Enedina Arellano Félix de Toledo (born April 12, 1961) is a Mexican drug lord who, alongside her brothers, founded the Tijuana Cartel and played a role as a logistical accountant for the criminal organization.

Throughout most of the 1990s, the Tijuana Cartel was headed by her six brothers, while Enedina advised and helped them in money laundering and financial administration. But after the fall of a financial mastermind in the cartel in the year 2000, Enedina took up the position. She first started working behind the scenes as a money launderer for the Tijuana Cartel but then ended up leading the cartel after the arrest of her brother Eduardo Arellano Félix in 2008.

Since most of her brothers are either incarcerated or deceased, Enedina has managed the financial aspect of the organization, overseen alliances, and taken the lead of the Tijuana Cartel alongside Luis Fernando (before his capture in 2014). Her historical contacts with drug suppliers in Colombia managed to keep the organization afloat.

Early life
Enedina Arellano Félix was born in Mazatlán, Sinaloa, on April 12, 1961, in a family of drug traffickers. In 1977, when she was sixteen, Enedina reportedly harbored a dream of becoming the Mazatlán Carnival Queen but abandoned it after her two brothers, Ramón and Benjamín, were wanted by the United States and the Mexican government. During that time, her older brothers were working for Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo, who would eventually give them the drug corridor in Tijuana, Baja California.

Criminal career
Enedina enrolled at a private university in Guadalajara, Jalisco, graduating with a bachelor's degree in accounting. By the mid 1980s, Enedina was working with the family business, but was never considered by the authorities as a visible head in the Tijuana Cartel. Nonetheless, after the fall of the former cartel's financial brain, Jesús Labra Avilés, alias El Chuy, in the year 2000, Enedina began to directly manage the money laundering activities of the criminal organization.

Family members in the Tijuana Cartel
Enedina is the sister of former cartel leaders Benjamín, Carlos, Eduardo, Francisco Javier, Francisco Rafael and Ramón. Luis Fernando Sánchez Arellano captured in 2014, the son of Alicia,  Enedina's husband, Luis Raúl Toledo Carrejo, was accused by the United States Department of Treasury in the year 2005 for having links with the Tijuana Cartel. Alicia Arellano Félix, the sister of Enedina, is currently a leader in the Tijuana Cartel.

Cartel workings
Since the apprehension of Benjamín in 2002, the Mexican government was able to severely undermine the Tijuana Cartel but failed to destroy it. Enedina has been a leader in the organization since 2003. After the arrest of Eduardo in 2008, Enedina finally became the leader of the Tijuana clan along with her nephew.

Enedina has helped contribute a more "business-like vision" instead of the old and violent practices of her brothers, who previously led the Tijuana Cartel before they were arrested or killed. She forged alliances with other criminal organizations, as opposed to her brothers, who often resorted to violence. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Mexican media identify Enedina as the first and one of the few women to lead a criminal organization in the world other than Sandra Avila Beltran in Mexico, activities historically reserved for men.

Enedina has several aliases, including: La Jefa, La Madrina, and La Narcomami. The authorities in the United States and Mexico consider Enedina the "financial brains" of the Tijuana Cartel.

Kingpin Act
In June 2000, the United States Department of the Treasury sanctioned Enedina under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act.

In media
Enedina Arellano Félix is portrayed in Narcos: Mexico by Mayra Hermosillo.

See also
Griselda Blanco
Illegal drug trade
Mexican Drug War

References

Bibliography

1961 births
People from Mazatlán
20th-century Mexican businesswomen
20th-century Mexican businesspeople
Mexican crime bosses
Mexican female gangsters
Tijuana Cartel traffickers
Living people
People sanctioned under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act
21st-century Mexican businesswomen
21st-century Mexican businesspeople

Enedina Arellano Félix


The Chobanids or the Chupanids () were descendants of a Mongol family of the Suldus clan that came to prominence in 14th century Persia. At first serving under the Ilkhans, they took de facto control of the territory after the fall of the Ilkhanate. The Chobanids ruled over Azerbaijan (where they were based), Arrān, parts of Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, and west central Persia, while the Jalayirids took control in Baghdad.

Amir Chupan and his sons

During the early 14th century, Amir Chupan served under three successive Ilkhans, beginning with Ghazan Mahmud. A military commander of note, Chupan quickly gained a degree of influence over the Ilkhans and married several members of the line of Hulagu Khan. His power fueled resentment among the nobility, who conspired against him in 1319 but failed. The Ilkhan Abu Sa'id, however, also disliked Chupan's influence and successfully eliminated him from court. He fled in 1327 to Herat, where the Kartids executed him. Several of his sons fled to the Golden Horde or the Mamluks of Egypt while others were killed.

Baghdad Khatun

The Chobanids were not completely wiped out from Persia. A daughter of Chupan's, Baghdad Katun, had caught the eye of Abu Sa'id. During Chupan's lifetime, she had been married to Hasan Buzurg, the future founder of the Jalayirids, but after Chupan fled Hasan Buzurg divorced her, and she married Abu Sa'id. She quickly gained influence over the Ilkhan and exercised the wide powers given to her. She was alleged (but never proven) to have been involved in any conspiracies against the Ilkhan, but was believed by some to have caused Abu Sa'id's death in 1335. Abu Sa'id's successor Arpa Ke'un executed her.

Role during the fall of the Ilkhanate, and Hasan-i Kuchak

Arpa Ke'un's position proved to be weak; when a granddaughter of Chupan, Delsad Katun, fled to Diyarbakr, it caused the governor of that region to attack and defeat the Ilkhan. During the strife that occurred in the next few years, individual members of the Chobanids sided with various factions, such as Arpa or Hasan Buzurg. The latter ended up marrying Delsad Katun, who provided for the heirs to the Jalayirid position.

While the Jalayirids were consolidating their position in Iraq, however, other Chobanid were also busy. Hasan Kucek, a grandson of Chupan, rallied much of the Chobanid family to his side and defeated the Jalayirids in 1338, paving the way for a Chobanid realm in the area around Tabriz. That same year, he elevated Sati Beg, sister of Abu Sa'id and widow of Chupan, to the Ilkhanid throne. To keep Sati Beg in check, he forced her to marry his puppet Suleiman Khan. Hasan Kucek continued to fight the Jalayirids (a fight which was further complicated by the incursions made by Togha Temur of Khurasan), but family infighting proved to be the most difficult challenge. Several members defected to the Jalayirids; in any case, Hasan Kucek was forced to deal with them up until his death in 1343.

Malek Ashraf and the Chobanid decline

A power struggle quickly emerged after Hasan Kucek's death. During the dispute, Hasan Kucek's brother Malek Asraf gained the upper hand and eliminated his uncles. By the end of 1344, Malek Asraf had gained effective control of the Chobanid lands. Like his predecessor, Malek Asraf used puppet monarchs from behind which he ruled. During his reign, the Chobanid attempted to capture Baghdad from the Jalayirids in 1347 but failed miserably. He also failed to seize Fars from the Injuids in 1350. As his reign wore on, Malek Asraf became more and more cruel, prompting widespread dissatisfaction amongst his subjects. When forces of the Golden Horde overran the Chobanid realm and captured Tabriz in 1357, few lamented the loss of power by the Chupanids. Malek Asraf was executed, and his family brought north to the Golden Horde. Malek Asraf's offspring were eventually killed off in Persia, bringing a definitive end to the Chobanids as a power.

Family tree

See also

Dai Chopan
Dey Chopan District
Chopan - a town in India

References

Sources

Further reading

1357 disestablishments in Asia
States and territories established in 1335
Former countries in the Middle East
Medieval Azerbaijan
Mongol dynasties

Chobanids


Elgeyo escarpment  is a fault-scarp caused by post-Miocene faulting. Miocene beds are still visible. The escarpment is part of the western wall of the Great Rift Valley.

The northwest part of Kenya has three main geographic zones running in parallel  north to south. There is the highland plateau, which rises gradually  to 3,350 meters above sea level, on the Cherangani Hills. In the intermediate zone is the Elgeyo Escarpment which rapidly gives way to the lower Kerio Valley.  The yearly rainfall in the escarpment area ranges between 100–140 cm.

References

Escarpments of Kenya
Great Rift Valley

Elgeyo Escarpment


Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), is a 5–4 U.S. Supreme Court case in which Massachusetts, along with eleven other states and several cities of the United States, represented by James Milkey, brought suit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) represented by Gregory G. Garre to force the federal agency to regulate the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) that pollute the environment and contribute to climate change.

Under the Clean Air Act, Massachusetts argued that the Environmental Protection Agency was required by law to regulate "any air pollutant" which could "endanger public health or welfare." The EPA denied the petition, claiming that federal law does not authorize the agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Background
Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7521(a)(1), requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to set emission standards for "any air pollutant" from motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines "which in his judgment cause[s], or contribute[s] to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare."

In 2003, the EPA made two determinations:
 The EPA lacked authority under the CAA to regulate carbon dioxide and other GHGs for climate change purposes.
 Even if the EPA did have such authority, it would decline to set GHG emissions standards for vehicles.

Parties

The petitioners were the states of California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, the cities of New York, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C., the territory of American Samoa, and the organizations Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Advocates, Environmental Defense, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, International Center for Technology Assessment, National Environmental Trust, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists, and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. James Milkey of the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office represented the petitioners in oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Respondents were the Environmental Protection Agency, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, National Automobile Dealers Association, Engine Manufacturers Association, Truck Manufacturers Association,  Litigation Group, Utility Air Regulatory Group, and the states of Michigan, Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, and Utah.

