Elias James Corey (born July 12, 1928) is an American organic chemist. In 1990, he won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry "for his development of the theory and methodology of organic synthesis", specifically retrosynthetic analysis.  Regarded by many as one of the greatest living chemists, he has developed numerous synthetic reagents, methodologies and total syntheses and has advanced the science of organic synthesis considerably.

Biography
E.J. Corey (the surname was anglicized from Levantine Arabic Khoury, meaning priest) was born to Lebanese Greek Orthodox Christian immigrants Fatima (née Hasham) and Elias Corey in Methuen, Massachusetts,  north of Boston. His mother changed his name from William to "Elias" to honor his father, who died eighteen months after Corey's birth. His widowed mother, brother, two sisters, aunt and uncle all lived together in a spacious house, struggling through the Great Depression. As a young boy, Corey was independent and enjoyed sports such as baseball, football, and hiking. He attended a Catholic elementary school and Lawrence High School in Lawrence, Massachusetts.

At the age of 16 Corey entered MIT, where he earned both a bachelor's degree in 1948 and a Ph.D. under Professor John C. Sheehan in 1951. Upon entering MIT, Corey's only experience with science was in mathematics, and he began his college career pursuing a degree in engineering. After his first chemistry class in his sophomore year he began rethinking his long-term career plans and graduated with a bachelor's degree in chemistry. Immediately thereafter, at the invitation of Professor John C. Sheehan, Corey remained at MIT for his Ph.D. After his graduate career he was offered an appointment at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, where he became a full professor of chemistry in 1956 at the age of 27. He was initiated as a member of the Zeta chapter of Alpha Chi Sigma at the University of Illinois in 1952. In 1959, he moved to Harvard University, where he is currently an emeritus professor of organic chemistry with an active Corey Group research program. He chose to work in organic chemistry because of "its intrinsic beauty and its great relevance to human health". He has also been an advisor to Pfizer for more than 50 years.

Among numerous honors, Corey was awarded the National Medal of Science in 1988, the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1990, and the American Chemical Society's greatest honor, the Priestley Medal, in 2004.

Major contributions

Reagents
Corey has developed several new synthetic reagents: PCC (pyridinium chlorochromate), also referred to as the Corey-Suggs reagent, is widely used for the oxidation of alcohols to corresponding ketones and aldehydes.  PCC has several advantages over other commercial oxidants.  An air-stable yellow solid, it is only slightly hygroscopic. Unlike other oxidizing agents, PCC requires only about 1.5 equivalents  to complete a single oxidation (scheme 1).

In the reaction, the alcohol nucleophilically displaces chlorine from the electropositive chromium(VI) metal. The chloride anion then acts as a base to afford the aldehyde product and chromium(IV).

The slightly acidic character of PCC makes it useful for cyclization reactions with alcohols and alkenes (Scheme 2).

The initial oxidation yields the corresponding aldehyde, which can then undergo a Prins reaction with the neighboring alkene. After elimination and further oxidation, the product is a cyclic ketone. Conversely, powdered sodium acetate co-reagent inhibits reaction after formation of the aldehyde.

PCC's oxidatory robustness has also rendered it useful in the realm of total synthesis (Scheme 3). This example illustrates that PCC is capable of performing a Dauben oxidative rearrangement with tertiary alcohols through a [3,3]-sigmatropic rearrangement.
t-Butyldimethylsilyl ether (TBS), triisopropylsilyl ether (TIPS), and methoxyethoxymethyl (MEM) are popular alcohol protecting groups. The development of these protecting groups allowed the synthesis of several natural products whose functional groups could not withstand standard chemical transformations. Although the synthetic community attempts to minimize the use of protecting groups, it is still rare that a published natural-product synthesis omits them entirely.

Since 1972 the TBS group has become the most popular silicon protecting group (Scheme 4).  TBS is stable to chromatography and labile enough to cleave under basic and acidic conditions. More importantly, TBS ethers are stable to such carbon nucleophiles as Grignard reagents and enolates.

CSA selectively removes a primary TBS ether in the presence of TIPS and tertiary TBS ethers. Other TBS deprotection methods include acids (also Lewis acids), and fluorides.

TIPS protecting groups provide increased selectivity of primary over secondary and tertiary alcohol protection. Their ethers are more stable under acidic and basic conditions than TBS ethers, but less labile for deprotection. The most common cleavage reagents employ the same conditions as TBS ether, but longer reaction times.

Usually TBAF severs TBS ethers, but the hindered TBS ether above survives primary TIPS removal (scheme 5).

The MEM protecting group was first described by Corey in 1976. This protecting group is similar in reactivity and stability to other alkoxy methyl ethers under acidic conditions. Acidic conditions usually accomplish cleavage of MEM protecting groups, but coordination with metal halides greatly enhances lability  (scheme 6).
1,3-Dithianes are a temporary modification of a carbonyl group that reverses their reactivity in displacement and addition reactions. Dithianation introduced umpolung chemistry, now a key concept in organic synthesis.

The formations of dithianes can be accomplished with a Lewis acid (scheme 7) or directly from carbonyl compounds.

The pKa of dithianes is approximately 30, allowing deprotonation with an alkyl lithium reagent, typically n-butyllithium.

The reaction between dithianes and aldehydes is now known as the Corey-Seebach reaction. The dithiane, once deprotonated, serves as an acyl anion, attacking incoming electrophiles. Dithiane deprotection, usually with HgO, constructs a ketone product.
Corey also commenced detailed studies on cationic polyolefin cyclizations utilized in enzymatic production of cholesterol from simpler plant terpenes. Corey established the details of the remarkable cyclization process by first studying the biological synthesis of sterols from squalene.

Methodology
Several reactions developed in Corey's lab have become commonplace in modern synthetic organic chemistry.  At least 302 methods have been developed in the Corey group since 1950. Several reactions have been named after him: Corey-Itsuno reduction, also known as the Corey-Bakshi-Shibata reduction, is an enantioselective reduction of ketones to alcohols through an oxazaborolidine catalyst, with various boranes as the stoichiometric reductant.

