.	“Relative Justice.” Litigation 18:32-35.
 * 1992.	“Social Control of the Self.” Pages 39–49 in Virginia Review of Sociology:  Law and Conflict Management, edited by James Tucker.  Greenwich:  JAI Press Inc.
 * 1993.	“La Mobilisation du Droit: Autobiographie d’un Concept:  (The Mobilization of Law:  Autobiography of a Concept”).  Pages 376–378 in Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de Théorie et de Sociologie de Droit, under the direction of André-Jean Arnaud.  Paris:  Librairie, Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence.
 * 1995.	“The Epistemology of Pure Sociology.” Law and Social Inquiry 20:829-870.\
 * 1997.	“The Lawyerization of Legal Sociology.” Amici (Newsletter of the Sociology of Law Section, American Sociological Association) 5:4-7.
 * 1998.	The Social Structure of Right and Wrong. San Diego:  Academic Press.
 * 2000.	“On the Origin of Morality.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 7:107-1191.
 * 2000.	“The Purification of Sociology.” Contemporary Sociology 29(5):704-709.
 * 2000.	“Dreams of Pure Sociology.” Sociological Theory 18(3):343-367.
 * 2002.	“The Geometry of Law: An Interview with Donald Black”, by Aaron Bell.  International Journal of the Sociology of Law 30:101-129.
 * 2002.	“Terrorism as Social Control. Part I:  The Geometry of Destruction.”  American Sociological Association Crime, Law, and Deviance Newsletter Spring:3-5.
 * 2002.	“Terrorism as Social Control. Part II:  The Geometry of Retaliation.”  American Sociological Association Crime, Law, and Deviance Newsletter Summer:3-5.
 * 2002.	“Pure Sociology and the Geometry of Discovery.” In Toward a New Science of Sociology:  A Retrospective Evaluation of The Behavior of Law, by Allan V. Horwitz.  Contemporary Sociology 31(6):668-674.
 * 2004.	“The Geometry of Terrorism.” In “Theories of Terrorism,” symposium edited by Roberta Senechal de la Roche.  Sociological Theory 22:14-25.
 * 2004.	“Violent Structures.” Pages 145–158 in Violence: From Theory to Research, edited by Margaret A. Zahn, Henry H. Brownstein, and Shelly L. Jackson.  Cincinnati:  Anderson Publishing Company.
 * 2004.	“Terrorism as Social Control.” In Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism:  Criminological Perspectives, edited by Mathieu Deflem.  New York:  Elsevier Ltd.
 * 2007.	“Legal Relativity.” In the Encyclopedia of Law and Society: American and Global Perspectives, Volume 3, edited by David S. Clark. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
 * 2010. “How Law Behaves:  An Interview with Donald Black,” by Mara Abramowitz.  International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice 38:37-47.
 * 2010. The Behavior of Law (Special Edition).  Bingley, England:  Emerald.
 * 2011. Moral Time.  New York:  Oxford University Press.

Related sources
Works relying heavily upon Black's theoretical approach, including his epistemology and his explanatory model. See also, references section of Pure Sociology.
 * Baumgartner, M.P. 1988. The Moral Order of the Suburb. New York: Oxford University Press.
 * ________________. 1992. "War and peace in early childhood". Pages 1–38 in Virginia Review of Sociology Volume I, edited by James Tucker. Orlando: Academic Press.
 * Borg, Marian J. 1992. "Conflict management and the modern world-system". Sociological Forum 7:261-282.
 * Campbell, Bradley. 2010. “Contradictory Behavior During Genocides.”  Sociological Forum 25(2):296-314.
 * Cooney, Mark. 1997. "From Warre to Tyranny: Lethal Conflict and the State." American Sociological Review 62 (2): 316–338.
 * ____________. 1997b. "The Decline of Elite Homicide." Criminology 35(3): 381–407.
 * ____________. 1998. Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence. New York: New York University Press.
 * Morrill, Calvin. 1995. The Executive Way: Conflict Management in Corporations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
 * Senechal de la Roche, Roberta. 1996.	“Collective Violence as Social Control.”  Sociological Forum 11(1):97-128.
 * Tucker, James. 1993. "Everyday Forms of Employee Resistance". Sociological Forum 8: 25–45.
 * _____________. 1999. The Therapeutic Corporation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Critical references

 * Greenberg, David F. 1983.  "Donald Black's Sociology of Law:  A Critique."  Law and Society Review 17:337-368.
 * Hunt, Alan. 1983. "Behavioral Sociology of Law: A Critique of Donald Black". Journal of law and society 10 (1): 19–46.
 * Marshall, Douglas A. 2008. “The Dangers of Purity: On the Incompatibility of ‘Pure Sociology’ and Science” The Sociological Quarterly 49(2): 209–235.
 * Marshall, Douglas A. 2008. “Taking the Rhetoric out of Theoretic Debate: A Rejoinder to Michalski” The Sociological Quarterly 49(2): 275–284.
 * Smith, Christian. 2010.  "Network Structuralism's Missing Persons."  Chapter 4 of What is a Person?: Rethinking Humanity, Social Life, and the Moral Good from the Person Up.  University of Chicago Press.
 * Wong, Kam C. 1995.  "Black's Theory on the Behavior of Law Revisited."  International Journal of the Sociology of Law 23(1):189-232.

title: Donald Black (sociologist)


text:
1906 in rail transport

January events

 * January 3 – At the annual stockholder's meeting, the charter for the Cleveland Short Line Railway is amended to specify Collinwood, Ohio and Rockport, Ohio as the terminals of the railroad.
 * January 17 – Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway fully acquires its subsidiary Southern California Railway.
 * January 27 – Rail line completed to the Red Sea at Port Sudan from Atbara.

February events

 * February 2 – The Cairo Electric Railways and Heliopolis Oases Company is formed.

March events

 * March 10 – The Baker Street and Waterloo Railway opens in London.

April events

 * April – The Great Western Railway of England turns out the prototype of its 4-cylinder GWR 4000 Class steam locomotive, designed by George Jackson Churchward, from its Swindon Works.
 * April 18 – The great 1906 San Francisco earthquake strikes, damaging the Southern Pacific Railroad's headquarters building and destroying the mansions of the now-deceased Big Four. Also destroyed are many cable car routes, which will be replaced with electric streetcars.
 * April 19 – Lygten Station opens in Copenhagen, Denmark, as the terminus of the Copenhagen–Slangerup Railway.

May events

 * May 8 – A special train carrying E.H. Harriman makes a run from Oakland CA to New York in 761 hours and 27 minutes. This record will stand until October 1934, when it will be broken by Union Pacific Streamliner M-10000.
 * May 19 – The Simplon Tunnel between Italy and Switzerland, the world's longest tunnel until 1979, opens to rail traffic.

July events

 * July 1 (1:57 am) – 24 passengers and 4 railwaymen die as the result of the 1906 Salisbury rail crash on the London and South Western Railway of England when an express train passes through Salisbury railway station at excessive speed.
 * July 7 – Completion of the Tauern Tunnel (8.5 km) in Austria.
 * July 22 – The State Street Line, Chicago's last cable car route, ends operations.

August events

 * August 1 – The Green Bay and Western acquires a majority interest in the Ahnapee and Western Railway in Wisconsin.

September events

 * September 8 – Ottawa's Bank Street subway is opened as streetcar number 253 of the Ottawa Electric Railway traverses the tunnel.
 * September 19 – 14 die as a result of the Grantham rail accident on the Great Northern Railway (Great Britain) when a sleeping car train is derailed passing through Grantham railway station at excessive speed.
 * September 21 – A Grand Trunk Railway passenger train hits a stopped freight train at a crossover in Napanee, Ontario; the engineer stays at the controls trying to slow his train as much as possible and becomes the only fatality. The train's passengers later erect a monument in the engineer's honor.

October events

 * October 1 – Karawanks Tunnel is opened to provide a through route between Klagenfurt and Trieste in Austria-Hungary.
 * October 10 – Valdresbanen is completed from Oslo to Fagernes, Norway.

November events

 * November 13 – Shinpei Goto begins his term as the first president of South Manchuria Railway.
 * November 12 – Dunedin railway station in New Zealand is officially opened.
 * November 29 – Samuel Spencer, president of the Southern Railway (US), is killed in a railroad accident; he will be succeeded by William Finley.
 * November – The last locomotive built by the Portland Company is completed for the Bridgton and Saco River Railroad.

December events

 * December 2 - Construction begins on Santa Fe's Rocky Ford, Colorado, station; the station is completed and occupied by the end of March 1907.
 * December 7 – The Southern Pacific Railroad and Union Pacific Railroad jointly form the Pacific Fruit Express Company (PFE) refrigerator car line.
 * December 14 – John D. Spreckels announces he will form the San Diego & Arizona Railway Company and build a 148-mile (238-kilometre) line between San Diego and El Centro, California. Spreckels has an agreement with the Southern Pacific Railroad to silently fund the project.
 * December 15
 * The Great Northern, Piccadilly and Brompton Railway opens in London.
 * The SEPTA trolley subway opens as Route 34 is routed underground in Philadelphia.
 * December 28
 * Elliot Junction rail accident in Scotland: 22 killed in a collision during a blizzard.
 * After his death, Alexander J. Cassatt is succeeded as president of the Pennsylvania Railroad by James McRea.
 * December 30 – A train wreck at Terra Cotta near modern-day Fort Totten in Washington, D.C., kills 52; the accident leads to the Interstate Commerce Commission banning future wooden body passenger car construction.