Appeals court

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decided on September 13, 2005, to uphold the decision of the EPA. However, appellate judges were sharply at odds in their reasoning for reaching the majority conclusion.

The lower court was sharply divided on whether the petitioners had "standing", a personalized injury creating a right to claim remedial action from the government through the courts (i.e., rather than to seek favorable action by pressing for supportive legislation). One of the three judges found no standing while a second of the three postponed a factual decision for any later trial. Although it had granted certiorari, the Supreme Court could have revisited the question of standing to dodge a difficult decision and dismiss the case for lack of standing. However, once certiorari has been granted, such a reversal is rare.

Granting of certiorari

On June 26, 2006, the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari.

Issues
 Whether the petitioners had standing.
 Whether carbon dioxide is an "air pollutant" causing "air pollution" as defined by the CAA. If carbon dioxide is not an air pollutant causing air pollution, then the EPA has no authority under the CAA to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. If the CAA governs carbon dioxide, the EPA Administrator could decide not to regulate carbon dioxide, but only consistent with the terms of the CAA.
 Whether the EPA Administrator may decline to issue emission standards for motor vehicles on the basis of policy considerations not enumerated in section 202(a)(1).

Arguments
The Petitioners argued that the definition in the CAA is so broad that carbon dioxide must be counted as an air pollutant. They claimed that the question was controlled by the words of the statute, so that factual debate was immaterial. Furthermore, the Petitioners filed substantial scientific evidence that the toxicity of carbon dioxide results from high concentrations and that causation of global warming transforms the gas into a pollutant.

If the statutory definition of the CAA includes carbon dioxide, then the Federal courts would have no discretion to reach any other conclusion. The definition contained in the statute, not evidence or opinion, would control the outcome.

The law's definition of air pollutant contains "any air pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any physical, chemical, biological, radioactive ... substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air, ..."  Both sides agreed that  and greenhouse gases are part of the second half.  Petitioners argued that the use of 'including' automatically means greenhouse gases are part of the first group, 'any air pollution agent' which was not separately defined.  EPA argued that this is wrong because 'Any American automobile, including trucks and minivans, ... ' does not mean that foreign trucks are American automobiles.

The Petitioners asserted that the EPA Administrator's decision not to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases violated the terms of the CAA. Thus, the Supreme Court also considered whether the reasons given by the EPA were valid reasons within the CAA statute for the EPA Administrator to decide not to regulate carbon dioxide. The EPA argued that the Administrator has the discretion under the CAA to decide not to regulate.

The EPA Administrator argued that other actions are already being taken to increase fuel efficiency of automobiles and that (as of 2003) scientific investigation was still under way.  Thus, the EPA Administrator decided not to regulate "at this time".

This case has become notable because of a widespread perception that the truth or falsehood of theories of global warming will be decided by the courts. While this could eventually occur in later proceedings, the questions before the U.S. Supreme Court here were much more narrow, and legal in nature.

One of several reasons that the EPA Administrator declined to regulate carbon dioxide is uncertainty about whether man-made carbon dioxide emissions cause global warming. This has attracted great attention to the case. However, the Supreme Court only decided whether the Administrator's reason is a valid reason within the CAA. The Supreme Court did not explicitly decide if it is true or untrue that man-made carbon dioxide emissions cause global warming, although high-profile comments by Justices during oral argument are likely to affect the public debate.

The Petitioners argued that scientific uncertainty is not a valid basis for the EPA Administrator to decline to regulate.  The question before the Supreme Court "was not whether the causation is true or untrue," but whether it is a valid reason for the Administrator to not regulate a pollutant.

Opinion of the Court
First, the petitioners were found to have standing. Justice Stevens reasoned that the states had a particularly strong interest in the standing analysis. The majority cited Justice Holmes' opinion in Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co. (1907):

"The case has been argued largely as if it were one between two private parties; but it is not. The very elements that would be relied upon in a suit between fellow-citizens as a ground for equitable relief are wanting here. The State owns very little of the territory alleged to be affected, and the damage to it capable of estimate in money, possibly, at least, is small. This is a suit by a State for an injury to it in its capacity of quasi-sovereign. In that capacity the State has an interest independent of and behind the titles of its citizens, in all the earth and air within its domain. It has the last word as to whether its mountains shall be stripped of their forests and its inhabitants shall breathe pure air."

Second, the Court held that the CAA gives the EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. The CAA provides:

"The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to time revise) in accordance with the provisions of this section, standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare."

The CAA defines "air pollutant" as "any air pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any physical, chemical, biological, radioactive ... substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air". The majority opinion commented that "greenhouse gases fit well within the CAA's capacious definition of air pollutant."

Finally, the Court remanded the case to the EPA, requiring the agency to review its contention that it has discretion in regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.  The Court found the current rationale for not regulating to be inadequate and required the agency to articulate a reasonable basis in order to avoid regulation.

Roberts' dissent
Chief Justice Roberts authored a dissenting opinion. First, the dissent condemns the majority's "special solicitude" conferred to Massachusetts as having no basis in Supreme Court cases dealing with standing. The dissent compares the majority opinion to "the previous high-water mark of diluted standing requirements," United States v. SCRAP (1973). Roberts then argues that the alleged injury (i.e., Massachusetts' loss of land because of rising sea levels) is too speculative and without adequate scientific support. The dissent also finds that even if there is a possibility that the state may lose some land because of global warming, the effect of obliging the EPA to enforce automobile emissions is hypothetical at best. According to Roberts, there is not a traceable causal connection between the EPA's refusal to enforce emission standards and petitioners' injuries. Finally, the dissent maintains that redressability of the injuries is even more problematic given that countries such as India and China are responsible for the majority of the greenhouse-gas emissions. The Chief Justice concludes by accusing the majority of lending the Court as a convenient forum for policy debate and of transgressing the limited role afforded to the Supreme Court by the U.S. Constitution.

Scalia's dissent
First, Justice Scalia found that the Court has no jurisdiction to decide the case because petitioners lack standing, which would have ended the inquiry. However, since the majority saw fit to find standing, his dissent continued.

The main question is, "Does anything require the Administrator to make a 'judgment' whenever a petition for rulemaking is filed?" Justice Scalia sees the Court's answer to this unequivocally as yes, but with no authority to back it. He backs this assertion by explaining that the "statute says nothing at all about the reasons for which the Administrator may defer making a judgment"—the permissible reasons for deciding not to grapple with the issue at the present time. Scalia saw no basis in law for the Court's imposed limitation.

In response to the Court's statement that, "If the scientific uncertainty is so profound that it precludes EPA from making a reasoned judgment as to whether greenhouse gases contribute to global warming, EPA must say so," Scalia responded that EPA has done precisely that, in the form of the National Research Council panel that researched climate-change science.

Remand
On remand, EPA found that six greenhouse gases "in the atmosphere may reasonably be anticipated both to endanger public health and to endanger public welfare." On February 16, 2010, the states of Alabama, Texas, and Virginia and several other parties sought judicial review of EPA's determination in the U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. On June 26, 2012, the court issued an opinion which dismissed the challenges to the EPA's endangerment finding and the related GHG regulations. The three-judge panel unanimously upheld the EPA's central finding that GHG such as carbon dioxide endanger public health and were likely responsible for the global warming experienced over the past half century.

A later Supreme Court case in 2022, West Virginia v. EPA, found that the EPA had taken undue authority within the major questions doctrine on regulation of emissions and promoting alternate forms of energy for power plants in the Clean Power Plan. In response, part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 includes language to address the Court's decision in West Virginia, and codified the findings in Massachusetts in that carbon dioxide among several other greenhouse gases were within the EPA's remit to regulate as pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

See also
 Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency (2014)
 Effects of global warming
 Global warming
 Global warming controversy and Climate change denial
 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - Fourth Assessment Report
 Lists of United States Supreme Court cases
 List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 549
 Regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act
 Standing (law)

Notes

Further reading
 Suing the Tobacco and Lead Pigment Industries: Government Litigation as Public Health Prescription by Donald G. Gifford. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2010.
 The Rule of Five: Making Climate History at the Supreme Court by Richard J. Lazarus, Harvard University Press, 2020.

External links

 CRS Report (public domain—may be copied verbatim into article with citations)
 New York Times article of April 2, 2007 relating to decision
 [ Transcript of Oral Arguments]
 Bloomberg report of 6/26/2006

Climate change policy in the United States
United States environmental case law
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Constitution Article Three case law
United States Supreme Court cases
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
2007 in the environment
2007 in United States case law
v. Environmental Protection Agency
Climate change litigation

Massachusetts v. EPA


A Jodhpuri suit  or Bandhgala (lit. closed neck) suit, is a formal suit from India. It originated in the Jodhpur State, and was popularized during mid 19th - mid 20th century in India. It consists of a coat and trousers, sometimes accompanied by a vest. It brings together a shorter cut with hand-embroidery escorted  by the waistcoat. It is suitable for occasions such as weddings and formal gatherings.

The material can be silk or any other suiting material. Normally, the material is lined at the collar and at the buttons with embroidery. This can be plain, jacquard or jamewari material. Normally, the trousers match that of the coat. There is also a trend to wear contrasting trousers to match the coat colour.

History
Angarkha is considered the predecessor of the Bandhgala. An angrakha was a traditional court outfit in ancient and classical India that a person could wrap comfortably around himself, offering flexible ease with the knots and ties. Bandhgala emerged as a shortened version of the Achkan. Bandhgala quickly became a popular formal and semi-formal uniform across Rajasthan and eventually throughout India. Designer Wendell Rodricks observes that formal wear such as the Bandhgala are evolutions of a costume legacy that is 6,000 years old. Although, unlike the indigenous european style men's skirts, eastern style pants are worn with it.