The Corey group first demonstrated the catalyst's synthesis using borane and the chiral amino acid proline (scheme 9).Corey, E.J.; Kürti, L. Enantioselective Chemical Synthesis; Direct Book Publishing: Dallas, 2010

Later, Corey demonstrated that substituted boranes were easier to prepare and much more stable.

The reduction mechanism begins with the oxazoborolidine, only slightly basic at nitrogen, coordinating to a borane reductant (scheme 10). Poor donation from the nitrogen to the boron leaves the Lewis acidity mostly intact, allowing coordination to the ketone substrate. The complexation of the substrate occurs from the most accessible lone pair of the oxygen, restricting rotation around the B-O bond due to the sterically neighboring phenyl group.

Migration of the hydride from borane to the electrophilic ketone center occurs via a 6-membered ring transition state, leading to a four-membered ring intermediate, ultimately providing the chiral product and regeneration of the catalyst.

The reaction has also been of great use to natural products chemists (scheme 11). The synthesis of dysidiolide by Corey and co-workers was achieved via an enantioselective CBS reduction using a borane-dimethylsulfide complex.
Corey-Fuchs alkyne synthesis is the synthesis of terminal alkynes through a one-carbon homologation of aldehydes using triphenylphosphine and carbon tetrabromide.Corey, E.J.; Fuch, P.L. Tetrahedron Lett. 1972, 3769 The mechanism is similar to that of a combined Wittig reaction and Appell reaction. Reacting a phosphorus ylide formed in situ with the aldehyde substrate yields a dibromoolefin.

On treatment with two equivalents of n-butyllithium, lithium halogen exchange and deprotonation yields a lithium acetylide species that undergoes hydrolysis to yield the terminal alkyne product (scheme 12).

More recent developments include a modified procedure for one-pot synthesis.

This synthetic transformation has been proven successful in the total synthesis (+)-taylorione by W.J. Kerr and co-workers (scheme 13).
The Corey–Kim oxidation was a new conversion of alcohols into corresponding aldehydes and ketones. This combination of N-chlorosuccinimidosulfonium chloride (NCS), dimethylsulfide (DMS), and triethylamine (TEA) offers a less toxic alternative to chromium-based oxidations.

The Corey-Kim reagent is formed in situ when the succinimide and sulfide react to form a dimethylsuccinimidosulfonium chloride species (scheme 14).

Triethylamine deprotonates the alkoxysulfonium salt at the α position to afford the oxidized product. The reaction accommodates a wide array of functional groups, but allylic and benzylic alcohols are typically transformed into chlorides instead.

Its application in synthesis is based on the mild protocol conditions and functional and protecting group compatibility. In the total synthesis of ingenol, Kuwajima and co-workers exploited the Corey-Kim oxidation by selectively oxidizing the less hindered secondary alcohol(scheme 15).
Corey-Winter olefination is a stereospecific transformation of 1,2-diols to alkenes involving the diol substrate, thiocarbonyldiimidazole, and excess trialkylphosphite.

The exact mechanism is unknown, but has been narrowed down to two possible pathways. The thionocarbonate and trialkylphosphite either form a phosphorus ylide or carbenoid intermediate.

The reaction is stereospecific for most substrates unless the product would lead to an exceedingly strained structure, as discovered when Corey et al attempted to form sterically hindered trans alkenes in certain 7-membered rings.

Stereospecfic alkenes are present in several natural products as the method continues to be exploited to yield a series of complex substrates. Professor T.K.M Shing et al used the Corey-Winter olefination reaction to synthesize (+)-Boesenoxide (scheme 16).
CBS-type enantioselective Diels–Alder reaction has been developed using a similar scaffold to the enantioselective CBS reduction. After the development of this reaction the CBS reagent proved to be a very versatile reagent for a series of several powerful synthetic transformations. The use of a chiral Lewis acid such as the CBS catalyst includes a broad range of unsaturated enones substrates.

The reaction likely proceeds via a highly organized 6-membered ring pre-transition state to deliver highly enantio-enriched products (scheme 17).

This transition state likely occurs because of favorable pi-stacking with the phenyl substituent. The enantioselectivity of the process is facilitated from the diene approaching the dienophile from the opposite face of the phenyl substituent.

The Diels-Alder reaction is one of the most powerful transformations in synthetic chemistry. The synthesis of natural products using the Diels-Alder reaction as a transform has been applied especially to the formation of six-membered rings(scheme 18).
Corey-Nicolaou macrolactonization provides the first method for preparing medium-to-large-size lactones. Previously, intermolecular outcompeted intramolecular lactonization even at low concentrations. One big advantage of this reaction is that it is performed under neutral conditions allowing the presence of acid and base-labile functional groups. To date, rings of 7–48 members have been successfully synthesized using this method.

The reaction occurs in the presence of 2,2'-dipyridyl disulfide and triphenylphosphine with reflux of a nonpolar solvent such as benzene. The mechanism begins with formation of the 2-pyridinethiol ester (scheme 19). Proton-transfer provides a dipolar intermediate in which the alkoxide nucleophile attacks the electrophilic carbonyl center, providing a tetrahedral intermediate that yields the macrolactone product.

One of the first examples of this protocol was applied to the total synthesis of zearalenone (scheme 20).
The Johnson-Corey-Chaykovsky reaction synthesizes epoxides and cyclopropanes. The reaction forms a sulfur ylide in situ that reacts with enones, ketones, aldehydes, and imines to form corresponding epoxides, cyclopropanes, and aziridines. Two sulfur ylide variants have been employed that give different chemeoselective products (scheme 21).The dimethylsulfoxonium methylide provides epoxides from ketones, but yields the cyclopropanes when enones are employed. Dimethylsulfonium methylide transforms ketones and enones to the corresponding epoxides. Dimethylsulfonium methylide is much more reactive and less stable than dimethylsulfoxonium methylide, so it is generated at low temperatures.