Unknown date events

 * Prussian S 6 Class 4-4-0 steam locomotives introduced; 584 are eventually built to this design.

June deaths

 * June 4 – Francis Webb, Chief Mechanical Engineer of the London and North Western Railway (born 1836).

December deaths

 * December 28 – Alexander J. Cassatt, president of the Pennsylvania Railroad 1899–1906 (born 1839).

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

title: 1906 in rail transport


text: User talk:70.16.32.225

title: User talk:70.16.32.225


text:
Batonishvili

Batonishvili (ბატონიშვილი, lit. 'a child of a lord or sovereign') is a title for royal princes and princesses who descend from the Kings of Georgia from the Bagrationi dynasty.

Batonishvili is suffixed after or before the given names e.g. David Batonishvili or Batonishvili Ioane, etc.

History
The title was eventually borne not only by the children of the reigning king (mepe), but by all male-line descendants of past kings. The customary attribute or form of address for a batonishvili was "უგანათლებულესი" (uganatlebulesi) ("Most Brilliant" or "Most High").

There were several types of noble in the monarchies of the Caucasus, some exercising more or less sovereign authority at times, whose titles are prone to be confused with the title and rank of Batonishvili when translated from Georgian into other languages. This is partially because there were no precise Western equivalents for those titles, and partially because they all came to be translated by the Russian word for prince, Knyaz, as Russia increasingly dominated the region.

A list of Georgian titled families was attached to the 1783 Treaty of Georgievsk between Georgia and Russia pursuant to Article IX's promise that Russia would allow those families to "...enjoy all the same privileges and advantages granted to the Russian nobility". Inexplicably, the list did not differentiate among the ranks of the families included therein (although they were apparently listed in descending order of rank). Russia eventually added all of them to the Fifth Book of Nobility, wherein were already included nobles that held the title of prince but who had no claim to sovereign or quasi-sovereign rank. The first family named on the treaty's list was that of Bagrationi, to which belonged Georgia's king and agnates, but henceforth they and all of the other families were accorded the title of Knyaz and the rank of ordinary nobleman in Russia.

In fact, members of the Kartli (including Mukhranian progeny of King Vakhtang V), Kakheti, and Imereti branches of the Bagrationi dynasty all bore the title of batonishvili in Georgia and had descendants living in Russia in the 19th century. The heirs of Kakheti and Imereti had been deported to Russia after their kingdoms were annexed in 1801 and 1810 respectively. Yet at the Russian court they were allowed to bear the Russian title equivalent to Batonishvili, Tsarevich, until 1833, the year following the abortive 1832 Georgian plot to restore the Georgian crown which had been led by Alexandre Batonishvili. Henceforth Georgia's royal heirs and their descendants were demoted to Knyaz, as Prince Gruzinsky and Prince Imeretinsky, respectively.

title: Batonishvili


text:
Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi

The Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi (once commonly spelled Unkiar Skelessi, and translating to The Treaty of "the Royal Pier" or "the Sultan's Pier") was a treaty signed between the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire on July 8, 1833, following the military aid of Russia against Muhammad Ali Pasha of Egypt that same year. The treaty brought about an alliance between the two powers, as well as a guarantee that the Ottomans would close the Dardanelles to any foreign warships if the Russians requested such action. The treaty would have significant consequences regarding the Ottoman Empire's foreign relations, especially with Great Britain and Ireland, as the terms of the treaty worried the other great powers of Europe.

Background
Mehmed Ali, ostensibly only a vassal of the Ottoman Empire, was seeking to increase his personal power and gain control over Palestine, Syria, and Arabia. In order to justify the assault on his liege, he used the pretext of a personal dispute with the pasha of Acre.

Egyptian advance
In late 1831, he sent his newly reformed army towards Syria, under the command of his son Ibrahim Pasha, resulting in the Egyptian–Ottoman War (1831–1833) against the Ottoman sultan, Mahmud II. Ibrahim's forces quickly captured Gaza and Jerusalem, and successfully laid siege to Acre before marching on to Aleppo and Damascus, “winning successive battles against Mahmud’s new troops, which were not yet a match for so practiced an enemy”; by June 18, 1832, Ibrahim had managed to seize control of all of Syria. For a time, the Egyptian army halted while Mehmed Ali attempted to negotiate with the Sultan. However, once it became clear that diplomacy had failed, Ibrahim led his forces into Anatolia itself where he rallied opponents of the Sultan and captured the city of Konya on November 21. Mahmud II dispatched a large army to try to halt the Egyptian advance, but it was crushed in the Battle of Konya on December 21 and “in a single blow [opened] the way for a complete conquest of Anatolia.” Ibrahim continued his advance until he was within striking distance of Istanbul, the Ottoman capital.

Response
Panic spread through the imperial city as the Egyptian army pushed closer to the seat of Ottoman authority. Mahmud II urgently dispatched pleas for assistance to both Britain and France, but was turned down due to domestic concerns as well as the involvement of both nations in managing the state of affairs after the recently ended Belgian Revolution. Lord Kinross argues that this left the Sultan no choice but to call upon his former enemy, Russia, for assistance. According to Bailey, the response from the Tsar was so positive and swift, that Mahmud II hesitated in accepting, believing it might be a trap. Nevertheless, the Sultan was willing to welcome any help he could receive, and accepted the Russian offer. The Tsar immediately dispatched a sizeable force of troops to block the potential Egyptian advance on Istanbul. It is unclear exactly how many troops the Tsar sent; Lord Kinross claims it was an army of approximately 18,000 men in total while Bailey suggests it may have been a force more than twice that size of nearly 40,000 troops. Regardless of the exact size of the Russian host, it was formidable enough to cause Ibrahim to decide to begin negotiating with the Sultan rather than risk a battle with the Russians. Thus, the mere presence of Russian troops was enough to halt the Egyptian onslaught.

European reaction
The presence of Russian troops so close to the Ottoman capital also worried Britain and France considerably. Seeing this potential threat forced the two nations into action. Lord Palmerston, the British Foreign Secretary, led the effort and brought strong diplomatic pressure “to bear upon the Sultan to insist on the Russian withdrawal, in return for concessions to Mehmed Ali and an Anglo-French guarantee against his further invasion.” Diplomacy was not the only tool they employed however, as both the British and the French dispatched fleets to the Dardanelles. This action served the dual purpose of coercing the Sultan to accept their demanding proposal, while also threatening the Russians and checking any further military action they might take.

Consequences of the conflict and intervention
The Sultan finally submitted, which led to the Convention of Kütahya in May 1833, which officially granted Mehmed Ali control of Syria, Adana, Tripoli, Crete, and Egypt, though these titles were not guaranteed to be hereditary upon his death. As soon as this peace was established, the Russians began the process of removing their troops from Ottoman territory. It seemed as though things had come to a reasonable end, but soon after the withdrawal of all Russian troops, the British government learned that two days prior to the completion of this evacuation, the Sultan Mahmud II had signed the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi with Tsar Nicholas I. This realization alarmed British leaders, as it seemed to indicate that Russia now held an enormous amount of influence over the Ottoman Empire and its affairs.

Treaty
The quickly negotiated treaty, signed on July 8, 1833, consisted primarily of a defensive alliance between Russia and the Ottoman Empire which was to initially last for eight years, and included pledges to discuss matters of security with one another. This bound the two empires together in a significant way and seemed to give the Russians the opportunity for future military interventions in the Ottoman Empire, effectively making it a protectorate of the Russian state. While this portion of the treaty was itself important, the most significant feature was its secret article.

Secret Article
This article called for an alternative to Ottoman military support per the terms of the treaty; rather than sending troops and arms in support of their Russian allies, the Ottomans would close the Dardanelles to all foreign warships at Russia's command. Below is the full text of the secret article:

"“In virtue of one of the clauses of Article I of the Patent Treaty of Defensive Alliance concluded 	between the Imperial Court of Russia and the Sublime Porte, the two High Contracting Parties, 	are bound to afford to each other, mutually substantial aid, and the most efficacious assistance, for the safety of their respective dominions. Nevertheless, His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, wishing to spare the Sublime Ottoman Porte the expense and inconvenience which might be occasioned to it by affording such substantial aid, will not ask for that aid, if circumstances should place the Sublime Porte under the obligation of furnishing it. The Sublime Porte, in place of aid which it is bound to furnish in case of need according to the principal of reciprocity of the Patent Treaty, shall confine its action in favour of the Imperial Court of Russia to closing the Strait of the Dardanelles, that is to say, to not allowing any foreign vessel of war to enter therein, under any pretext whatsoever.”"

Interpretations of the Secret Article
This article was highly controversial and its true meaning is still a matter of debate. There is disagreement over what exactly the terms of the closing of the Dardanelles would be. Some interpret the lack of any specific mention of Russian warships to mean that their ships were not included with those to be barred passage through the Dardanelles. Others point out that this same lack of any specific provision for Russian warships indicates that the treaty did not grant them any special rights. There is also debate over what is meant by the phrase “in case of need.” Some believe this meant only while Russia was at war, while others interpreted it to mean that the Dardanelles would be closed to foreign warships at all times. These speculations began when the British discovered the full scope of the treaty. The secret article was not officially communicated to the British government until January 16, 1834, but they were aware of it several months before that point.