See also
 Nehru jacket

References

Rajasthani clothing
Jodhpur
Indian clothing
Folk costumes
Jackets
Suits (clothing)

Jodhpuri


John Norquay (May 8, 1841 – July 5, 1889) was the fifth premier of Manitoba from 1878 to 1887. He was born near St. Andrews in what was then the Red River Colony, making him the first Premier of Manitoba to have been born in the region. Norquay was also the first Indigenous Premier of a Canadian province, since Louis Riel was not a Premier of Manitoba.

Early life
Norquay came from an Anglo-Métis ethnic background (the contemporary term used was "Half-Breed", which was not then considered offensive and is even an important constitutional designation, given the rights afforded to them in the Manitoba Act). He was educated by Church of England Bishop David Anderson and worked as a teacher, farmer, and fur trader during the 1860s.

Early political career
Norquay played only a minor role in the events of Louis Riel's Red River Rebellion (1869–70), but decided to enter public life shortly thereafter. He was acclaimed for the riding of High Bluff in Manitoba's first general election (December 27, 1870), and soon became a leader in the "mixed-blood" community.

In 1871, Manitoba's parliamentary opposition agitated for the removal of Provincial Secretary Alfred Boyd. When this opposition became impossible to ignore, he resigned. In withdrawing from office, Boyd suggested that someone from Manitoba's "mixed-blood" community be called to cabinet in his place (Manitoba's government was balanced along ethnic, religious and linguistic lines in this period, but British "mixed-bloods" had been left out of the first cabinet). Norquay was accordingly called to serve as Minister of Public Works and Minister of Agriculture.

While still serving as a provincial Cabinet Minister, Norquay attempted to enter federal politics in the general election of 1872. Running in the riding of Marquette, he was defeated by Robert Cunningham, an ally of Louis Riel. He would not run for federal office again.

Manitoba's first government (which did not have a Premier) lost a vote of confidence in July 1874, after Norquay's electoral redistribution bill met with opposition from both English and French MLAs. Norquay did not serve in the cabinet of Marc-Amable Girard (1874), nor was he called into the first cabinet of Robert A. Davis (1874–1878). In Manitoba's second election (December 30, 1874), he was a leader of the opposition; running in St. Andrew's North, he defeated former Girard minister Edward Henry Hay by 67 votes to 34.

The 1874 election resulted in a hung parliament, with Davis's support coming primarily from French-speaking constituencies. Davis knew that he would be unable to govern effectively without strong British representation, and invited Norquay to join his cabinet in March 1875.  Norquay accepted, and brought with him enough parliamentary support to ensure the ministry's continued survival.

Premiership
Norquay was a prominent minister in the Davis administration, and it was not a surprise when he was called to replace Davis as Premier in November 1878 (he also took the office of Provincial Treasurer). He sought a new mandate on December 18, 1878, and was re-elected with the support of 14-17 MLAs (out of 24). Norquay faced a tough challenge in his own constituency from one John Allan, but won by 62 votes to 54.

In early 1879, Norquay faced a more serious challenge after losing the support of Joseph Royal. Royal was an ultramontane Catholic and the undisputed leader of the Francophone parliamentary bloc. Like Norquay, he had been a prominent minister in the Davis administration (in fact, he had often referred it as the "Davis-Royal" administration). Now, he sought to forge a new parliamentary alliance with opposition leader Thomas Scott, an Orangeman and a leading figure among the new Ontario settlers (not to be confused with the man of the same name executed by Louis Riel) in 1870. Royal and Scott wanted to bring formal party politics to Manitoba; both were Conservatives, and Scott believed that he was best positioned to become the leader of a provincial Conservative Party. Norquay was also affiliated with the federal Conservatives, but relied on support from local Liberals to keep his government intact. Accordingly, he wanted to preserve the province's "non-partisan" character.

Norquay countered the Royal-Scott "coup attempt" by forging a new parliamentary alliance with all of the province's British MLAs (except Scott), and expelling his French Canadian ministers from cabinet. This reconstituted ministry then sought to pass a variety of bills which were detrimental to Francophone interests.

Norquay did not follow through on the worst of his ministry's threats. He recognized the need for conciliation, and soon convinced former Premier Marc-Amable Girard to rejoin cabinet as Provincial Secretary. Norquay would later argue that his "anti-French" ministry was an unpleasant political necessity. The Norquay-Girard government won a new mandate on December 16, 1879, with Norquay re-elected by acclamation in the riding of St. Andrew's.

Railway development
In terms of the legislation it promoted, Norquay's ministry may be described as interventionist but not particularly ambitious. Like many other Canadian politicians in the 19th century, Norquay devoted much of his attention to railway development. As a result, he was compelled to walk a thin line between local and federal alliances; eventually, his inability to successfully navigate this course led to his downfall.

During the 1880s, many entrepreneurs in Manitoba tried to develop local rail lines to reduce transportation costs. Although popular with farmers and merchants, these plans were opposed by the Canadian Pacific Railway, which had a guaranteed 20-year monopoly on "western travel" through the area (some historians have argued that the "local service lines" were a financial impossibility to begin with). Although Norquay initially gave tepid support to these local efforts, the opposition accused him (probably correctly) of having made a secret deal with the CPR and Canadian Prime Minister John A. Macdonald to ensure that they never came to fruition. When Macdonald disallowed Norquay's half-hearted railway legislation in 1882, a coherent local opposition began to form around Thomas Greenway, whose "Provincial Rights" group would soon become the Manitoba Liberal Party.

These developments brought Norquay into a reluctant alliance with the province's Conservative establishment (which had opposed him only three years earlier). While Norquay still claimed to be non-partisan, his MLAs were recognized as the de facto Conservative Party within Manitoba. In Manitoba's fifth election (January 23, 1883), "Liberal-Conservative" and "Conservative" candidates won 19 of 30 seats between them; all were regarded as Norquay supporters, set against a Liberal opposition. Formal party government would not arrive until 1888, but a functional two-party system was already in place.

Although John A. Macdonald was sometimes disparaging of Norquay in private correspondence, he supported the Norquay ministry for most of its nine years in power. Macdonald took Norquay's side in a boundary dispute with Ontario, and personally visited Manitoba in 1886 to ensure Norquay's re-election on December 9 of that year: Norquay's Conservatives won about 21 seats, compared to 14 for Greenway's Liberals with the popular vote almost evenly split. Without Macdonald's visit, Norquay probably would have been defeated.

Norquay's alliance with Macdonald ended in the summer of 1887, when the provincial government reversed its previous policy and actively promoted the Red River Valley Railway, a local line meant to link Winnipeg with the Canada–US border. Macdonald and the CPR would both play leading roles in Norquay's downfall later in the year.

Defeat
In September 1887, the Norquay government was accused of using trust funds for Métis children as general revenue.  Norquay himself faced extreme pressure to resign, particularly after a tour of eastern cities for railway loans ended without success. His ministry's fate was sealed when Macdonald disallowed the transfer of CPR land to Manitoba, after Norquay's government had already paid $256,000 to the company in compensation. Norquay was abandoned by his ministers, and resigned on December 23, 1887. His successor, David H. Harrison, unsuccessfully tried to keep Norquay's governing alliance together for another month; after this, Greenway was called upon to form a new ministry.

Greenway's Liberals won a landslide victory on July 11, 1888. Norquay was narrowly re-elected in Kildonan, defeating Liberal Duncan McArthur by 305 votes to 303. He once again became leader of the opposition, but with a much reduced political base: he was now opposed by John A. Macdonald, distrusted by other Manitoba Conservatives, lacking in popular support, and suffering personal financial hardship. He died on July 5, 1889, without having attained a reversal in his fortunes.

Legacy
Despite the tragedy of his last years, Norquay was generally successful in developing Manitoba during his time in office. Between his first election in 1870 and his resignation in 1887, the population of Manitoba had grown tenfold; as Premier, Norquay was responsible for expanding government services accordingly.

In addition to his political career, John Norquay was also a prominent lay member of the Church of England in Manitoba. Beginning in 1875, he was regularly elected as a representative to the synod of the diocese of Rupert's Land.

It may be added that Norquay's career was relatively free of racial prejudice. He was the victim of some racial slurs (Legislative Councilor Donald Gunn once referred to him as "Greasy John"), but his longevity in office suggests that Manitobans were willing to accept an aboriginal Premier, despite the tensions caused by Louis Riel's rebellions.

In 1904, Mount Norquay in Banff National Park was named after him. Norquay attempted to climb the mountain in 1887 or 1888 but contrary to some reports, did not reach the summit. Poor health and route difficulties presented by the mountain were the likely reasons for not reaching the top.

External links

Biography at the Canadian Dictionary of Biography Online

1841 births
1889 deaths
Canadian Anglicans
Premiers of Manitoba
Métis politicians
Canadian people of English descent
Persons of National Historic Significance (Canada)
Members of the Executive Council of Manitoba
Finance ministers of Manitoba
Canadian Métis people

John Norquay


The Museum of Fine Arts Bern (German: Kunstmuseum Bern), established in 1879 in Bern, is the museum of fine arts of the de facto capital of Switzerland.

Its holdings run from the Middle Ages to the present. It houses works by Paul Klee, Pablo Picasso, Edmond Jean de Pury, Ferdinand Hodler, Méret Oppenheim, Ricco Wassmer and Adolf Wölfli. The collection consists of over 3,000 paintings and sculptures as well as 48,000 drawings, prints, photographs, videos and films.