Based on their reactivity, another distinct advantage of these two variants is that kinetically they provide a difference in diastereoselectivity. The reaction is very well established, and enantioselective variants (catalytic and stoichiometric) have also been achieved. From a retrosynthetic analysis standpoint, this reaction provides a reasonable alternative to conventional epoxidation reactions with alkenes (scheme 22). Danishefsky utilized this methodology for the synthesis of taxol. Diastereoselectivity is established by 1,3 interactions in the transition state required for epoxide closure.

Total syntheses
E. J. Corey and his research group have completed many total syntheses. At least 265 compounds have been synthesized in the Corey group since 1950.

His 1969 total syntheses of several prostaglandins are considered classics. Specifically the synthesis of Prostaglandin F2α presents several challenges. The presence of both cis and trans olefins as well as five asymmetric carbon atoms renders the molecule a desirable challenge for organic chemists. Corey's retrosynthetic analysis outlines a few key disconnections that lead to simplified precursors (scheme 23).

Molecular simplification began first by disconnecting both carbon chains with a Wittig reaction and Horner-Wadsworth Emmons modification. The Wittig reaction affords the cis product, while the Horner-Wadsworth Emmons produces the trans olefin. The published synthesis reveals a 1:1 diastereomeric mixture of the carbonyl reduction using zinc borohydride. However, years later Corey and co-workers established the CBS reduction. One of the examples that exemplified this protocol was an intermediate in the prostaglandin synthesis revealing a 9:1 mixture of the desired diastereomer (scheme 24).

The iodolactonization transform affords an allylic alcohol leading to a key Baeyer-Villiger intermediate. This oxidation regioselectively inserts an oxygen atom between the ketone and the most electron-rich site. The pivotal intermediate leads to a straightforward conversion to the Diels-Alder structural goal, which provides the carbon framework for the functionalized cyclopentane ring. Later Corey developed an asymmetric Diels-Alder reaction employing a chiral oxazoborolidine, greatly simplifying the synthetic route to the prostaglandins.

Other notable syntheses:
 Longifolene
 Ginkgolides A and B
 Lactacystin
 Miroestrol
 Ecteinascidin 743
 Salinosporamide A

Publications
E.J. Corey has more than 1100 publications. In 2002, the American Chemical Society (ACS) recognized him as the "Most Cited Author in Chemistry".  In 2007, he received the first ACS Publications Division "Cycle of Excellence High Impact Contributor Award" and was ranked the number one chemist in terms of research impact by the Hirsch Index (h-index). His books include:

Altom suicide

Jason Altom, one of Corey's students, committed suicide in 1998.  Altom's suicide caused controversy because he explicitly blamed Corey, his research advisor, for his suicide. Altom cited in his 1998 farewell note "abusive research supervisors" as one reason for taking his life. Altom's suicide note also contained explicit instructions on how to reform the relationship between students and their supervisors.

Altom was the third member of Corey's lab to commit suicide since 1980. Corey was reportedly devastated and bewildered by his student's death. Corey said, "That letter doesn't make sense. At the end, Jason must have been delusional or irrational in the extreme." Corey also claimed he never questioned Altom's intellectual contributions. "I did my best to guide Jason as a mountain guide would to guide someone climbing a mountain. I did my best every step of the way," Corey states. "My conscience is clear. Everything Jason did came out of our partnership. We never had the slightest disagreement." The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) cited The New York Times article on Altom's suicide as an example of problematic reporting, arguing that Altom presented warning signs of depression and suicidal ideation and that the article had scapegoated Corey despite a lack of secondary evidence that the advisor's behavior had contributed to Altom's distress. According to The Boston Globe, students and professors said Altom actually retained Corey's support.

Corey Group members
As of 2010, approximately 700 people have been Corey Group members including notable students Eric Block,
Dale L. Boger, Rajender Reddy Leleti, Weston T. Borden, David E. Cane, Rick L. Danheiser, William L. Jorgensen, John Katzenellenbogen, Alan P. Kozikowski, Bruce H. Lipshutz, David R. Liu, Albert Meyers, K. C. Nicolaou, Ryōji Noyori, Gary H. Posner, Bengt I. Samuelsson, Dieter Seebach, Vinod K. Singh, Brian Stoltz, Alice Ting, Hisashi Yamamoto, and Jin-Quan Yu. A database of 580 former members and their current affiliation was developed for Corey's 80th birthday in July 2008.

Woodward–Hoffmann rules
When awarded the Priestley Medal in 2004, E. J. Corey created a controversy with his claim to have inspired Robert Burns Woodward prior to the development of the Woodward–Hoffmann rules. Corey wrote:

"On May 4, 1964, I suggested to my colleague R. B. Woodward a simple explanation involving the symmetry of the perturbed (HOMO) molecular orbitals for the stereoselective cyclobutene → 1,3-butadiene and 1,3,5-hexatriene → cyclohexadiene conversions that provided the basis for the further development of these ideas into what became known as the Woodward–Hoffmann rules."

This was Corey's first public statement on his claim that starting on May 5, 1964, Woodward put forth Corey's explanation as his own thought with no mention of Corey and the conversation of May 4.  Corey had discussed his claim privately with Hoffmann and close colleagues since 1964.  Corey mentions that he made the Priestley statement "so the historical record would be correct".

Corey's claim and contribution were publicly rebutted by Roald Hoffmann in the journal Angewandte Chemie.  In the rebuttal, Hoffmann states that he asked Corey over the course of their long discussion of the matter why Corey did not make the issue public.  Corey responded that he thought such a public disagreement would hurt Harvard and that he would not "consider doing anything against Harvard, to which I was and am so devoted." Corey also hoped that Woodward himself would correct the historical record "as he grew older, more considerate, and more sensitive to his own conscience." Woodward died suddenly of a heart attack in his sleep in 1979.