The British interpreted the treaty and its secret clause to have a potentially great impact on their relations with Russia, the Ottoman Empire, and the established balance of power. Hale argues that Lord Palmerston was stung into action “since he mistakenly believed that [the treaty’s] secret clause had given Russian warships free passage through the straits.” Additionally, Palmerston and the rest of the British government saw that “while the immediate advantages of the treaty were slight, the ‘potential advantage to Russia’ was very great, in that ‘in accustoming the Porte to the position of vassal’ Russia had ‘prepared the way for a repetition of the 1833 expedition.’” They feared that this potential for future Russian intervention in the Ottoman Empire would threaten British connections with India and trade in the Near East as a whole, though as Bailey puts it, “The Foreign Secretary’s immediate concern, however, was the problem of the Straits.” This interpretation of the treaty was to shape British foreign policy towards the Ottoman Empire for decades to come.

Consequences of the treaty
According to Bailey, the signing of the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi was what fully awakened Britain to “the importance of the Ottoman Empire’s geographical, political, and economic position in Europe.” In the short term, the British protested the treaty, claiming that it violated the Anglo-Ottoman Treaty of 1809, which set forth terms that no foreign warship would be allowed to enter the straits. Their formal protest concluded “if the stipulations of that treaty (Unkiar Skelessi) should hereafter lead to the armed interference of Russia in the internal affairs of Turkey, the British government will hold itself at liberty to act upon such an occasion, in any manner which the circumstances of the moment may appear to require.” The French also issued a similar statement regarding their concerns about possible Russian military interference. These two statements were indicative of how seriously the terms of the treaty were taken by the Western powers.

In the longer term, the British became convinced that a different approach was needed, and committed to a policy that “the Ottoman Empire was to be preserved, supported, reformed, and strengthened.” From that point forward, the British, under Palmerston's leadership, took a number of actions to enact this new policy towards the Ottoman Empire. These ranged from increased trade with the Ottomans to a strengthening of the British fleet in the Levant and offers of both military and naval missions to Mahmud II both to aid the Sultan should Mehmed Ali threaten further military action, and “as a gesture to redress Britain’s former neglect.”

While Britain certainly took the most active role, it was not the only European power which took an interest in the Ottoman Empire as a result of this treaty. Not long after the signing of the treaty, Austria and Prussia joined Russia in the Münchengrätz Convention of September 18, 1833, which committed the powers to opposing further expansion by Mehmed Ali and to “maintain[ing] Ottoman integrity.” In July 1840, a broader coalition was formed including Britain, Austria, Prussia, and Russia, which agreed to protect the Sultan's government against Mehmed Ali; this agreement, known as the Convention of London (1840) also required that the Ottomans declare that the straits would be closed to all non-Ottoman warships in peacetime. European support, specifically that of the British, also aided in the ultimate submission of Mehmet Ali; in an agreement signed in June 1841, he accepted the limitation of his army in exchange for guarantees of hereditary governorship of Egypt for his family. This marked “the emergence of Britain as a more active player in the Near Eastern power game, and the Ottoman Empire’s main ally for the next 37 years.” Thus, the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi had long-lasting effects on the future of the Ottoman Empire, and especially on European outlooks towards that same future.

End of the treaty
Not long after its signing, the terms of the treaty would be progressively weakened by other treaties and agreements. The Convention of London (1840) took the first big step by compelling the Ottomans to keep the straits closed to all non-Ottoman warships in peacetime. This helped assuage the British fear that the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi had effectively granted the Russian fleet free passage through the straits and into the Mediterranean. Another step towards nullifying the treaty came in the form of the London Straits Convention the following year. This agreement barred all warships from entering the straits, save those of allies of the Sultan in wartime. While it may seem that this agreement does not change much, it is important to remember that at this point, Britain was one of the Sultan's allies. Thus, this would allow the British fleet to enter the straits in times of war, eliminating the perceived exclusive right of the Russians to do so. By this point, the most important aspect of the treaty had effectively been negated. Russo-Ottoman relations continued to deteriorate in the following decade, and while it is unclear when the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi was entirely invalidated, it can be said with certainty that the coming of the Crimean War meant the end of any potential for the continuation of the Russo-Ottoman alliance set out in the treaty.

title: Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi


text:
Giorgi Baramidze

Giorgi Baramidze (გიორგი ბარამიძე; born January 5, 1968) is a Georgian politician who served as Vice-Prime Minister of Georgia and State Minister for Euro-Atlantic Integration from 2004 to 2012. On October 21, 2012, he was elected as a vice-speaker of the Parliament of Georgia.

Early life
Baramidze was born on January 5, 1968, in Tbilisi, Georgia. He graduated from the Department of Chemical Technologies of the Georgian Technical University in 1992. While at the university, he was a co-founder and one of leaders of the student movement. In 1990, he joined forces with other activists establishing and leading Green Party of Georgia. Following graduation from the university in 1992, he worked as the head of a department at the Committee of Human Rights and National Minorities. In 1995, he graduated from George C. Marshall Center for European Security Studies and Defense Economics in Garmisch, Germany.

After start of the military operations in Abkhazia in 1992, he became the head of Green Party Humanitarian Aid Office where he oversaw provision of humanitarian supplies, evacuation of peaceful population from the occupied territories and liberation of Georgian hostages. He's credited with freeing of 200 Georgian prisoners and facilitating rescue of 3,000 Georgian civilians who fled the conflict zone. He later participated in combat operations in Labra village of Ochamchire district and around Sukhumi.

Member of Parliament
In 1992, Baramidze was elected to the Parliament of Georgia from bloc "Green Party of Georgia" and served as the Secretary for the Commission of Human Rights and National Minorities and as a member of the Parliamentary Defense and Security Commission. He was also elected a member of the State Coordination Commission of Georgia's participation in NATO Partnership for Peace Program (PFP). In 1995, he was one of the co-founders of Eduard Shevardnadze's Union of Citizens of Georgia Party and was elected its deputy chairman, acting as Secretary General of the party from 1995 through 1996.

In the 1995 parliamentary elections, he was elected from the Didube district of Tbilisi from bloc "Union of citizens of Georgia". In 1996, he was elected Chairman of the Investigation Commission of the Parliamentary Anti-Corruption Committee. As a result of anti-corruption activities, he masterminded having the following several ministers resign, D. Gulua (Minister of Agriculture), P. Injia (Minister of Communications and Postage), D. Zubitashvili (Minister of Energy), D. Iakobidze (Minister of Finance) and D. Eliashvili (Chairman of Department of Gas of Georgia) among them.

In 1996, Baramidze was elected chairman of the parliamentary faction of the Union of Citizens of Georgia. A year later, he started joint Georgian government-UNDP program on Corruption Investigation Center becoming its first director.

From 1998 through 1999, Baramidze worked as an Associate Researcher at Institute for the Study of Diplomacy of Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., conducting research on U.S. government policy, structures and functions as well as on political, military and defense issues in Caucasus. In 1999, he worked with Senator Carl Levin in the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services. Upon his return to Georgia in 1999, he was re-elected to the parliament from Didube district and elected Chairman of the Defence and Security Committee in 2000 and Chairman of the Faction of the United Democrats of Parliament of Georgia in 2002, subsequently playing a pivotal role in the Rose Revolution in November 2003. In 2003 parliamentary elections, Baramidze was re-elected from the same district of Tbilisi from bloc Burjanadze-Democrats. After the 2003 Revolution Baramidze became a key player in Saakashvili's administration and influenced Georgian foreign policy for the 9 years UNM governance.

Ministerial positions
With the new government in power in late 2003, he was appointed Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia.

He was seen as a member of the government faction grouped around the then Prime Minister (and Rose Revolution leader) Zurab Zhvania that were seen to be in opposition to the President Mikheil Saakashvili. As such he publicly cast doubt upon the official explanation for Zhvania's death due to carbon monoxide poisoning and instead appeared to endorse the possibility of foul play stating "none of the versions [of explanation for his death] should be ruled out."

In June 2004, he was appointed Minister of Defense replacing Gela Bezhuashvili. In December 2004, he was moved to the post of Vice Premier and State Minister for Euro-Atlantic Integration.

Return to the Parliament
In August 2012, Baramdize resigned from his government position in order to run as the United National Movement's majoritarian candidate in Batumi in the 2012 parliamentary election. The election saw the defeat of the UNM by the Georgian Dream coalition and Baramidze lost the Batumi race, but he obtained a seat in the new parliament through a party list. On October 21, 2012, he was elected as one of the vice-speakers of the Parliament of Georgia from bloc "United National Movement - More benefit to People", representing the parliamentary minority.

In June 2013, the UNM named Baramidze as one of the four candidates for the party's presidential primaries.

Personal life
Baramidze speaks Georgian, English, Russian and French. Baramidze has one daughter, Anna Baramidze, from his first marriage.

title: Giorgi Baramidze


text:
The Sudbury Star

The Sudbury Star is a Canadian daily regional newspaper published in Sudbury, Ontario. It is owned by the media company, Postmedia. It is the largest daily paper in Northeastern Ontario by circulation.

History
The Sudbury Star began as a daily in January 1909 as the Northern Daily Star, in competition with the city's established daily Sudbury Journal, but it was in immediate financial trouble and folded within just six months. Staff took over ownership of the struggling newspaper, led by foreman William Edge Mason, who then found 10 prominent investors to provide financial backing to the paper. W.E. Mason Equipment was created to take over management of the paper, and by World War I the paper was flourishing and the Sudbury Journal was out of business. In 1922 Mason acquired the North Bay Nugget in North Bay.