In May 2014, the museum was named sole heir in the will of Cornelius Gurlitt, the German collector associated with the 2012 Munich artworks discovery. The authorities had found over 1,400 artworks, many of them suspected to be stolen from European Jews by the Nazis, in Gurlitt's homes in Munich and Salzburg. The museum was given six months to decide whether it would accept the bequest and its terms. The most important provision required that the museum conduct research into the provenance of the paintings and make restitution where needed to the heirs of the original owners. The museum director, Matthias Frehner, pledged that it would do so if it accepted the bequest. The German government quietly urged the museum to accept the collection in order to provide a neutral place where research into its history could continue. (There was concern that if the collection were dispersed among Gurlitt's distant relatives, there would be no guarantee that they would conduct the research properly.) Determining whether or not to accept required much deliberation on the part of the museum board, work by its legal team, and significant fundraising from Swiss donors, so that the museum would not be reliant on German funding that could taint the neutrality of the provenance research. In November 2014 the board voted to accept the collection.

In August 2018, an episode of Fake or Fortune featured the director of the museum Dr. Nina Zimmer asking the team to investigate what appears to be the sole British piece of art in the Gurlitt collection.

References

External links

 Official Museum of Fine Arts Bern website — info on history + collections.
 Credit-suisse.com: Interview with the Director of Bern Museum of Fine Arts

Art museums and galleries in Switzerland
Museums in Bern
Art museums established in 1879
1879 establishments in Switzerland
Neoclassical architecture in Switzerland

Museum of Fine Arts Bern


Frank Clifford Whitmore (October 1, 1887 – June 24, 1947), nicknamed "Rocky", was a prominent chemist who submitted significant evidence for the existence of carbocation mechanisms in organic chemistry.

He was born in 1887 in the town of North Attleborough, Massachusetts.

Academic career

Whitmore earned both his bachelor's degree (1911) and Ph.D. (1914) from Harvard University, where his Ph.D. advisor was Charles Loring Jackson. Several prominent contemporaries of Whitmore at Harvard were E.K. Bolton, Farrington Daniels, Roger Adams, James B. Sumner and James Bryant Conant. After graduating from Harvard he became a professor and taught at the University of Minnesota, Northwestern University, and The Pennsylvania State University.

At Penn State, Whitmore served as the Dean of the School of Chemistry and Physics from 1929–1947, succeeding his former Harvard colleague Gerald Wendt in the position. He hired several prominent scientists as faculty members, including Russell Marker and Merrell Fenske.

Whitmore was a member of several academic societies, namely the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (1939), the American Philosophical Society (1943), and the United States National Academy of Sciences (1946).

Research and publications

While at the Pennsylvania State University Whitmore did his research on carbocations. The field of organic chemistry was struggling to explain how a compound with a double bonded carbon, an alkene, reacts with a halide compound. Whitmore worked on the findings of others and generalized the concept of molecules with a positively charged carbon atom, a carbocation, as an intermediate step in the addition of a halogen element.

Whitmore would go on to publish his findings in a paper titled "The Common Basis of Intramolecular Rearrangements." They were controversial at the time because many chemists, notably well known chemist Roger Adams, a critic of Whitmore's, believed that a molecule like a carbocation would never be stable enough to exist. Nevertheless, Whitmore published these findings which today are accepted as the most logical explanation for the reactions in question.

In 1937, Whitmore published Organic Chemistry, the first advanced organic chemistry textbook to be written in English.  Whitmore worked on a revision of the book for several years, though the work was interrupted by World War II.  The second edition of Organic Chemistry was published posthumously in 1951.

American Chemical Society

Whitmore was very active in the American Chemical Society (ACS), holding several different offices in the organization throughout his life.  In 1938, he served as president of ACS.  During his presidency, he visited 72 of 104 local ACS sections.  In 1937, Whitmore won the prized William H. Nichols Medal Award, given by the New York section of ACS.  In 1945, Whitmore was awarded the Willard Gibbs Medal (considered to be the highest chemical honor in America) by the Chicago section of ACS.

Whitmore rarely slept.  It was not rare for him work twenty hours a day, and take one-hour naps when he was tired.

Personal life
Whitmore married Marion Gertrude Mason (who graduated from Radcliffe College with a degree in chemistry in 1912) in 1914.  The Whitmores had four children: Frank Jr., Mason, Harry, and Marion, Jr ("Marionette").

Whitmore died in 1947 at the age of 59 as the result of a heart ailment.

Penn State's Whitmore Laboratory is named after Whitmore.

Notes

References
 Yarmey, Kristen. Labors and Legacies: The Chemists of Penn State, 1855-1947.  University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Department of Chemistry, 2005.
 C. S. Marvel. Biographical memoir: Frank Clifford Whitmore. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1954. [Full text, including a photograph]
 M. R. Fenske. "Obituary notice: Frank Clifford Whitmore. Studies in the Detoxication of Catalyst Poisom. Part VI. p. 1090-1. Full text

1887 births
1947 deaths
Organic chemists
20th-century American chemists
Pennsylvania State University faculty
Harvard University alumni
Members of the American Philosophical Society

Frank C. Whitmore


Geedka nolosha (1988), or The Tree of Life, is a short film from Somali writer and director Abdulkadir Ahmed Said. In 1988, it won the Prize of the City of Torino in the Best Film - International Short Film Competition category at the Torino International Festival of Young Cinema.

Plot
A man leaves his home and walks through a village, past various animals, as well as people going about their daily tasks, as stops to greet some of them. Eventually he comes to a forest where he selects a tree and starts to chop it. The sound of the axe echoes through the surrounding area, startling villagers and animals. After great effort, he successfully fells the tree and the sound of it crashing is particularly upsetting to those around. A great wind rushes through the forest and the man wraps himself in his sheet to protect himself. When he removes the sheet, he finds himself alone in the middle of a desert that he does not recognize. As he runs up and down the dunes looking for an escape, the film is intercut with scenes of trees being cut through simple and mechanized forestry, as well as scenes of famine and death. After crying out in despair and rolling down a dune, he comes across a small plant growing in the sand. He surrounds it with his body and sheet to protect it.

Other
Geedka nolosha was shot on 16 mm film.

Notes

References

External links

1988 films
1988 short films
Somalian short films
Somali-language films
Somalian drama films

Geedka nolosha


The electric chair is a specialized device employed for carrying out capital punishment through the process of electrocution. During its use, the individual sentenced to death is securely strapped to a specifically designed wooden chair and electrocuted via strategically positioned electrodes affixed to the head and leg. This method of execution was conceptualized by Alfred P. Southwick, a dentist based in Buffalo, New York, in 1881. Over the following decade, this execution technique was developed further, aiming to provide a more humane alternative to the conventional forms of execution, particularly hanging. The electric chair was first utilized in 1890 and subsequently became known as a symbol of this method of execution.

The electric chair has been closely associated with the history of capital punishment in the United States and has also been utilized for a significant period in the Philippines. Originally, it was believed that death resulted from cerebral damage, but in 1899, it was scientifically established that the primary cause of death is ventricular fibrillation followed by cardiac arrest.

Despite its historical significance in the context of the American death penalty, the use of the electric chair has diminished over time due to the increasing adoption of lethal injection as a more humane method of execution. While certain states still retain electrocution as a legally authorized method of execution, it is often employed as a secondary option, contingent upon the preference of the condemned individual. Exceptions to this include states like Tennessee and South Carolina, where electrocution can be used without prisoner input if the necessary drugs for lethal injection are unavailable.

As of 2021, electrocution remains a selectable method of execution in states such as Alabama and Florida, where inmates may opt for lethal injection instead. In contrast, Kentucky has retired the electric chair, except for individuals sentenced to capital punishment before March 31, 1998, who can choose electrocution. Inmates who do not select this method, as well as those convicted after the aforementioned date, are executed through lethal injection. Kentucky has also authorized the use of electrocution as a potential alternative if lethal injection is deemed unconstitutional by a court.

The electric chair continues to be an accepted alternative method of execution in states like Arkansas, Mississippi, and Oklahoma, to be utilized if other forms of execution are ruled unconstitutional at the time of the execution.

A significant turning point occurred on February 8, 2008, when the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled that execution by electric chair constituted a form of "cruel and unusual punishment" under the state's constitution. This decision marked the cessation of electric chair executions in Nebraska, making it the last state to rely solely on this method of execution.

Historical Background

Invention
In the late 1870s to early 1880s, the spread of arc lighting, a type of outdoor street lighting that required high voltages in the range of 3000–6000 volts, was followed by one story after another in newspapers about how the high voltages used were killing people, usually unwary linemen; it was a strange new phenomenon that seemed to instantaneously strike a victim dead without leaving a mark. One of these accidents, in Buffalo, New York, on August 7, 1881, led to the inception of the electric chair. That evening a drunken dock worker named George Lemuel Smith, looking for the thrill of a tingling sensation he had noticed when grabbing the guard rail in a Brush Electric Company arc lighting power house, managed to sneak his way back into the plant at night and grabbed the brush and ground of a large electric dynamo. He died instantly. The coroner who investigated the case brought it up that year at a local Buffalo scientific society. Another member attending that lecture, Alfred P. Southwick, a dentist who had a technical background, thought some application could be found for the curious phenomenon.

Southwick joined physician George E. Fell and the head of the Buffalo ASPCA in a series of experiments electrocuting hundreds of stray dogs. They ran trials with the dog in water and out of water, and varied the electrode type and placement until they came up with a repeatable method to euthanize animals using electricity. Southwick went on in the early 1880s to advocate that this method be used as a more humane replacement for hanging in capital cases, coming to national attention when he published his ideas in scientific journals in 1882 and 1883. He worked out calculations based on the dog experiments, trying to develop a scaled-up method that would work on humans. Early on in his designs he adopted a modified version of the dental chair as a way to restrain the condemned, a device that from then on would be called the electric chair.