Awards and honors
E.J. Corey has received more than 40 major awards including the Linus Pauling Award (1973), Franklin Medal (1978), Tetrahedron Prize (1983), Wolf Prize in Chemistry (1986), National Medal of Science (1988),  Japan Prize (1989), Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1990), Golden Plate Award of the American Academy of Achievement (1991), Roger Adams Award (1993), and the Priestley Medal (2004). He was inducted into the Alpha Chi Sigma Hall of Fame in 1998.
As of 2008, he has been awarded 19 honorary degrees from universities around the world including Oxford University (UK), Cambridge University (UK), and National Chung Cheng University. In 2013, the E.J. Corey Institute of Biomedical Research (CIBR) opened in Jiangyin, Jiangsu Province, China.

Corey was elected a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (ForMemRS) in 1998.

References

External links

Compiled Works of E.J. Corey

Elias James Corey Nobel Lecture (PDF)
Podcast interview with E.J. Corey about his Lifelong Pursuit of Learning – May 30, 2018

1928 births
Living people
Members of the United States National Academy of Sciences
20th-century American chemists
21st-century American chemists
Organic chemists
American people of Lebanese descent
Nobel laureates in Chemistry
American Nobel laureates
Harvard University faculty
Wolf Prize in Chemistry laureates
Massachusetts Institute of Technology School of Science alumni
National Medal of Science laureates
Foreign Members of the Royal Society
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign faculty
People from Methuen, Massachusetts
Lawrence High School (Massachusetts) alumni
Members of the National Academy of Medicine
Recipients of Franklin Medal

Elias James Corey


Creswick  is a town in west-central Victoria, Australia, 18 kilometres north of Ballarat and 122 kilometres northwest of Melbourne, in the Shire of Hepburn. It is 430 metres above sea level. At the 2016 census, Creswick had a population of 3,170. Creswick was named after the Creswick family, the pioneer settlers of the region.

History

The area was inhabited by the Dja Dja Wurrung people before white settlement. The pioneer white settlers were Henry, Charles and John Creswick, three brothers who started a large sheep station in 1842.

Creswick is a former gold-mining town, established during the Victorian gold rushes in the 1850s. The Post Office opened on 1 September 1854 but was named Creswick's Creek until around 1857. The population reached a peak of 25,000 during the gold rush. Today, local industries include forestry, grazing and agriculture.

Creswick was the site of the New Australasian Gold Mine disaster on 12 December 1882, Australia's worst mining disaster in which 22 men drowned.

The Creswick Magistrates' Court closed on 1 January 1983, not having been visited by a Magistrate since 1976.

Creswick was used as a filming location for the 2004 American television miniseries adaptation of Stephen King's Salem's Lot, which starred Rob Lowe, Donald Sutherland, Rutger Hauer and James Cromwell. Most of the supporting cast were Australian actors.

The town today
The original Victorian School of Forestry was established in 1910 by the Department of Forestry. It was the first institution set up in Victoria to train and accredit young foresters. Now the campus is part of The University of Melbourne. The campus is situated in Water Street and houses the School of Forest & Ecosystem Science, a highly regarded research and teaching institution.

Creswick has three primary schools—two government and one Catholic: Creswick Primary School, Creswick North Primary School and St Augustine's Primary School respectively.

The town also has an aged care facility. John Curtin Aged Care was formerly the township's health care hospital, but was converted to a nursing home in 1998.

Features

Attractions
 The Creswick Men's Friendship Shed. It is one of Australia's founding Men's Sheds. It has one of the longest running men's shed in Australia. It started in 2001 at the nurses quarters at Creswick Hospital. It moved to a shanty clad building at Park Lake. It provides community support to its locals and its community. Creswick Men's Friendship opens on days, as needed by the community members. It primary running day is Tuesday but also opens on Thursdays for men. On Wednesdays they are temporarily running a Woman's Group and its goal is to continue for the long term as needs continue. Creswick Men's Friendship Shed is in partnership with Creswick Hospital and Community Health Centre, and supported by the Hepburn Shire Council. It is a valuable part of community for resources information on health support. It currently operates at 15 Bridge Street Creswick. Beside the Park Lake house that was used by the Men's Shed but council unwillingness to provide maintenance made it unsafe and unusable to its Men's Shed Group. The current Creswick Men's Shed is on crown land and supported by its community, Creswick Hospital and Community Health Services and many volunteers.
 The Creswick Bazaar is held on the third Saturday and Sunday of the month at the historic railway precinct in Raglan Street. The Bazaar features crafts by local people.  The railway station, one of the best restored railway stations in Victoria, was restored by a group of volunteers. The railway goods shed hosts the Bazaar and other community events.
 The Creswick Market is located at (Creswick Neighbourhood Centre ), Victoria Street, Creswick. Held the third Saturday of every month from 9am to 1pm, Creswick Market features: free live music; kids' entertainment and playground; beautiful gardens to relax in; freshly made delicacies and great coffee; hand-made arts, crafts, jewellery and clothes; homegrown fruit, vegetables and plants; over 90 specialist boutique sites.
 The Creswick Woollen Mills, established in 1947, is the last remaining coloured spinning mill of its kind in Australia, still owned and run by the founder's family. It produces natural fibre products such as woollen blankets, throws and accessories. The mill is open seven days a week and operates a self-guided tour and shop.
 The Creswick Museum is situated at two addresses. The museum in the old Creswick Town Hall is open weekends and public holidays from 11am until 3.30pm. The Research Centre, operating out of the former Infant Child Centre, is open Friday and Saturday 11am to 3.00pm.
 Creswick has a range of singletrack trails suitable for both mountain biking and trail running. The Annual Brackenbury Mountain Bike Challenge in November attracts participants from across Australia. These trails have been identifies as a venue for Mountain biking during the 2026 Commonwealth Games held across Victoria.
 The iridescent blue of Creswick's Blue Waters lake is a draw for photography enthusiasts. The former open cut mine is located within Creswick Regional park, off Melbourne Road and just minutes from the town centre.