In 1935, Mason launched the city's first commercial radio station, CKSO.

In 1948, Mason died and ownership of the paper was taken over by his W.E. Mason Estate. The Nugget was almost immediately sold in an employee buyout, but the Sudbury Star remained under the ownership of Mason's estate until 1950, when J. R. Meakes, Mason's successor as publisher and general manager, bought the paper with co-investors George Miller, Jim Cooper and Bill Plaunt. The same investment group launched CKSO-TV, the city's first television station and the first television station in Canada not owned by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, in 1953.

In 1955 the paper was acquired by Thomson Newspapers. Meakes remained as publisher and general manager until his retirement in 1975.

In the early 1960s, the city saw a "newspaper war" between two startup weekly newspapers, the Sudbury Sun and the Star-owned Sudbury Scene. The Sun, a publication of Northland Publishers, was out of business by 1962, and filed a competition lawsuit against the Scene, alleging that the Scene had deliberately undercut the Sun's advertising rates to protect Thomson's monopoly on English-language periodical publication in the city. The federal trade practices commission ruled in Thomson's favour.

The paper was sold to Southam Newspapers in 1996, to Osprey Media in 2001, and to Sun Media in 2007. In 2015 Postmedia Network acquired Sun Media.

In October 2013 the paper moved from its longtime home at 33 MacKenzie Street in Sudbury to new offices at 128 Pine Street.

The current managing editor of the Sudbury Star is Don MacDonald, who assumed the role in 2014.

title: The Sudbury Star


text:
Irakli Okruashvili

Irakli Okruashvili (ირაკლი ოქრუაშვილი) (born 6 November 1973) is a Georgian politician who had served on various important posts in the Government of Georgia under President Mikheil Saakashvili, including being the Minister of Defense from December 2004 until being dismissed in November 2006.

In September 2007, Okruashvili staged a public comeback to Georgian politics, openly confronting Mikheil Saakashvili and creating the opposition party Movement for United Georgia. On September 27, 2007, Okruashvili was briefly arrested at his party headquarters on the charges of corruption, money laundering, and abuse of office. In 2007 he left Georgia and was granted political asylum in France. He was sentenced to 11-year prison term in Georgia in absentia in March 2008. In October 2010, he, remaining in France, joined Sozar Subari, Levan Gachechiladze and Erosi Kitsmarishvili in the new Georgian Party.

Okruashvili was sentenced to five years in prison for allegedly participating in group violence in anti-government rallies organized in June 2019. However, President Salome Zourabichvili pardoned him, alongside Gigi Ugulava, on May 15, 2020.

On March 8, 2022 the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence stated that Okruashvili had arrived in Ukraine, together with other Georgian volunteers, in order to fight against the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Political career
Irakli Okruashvili was born in Tskhinvali, South Ossetian AO, Georgian SSR. He graduated from Faculty of International Law and Relations at Tbilisi State University. He then worked as an attorney.

In government
Okruashvili served as the Deputy Minister of Justice from 2000 to 2001. He joined Mikhail Saakashvili's United National Movement and was elected as a member of Tbilisi Assembly (Sakrebulo) in 2002. After the Rose Revolution, Okruashvili was appointed the Person Authorized (governor) of the president of Georgia in Shida Kartli (to which breakaway South Ossetia was a de jure part) in November 2003 and established strong anti-corruption and anti-smuggling measures in the region.

He served as the Prosecutor General from January 2004 until Saakashvili appointed him Interior Minister in June 2004 and moved him to the post of defence minister in December 2004. During his tenure as defence minister, Okruashvili was known for advocating military actions against the separatists in South Ossetia.

Okruashvili said on May 1, 2006, that he would resign if Georgia failed to restore control over breakaway South Ossetian by January 1, 2007.

On November 10, 2006, Saakashvili appointed him Minister for Economic Development. Davit Kezerashvili became the Minister of Defence. Okruashvili resigned as Minister for Economic Development on 17 November 2006.

In opposition
On September 25, 2007, he announced the formation of the new opposition Movement for United Georgia and unleashed criticism on President Saakashvili, accusing him of corruption, incompetency and human rights violations. He also raised new concerns around Zurab Zhvania's death, challenging the official investigation point of view and personally accused the Georgian president in planning the murder of businessman Badri Patarkatsishvili.

Speculations about Okruashvili's planned party had been circulating for a long time already and many commentators expected, what they called, "a war of compromising materials" in case of Okruashvili's political comeback. The presentation was preceded by the controversies over financial irregularities surrounding the party's new office and the arrest of Mikheil Kareli, Orkuashvili's close associate and governor of Shida Kartli, on the charges of corruption.

Arrest
On September 27, 2007, Okruashvili was detained on charges of extortion, money laundering, and abuse of office while Georgia's defense minister. On September 28, 2007, several opposition parties organized a peaceful mass rally in Okruashvili's support at the Parliament of Georgia.

On October 8, 2007, in a video taped confession released by the General Prosecutor's Office, Okruashvili pleaded guilty to large-scale bribery through extortion and negligence while serving as minister and retracted his accusations against the president, winning release on bail of 10 million Georgian lari. He also said that his earlier accusations levelled against Saakashvili were not true and were aimed at gaining political dividends for himself and Badri Patarkatsishvili and at discrediting the President of Georgia. Some opposition leaders said Okruashvili's statement had been made under duress. Okruashvili declared, however, that he had decided to cooperate with the investigation in order to "mitigate [his] situation".

Expulsion from Georgia
After he pleaded guilty, Okruashvili was released. Okruashvili left Georgia around November 1, 2007. He subsequently said he was forced into exile; the government said he had asked to leave because of medical issues.

On November 5, 2007, Okruashvili made a surprise appearance on Imedi TV from Munich, claiming that he had been forced to retract accusations against President Saakashvili while being in jail. A Georgian prosecuting officer, however, rejected Okruashvili's allegations, while the senior members of the Parliament of Georgia for the ruling party described him "an instrument in the hands of Patarkatsishvili", the owner of Imedi TV, who financed opposition rallies against the Georgian government.

On November 14, 2007, following a Prosecutor's Office request, a court in Tbilisi ruled that Okruashvili be returned to police custody pending investigation. In December 2007, he was arrested in Germany at the request of Georgia, but was later transferred to France, where a court ruled that he be freed on bail with Georgia's extradition request to be examined on April 16, 2008. In the meantime, a Georgian court found him guilty of "large-scale extortion" and sentenced him to 11 years in prison in absentia on March 28, 2008. On April 23, 2008, he was granted political asylum. The French courts ultimately rejected the extradition request as well.

In September 2008 Reuters reported Okruashvili had said that Saakashvili had long planned the 2008 South Ossetia war but had executed it poorly. While defence minister from 2004 to 2006 he and Saakashvili worked together on military plans to retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia, saying "Abkhazia was our strategic priority, but we drew up military plans in 2005 for taking both Abkhazia and South Ossetia as well".

In October 2010, Okruashvili resigned his position in the Movement for United Georgia and shortly afterwards joined with the high-profile Georgia-based politicians — Sozar Subari, Levan Gachechiladze, and Erosi Kitsmarishvili to establish a new opposition party, the Georgian Party.

Return, imprisonment and release
In a phone interview with the Tbilisi-based Maestro TV on May 22, 2011, he said "On May 25 I will be in Georgia together with my people. I will not talk about details. On May 25 we will manage to put an end to Saakashvili's regime with minimal losses. If there is a great public support, the losses will be minimal. So, everybody should acknowledge the responsibility, which should be assumed before our country."

After government change in Georgia Okruashvili, who faces multiple criminal charges in Georgia, returned from his French exile back to his home country. But despite a broad amnesty for political prisoners he was arrested upon arrival in the Tbilisi airport on November 20, 2012. Georgian Justice Minister, Tea Tsulukiani, commented, that she shared the view that Okruashvili "was subjected to politically-motivated persecution by the [previous] authorities." "But it does not automatically mean that he is innocent in those criminal charges that he may face; it requires investigation," Tsulukiani told journalists. "There are number of criminal charges brought against him and the most recent one is related to setting up of illegal armed groups and that is related to the events of May, 2011 [during street protest rallies]. It requires further probe and I think that Okruashvili returned in order to prove his truth." Irakli Okruashvili was released from a courtroom on January 11. His release was made possible after Okruashvili was cleared of bribe-taking and extortion charges during a hearing in the Court of Appeals on January 10 and after the Tbilisi City Court accepted on January 11 a motion from prosecutors to release Okruashvili from custody on GEL 15,000 bail. A trial into negligence will be continued later in the Tbilisi City Court.

After his release Okruashvili gave an interview to Reuters to define the reasons of his return to Georgia after several years of residence in France under political asylum. Okruashvili sayd Georgia's prosecution does not use him as "a golden witness" against President Saakashvili, as it was suggested in the Georgian media, and there was no big agreement with the new government about any issue. "My return (to the country) was just based on my decision and that`s it", Okruashvili said.

title: Irakli Okruashvili


text:
Consolamentum

Consolamentum (called heretication by its Catholic opponents) was the unique sacrament of the Cathars. Cathars believed in original sin, and – like Gnostics – believed temporal pleasure to be sinful or unwise. The process of living thus inevitably incurred "regret" that required "consolation" to move nearer to God or to approach heaven. It occurred only twice in a lifetime: upon confirmation in the faith and upon impending death. It was available to both men and women who made a commitment to the faith. Following the ceremony the consoled individual became a "Cathar Perfect" or "Parfait".