The Gerry Commission
After a series of botched hangings in the United States, there was mounting criticism of that form of capital punishment and the death penalty in general. In 1886, newly elected New York State governor David B. Hill set up a three-member death penalty commission, which was chaired by the human rights advocate and reformer Elbridge Thomas Gerry and included New York lawyer and politician Matthew Hale and Southwick, to investigate a more humane means of execution.

The commission members surveyed the history of execution and sent out a fact-finding questionnaire to government officials, lawyers, and medical experts all around the state asking for their opinion. A slight majority of respondents recommended hanging over electrocution, with a few instead recommending the abolition of capital punishment. The commission also contacted electrical experts, including Thomson-Houston Electric Company's Elihu Thomson (who recommended high voltage AC connected to the head and the spine) and the inventor Thomas Edison (who also recommended AC, as well as using a Westinghouse generator). They also attended electrocutions of dogs by George Fell who had worked with Southwick in the early 1880s experiments. Fell was conducting further experiments, electrocuting anesthetized vivisected dogs trying to discern exactly how electricity killed a subject.

In 1888, the Commission recommended electrocution using Southwick's electric chair idea with metal conductors attached to the condemned person's head and feet. They further recommended that executions be handled by the state instead of the individual counties with three electric chairs set up at Auburn, Clinton, and Sing Sing prisons. A bill following these recommendations passed the legislature and was signed by Governor Hill on June 4, 1888, set to go into effect on January 1, 1889.

The New York Medico-Legal Commission
The bill itself contained no details on the type or amount of electricity that should be used and the New York Medico-Legal Society, an informal society composed of doctors and lawyers, was given the task of determining these factors. In September 1888, a committee was formed and recommended 3000 volts, although the type of electricity, direct current (DC) or alternating current (AC), was not determined, and since tests up to that point had been done on animals smaller than a human (dogs), some members were unsure that the lethality of AC had been conclusively proven.

At this point the state's efforts to design the electric chair became intermixed with what has come to be known as the war of the currents, a competition between Thomas Edison's direct current power system and George Westinghouse's alternating current based system. The two companies had been competing commercially since 1886 and a series of events had turned it into an all-out media war in 1888. The committee head, neurologist Frederick Peterson, enlisted the services of Harold P. Brown as a consultant. Brown had been on his own crusade against alternating current after the shoddy installation of pole-mounted AC arc lighting lines in New York City had caused several deaths in early 1888. Peterson had been an assistant at Brown's July 1888 public electrocution of dogs with AC at Columbia College, an attempt by Brown to prove AC was more deadly than DC. Technical assistance in these demonstrations was provided by Thomas Edison's West Orange laboratory and there grew to be some form of collusion between Edison Electric and Brown. Back at West Orange on December 5, 1888, Brown set up an experiment with members of the press, members of the Medico-Legal Society including Elbridge Gerry who was also chairman of the death penalty commission, and Thomas Edison looking on. Brown used alternating current for all of his tests on animals larger than a human, including 4 calves and a lame horse, all dispatched with 750 volts of AC. Based on these results the Medico-Legal Society recommended the use of 1000–1500 volts of alternating current for executions and newspapers noted the AC used was half the voltage used in the power lines over the streets of American cities. Westinghouse criticized these tests as a skewed self-serving demonstration designed to be a direct attack on alternating current and accused Brown of being in the employ of Edison.

At the request of death penalty commission chairman Gerry, Medico-Legal Society members; electrotherapy expert Alphonse David Rockwell, Carlos Frederick MacDonald, and Columbia College professor Louis H. Laudy, were given the task of working out the details of electrode placement. They again turned to Brown to supply the technical assistance. Brown asked Edison Electric Light to supply equipment for the tests and treasurer Francis S. Hastings (who seemed to be one of the primary movers at the company trying to portray Westinghouse as a peddler of death dealing AC current) tried to obtain a Westinghouse AC generator for the test but found none could be acquired. They ended up using Edison's West Orange laboratory for the animal tests they conducted in mid-March 1889. Superintendent of Prisons Austin E. Lathrop asked Brown to design the chair, but Brown turned down the offer. George Fell drew up the final designs for a simple oak chair and went against the Medico-Legal Society recommendations, changing the position of the electrodes to the head and the middle of the back. Brown did take on the job of finding the generators needed to power the chair. He managed to surreptitiously acquire three Westinghouse AC generators that were being decommissioned with the help of Edison and Westinghouse's chief AC rival, the Thomson-Houston Electric Company, a move that made sure that Westinghouse's equipment would be associated with the first execution. The electric chair was built by Edwin F. Davis, the first "state electrician" (executioner) for the State of New York.

First execution

The first person in line to die under New York's new electrocution law was Joseph Chapleau, convicted for beating his neighbor to death with a sled stake, but his sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. The next person scheduled to be executed was William Kemmler, convicted of murdering his wife with a hatchet. An appeal on Kemmler's behalf was made to the New York Court of Appeals on the grounds that use of electricity as a means of execution constituted a "cruel and unusual punishment" and was thus contrary to the constitutions of the United States and the state of New York. On December 30, 1889, the writ of habeas corpus sworn out on Kemmler's behalf was denied by the court, with Judge Dwight writing in a lengthy ruling:

We have no doubt that if the Legislature of this State should undertake to proscribe for any offense against its laws the punishment of burning at the stake, breaking at the wheel, etc., it would be the duty of the courts to pronounce upon such attempt the condemnation of the Constitution. The question now to be answered is whether the legislative act here assailed is subject to the same condemnation. Certainly, it is not so on its face, for, although the mode of death described is conceded to be unusual, there is no common knowledge or consent that it is cruel; it is a question of fact whether an electric current of sufficient intensity and skillfully applied will produce death without unnecessary suffering.

Kemmler was executed in New York's Auburn Prison on August 6, 1890; the "state electrician" was Edwin  Davis. The first 17-second passage of 1,000 volts AC through Kemmler caused unconsciousness, but failed to stop his heart and breathing. The attending physicians, Edward Charles Spitzka and Carlos Frederick MacDonald, came forward to examine Kemmler. After confirming Kemmler was still alive, Spitzka reportedly called out, "Have the current turned on again, quick, no delay." The generator needed time to re-charge, however. In the second attempt, Kemmler received a 2,000 volt AC shock. Blood vessels under the skin ruptured and bled, and the areas around the electrodes singed; some witnesses reported that his body caught fire. The entire execution took about eight minutes. George Westinghouse later commented that, "They would have done better using an axe", and the New York Times ran the headline: "Far worse than hanging".

Adoption
The electric chair was adopted by Ohio (1897), Massachusetts (1900), New Jersey (1906) and Virginia (1908), and soon became the prevalent method of execution in the United States, replacing hanging. Twenty six US States, the District of Columbia, the Federal government, and the US Military either had death by electrocution on the books or actively executed criminals using the method.  The electric chair remained the most prominent execution method until the mid-1980s when lethal injection became widely accepted for conducting judicial executions.

Other countries appear to have contemplated using the method, sometimes for special reasons. The Philippines also adopted the electric chair from 1926 to 1987.  A well-publicized triple execution took place there in May 1972, when Jaime Jose, Basilio Pineda and Edgardo Aquino were electrocuted for the 1967 abduction and gang-rape of the young actress Maggie de la Riva. The last electric chair execution in the Philippines was in 1976 and was later replaced with lethal injection when executions resumed in that country.

Key events in the United States

Martha M. Place became the first woman executed in the electric chair at Sing Sing Prison on March 20, 1899, for the murder of her 17-year-old stepdaughter, Ida Place.

Leon Czolgosz was executed in the electric chair at New York's Auburn Prison on October 29, 1901, for the assassination of then-President William McKinley.

The first photograph of an execution by electric chair was of housewife Ruth Snyder at Sing Sing on the evening of January 12, 1928, for the March 1927 murder of her husband. It was photographed for a front-page story on New York Daily News the following morning by news photographer Tom Howard who had smuggled a camera into the death chamber and photographed her in the electric chair as the current was turned on. It remains one of the best-known examples of photojournalism.

A record was set on July 13, 1928, when seven men were executed consecutively in the electric chair at the Kentucky State Penitentiary in Eddyville, Kentucky.

On June 16, 1944, an African-American teenager, 14-year-old George Stinney, became the youngest person ever executed in the electric chair when he was electrocuted at the Central Correctional Institution in Columbia, South Carolina. His conviction was overturned in 2014 after a circuit court judge vacated his sentence on the grounds that Stinney did not receive a fair trial. The judge determined that Stinney's legal counsel was inadequate, thus violating his rights under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

On May 25, 1979, John Spenkelink became the first person to be electrocuted after the Gregg v. Georgia decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1976. He was the first person to be executed in the United States in this manner since 1966.

The last person to be executed by electric chair without the choice of an alternative method was Lynda Lyon Block on May 10, 2002, in Alabama.

Process and mechanism

The condemned inmate's head and legs are shaved and they are seated in the chair. Their arms and legs are tightly strapped with leather belts, and a cap with saltwater-soaked sponge is strapped to the head, and electrodes are attached to the legs. The condemned person is typically hooded or blindfolded.

Various cycles (changes in voltage and duration) of alternating current are passed through the individual's body in order to cause lethal damage to the internal organs. The first, more powerful jolt (between 2000 and 2,500 volts) of electric current is intended to cause immediate unconsciousness, ventricular fibrillation, and eventual cardiac arrest. The second, less powerful jolt (500–1,500 volts) is intended to cause lethal damage to the vital organs.