Sport
 The Creswick Bowling Club, which was originally situated in the middle of town, has since relocated to the Lindsay Park complex after several flooding incidents in late 2010 and early 2011, offers lawn bowling for women and men during the spring, summer and autumn months.
 The town has an Australian Rules football team competing in the Central Highlands Football League.
 Golfers play at The RACV Resort on the Midland Highway. The Forest Resort is a multi-storied building that is used for vacationing and conferences. It also has a gymnasium, heated pool, spa, library and health spa on the top floor.
 The Creswick Imperials cricket club play home games at Doug Lindsay recreational reserve. The A grade and A reserve teams play in the Maryborough & District Cricket Association whilst arguably their most popular team will compete in the Ballarat Cricket Association one day B grade competition for the 2016/17 season after having convincingly triumphed in the C grade in 2015/16.

Notable people

Creswick is the birthplace of the Lindsays, perhaps Australia's best known art family. Famous Lindsays (in birth order) were Percy Lindsay (landscape painter), Sir Lionel Lindsay (printmaker, painter and critic), Norman Lindsay (painter, sculptor and writer), Ruby Lindsay (illustrator) and Sir Daryl Lindsay (painter and arts administrator). Percy Lindsay painted many landscapes of the town and Norman Lindsay immortalised the town in his novel Redheap, a work that was banned for many years.

Other famous Creswickians include John Curtin, Australia's Prime Minister during World War II; Sir Alexander Peacock, a Victorian Premier; Sir Hayden Starke, a Justice of the High Court; and early trade unionists William Spence and David Temple, co-founders of the Australian Shearers' Union and Amalgamated Shearers' Union, which evolved into the Australian Workers' Union.

Transport
Creswick is located on the Midland Highway. Creswick railway station is served by V/Line train services to and from Maryborough, as well as buses from Ballarat operated by CDC Ballarat.

References

External links

 Australian Places - Creswick

Mining towns in Victoria (state)
Towns in Victoria (state)

Creswick, Victoria


Greenwood Gardens is a  formal Italianate garden located in the Short Hills section of Millburn, in Essex County, New Jersey, United States.

History

Joseph Day, a prominent real estate auctioneer, purchased  of land in 1906, dubbed "Pleasant Days". Construction on Day's home was designed by William W. Renwick and built by Rafael Guastavino's Guastavino Fireproof Construction Company. The property remained with Days until his death in 1944, whereupon a majority of the land was purchased by Peter B. Blanchard Jr. and was rechristened The Greenwoods. Blanchard's stewardship of the land saw significant aesthetic and horticultural changes, beginning with the demolition of the Days' Mediterranean-style mansion and the construction of a Colonial-Revival style home. The Blanchard's were also primarily responsible for the growth and diversification of the namesake gardens on the property, planting hundreds of ornamental trees and shrubs.

After Peter Blanchard died in 2000 and in accordance with his wishes, Greenwood Gardens was designated a nonprofit organization and is one of 16 gardens nationwide that is supported by The Garden Conservancy. The following years saw the beginnings of a comprehensive renovation of the property; efforts were made to refurbish the forecourt, retaining walls and many of the statues and assorted ornamentation.

Notable features
Greenwood Gardens is home to several unique architectural and artistic creations. Two of the most prominent works of art on the property are a wrought iron gate featuring a bird, vines and assorted plants created by Samuel Yellin, and a bronze statue of a boy holding two geese created by Emilio Angela. In addition to the main house the property boasts a summerhouse and teahouse constructed in 1920, and several cottages meant to house workers to maintain the grounds.

Admission
Prospective visitors can gain access to the garden through a one-time admission fee, or by becoming a member of the Gardens. Greenwood Gardens hosts periodic events including educational tours and musical events.

References

External links

Gardens in New Jersey
Millburn, New Jersey
1906 establishments in New Jersey

Greenwood Gardens


Ureli Corelli Hill (1802 – September 2, 1875) was an American conductor, and the first president and conductor of the New York Philharmonic Society.

Biography
Hill was born in 1802 in Hartford, Connecticut.

His grandfather, Frederick Hill, was a fifer in the Revolutionary army. His father, Uri Keeler Hill, was a music teacher and composer. Ureli's only sibling, George Handel "Yankee" Hill, was a writer and actor noted for his depiction of Yankee characters.

Hill served alternately as conductor and violinist with the New York Sacred Music Society between 1828 and 1835. In 1838 he directed the first American performance of Mendelssohn's cantata St. Paul. He studied in Germany for two years with the composer, conductor, and violinist Louis Spohr. After returning to New York, Hill organized the meeting on April 2, 1842, at which the New York Philharmonic Society was founded. At the meeting, Hill was named the first President of the Society.

Hill opened the Society's inaugural concert on December 7, 1842 by conducting Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. As was typical of this era, the concert featured several different conductors and a mixture of opera excerpts, full orchestral works, and chamber music. Later during the same concert, Hill played violin in a performance of a Hummel Piano Quintet. For the Orchestra's third season, Hill invited both Spohr and Felix Mendelssohn to conduct, however neither could accept, sending letters of acknowledgement instead. Both were later made honorary members of the Philharmonic. Hill continued to conduct the Society, in alternation with six others, until 1849.

Hill was in Ohio from 1847 to 1850, but returned to New York, and signed on as violinist, and board member of the Orchestra. In his capacity as board member, he became embroiled in the controversy over the nature of American music and the role the Orchestra should take to foster and promote American composers such as George Bristow and William Henry Fry.

Hill had a series of failed artistic and business ventures. He invented a piano that would never go out of tune, as it used small bells instead of wire strings. He traveled as far as London in an effort to commercialize the instrument, but it did not succeed. He also made bad investments in real estate in New Jersey. These difficulties, combined with his forced retirement from the violins of the Philharmonic on account of his old age, are thought to have contributed to his taking his own life on  September 2, 1875 at his home in Paterson, New Jersey. His farewell note, written before swallowing an overdose of morphine, stated "Why should or how can a man exist and be powerless to earn means for his family?"