According to the Albigenses and other Cathars, the consolamentum was an immersion (or baptism) in the Holy Spirit. It implied reception of all spiritual gifts including absolution from sin, spiritual regeneration, the power to preach, and elevation to a higher plane of perfection.

The ritual
Reference to the trinity was systematically replaced with the name of Christ since the doctrine of the Albigenses and Cathars professed a modalistic or (in the east) adoptionistic doctrine about God's nature.

The ritual took various forms; some used the entire New Testament scripture whilst others relied on extracts such as the Gospel of John while administering consolation. There were reportedly some remote cases where holy water was used as a cleansing agent during consolamentum being profusely poured over the recipient's head until he/she was completely wet (as opposed to sprinkling).

In contrast to Catholic ceremonies, the form used by the majority of Cathars only required verbal blessings and scriptures administered to the person to be consoled, and did not involve tokens such as consecrated bread or wine, because these would pass through the body and become befouled. Dying persons might abstain from food in order that their body be as pure as possible as it passed into eternity.

According to a few known cases in the latter years of Catharism, the terminally ill would voluntarily undertake a complete fast known as the endura. It was only undertaken when death was clearly inevitable. It was a form of purification and separation from the material world which was controlled by the evil one. They believed that this final sacrifice ensured their reunification with the Good God.

Laying on of hands was always part of the ceremony. Some historians have stated that incidents of ecstatic utterances during consolamentum was actually glossolalia, or "speaking in tongues", which demanded that the rite be guarded even more secretly, since this practice occurring outside of the Catholic Church was considered witchcraft, and was punishable by death.

After the ritual
Once consoled, Parfaits were required to be pescatarian, to be celibate, and to dedicate their lives to travelling and teaching Cathar doctrines. These Parfaits were the leaders of the Cathar communities.

The vast majority of believers did not receive consolamentum until on the verge of death. Once given the consolamentum, the same rules applied to them except for not being expected to travel or preach from their deathbed. This allowed most Cathars to live somewhat ordinary lives, and receive consolamentum shortly before passing away.

title: Consolamentum


text:
Dry transfer

Dry transfers (also called rub-ons or rubdowns) are decals that can be applied without the use of water or other solvent. The decal itself is on a backing material such as paper or plastic sheeting much like a transparency. The dry transfer is placed in the desired location with the backing side up. The decal is then applied by burnishing the backing with a stylus or similar object such as a ballpoint pen. The contact side of the decal includes a pressure-sensitive adhesive; the combination of heat and pressure causes the decal to stick more strongly to the new surface than to the backing. When the backing is removed, the decal remains. This allows for ink only where needed even if the pattern is delicate, because the backing supports the decal while it is being applied.

Dry transfers are used in manual technical drawing when standard graphic elements such as title blocks, forms, patterned lines, shading, piping or electronic schematic symbols need to be repetitively used. Use of a dry transfer reduces drawing time and standardizes appearance. Dry transfer lettering such as Letraset brand is used where hand-drawn lettering is laborious to apply. From the 1960s to the 1980s, dry transfers featuring action scenes were a popular children's pastime.

title: Dry transfer


text:
User:Choster/Contributions

A selection of articles created or substantially expanded by choster:

Business and finance

 * AAdvantage
 * Computer reservations system
 * Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001
 * List_of_banks
 * Wilshire 5000

Companies

 * AMR Corporation
 * Banta Corporation
 * Capital Airlines
 * Colgan Air
 * Daylin
 * Hechinger
 * Ithaca Gun Company
 * Mazza Gallerie
 * Medieval Times
 * Olin Corporation
 * Rohr, Inc.
 * S. C. Johnson & Son
 * Security Pacific Bank
 * Software Publishing Corporation
 * SsangYong Group
 * Thalhimer's
 * TIAA-CREF
 * Trak Auto
 * Trans International Airlines
 * Trans World Entertainment
 * UAL Corporation
 * United States Radium Corporation
 * W.C. and A.N. Miller
 * Woodward & Lothrop

Education

 * Commons club
 * Cornell Daily Sun
 * Cornell North Campus
 * Cornell West Campus
 * John F. Kennedy Preparatory High School
 * JSerra Catholic High School
 * List of Lambda Chi Alpha chapters
 * Servite High School
 * Trinity League
 * Weill Cornell Medical College

Geography and landmarks

 * Belt regions of the United States
 * Bruin
 * Boston Citgo sign
 * Columbus Circle
 * Faliraki
 * Korean Bell of Friendship
 * List of Maryland county name etymologies
 * Myeongdong Cathedral
 * Rungnado May Day Stadium
 * Six Mile Creek (Ithaca)

Washington, DC

 * 1968 Washington, DC riots
 * American University Park
 * Cleveland Park (created)
 * Massachusetts Avenue (Washington, DC)
 * Spring Valley (Washington, D.C.)
 * Sursum Corda (created)
 * Washington Star
 * Woodward & Lothrop

History

 * 1968 Washington, DC riots (created)
 * 1980s
 * Chicago Daily News
 * King of Bavaria
 * Leisler's Rebellion
 * List of state leaders in 1389 (created)

Politics and current events

 * 1996 Republican National Convention
 * International Conference on Population and Development
 * Foreign Policy Research Institute
 * List of U.S. political families
 * Richard Nixon Library & Birthplace
 * U.S. House Committee on Armed Services

People

 * Adrian A. Basora
 * Aristide Beaugrand-Champagne
 * William E. Dannemeyer
 * Houston I. Flournoy
 * Chester Gould
 * Henri Jova
 * Cordelia Scaife May
 * Richard King Mellon
 * Thomas Mellon
 * William Larimer Mellon
 * Henry Messmer
 * Connie Morella
 * Henry W. Sage
 * Mary Louise Smith (1914-1997)
 * Richard Mellon Scaife
 * Dick Schaap
 * H. S. Thompson
 * William Douglas Wallach
 * Samuel William Yorty

Religion

 * Foundry United Methodist Church
 * List of churches in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange
 * Parish (Catholic Church)
 * Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange
 * St. Gregory's Church (St. Nazianz, Wisconsin)
 * Teaching order

Transportation

 * AAdvantage
 * AMR Corporation
 * Capital Airlines
 * Colgan Air
 * Columbus Circle
 * Computer reservations system
 * Daegu subway fire
 * El Toro Y
 * Fullerton Municipal Airport
 * Ithaca Tompkins International Airport
 * Kawasaki Ninja 1000
 * Shuttle by United
 * Trans International Airlines
 * Union Station (Alexandria)
 * Wings Alliance

title: User:Choster/Contributions


text:
Tetri

Tetri (თეთრი) is a fractional currency used in the country of Georgia. It was put into circulation in 1995.

The name tetri ("white") was adopted from the term describing golden, silver or copper coins known in ancient and medieval Georgia.

The plural of the term "tetri" is "tetrebi." However, the Georgian language uses the singular form when the quantity is specified, so in practice the plural of "tetri" is just "tetri."

In some instances tetri is informally referred to as "kapiki", derived from the Russian fractional currency kopek from the Soviet era.

100 tetri = 1 lari.

Image gallery
Modern coins minted in the Republic of Georgia (should be displayed approximately at the effective coin size, if the images are rendered at 3.78 pixels per millimeter, or 96 pixels per inch).

title: Tetri


text:
George McCready Price

George McCready Price (26 August 1870 – 24 January 1963) was a Canadian creationist. He produced several anti-evolution and creationist works, particularly on the subject of flood geology. His views did not become common among creationists until after his death, particularly with the modern creation science movement starting in the 1960s.

Personal life
Price was the father of Ernest Edward Price and grandfather of actor John Shelton, who named one of his sons Darwin to "balance everything out". He is also the great great grandfather of Lake Street Dive vocalist Rachael Price

Biography
Price was born in Havelock, New Brunswick, Canada. His father died in 1882, and his mother joined the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Price attended Battle Creek College (now Andrews University) between 1891 and 1893. In 1896, he enrolled in a one-year teacher training course at the Provincial Normal School of New Brunswick (now the University of New Brunswick), where he took some elementary courses in some of the natural sciences, including some mineralogy.

Price taught at a series of small-town schools from 1897 onwards, including at a high school in Tracadie between 1899 and 1902. While there, socially, he met Alfred Corbett Smith (head of the medical department at a local leprosarium) who loaned him scientific literature. Believing the Earth was young, Price concluded that geologists had misinterpreted their data. In 1902, Price completed the manuscript Outlines of Modern Christianity and Modern Science before leaving Tracadie to serve brief stints as an Adventist evangelist on Prince Edward Island and the head of a new Adventist boarding academy in Nova Scotia. He briefly returned to book-selling in 1904, and then moved to New York City in an attempt to become a magazine and newspaper writer.

In a response to a plea from his wife, the Adventist church first employed Price as a construction worker in Maryland. He then was principal of a small Adventist school in Oakland, California, before becoming a construction worker and handyman at a newly purchased Adventist sanitarium in Loma Linda, California, where he published Illogical Geology: The Weakest Point in the Evolution Theory in 1906. In Illogical Geology, Price offered $1000 "to any one who will, in the face of the facts here presented, show me how to prove that one kind of fossil is older than another."

From 1907 to 1912, Price taught at the Seventh-day Adventist-run College of Medical Evangelists, now known as Loma Linda University, which awarded him a B.A., based partially on his authorship and independent study. From 1912 to 1914, he taught at the San Fernando Academy in San Fernando, California, and from 1914 to 1916 at Lodi Academy, Lodi, California.