In 1999, Allen Lee Davis was the last person executed in Florida's electric chair.  Up to 10 Amperes of electric current were applied for 38 seconds.

After the cycles are completed, a doctor checks the inmate for any signs of life. If none are present, the doctor reports and records the time of death, and prison officials will wait for the body to cool down before removing it to prepare for autopsy. If the inmate exhibits signs of life, the doctor notifies the warden, who usually will order another round of electric current or (rarely) postpone the execution such as with Willie Francis.

Controversies and criticisms

Possibility of consciousness and pain during execution
Critics of the electric chair dispute whether the first jolt of electricity reliably induces immediate unconsciousness as proponents often claim. Witness testimony, botched electrocutions (see Willie Francis and Allen Lee Davis), and post-mortem examinations suggest that execution by electric chair is often painful.

Botched executions
The electric chair has been criticized because of several instances in which the subjects were killed only after being subjected to multiple electric shocks. This led to a call for ending of the practice, as being a "cruel and unusual punishment". Trying to address such concerns, Nebraska introduced a new electrocution protocol in 2004, which called for the administration of a 15-second application of current at 2,450 volts; after a 15-minute wait, an official then checks for signs of life. In April 2007, new concerns raised regarding the 2004 protocol resulted in the ushering in of a different Nebraska protocol, calling for a 20-second application of current at 2,450 volts. Prior to the 2004 protocol change, an initial eight-second application of current at 2,450 volts was administered, followed by a one-second pause, then a 22-second application at 480 volts. After a 20-second break, the cycle was repeated three more times.

In 1946, the electric chair failed to kill Willie Francis, who reportedly shrieked, "Take it off! Let me breathe!", after the current was applied. It turned out that the portable electric chair had been improperly set up by an intoxicated prison guard and inmate. A case was brought before the U.S. Supreme Court (Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber), with lawyers for the condemned arguing that although Francis did not die, he had, in fact, been executed. The argument was rejected on the basis that re-execution did not violate the double jeopardy clause of the 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution, and Francis was returned to the electric chair and executed in 1947.

Florida saw three highly controversial botched electrocutions in the 1990s, starting with the 1990 execution of Jesse Tafero. His case generated significant controversy, as with the first administration of electricity, Tafero's face and head caught fire. Tafero's execution ultimately required three shocks over the course of seven minutes. The error was blamed on prison officials replacing Florida's old natural sea sponge with a kitchen sponge. The 1997 execution of Pedro Medina in Florida created controversy when flames burst from his head. An autopsy found that Medina had died instantly when the first surge of electricity had destroyed his brain and brain stem. A judge ruled that the incident arose from "unintentional human error" rather than any faults in the "apparatus, equipment, and electrical circuitry" of Florida's electric chair. In Florida, on July 8, 1999, Allen Lee Davis, convicted of murder, was executed in the Florida electric chair "Old Sparky". Davis' face was bloodied, and photographs were taken, which were later posted on the Internet. An investigation concluded that Davis had begun bleeding before the electricity was applied and that the chair had functioned as intended. Florida's Supreme Court ruled that the electric chair did not constitute "cruel and unusual punishment".

Decline and current status
The use of the electric chair has declined since the 1979 advent of lethal injection, which is now the default method in all U.S. jurisdictions that authorize capital punishment.

As of 2023, the only places that still reserve the electric chair as an option for execution are the U.S. states of Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Arkansas, Mississippi, and Oklahoma laws provide for its use should lethal injection ever be held to be unconstitutional. Inmates in the other states must select either it or lethal injection. In Kentucky, only inmates sentenced before a certain date can choose to be executed by electric chair. Electrocution is also authorized in Kentucky in case lethal injection is found unconstitutional by a court. Tennessee was among the states that provided inmates with a choice of the electric chair or lethal injection; in May 2014, however, the state passed a law allowing the use of the electric chair if lethal injection drugs were unavailable or made unconstitutional.

On February 15, 2008, the Nebraska Supreme Court declared execution by electrocution to be "cruel and unusual punishment" prohibited by the Nebraska Constitution.

The last judicial electrocution in the U.S. prior to Furman v. Georgia took place in Oklahoma in 1966. The electric chair was used quite frequently in post-Gregg v Georgia executions during the 1980s, but its use in the United States gradually declined in the 1990s due to the widespread adoption of lethal injection. A number of states still allow the condemned person to choose between electrocution and lethal injection, with the most recent U.S. electrocution, of Nicholas Todd Sutton, taking place in February 2020 in Tennessee.

In 2021, South Carolina's governor Henry McMaster passed a law forcing inmates to be executed by electrocution if lethal injection were not available. The law also mandated electrocution in the event that an inmate refused to select their execution method, between South Carolina's options of lethal injection, the electric chair, and a firing squad. In 2022, a judge in Richland County, South Carolina, declared that execution by firing squad and electrocution were both in violation of the South Carolina State Constitution, which bans methods that are "cruel, unusual, or corporal." The court, in their decision, stated that there was no evidence that electrocution could instantaneously or painlessly kill an inmate, writing that the idea of the electric chair inducing instant unconsciousness was based on "underlying assumptions upon which the electric chair is based, dating back to the 1800s, [that] have since been disproven." The decision also called electrocution "inconsistent with both the concepts of evolving standards of decency and the dignity of man," and stated, "Even if an inmate survived only fifteen or thirty seconds, he would suffer the experience of being burned alive – a punishment that has 'long been recognized as manifestly cruel and unusual.'" The ruling led to a permanent injunction being issued against both methods of execution, preventing the state from subjecting death row inmates to death by firing squad or electrocution.

See also

Nicknames of various electric chairs
 Gruesome Gertie
 Old Smokey
 Old Sparky
 Yellow Mama

State electricians
 New York State Electrician
 John Hulbert
 Robert G. Elliott
 Joseph Francel
 Dow Hover

References

External links

 "Kemmler's Death by Torture", New York Herald, August 7, 1890.
 Death Penalty Worldwide Academic research database on the laws, practice, and statistics of capital punishment for every death penalty country in the world.

Electric chairs
American inventions
Chairs
Execution equipment
Execution methods

Electric chair


Michael Marshall (September 13, 1944 – June 2, 2005) was a French American actor.

Early life and career
Marshall was born in Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, a hospital in Hollywood, on September 13, 1944. When his parents divorced, his father made sure that he received an American education.  He began studying law, but dreamed of becoming an actor. He later joined his mother in Paris. Marshall began to take drama classes from Raymond Griard and later directed his first film, Potato, in France under the direction of Robert Thomas, adapted from the play's eponymous Marcel Achard. He had already appeared in two films from overseas, the first was directed by his father, and the second by Vincente Minnelli. Gérard Oury, Marshall's step-father, offered him a role of a young Canadian airman in La Grande Vadrouille, as a doctor in Le Coup du parapluie. Marshall had a long, low-key career as a character actor in French cinema. On stage he starred in Croque-monsieur, Le Vallon, and Point de feu sans fumée. Marshall has also appeared in several television series.

Personal life and death
He was the only child of American actor-director William Marshall and French actress Michèle Morgan and was the stepson of Gérard Oury as well as half-brother to Tonie Marshall. Marshall fathered six children. He died in Caen, France, aged 60, survived by his mother.

Filmography

1961: The Phantom Planet (by William Marshall) - Lt. White
1963: The Courtship of Eddie's Father (by Vincente Minnelli) - Wedding guest (uncredited)
1964: Patate (by Robert Thomas) - Jean François de Baylac
1965: Déclic et...des claques (by Philippe Clair) - Vivi
1965: Les Deux orphelines (by Riccardo Freda) - Roger de Vaudray
1966: La Fille de la mer Morte (Fortuna) (by Menahem Golan) - Pierre
1966: Is Paris Burning? (by René Clément) - Membre F.F.I (uncredited)
1966: La Grande Vadrouille (by Gérard Oury) - Alan Mac Intosh
1967: Susanne, die Wirtin von der Lahn (by François Legrand / Franz Antel) - Anselmo, a student
1968: Death Rides Along, by Joseph Warren / Giuseppe Vari : Idaho Kent
1968: I'll Sell My Skin Dearly (Vendo cara la pelle) (by Ettore Maria Fizzarotti) - Shane
1969: Les Chemins de Katmandou (by André Cayatte) - Harold
1970: Hello-Goodbye (by Jean Negulesco) - Paul
1970: La liberté en croupe (by Édouard Molinaro) - uniquement assistant réalisateur (uncredited)
1973: Quelques messieurs trop tranquilles (by Georges Lautner) - Inspector
1973: Le Serpent (by Henri Verneuil) - (uncredited)
1973: The Day of the Jackal (by Fred Zinnemann) - Gendarme in Tulle (uncredited)
1973: Les Aventures de Rabbi Jacob (by Gérard Oury) - Rôle coupé au montage (uncredited)
1973: L'Histoire très bonne et très joyeuse de Colinot trousse-chemise (by Nina Companeez) - Le seigneur
1979: Lady Oscar (by Jacques Demy) - Nicolas de la Motte
1979: I love you, je t'aime (by George Roy Hill) - 1st Assistant Director
1979: Moonraker (by Lewis Gilbert) - Col. Scott
1979: The Hostage Tower (by Claudio Guzman) - U.S. Guard
1980: Le Coup du parapluie (by Gérard Oury) - Le docteur
1981: Une saison de paix à Paris – (Sezona mira u Parizu) (by Pregrad Golobovic)
1981: Téhéran 43, nid d'espions (by Alexandre Alov and Vladimir Naoumov) - First Terrorist
1982: La Morte Vivante (by Jean Rollin) - Greg
1983: Ça va pas être triste (by Pierre Sisser) - Le motard
1984: The Secret of the Selenites (by Jean Image) - Sirius (voice)
1984: French Lover (Until September) (by Richard Marquand) - Friend of Xavier
1985: Asterix Versus Caesar (by Paul and Gaëtan Brizzi) - (English version, voice)
1985: Maine-Océan (by Jacques Rozier) - L'Avocat 'au fond des bois'
1986: Je hais les acteurs (by Gérard Krawczyk) - J.P. Jones
1986: Asterix in Britain - (English version, voice)
1987: Club de rencontres (by Michel Lang) - Roland - l'amant d'Agnès
1987:  (by Franz Antel) - Eduard Hanslick
1987: Grand Larceny (by Jeannot Szwarc) - (uncredited)
1989: La Révolution française / Les années terribles (by Richard T. Heffron) - Un lieutenant (segment "Années Terribles, Les")
1990: Mister Frost (by Philippe Setbon) - Patrick Hollander
1991: S.A.S, l'œil de la veuve – (Eye of the widow) (by Andrew V. McLaglen) - Klaus
1994: Neuf mois (by Patrick Braoudé) - Arthur's father
2001: Fifi Martingale (by Jacques Rozier) - L'auteur
2004: L'Américain (by Patrick Timsit) - Le policier américain
2004: Les aventures extraordinaires de Michel Strogoff (by Bruno-René Huchez and Alexandre Huchez - Ivan Ogareff (voice)