References

Bibliography

1802 births
1875 deaths
1870s suicides
American conductors (music)
American male conductors (music)
Musicians from Paterson, New Jersey
Drug-related suicides in New Jersey
Music directors of the New York Philharmonic
19th-century conductors (music)
19th-century American musicians
Musicians from Hartford, Connecticut
Classical musicians from New Jersey

Ureli Corelli Hill


Peter and the Wolf is a composition by Sergei Prokofiev. It was written in 1936 after his return to Russia, then part of the Soviet Union. It is a children's story. Prokofiev got the idea from Natalya Sats, who led the Moscow State Musical Theater for Children. The idea was to introduce children to the different musical instruments in the orchestra. For this reason, each character in the story has a particular instrument and a musical theme:
Bird: flute

Duck: Oboe

Cat: Clarinet (in A)

Grandfather: Bassoon

Wolf: 3 French Horns

Peter: String instruments

Hunters: Timpani and Bass Drum

(The hunters' theme is actually introduced by the woodwinds)
In addition, there is a narrator telling the story.

In 1946, Walt Disney produced an animated version of Peter and the Wolf. There are some differences to the original work, for example the animals are given names. It was released on video tape in the 1990s.

Other websites
 http://www.internet-maerchen.de/download/peter.mp3

Compositions by Sergei Prokofiev

Peter and the Wolf


Caranus or Karanos () was the first king of the ancient kingdom of Macedonia according to later traditions. According to Herodotus, however, the first king was Perdiccas I. Caranus is first reported by Theopompus and is the mythical founder of the Argead dynasty.

Myth
According to a Greek myth, Caranus was the son of Temenus, king of Argos, who in turn was a Heraclid, a descendant of Heracles. Plutarch agrees on the Heraclid lineage of Caranus and argues that Alexander the Great is a descendant of Heracles through Caranus. Temenus, along with Cresphontes and Aristodemus were the three Doric leaders who invaded the Mycenean Peloponnese region. Then they proceeded to divide the conquered territories between them. Cresphontes was given Messenia and Sparta; Aristodemus took Laconia; and finally Temenus was given Argos. Following the death of Temenus, the princes argued about who should be king. One of them, Pheidon, defeated his brothers in battle and took over the kingship. Caranus then decided to find another kingdom of his own, where he could be king. First, however he went to the Oracle of Delphi to ask Pythia's advice. "You should find your kingdom there, where you will find plenty of game and domestic animals, she advised." Thus Caranus and his entourage moved to the North, in search of suitable land to establish his new kingdom. Finally, he discovered a green valley, with a lot of game and goats, whereupon he thought that the prophecy of Pythia had been fulfilled. Thus he built a city there, which he named Aigai (), present day Vergina, a site of substantial archaeological activity, as numerous important findings have been unearthed.

View of historians
According to Justin (7.1) citing Marsyas of Pella

According to Chronicon (Eusebius)

According to Livy (The History of Rome, 45.9.3)

See also
Heracleidae

References

Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology Caranus

8th-century BC Macedonian monarchs
Argead kings of Macedonia
Mythology of Macedonia (ancient kingdom)
Legendary Greek people

Caranus of Macedon


An adding machine is a class of mechanical calculator, usually specialized for bookkeeping calculations.
In the United States, the earliest adding machines were usually built to read in dollars and cents. Adding machines were ubiquitous office equipment until they were phased out in favor of calculators in the 1970s and by personal computers beginning in about 1985. The older adding machines were rarely seen in American office settings by the year 2000.

Blaise Pascal and Wilhelm Schickard were the two original inventors of the mechanical calculator in 1642. For Pascal, this was an adding machine that could perform additions and subtractions directly and multiplication and divisions by repetitions, while Schickard's machine, invented several decades earlier, was less functionally efficient but was supported by a mechanised form of multiplication tables. These two were followed by a series of inventors and inventions leading to those of Thomas de Colmar, who launched the mechanical calculator industry in 1851 when he released his simplified arithmometer (it took him thirty years to refine his machine, patented in 1820, into a simpler and more reliable form).  However, they did not gain widespread use until Dorr E. Felt started manufacturing his comptometer (1887) and Burroughs started the commercialization of differently conceived adding machines (1892).

Operation

To add a new list of numbers and arrive at a total, the user was first required to "ZERO" the machine. Then, to add sets of numbers, the user was required to press numbered keys on a keyboard, which would remain depressed (rather than immediately rebound like the keys of a computer keyboard or typewriter or the buttons of a typical modern machine).  The user would then pull the crank, which caused the numbers to be shown on the rotary wheels, and the keys to be released (i.e. to pop back up) in preparation for the next input. To add, for example, the amounts of 30.72 and 4.49 (which, in adding machine terms, on a decimal adding machine is 3,072 plus 449 "decimal units"), the following process took place: Press the  key in the column fourth from the right (multiples of one thousand), the  key in the column second from right (multiples of ten) and the  key in the rightmost column (multiples of 1). Pull the crank. The rotary wheels now showed 3072. Press the  key in the third column from the right, the  key in the second column from right, and the  key in the rightmost column. Pull the crank. The rotary wheels now show a running 'total' of 3521 which, when interpreted using the decimal currency colour-coding of the key columns, equates to 35.21. Keyboards typically did not have or need  (zero) keys; one simply did not press any key in the column containing a zero. Trailing zeros (those to the right of a number), were there by default because when a machine was zeroed, all numbers visible on the rotary wheels were reset to zero.

Subtraction was impossible, except by adding the complement of a number (for instance, subtract 2.50 by adding 9,997.50).

Multiplication was a simple process of keying in the numbers one or more columns to the left and repeating the "addition" process. For example, to multiply 34.72 by 102, key in 3472, pull crank, repeat once more. Wheels show 6944. Key in 3472(00), pull crank. Wheels now show 354144, or 3,541.44.