Beginning in 1920, Price taught at Pacific Union College, Angwin, California, where he was awarded an M.A. (described by Ronald L. Numbers as a "gift"). From 1924 to 1928, Price taught at Stanborough Missionary College in Watford, England, where he served as president from 1927 to 1928. He then taught at Emmanual Missionary College (now Andrews University) in Berrien Springs, Michigan from 1929 to 1933, and Walla Walla College near Walla Walla, Washington from 1933 to 1938.

While Price claimed that his book-selling travels gave him invaluable "firsthand knowledge of field geology", his "familiarity with the outside world" remained rudimentary, with even his own students noting that he could "barely tell one fossil from another" on a field trip shortly before he retired.

In 1943, he moved to Loma Linda, California, where he died 20 years later at the age of 92.

Reception
In 1906 David Starr Jordan, president of Stanford University, and a leading American expert on fossil fishes, wrote a review of Price's Illogical Geology, in which he stated that Price should not expect "any geologist to take [his work] seriously." This led to a correspondence over the next twenty years in which Price once promised "to become an evolutionist within twenty-four hours" if "the foremost ichthyologist in the world" could prove that one fossil was older than another, and Jordan attempted to enlighten Price that his views were: based on scattering mistakes, omissions, and exceptions against general truths that anybody familiar with the facts in a general way can not possibly dispute. Jordan also unsuccessfully urged Price to "undertake some constructive work in Paleontology in the field and in laboratories."

Numbers says that Seventh-day Adventism is grounded on the Sabbath doctrine of a literal Creation week. To Price, the Sabbath doctrine is what saved Adventists from evolutionism. He adopted Ellen G. White's position on creationism as his own and he sought to persuade the world that a recent creation was required by the Bible and science.

Price criticized the 'geologic ages' and strict Lyellian uniformitarianism on which he thought they were based. As an alternative explanation of the geology of the earth, he re-invented Flood geology. He pondered ways to reinterpret the apparent order of the fossils that seemingly implied ancient bygone eras. After studying a wide variety of geologic literature, Price deduced that the "facts of the rocks and fossils, stripped of mere theories, splendidly refute this evolutionary theory of the invariable order of the fossils, which is the very backbone of the evolutionary doctrine." He had read of strata containing fossils of a young era lying conformably on strata containing fossils of very old eras. The geologist who described these lithically identical layers said that "one would naturally suppose that a single formation was being dealt with, were it not for fossil evidence." To Price, that, and the lack of any evidence of erosion between the strata, implied that little time could have occurred between the two layers of rock. Price also discovered in the literature examples of similar conformable strata, but in the reverse order, the old rocks on top and the young strata below according to interpretation of the fossils. Although appearing "to succeed one another conformably" the Canadian Geologic Survey contended for over-thrusting principally based on the fossil content. Price's interpretation of the evidence was that "the geological record does not prove succession of ages, but rather shows a "taxonomic" series representing different but contemporaneous zones of antediluvian life."

So, in Price's 1913 book, The Fundamentals of Geology, an expanded version of Illogical Geology, he presented the "Law of Conformable Stratigraphic Sequences" which states "any kind of fossiliferous rock may occur conformably on any other kind of fossiliferous rock, old or young." To Price this law was "by all odds the most important law ever formulated with reference to the order in which the strata occur."

Yale geologist Schuchert's review of The New Geology for the magazine Science stated that Price was "harboring a geological nightmare". However, the creationists welcomed the new book. Harry Rimmer claimed that it was "a masterpiece of REAL science [that] explodes in a convincing manner some of the ancient fallacies of science 'falsely so called'". Within a couple of years, Price appeared prominently in several conservative religious periodicals. A Science editor described him as "the principal scientific authority of the Fundamentalists".

Price, concerned about scientific methodology, had read Whithead and other philosophers and understood that facts were always subject to interpretation. While Price was confident that "inductive geology" inferred a recent Creation, he acknowledged that debate between creationism and naturalism lay outside of science, "across the boundary-line in the domain of philosophy and theology." He claimed that naturalists regarded facts "through the colored spectacles of Darwin and Lyell" while Creationists used the Bible to interpret the natural world. He said that the Creationist account of origins could never have been developed as a hypothesis from the study of nature alone, rather it was "suggested by our religion." In choosing between "the two alternatives now before the world," naturalistic geology versus world-catastrophe, there was but one suitable inquiry: "Will it give the most rational account nature's evidence?"

Price's defense of creation science (and attacks on evolution) first achieved wide notability in 1925 when his theories and arguments were utilized heavily by William Jennings Bryan in the famous Scopes Trial. Bryan had appealed to Price for assistance, but Price was busy teaching in England. Price advised Bryan to avoid science during the trial if possible. During the trial, defense counsel Clarence Darrow, sneered "You mentioned Price because he is the only human being in the world so far as you know that signs his name as a geologist that believes like you do . . . every scientist in this country knows [he] is a mountebank and a pretender and not a geologist at all."

Price's ideas were borrowed again in the early 1960s by Henry M. Morris and John Whitcomb in their book The Genesis Flood, a work that skeptic Martin Gardner calls "the most significant attack on evolution...since the Scopes trial". Morris, in his 1984 book History of Modern Creationism, spoke glowingly of Price's logic and writing style, and referred to reading The New Geology as "a life-changing experience for me".

Comments about Old Earth creationists
Price was more conservative in his views than Old Earth creationists such as William Jennings Bryan, Harry Rimmer or William Bell Riley. Contrary to Bryan, Rimmer and Riley, Price rejected the idea of a local flood and insisted on a pure literal 6-day creation consisting of six 24-hour days. He felt that Riley's day-age creationist views were "the devil's counterfeit". Price was equally dismissive of Rimmer, and his gap creationism for most of his career.

title: George McCready Price


title: User:Boly38


text:
Le Droit

Le Droit is a Canadian French-language digital weekly newspaper, published in Gatineau, Quebec. Initially established and owned by the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate, the paper was published by Martin Cauchon and his company, Capitales Médias, from 2015 - 2019, when a cooperative was formed by the employees to continue publishing the paper.

Formerly published in Ottawa, Ontario, for much of its history, it was the only francophone daily newspaper published in Ontario for the Franco-Ontarian community. Amid the context of the media profitability crunch of the late 2010s, it closed its Ottawa offices in 2019, moving across the river to Gatineau in order to qualify for special tax credits being offered by the government of Quebec to preserve endangered media outlets, although the newspaper reiterated that it would continue to cover Ottawa-related news.

The newspaper switched from daily to weekly publication in 2020, and dropped print issues to become digital-only at the end of 2023.

History
The newspaper was launched on March 27, 1913 as a tool to condemn Regulation 17, an Ontario law that restricted education in French at that time. Today, it defends federalism in Canada as well as provincial jurisdictions. It is still involved in the protection of francophone rights in Ontario, notably advocating for the survival of the Montfort Hospital during the government of Ontario premier Mike Harris. In the 1960s, Le Droit tried to extend its market into Northeastern Ontario, including the North Bay, Timmins and Sudbury areas, all of which have large francophone populations. However, it quickly abandoned the project due to high costs. Originally published as a broadsheet, it switched to tabloid format in 1988, following an 11-week strike by the pressmen. The newspaper also had a previous strike in 1982.

In 2001, Gesca, a subsidiary of Power Corporation owned by Franco-Ontarian Paul Desmarais acquired the paper from Conrad Black's Hollinger, who owned it between 1987 and 2001. In the eighties, it belonged to Montreal-based Jacques Francoeur, the founder of Sunday weekly Dimanche-Matin, who built the Unimedia chain which included Le Soleil (Quebec City) and Le Quotidien (Chicoutimi, now Saguenay). He acquired Le Droit from the Oblates.

In 2015, Gesca sold six of its francophone titles, including Le Droit, to Martin Cauchon, a former minister in the Jean Chrétien government. Terms were not disclosed.

In 2020, the paper switched from printing six times a week to once a week on Saturdays. Three years later the last print edition of the newspaper was published on December 30, 2023. Moving forward the publication will be entirely digital.

The publisher since 2007 is Jacques Pronovost. Before him, it was led by Claude Gagnon (2002–2007), Pierre Bergeron (1993–2002), Gilbert Lacasse (1987–1993) and Jean-Robert Bélanger (c. 1953 – 1987). Managing editors have included Jean Gagnon (?), André Larocque (2006–2010), Michel Gauthier (2001–2006), François Roy (1994–2001), Claude Beauregard (1994), Gilbert Lavoie (1991–1994), and André Préfontaine (1989–1991).

Today
It is also read by the Franco-Ontarian community and was the fourth all-time francophone newspaper (the previous three existed in the 19th century). Its articles can also be read on the internet in the Cyberpresse network, which also includes La Presse in Montreal, Le Soleil in Quebec City, Le Nouvelliste in Trois-Rivières, La Tribune in Sherbrooke, La Voix de l'Est in Granby and Le Quotidien in Saguenay.

Its main offices were located near the ByWard Market, with a second office located at Les Promenades Gatineau in Gatineau, until the move to Gatineau. It currently has about 150 employees.