French television
1972: Meurtre par la bande (TV) episode of the TV series Les Cinq Dernières Minutes, by Claude Loursais) - L'employé des Pompes funèbres
1973: L'Alphomega (by Lazare Iglesis)
1977: Little House on the Prairie, episode L'or ", le rôle du pasteur
1979: Les dames de la côte (by Nina Companeez)
1983: Les Enquêtes du commissaire Maigret (episode "La Tête d'un homme", by Louis Grospierre) - Le tzar Alexandre 1er
1987: Le Tiroir secret (6 episodes, by Édouard Molinaro, Nadine Trintignant, Michel Boisrond and Roger Gillioz) - Luc Jolivet
1987: Les Enquêtes du commissaire Maigret (épisode: Les Caves du Majestic ,by Maurice Frydland) - Oswald Clark / William Crosby
1991: La Grande Dune (by Bernard Stora) - Sammy
1996-1998: Les Vacances de l'amour (by Pat Le Guen-Ténot, Olivier Altman, Emmanuel Fonlladosa, reoccurring role of Capitaine Oliver) - Oliver
1997: Jamais deux sans toi...t (episode 131 de Dominique Masson: "Devine qui vient squatter") - Jean-Pierre
1997: Le grand Batre, réalisée par Laurent Carceles d'après le roman de Frédérique Hébrard, rôle de Teddy
2000: Avocats et Associés (épisode # 3.3: "Le bébé de la finale", by Denis Amar) - Dr. Meriot
2000: Commissaire Moulin (épisode "Une protection très rapprochée") - Machard

Theatre
 Croque-monsieur – directed by Jean-Pierre Grenier at the St. George Theatre
 Le Vallon – directed by Simone Benmussa at the Rennaud-Barrault Theatre
 Point de feu sans fumée – directed by Jean Paul Tribout at the Théâtre Édouard VII
 L'Homme au Parapluie – directed by Daniel Royan at the Theatre de saint Maur

References

External links

 Mike Marshall at Yahoo! Movies

1944 births
2005 deaths
French male film actors
American emigrants to France
Male actors from Hollywood, Los Angeles

Mike Marshall (actor)


St John the Baptist's Church is a redundant Anglican church in the village of Papworth St Agnes, Cambridgeshire, England.  It is recorded in the National Heritage List for England as a designated Grade II* listed building, and is under the care of the Friends of Friendless Churches.

Early history

A church was present on the site at the date of the Domesday Survey, and it was replaced by a further church in 1530.  By 1827 the chancel of this church had been demolished; at that time it consisted of a west tower and a nave in Perpendicular style.  It was almost completely rebuilt in the middle of the 19th century, the tower in 1848 and the rest of the church between 1852 and 1854.  The new church incorporated some items from the previous churches.  It was designed by the rector at that time, Rev J. H. Sperling.

Architecture

The church is constructed in alternating blocks of limestone and knapped flint fieldstone flushwork, forming a chequerboard pattern, and it has a tiled roof.  Its plan consists of a four-bay nave with a north porch, a two-bay chancel with a north vestry, and a west tower.  The bays are separated by five-stage buttresses.  The tower is in three stages, with similar buttresses at the angles; it has an embattled parapet with gargoyles at the corners.  All the windows are arched with three lights and tracery.  Both the porch and the vestry are gabled.  Items reused from former churches include a doorway dating from the 14th century, the tower arch of the 1530 church, and the gargoyles.

Recent history and present day

During the 20th century the condition of the church deteriorated and by the 1970s it was largely derelict.  It was declared redundant in 1976, deconsecrated, and a demolition order was granted.  However, in 1979 it was taken into the care of the charity the Friends of Friendless Churches.  The charity holds the freehold with effect from 5 December 1979. By the time it was taken over, tiles had been removed from the roofs, stained glass designed by William Wailes had been removed, and the font was in the churchyard.  The organ dating from about 1860, designed by George Holdich, had also been removed.  During the next few years money was raised for repair and restoration, and the Friends of Papworth St Agnes was founded.  One surviving panel of stained glass was moved to the Stained Glass Museum at Ely Cathedral.  As part of the restoration, modern lighting was installed, and a kitchen and toilets were added.  Activities in the church were resumed in 2006, the font was returned to the interior of the church, and the stained glass window was also returned.  The church is now used as a community centre, and services are occasionally held.

References

Grade II* listed churches in Cambridgeshire
Churches preserved by the Friends of Friendless Churches
Churches completed in 1854
19th-century Church of England church buildings
Gothic Revival church buildings in England
Gothic Revival architecture in Cambridgeshire
Church of England church buildings in Cambridgeshire

St John the Baptist's Church, Papworth St Agnes


[[Image:Giovanni Berchet.JPG|thumb|right|Giovanni Berchet.]]

Giovanni Berchet (; 23 December 1783 – 23 December 1851) was an Italian poet and patriot.  He wrote an influential manifesto on Italian Romanticism, Lettera semiseria di Grisostomo, which appeared in 1816, and contributed to Il Conciliatore, a reformist periodical.

Berchet was born in Milan.  He participated in various nationalist activities, including the revolutions that shook the Italian peninsula in 1821.  Thereafter, he lived in exile, primarily in Britain, until returning to Italy to take part in the revolutions of 1848.  His works include Il trovatore, Il romito del Cenisio, and, most famously, I profughi di Parga (1821).Lettera semiseria (Half-serious letter) presents the translations (written by Berchet) of two poems by Gottfried August Bürger as an example of a new kind of poetry, and expresses the author's thought about contents and language that can reach a new public: that is, no longer a public of academic readers, but the so-called "third class", i.e. the bourgeoisie, which is waiting for books that are interesting, full of real feelings, simple in language, without mythology and classic models. This text took an important part in the debate over Romanticism that developed in Italy (specially in Milan) in the second decade of the 19th century.

Giovanni was the grandfather of the historian Guglielmo Berchet.

Further reading
 Bellorini, Egidio (1930). Giovanni Berchet, 1783-1851. Torino, Milano: Paravia.
 Croce, Benedetto (1924). "Berchet." In: European Literature in the Nineteenth Century. London: Chapman & Hall, pp. 167–181.
 Derla, G. (1968). "Poetica e Ideologia di G. Berchet," Convivium, Vol. 36, pp. 293–308.
Garofalo, Piero (2011). "Giovanni Berchet and Early Italian Romanticism," Rivista di Studi Italiani, 29.2, pp. 107–130.
 Gotti, Ettore Li (1933). G. Berchet, la Letteratura e la Politica del Risorgimento Nazionale, 1783-1851.'' Firenze: La Nuova Italia.

External links

Italian poets
Italian male poets
1783 births
1851 deaths
19th-century Italian translators
19th-century Italian male writers

Giovanni Berchet


Lonnie Bradley Holley (born February 10, 1950), sometimes known as the Sand Man, is an American artist, art educator, and musician. He is best known for his assemblages and immersive environments made of found materials. In 1981, after he brought a few of his sandstone carvings to then-Birmingham Museum of Art director Richard Murray, the latter helped to promote his work. In addition to solo exhibitions at the Birmingham Museum of Art and the Halsey Institute of Contemporary Art at the College of Charleston, Holley has exhibited in group exhibitions with other Black artists from the American South at the Michael C. Carlos Museum and the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, the Studio Museum in Harlem, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Philadelphia Museum of Art, the Toledo Museum of Art, Pérez Art Museum Miami, NSU Museum of Art Fort Lauderdale, the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston, de Young Museum in San Francisco, National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., the Ikon Gallery in Birmingham, England, and the Royal Academy of Arts in London, among other places.

Holley's work is included in the representation of the Souls Grown Deep Foundation.

His albums are Just Before Music (2012), Keeping a Record of It (2013), MITH (2018), National Freedom (2020), Broken Mirror: A Selfie Reflection, a collaboration with Matthew E. White (2021), and Oh Me Oh My (2023).