A later adding machine, called the comptometer, did not require that a crank be pulled to add. Numbers were input simply by pressing keys. The machine was thus driven by finger power. Multiplication was similar to that on the adding machine, but users would "form" up their fingers over the keys to be pressed and press them down the multiple of times required. Using the above example, four fingers would be used to press down twice on the  (fourth column),  (third column),  (second column) and  (first column) keys. That finger shape would then move left two columns and press once. Usually a small crank near the wheels would be used to zero them. Subtraction was possible by adding complementary numbers; keys would also carry a smaller, complementary digit to help the user form complementary numbers. Division was also possible by putting the dividend to the left end and performing repeated subtractions by using the complementary method.

Some adding machines were electromechanical – an old-style mechanism, but driven by electric power.

Some "ten-key" machines had input of numbers as on a modern calculator – 30.72 was input as , , , . These machines could subtract as well as add. Some could multiply and divide, although including these operations made the machine more complex. Those that could multiply, used a form of the old adding machine multiplication method. Using the previous example of multiplying 34.72 by 102, the amount was keyed in, then the 2 key in the "multiplication" key column was pressed. The machine cycled twice, then tabulated the adding mechanism below the keyboard one column to the right. The number keys remained locked down on the keyboard. The user now pressed the multiplication  key which caused tabulation of the adding mechanism one more column to the right, but did not cycle the machine. Now the user pressed the multiplication  key. The machine cycled once. To see the total the user was required to press a  key and the machine would print the result on a paper tape, release the locked down keys, reset the adding mechanism to zero and tabulate it back to its home position.

Modern adding machines are like simple calculators. They often have a different input system, though.

Note: Sometimes the adding machine will have a key labeled  instead of . In this case, substitute  for  in the examples above. Alternatively, the plus key may continuously total instead of either a  or  key. Sometimes, the plus key is even labeled thus:

Burroughs's calculating machine

William Seward Burroughs received a patent for his adding machine on August 25, 1888. He was a founder of American Arithmometer Company, which became Burroughs Corporation and  evolved to produce electronic billing machines and mainframes, and eventually merged with Sperry to form Unisys. The grandson of the inventor of the adding machine is Beat author William S. Burroughs; a collection of his essays is called The Adding Machine.

See also
 Adder (electronics)
 Cash register
 Standard Adding Machine Company

Notes

Sources

External links

Mechanical calculators
Office equipment
1642 introductions

Adding machine


A tariff is a tax imposed by the government of a country or by a supranational union on imports or exports of goods. Besides being a source of revenue for the government, import duties can also be a form of regulation of foreign trade and policy that taxes foreign products to encourage or safeguard domestic industry. Protective tariffs are among the most widely used instruments of protectionism, along with import quotas and export quotas and other non-tariff barriers to trade.

Tariffs can be fixed (a constant sum per unit of imported goods or a percentage of the price) or variable (the amount varies according to the price). Taxing imports means people are less likely to buy them as they become more expensive. The intention is that they buy local products instead, boosting their country's economy. Tariffs therefore provide an incentive to develop production and replace imports with domestic products. Tariffs are meant to reduce pressure from foreign competition and reduce the trade deficit. They have historically been justified as a means to protect infant industries and to allow import substitution industrialisation. Tariffs may also be used to rectify artificially low prices for certain imported goods, due to 'dumping', export subsidies or currency manipulation.

There is near unanimous consensus among economists that tariffs have a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare, while free trade and the reduction of trade barriers has a positive effect on economic growth. Although trade liberalisation can sometimes result in large and unequally distributed losses and gains, and can, in the short run, cause significant economic dislocation of workers in import-competing sectors, free trade has advantages of lowering costs of goods and services for both producers and consumers.

Etymology
The English term tariff derives from the  which is itself a descendant of the  which derives from . This term was introduced to the Latin-speaking world through contact with the Turks and derives from the . This Turkish term is a loanword of the . The Persian term derives from  which is the verbal noun of .

History

Ancient Greece
In the city state of Athens, the port of Piraeus enforced a system of levies to raise taxes for the Athenian government. Grain was a key commodity that was imported through the port, and Piraeus was one of the main ports in the east Mediterranean. A levy of two percent was placed on goods arriving in the market through the docks of Piraeus. Despite the Peloponnesian War preceding year 399 BC, Piraeus had documented a tax income of 1,800 in harbor dues. The Athenian government also placed restrictions on the lending of money and transport of grain to only be allowed through the port of Piraeus.

Great Britain
In the 14th century, Edward III (1312–1377) took interventionist measures, such as banning the import of woollen cloth in an attempt to develop local woollen cloth manufacturing. Beginning in 1489, Henry VII took actions such as increasing export duties on raw wool. The Tudor monarchs, especially Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, used protectionism, subsidies, distribution of monopoly rights, government-sponsored industrial espionage and other means of government intervention to develop the wool industry, leading to England became the largest wool-producing nation in the world.

A protectionist turning point in British economic policy came in 1721, when policies to promote manufacturing industries were introduced by Robert Walpole. These included increased tariffs on imported foreign manufactured goods, and export subsidies. These policies were similar to those used by countries such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan after the Second World War.  In addition, in its colonies, Great Britain imposed a ban on advanced manufacturing activities that it did not want to see developed.  Britain also banned exports from its colonies that competed with its own products at home and abroad, forcing the colonies to leave the most profitable industries in Britain's hands.

In 1800, Britain, with about 10% of Europe's population, supplied 29% of all pig iron produced in Europe, a proportion that had risen to 45% by 1830. Per capita industrial production was even higher: in 1830 it was 250% higher than in the rest of Europe, up from 110% in 1800.

Protectionist policies of industrial promotion continued until the mid-19th century. At the beginning of that century, the average tariff on British manufactured goods was about 50%, the highest of all major European countries. Thus, according to economic historian Paul Bairoch, Britain's technological advance was achieved "behind high and enduring tariff barriers". In 1846, the country's per capita rate of industrialisation was more than twice that of its closest competitors. Even after adopting free trade for most goods, Britain continued to closely regulate trade in strategic capital goods, such as machinery for the mass production of textiles.