Controversy
In 2008, Sudbury's francophone community newspaper Le Voyageur published an editorial criticizing the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission for its handling of Le5 Communications' application to acquire two francophone radio stations, CHYC-FM in Sudbury and CHYK-FM in Timmins. The paper took issue with the fact that the CRTC's original notice of hearing was published only in Le Droit, and not in any of the region's local media—thereby giving the francophone community in Northeastern Ontario little notice of either the pending transaction or the deadlines for reviewing and submitting comments regarding the application.

Notable staff

 * Marcel Desjardins, political correspondent and sports journalist
 * Pierre Dufault, political correspondent and sports journalist

title: Le Droit


text:
Gunboat War

The Gunboat War (Kanonbådskrigen, Kanonbåtkrigen, Swedish: Kanonbåtskriget; 1807–1814) was a naval conflict between Denmark–Norway and Great Britain supported by Sweden during the Napoleonic Wars. The war's name is derived from the Danish tactic of employing small gunboats against the materially superior Royal Navy. In Scandinavia it is seen as the later stage of the English Wars, whose commencement is accounted as the First Battle of Copenhagen in 1801.

Background
The naval conflict between Britain and Denmark-Norway commenced with the First Battle of Copenhagen in 1801 when Horatio Nelson's squadron of Admiral Hyde Parker's fleet attacked the Danish capital. This came as a basis of Denmark-Norway's policy of armed neutrality during the latter stages of the French Revolutionary Wars, where Denmark used its naval forces to protect trade flowing within, into and out of the Danish-Norwegian waters. Hostilities between Denmark-Norway and the United Kingdom broke out again by the Second Battle of Copenhagen in 1807, when the British attacked the Danish capital to ensure that the Danish-Norwegian fleet did not fall into the hands of Napoleon.

Danish boat design
As a result of the British capture or scuttling of large parts of the Danish-Norwegian fleet during the assault on Copenhagen, the Dano-Norwegian government decided to build gunboats in large numbers to compensate for the loss. The gunboats were originally designed by a Swede, Fredrik Henrik af Chapman, and the strategic advantage of gunboats lay in the fact that they could be produced rapidly and inexpensively throughout the kingdom. The tactical advantages were that they were highly manoeuvrable, especially in still and shallow waters and presented small targets. On the other hand, the boats were vulnerable and likely to sink from a single hit. They therefore could not be used in rough seas, and they were less effective against large warships. Still, the Danish-Norwegian government produced more than 200 gunboats in two models: the shallop gunboat which had a crew of 76 men, with an 18- or 24-pounder cannon in the bow and another in the stern, and the smaller barge type that had a total crew of 24 men, armed with a single 24-pounder.

The Danish Commodore (later, Admiral) Steen Andersen Bille (1751–1833) is credited with being the driving force behind the post-1807 Dano-Norwegian strategy of gunboat warfare. Below is a description of each of the four classes of gunboats according to Junior Lieutenant Hans Georg Garde, himself a commander of one of the larger types of gunboats.
 * Kanonchaluppen: These were the larger type of gunboat. Each was armed with two 24-pounder cannon and four 4-pounder howitzers and had a wartime establishment of 69 – 79 men.
 * Kanonjollen: These were the smaller type of gunboat. Each was armed with one 24-pounder cannon and two 4-pounder howitzers, and had wartime establishment of 41 men.
 * Morterchaluppen: These were the larger, mortar-armed gunboats. Each was armed with one 100-pounder mortar and two 4-pounder howitzers, and had a wartime establishment of 40 men.
 * Morterbarkasserne: These were smaller, mortar-armed gunboats. Each was armed with one mortar and had a wartime establishment of 19 men. They were little more than ordinary ships' boats into which a mortar had been set. They had a tendency to leak badly after 5 – 7 mortar shells had been fired. Their crews then had to bring them back into harbour, remove the mortar, and recaulk their vessels.

Reserve crew who could not be accommodated on board were quartered in buildings on land or in the frigate Triton which was in ordinary. Battle-ready gunboats had their crews on board.

Defences on the Norwegian coast in 1808 are listed at Royal Dano-Norwegian Navy order of battle in Norway (1808). Ten schooner-rigged gunboats capable of operating in the rougher Norwegian Sea were built in Bergen and Trondheim in the years 1808 to 1811.

War
In the first three years of the Gunboat War, these boats were on several occasions able to seize enemy cargo ships from their convoys and to capture British brigs, though they were not strong enough to overcome larger frigates and ships of the line. The British had control of Danish waters during the whole of the 1807–1814 war, and when the season was suited to navigation they were regularly able to escort large merchant convoys out through the Sound and the Great Belt. Although the discussion below focuses on armed encounters involving an exchange of fire, one must keep in mind that the British also captured numerous Danish privateers without firing a shot, and regularly seized Danish merchant vessels as prizes. The British also conducted amphibious landings on several Danish islands, many populated but lacking garrisons. British warships frequently landed to replenish their stocks of firewood, fresh water and livestock, which were purchased or seized to augment their provisions.

The war overlapped, in time, the Anglo-Russian War. As a result, the British expanded their trade embargo to Russian waters and the British navy conducted forays northwards into the Barents Sea. The British navy conducted successful raids on Hasvik and Hammerfest and disrupted the Pomor trade, the Norwegian trade with Russia.

1807–08
On 12 August 1807, even before the war had been declared, the British sixth-rate HMS Comus (1806) took part in a one-sided single-ship action when she captured the 32-gun Danish frigate (fregat) Friderichsværn. In the engagement the British suffered only one man wounded; the Danes lost 12 men while 20 were wounded, some mortally. Lloyd's List described the Danish vessel as a "Danish Frigate, of 32 Guns, late Guardship", and reported that the action, near Elsinor, had been short. The Royal Navy took Frederiksværn into service as HMS Frederickscoarn (1807).

On 23 August, the British HMS Prometheus (1807) fired Congreve rockets from her decks against a Danish gunboat flotilla, but the attack had little effect. The British were instead more successful on 11 September when HMS Carrier (1805) brought to the British Admiralty the despatches from Admiral Thomas McNamara Russell announcing the capitulation of the small island of Heligoland to the British. Heligoland later also became a centre for smuggling and for espionage against Napoleon. In the East Indies, troops from the 14th Regiment of Foot landed from HMS Russell (1764) on the Coromandel Coast on 13 February 1808 and took over the Danish possessions at Tranquebar. On 14 March, the 14-gun HMS Childers (1778) and the Danish 20-gun sloop HDMS Lougen engaged in an inconclusive single-ship action. Childers lost two men killed and nine wounded before she could escape and return to Leith. On 22 March the British ships of the line HMS Nassau and HMS Stately (1784) destroyed the last Danish ship of the line, HDMS Prinds Christian Frederik, commanded by Captain C.W. Jessen, in the Battle of Zealand Point. Nassau was herself a former Danish warship. Nassau had one man killed and 16 men wounded, while Stately had four killed and 27 wounded. The Danes lost 55 men killed and 88 wounded.

Boats from HMS Daphne (1806) and HMS Tartarus (1806), supported by the brig HMS Forward (1805), drove ashore a Dano-Norwegian convoy at Flodstrand, near The Skaw on 22 April. The convoy was taking supplies to Norway as a result of supply shortages that had occurred there after the British had begun their naval blockade between Denmark and Norway in 1807. The British went in under heavy fire from the shore and a castle there and brought out five brigs, three galliots, a schooner, and a sloop (totalling some 870 tons burthen), for the loss of five men wounded. The British frigate HMS Tartar (1801) also approached Bergen under Dutch colours on 15 May in order to attack the Dutch frigate Guelderland, which had been undergoing repairs there. Unfortunately for the British the Guelderland had already sailed, so during the night the British sent in boats in an attempt to capture Danish shipping in the harbour. When the boats came under heavy fire, Tartar came in to cover them, only to come under attack by the schooner Odin and five gunboats. During the Battle of Alvøen Tartar's captain and another seaman were killed and twelve men were wounded before Tartar was able to make her escape.

The hired armed cutter Swan found herself in action off the island of Bornholm with a Danish 8-gun cutter-rigged vessel on 24 May. Swan had been carrying despatches when she had spotted the Danish vessel and lured her out. The engagement ended with the Danish vessel exploding, while Swan suffered no casualties despite coming under fire both from the Danish vessel and batteries on Bornholm. The fire from the batteries and the sighting of more Danish vessels forced Swan to withdraw after the battle without being able to make efforts to rescue survivors.

On 4 June four Danish gunboats attacked HMS Tickler (1804) and captured her after a four-hour fight. Tickler had lost her captain and 14 other men killed, and 22 other officers and men killed and wounded out of her crew of 50 men; the Danes had one man wounded. The Danes would later use Tickler as a cadet training ship.

The Danes were also victorious on 19 June, when the brig HMS Seagull (1805) pursued and caught up with the Danish brig HDMS Lougen, which was armed with eighteen short 18-pounder guns and two long 6-pounder guns. About 20 minutes into the engagement six Danish gunboats arrived from behind some rocks and in two divisions of three each took up positions on Seagull's quarter and fired on her with their 24-pounder guns while Lougen fired on her larboard bow. Within half an hour the Danish fire had badly damaged Seagull's rigging and dismounted five of her guns. Eventually Seagull struck, having lost eight men killed and 20 wounded, including her captain, R.B. Cathcart. Seagull sank soon after the Danes captured her, drowning several of her captors who were aboard. The Danes later recovered Seagull and added her to their navy.

The Danes also captured HMS Tigress (1804). Sixteen Danish gunboats captured her off Langeland in the Great Belt on 2 August. In the engagement Tigress lost two men killed and eight wounded.