Early life
Lonnie Holley was born on February 10, 1950, in Birmingham, Alabama during the Jim Crow era. From the age of five, Holley worked various jobs: picking up trash at a drive-in movie theatre, washing dishes, and cooking. He lived in a whiskey house, on the state fairgrounds, and in several foster homes. His early life was chaotic, and Holley was never afforded the pleasure of a real childhood. Born the seventh of 27 children, Holley claims to have been traded for a bottle of whiskey when he was four.

Before beginning his career, Holley spent time digging graves and picking cotton. He claims to have been pronounced brain-dead after being hit by a car. He became a father at 15 and now has 15 children. Holley also worked as a short-order cook at Disney World. He also did time at a notorious juvenile facility, the Alabama Industrial School for Negro Children in Mount Meigs.

Visual art career

Holley began his artistic life in 1979 by carving tombstones for his sister's two children, who died in a house fire. He used blocks of a soft sandstone-like byproduct of metal casting which he found discarded in piles by a foundry near his sister's house. Holley believes that divine intervention led him to the material and inspired his artwork. Inspired similarly, he made other carvings and assembled them in his yard along with various found objects. In 1981, Holley brought a few examples of his sandstone carvings to Birmingham Museum of Art director Richard Murray. The BMA displayed some of those pieces immediately, and Murray introduced him to the organizers of the 1981 exhibition "More Than Land and Sky: Art from Appalachia" at the Smithsonian American Art Museum in Washington, D.C. Soon Holley work was being acquired by other institutions, such as the American Folk Art Museum in New York and the High Museum of Art in Atlanta. His work has also been displayed at the White House.

Holley also became a popular guest at children's art events, bringing blocks of the foundry stone for children to carve. He gets special pleasure from sharing his experience of learning to love oneself through creative activity.

By the mid-1980s Holley work had diversified to include paintings and recycled found-object sculptures. His yard and adjacent abandoned lots near his home became an immersive art environment that was celebrated by visitors from the art world, but threatened by scrap-metal scavengers and eventually, by the expansion of the Birmingham International Airport.

Holley was included in the 1996 group exhibition "Souls Grown Deep: African-American Vernacular Art of the South," an exhibition of over 450 artworks by some 29 other contemporary artists, highlighting a significant artistic tradition that has risen in concert with the Civil Rights Movement. Held at Michael C. Carlos Museum at City Hall East in Atlanta, it was organized by the museum, the Atlanta Committee for the Olympic Games (ACOG) Cultural Olympiad, and the City of Atlanta Bureau of Cultural Affairs. Newsweek critic Malcolm Jones, Jr. in his review of the show wrote singled out Holley's work writing,

In late 1996 Holley was notified that his hilltop property near the airport would be condemned. He rejected the airport authority's offer to buy the property at the market rate of $14,000, knowing that his site-specific installation had personal and artistic value he demanded $250,000. The dispute went to probate court, and in 1997 a settlement was reached and the airport authority paid $165,700 to move Holley's family and work to a larger property in Harpersville, Alabama.

Holley's first major retrospective, Do We Think Too Much? I Don't Think We Can Ever Stop: Lonnie Holley, A Twenty-Five Year Survey, was organized by the Birmingham Museum of Art and traveled in 2003 to the Ikon Gallery in Birmingham, England. From May 2003 to May 2004, Holley created a "sprawling, sculptural environment" in the lower sculpture garden at the Birmingham Museum of Art as part of their "Perspectives" series of site-specific installations. The creation of the work was documented in the film The Sandman's Garden by Arthur Crenshaw and in photographs by Alice Faye "Sister" Love.

Holley's work was included in the traveling exhibition "Mary Lee Bendolph, Gee's Bend Quilts, and Beyond" which started at Museum of International Folk Art in Santa Fe in November 2007, and hit the Knoxville Museum of Art in 2008, the Loveland Museum & Gallery in Loveland, Colorado, the Missouri Historical Society in St. Louis in 2009, the Berman Museum of World History, in Anniston, Alabama, and concluded at the Flint Institute of Arts, in Flint, Michigan in April 2010.

His work was also included in the 2014 exhibition at the Studio Museum in Harlem, "When the Stars Begin to Fall: Imagination and the American South" which also featured the work of Kevin Beasley, Beverly Buchanan, Henry Ray Clark, Thornton Dial, Minnie Evans, Theaster Gates, Trenton Doyle Hancock, Bessie Harvey, David Hammons, Ralph Lemon, Kerry James Marshall, Rodney McMillian, John Outterbridge, Noah Purifoy, Marie "Big Mama" Roseman, Jacolby and Patricia Satterwhite, Xaviera Simmons, Georgia Speller, Henry Speller, Stacy Lynn Waddell, Kara Walker, Carrie Mae Weems, Geo Wyeth, and others. The exhibition travelled to NSU Museum of Art Fort Lauderdale the same year then the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston in 2015.

Holley installed sculptural work for the exhibition Groundstory: Tales From the Shade of the South, at Agnes Scott College of Decatur, Georgia, which ran at the Dalton Gallery (also in Decatur) from September 28 to November 17, 2012. In 2022, Holley was named a Fellow and received an unrestricted cash award from United States Artists (USA), a Chicago-based arts funding organization.

In 2015, the Halsey Institute of Contemporary Art at the College of Charleston presented Holley's first solo museum exhibition since 1994 featuring a residency, video, concert, and monographic catalogue entitled "Something to Take My Place: The Art of Lonnie Holley." The exhibition showcased some of Holley's assemblage works since the early 1990s. For the residency, he created works on site, and visited with school groups and College of Charleston classes.

Two years later, Holley's work was featured with 61 others in "Revelations: Art from the African American South" at the de Young Museum to mark the debut of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco major acquisition from the Souls Grown Deep Foundation in Atlanta of 62 works. Other artists represented include Dial, sculptors Ralph Griffin, Bessie Harvey, and Joe Minter, painters Joe Light and Mary T. Smith, and artists Ronald Lockett, Mose Tolliver,  and Purvis Young, and Gee's Bend quilt associates Jessie T. Pettway and Annie Mae Young. A writer for KQED described the show as a "breathtaking display of genius, grit and wit."

In 2018 his work was part of the exhibition, "History Refused to Die," at the Metropolitan Museum of Art with 30 paintings, sculptures, drawings, and quilts by self-taught contemporary Black artists from the American South. It marked the Souls Grown Deep Foundation's 2014 gift of works to the museum. The Wall Street Journal reviewer called it "a sharply focused, elegantly installed selection" and the reviewer from The Art Newspaper described the show as "a salve to see an exhibition as succinct, as purposeful, intelligently designed and filled with good art."

Other group exhibitions marking respective institutional acquisitions from the Atlanta-based foundation include "Souls Grown Deep: Artists of the African American South" at the Philadelphia Museum of Art in 2019, "What Carried Us Over: Gifts from the Gordon W. Bailey Collection" at the Pérez Art Museum Miami, "Living Legacies: Art of the African American South" at the Toledo Museum of Art in 2022, and "Called to Create: Black Artists of the American South" at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C.

Other exhibitions
 "Outliers and American Vanguard Art," National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., January 28, 2018 – May 13, 2018; High Museum of Art, Atlanta, June 24 – September 30, 2018; Los Angeles County Museum of Art, November 18, 2018 – March 18, 2019

 "We Will Walk – Art and Resistance in the American South" at Turner Contemporary, Kent, England, February 7, 2020 – September 6, 2020

 "Souls Grown Deep like the Rivers: Black Artists from the American South," Royal Academy of Arts, London, March 17, 2023 - June 18, 2023

Music career

Holley's professional music career began in 2006 when he made improvisational vocal recordings, at the urging of Matt Arnett (son of William Arnett), in an Alabama church using just a keyboard and a microphone.
In 2012, he released his debut album Just Before Music on the Dust-to-Digital label, followed by Keeping a Record of It the following year. In September 2018, he released his third album MITH on Jagjaguwar. Pitchfork gave it' a 7.9 out of 10 rating.

Pitchfork gave Holley's 2020 album National Freedom a 8.0 out of 10 rating.

In April 2021, Holley released a collaboration album with Matthew E. White titled Broken Mirror: A Selfie Reflection. Also in 2022, he has begun to record his fourth album, Oh Me Oh My, which was released on March 10, 2023 to critical acclaim: Pitchfork gave it a 8.5 out of 10 rating, and Paste included it on its list of the Top 10 albums of 2013, and the Washington Post interviewed Holley for it.

Discography
 Just Before Music (2012)
 Keeping a Record of It (2013)
 Live on the Modern World with DJ Trouble – April 2013
 MITH (2018)
 National Freedom (2020)
 Broken Mirror: A Selfie Reflection (2021) – with Matthew E. White
 Oh Me Oh My (2023)

References

Sources
 Dietz, Andrew (April 1, 2006) The Last Folk Hero: A True Story of Race and Art, Power and Profit. Atlanta: Ellis Lane Press.
 Reeves, Jay (February 8, 1997) "Acclaimed folk artist losing fight against FAA and urban sprawl." Associated Press.

External links
 At Souls Grown Deep website
 At Discogs
 Birmingham Museum of Art (August 13, 2004) exhibition announcement

American male sculptors
American installation artists
1950 births
Living people
Artists from Birmingham, Alabama
African-American sculptors
21st-century African-American artists
20th-century African-American artists
20th-century African-American musicians
Sculptors from Alabama
Musicians from Birmingham, Alabama
20th-century American sculptors
20th-century American male artists
21st-century American sculptors
21st-century American male artists
21st-century American male musicians
21st-century American musicians
Artists from Alabama
Outsider artists
Self-taught artists

Lonnie Holley