Immobilized by a dead calm, HMS Africa (1781), under Captain John Barrett, barely survived an attack by 25 Danish gunboats and seven armed launches under the command of Commodore J.C. Krieger in an action in the Øresund on 20 October 1808. Africa lost nine men killed and 51 wounded; had night not descended the Danes might well have captured her. The British, however, were less fortunate on 5 December, when the bomb vessel HMS Proselyte (1804) was wrecked on Anholt Reef while caught in the ice. The reason that the vessel sank in that area was because the Danes had closed the lighthouse on the island of Anholt, in the Kattegat early during the war, and the Admiralty had ordered her to station herself off the island on 9 November to carry a light for the safety of passing convoys. All her crew was however saved.

1809–10
The British 64-gun third rate HMS Standard (1782), under Captain Aiskew Paffard Hollis, and the 18-pounder 36-gun frigate HMS Owen Glendower (1808) captured the island of Anholt on 18 May 1809. A party of seamen and marines under the command of Captain William Selby of Owen Glendower, with the assistance of Captain Edward Nicolls of the Standard's marines, landed. The Danish garrison of 170 men put up a sharp, but ineffectual resistance that killed one British marine and wounded two before the garrison then surrendered and the British took immediate possession of the island. The principal objective of the mission was to restore the lighthouse on Anholt to its pre-war state to facilitate the movement of British men of war and merchantmen navigating the dangerous seas there.

On 9 June a Danish and Norwegian flotilla of twenty-one gunboats and seven mortar boats attacked a British convoy of 70 merchant ships off the island of Saltholm in Øresund Strait near Copenhagen. The Dano-Norwegian flotilla was able to capture 12 or 13 merchant vessels, plus HMS Turbulent (1805), one of the escorts. The Danes also captured HMS Allart during the Battle of Saltholm on 10 August. During the battle HMS Allart, a former Danish Navy brig, chased Lougen and Seagull into Fredriksvern only to find herself pursued by 15 Danish gunboats, arrayed in three divisions. After a three-hour chase the gunboats closed with Allart and an engagement began. After two hours Allart struck, having had her rigging shot away and having lost one man killed and three wounded.

On 12 August, Commander John Willoughby Marshall and HMS Lynx (1794) were in the company of the gun-brig HMS Monkey (1801), Lieutenant Thomas Fitzgerald, when they discovered three Danish luggers off the Danish coast. The water was too shallow for Lynx, so Marshall sent Monkey and boats from Lynx in to cut them out. The largest of the luggers, which had four guns and four howitzers, opened fire on Monkey before all three luggers ran ashore once Monkey and the launch's 18-pounder carronade returned fire. The British refloated the luggers and brought them out the next day, having taken no casualties. In their haste to escape the vessel, the Danes failed to fire the fuse on a cask of gunpowder they had left by the fireplace on the largest lugger. Marshall thought the Danes' behaviour in leaving the explosive device disgraceful.

The Danish-Norwegian navy managed to capture another British vessel on 2 September, when a Danish gunboat flotilla from Fladstrand, North Jutland, under the command of Lieutenant Nicolai H. Tuxen, captured the gun-brig HMS Minx (1801). The engagement cost Minx two dead and nine wounded. The British Royal Navy had stationed her off the Skaw Reef to show a warning light. HMS Sheldrake (1806) reported the loss to the Admiralty.

Early in 1810, the Danes ceased sending provisioning ships to Norway because of British naval activity in Øresund and withdrew the naval officers that were so involved to Zealand. Meanwhile, there were difficulties in transporting grain from Vordingborg, in the south of Denmark, past Møn to Copenhagen. This was overcome by using gunboats to convoy the merchant vessels, as the gunboats were much more maneuverable in the shallow coastal waters, and restricting the cargo vessels to those which could pass inside of Møn. Larger seagoing ships which would have to go outside, i.e. east of Møn, were too liable to be caught by the British. These actions, together with a good form of coastal signalling, resulted in a steady supply of grain to the Danish capital.

On 13 April 1810, four Danish gunboats, under the command of First Lieutenant Peter Nicolay Skibsted, captured the British gunboat HMS Grinder (1809) off the Djursland peninsula near Grenå. Grinder was armed with one 24-pounder gun and one 24-pounder carronade. She was under the command of Master's Mate Thomas Hester and had over-wintered at Anholt. Of her crew of 34 men, two were killed and two wounded in the action.

On 23 May, seven Danish gunboats engaged the Cruizer-class brig-sloop HMS Raleigh (1806), HMS Alban (1806), and His Majesty's hired armed cutter HIRED ARMED CUTTER Princess of Wales, off the Skaw. The engagement cost the Danes the loss of one gunboat, which blew up, and heavy damage to the rest.

The Battle of Silda was fought on 23 July near the Norwegian island of Silda. The British frigates HMS Belvidera (1809) and HMS Nemesis (1780) attacked the pilot's station on the island and defeated the three gun schooners Odin,  Tor and  Balder and the gun barge  Cort Adeler, which were stationed there.

On 12 September, six Danish gunboats captured a becalmed Alban after a four-hour battle during which she lost her captain and one man killed and three men wounded. The Danes then took her into service as The Alban.

1811–14
Danish gunboats manned by nearly 1,000 men, including infantry forces attempted to recapture Anholt on 27 February 1811. The Battle of Anholt resulted in a Danish withdrawal to Jutland, with heavy losses. The Danes did however emerge victorious on 23 April when Swan encountered three Danish gunboats in Sunningesund. A shot from one of the gunboats damaged Swan and resulted in the wetting of her powder magazine, forcing her surrender. The Danes boarded her but were able to retrieve little before Swan sank off Uddevalla, on the Swedish coast north of Gothenburg. The fight cost Swan two men killed, as the same battle apparently also resulted in the damaging of the hired armed cutter Hero. On 11 May, HMS Rifleman (1809) recaptured Alban from the Danes. The capture occurred after a 12-hour chase near Shetland. At the time of her capture Alban was armed with 12 guns and had a crew of 58 men, all under the command of a lieutenant of the Danish navy. She was three days out of Farsund in Norway and had taken no prizes.

On 31 July 1811, HMS Brev Drageren (1807) and HMS Algerine (1810) were cruising together in Long Sound, Norway, when they encountered and engaged three Danish brigs: the 20-gun Langeland, the 18-gun Lügum, and the 16-gun Kiel. Outnumbered and outgunned, the British vessels took flight. The next day Brev Drageren unsuccessfully re-engaged first one and then two of the brigs. In the inconclusive engagement each British vessel sustained one man killed, and Brev Drageren also had three wounded. On 17 August HMS Manly (1804) sailed from Sheerness with a convoy for the Baltic. On 2 September, while she was cruising off Arendal on the Norwegian coast in the company of HMS Chanticleer (1808), three Danish 18-gun-brigs (Alsen, Lolland, and Samsø) engaged them. Lolland engaged Manly while the other two chased Chanticleer but she maintained a course away from the action and made good her escape. In the engagement with Lolland, Manly had her spars and rigging cut to pieces. With only six guns left, and having lost one man killed and three wounded, Manly was forced to strike.

The last major fight between Danish-Norwegian and British warships took place on 6 July 1812 during the Battle of Lyngør, when a small squadron of British warships met a small squadron of Norwegian warships at Lyngør on the Norwegian coast. The British withdrew after destroying the Norwegian frigate Najaden. On 2 August the same year, boats of HMS Horatio (1807), which was under the command of Captain Lord George Stuart, captured two Danish vessels, under the command of Lieutenant Hans Buderhof, and their prize, an American vessel of about 400 tons burthen (bm). The two Danish vessels were schooner No. 114 (of six 6-pounders and 30 men), and cutter No. 97 (of four 6-pounders and 22 men). In the action the British lost nine men killed and 16 wounded, of whom two died of their wounds; the Danes lost ten men killed and 13 wounded.

Peace
As a result of the Swedish invasion of Holstein in December 1813 during the War of the Sixth Coalition, Denmark-Norway was forced to seek peace, and the Treaty of Kiel ended the war on 14 January 1814. Denmark-Norway had to cede Heligoland to Britain and the Kingdom of Norway (except for Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Islands) to the King of Sweden, while Denmark did get back the island of Anholt and was compensated for the loss of Norway with the Duchy of Saxe-Lauenburg. However, this treaty was not accepted by the Norwegian people, who refused to be simply a bargaining chip, and a war between Norway and Sweden broke out on 26 July.

title: Gunboat War


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pecos

Pecos was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete

Pecos
Vanity. Not notable bar. Promotional. --Edcolins 22:30, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Absolute advertising and nothing else. A bar.  See the reviews.  Signed by author.  Geogre 01:35, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Excellent candidate for deletion. Though I could use a pint of Kingfisher myself. Katefan0 03:47, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Cdc 04:41, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * del. Mikkalai 09:03, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ad. utcursch 12:55, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * Isn't there a travel wiki? Seems like the place for this. Otherwise delete.Sabine's Sunbird 22:25, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, advert. Tempshill 00:23, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete as is. Please replace with disambig page for places like Pecos, Texas and Pecos River. R ADICAL B ENDER  ★  01:07, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Ditto everything RadicalBender said. DreamGuy 10:56, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Please, let's not list every bar as well as every high school and every street. Gsd97jks 23:08, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pecos


text: User talk:Boly38

title: User talk:Boly38