Free trade in Britain began in earnest with the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846, which was equivalent to free trade in grain. The Corn Acts had been passed in 1815 to restrict wheat imports and to guarantee the incomes of British farmers; their repeal devastated Britain's old rural economy, but began to mitigate the effects of the Great Famine in Ireland. Tariffs on many manufactured goods were also abolished. But while liberalism was progressing in Britain, protectionism continued on the European mainland and in the United States.

On June 15, 1903, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Henry Petty-Fitzmaurice, 5th Marquess of Lansdowne, made a speech in the House of Lords in which he defended fiscal retaliation against countries that applied high tariffs and whose governments subsidised products sold in Britain (known as "premium products", later called "dumping"). The retaliation was to take the form of threats to impose duties in response to goods from that country. Liberal unionists had split from the liberals, who advocated free trade, and this speech marked a turning point in the group's slide toward protectionism. Lansdowne argued that the threat of retaliatory tariffs was similar to gaining respect in a room of gunmen by pointing a big gun (his exact words were "a gun a little bigger than everyone else's"). The "Big Revolver" became a slogan of the time, often used in speeches and cartoons.

In response to the Great Depression, Britain finally abandoned free trade in 1932 and reintroduced tariffs on a large scale, noticing that it had lost its production capacity to protectionist countries like the United States and Weimar Germany.

United States

Before the new Constitution took effect in 1788, the Congress could not levy taxesit sold land or begged money from the states.  The new national government needed revenue and decided to depend upon a tax on imports with the Tariff of 1789. The policy of the U.S. before 1860 was low tariffs "for revenue only" (since duties continued to fund the national government).

The Embargo Act of 1807 was passed by the U.S. Congress in that year in response to British aggression.  While not a tariff per se, the Act prohibited the import of all kinds of manufactured imports, resulting in a huge drop in US trade and protests from all regions of the country. However, the embargo also had the effect of launching new, emerging US domestic industries across the board, particularly the textile industry, and marked the beginning of the manufacturing system in the United States.

An attempt at imposing a high tariff was attempted in 1828, but the South denounced it as a "Tariff of Abominations" and it almost caused a rebellion in South Carolina until it was lowered.

Between 1816 and the end of the Second World War, the United States had one of the highest average tariff rates on manufactured imports in the world. According to Paul Bairoch, the United States was "the homeland and bastion of modern protectionism"during this period

Many American intellectuals and politicians during the country's catching-up period felt that the free trade theory advocated by British classical economists was not suited to their country. They argued that the country should develop manufacturing industries and use government protection and subsidies for this purpose, as Britain had done before them. Many of the great American economists of the time, until the last quarter of the 19th century, were strong advocates of industrial protection: Daniel Raymond who influenced Friedrich List, Mathew Carey and his son Henry, who was one of Lincoln's economic advisers. The intellectual leader of this movement was Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States (1789-1795). Thus, it was against David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage that the United States protected its industry. They pursued a protectionist policy from the beginning of the 19th century until the middle of the 20th century, after the Second World War.

In Report on Manufactures, considered the first text to express modern protectionist theory, Alexander Hamilton argued that if a country wished to develop a new activity on its soil, it would have to temporarily protect it. According to him, this protection against foreign producers could take the form of import duties or, in rare cases, prohibition of imports. He called for customs barriers to allow American industrial development and to help protect infant industries, including bounties (subsidies) derived in part from those tariffs. He also believed that duties on raw materials should be generally low. Hamilton argued that despite an initial "increase of price" caused by regulations that control foreign competition, once a "domestic manufacture has attained to perfection… it invariably becomes cheaper. He believed that political independence was predicated upon economic independence. Increasing the domestic supply of manufactured goods, particularly war materials, was seen as an issue of national security. And he feared that Britain's policy towards the colonies would condemn the United States to be only producers of agricultural products and raw materials.

Britain initially did not want to industrialise the American colonies, and implemented policies to that effect (for example, banning high value-added manufacturing activities). Under British rule, America was denied the use of tariffs to protect its new industries. This explains why, after independence, the Tariff Act of 1789 was the second bill of the Republic signed by President Washington allowing Congress to impose a fixed tariff of 5% on all imports, with a few exceptions.

The Congress passed a tariff act (1789), imposing a 5% flat rate tariff on all imports. Between 1792 and the war with Britain in 1812, the average tariff level remained around 12.5%. In 1812 all tariffs were doubled to an average of 25% in order to cope with the increase in public expenditure due to the war. A significant shift in policy occurred in 1816, when a new law was introduced to keep the tariff level close to the wartime level—especially protected were cotton, woolen, and iron goods. The American industrial interests that had blossomed because of the tariff lobbied to keep it, and had it raised to 35 percent in 1816. The public approved, and by 1820, America's average tariff was up to 40 percent.

In the 19th century, statesmen such as Senator Henry Clay continued Hamilton's themes within the Whig Party under the name "American System which consisted of protecting industries and developing infrastructure in explicit opposition to the "British system" of free trade.  Before 1860 they were always defeated by the low-tariff Democrats.

From 1846 to 1861, during which American tariffs were lowered but this was followed by a series of recessions and the 1857 panic, which eventually led to higher demands for tariffs than President James Buchanan, signed in 1861 (Morrill Tariff).

During the American Civil War (1861-1865), agrarian interests in the South were opposed to any protection, while manufacturing interests in the North wanted to maintain it. The war marked the triumph of the protectionists of the industrial states of the North over the free traders of the South. Abraham Lincoln was a protectionist like Henry Clay of the Whig Party, who advocated the "American system" based on infrastructure development and protectionism. In 1847, he declared: "Give us a protective tariff, and we will have the greatest nation on earth". Once elected, Lincoln raised industrial tariffs and after the war, tariffs remained at or above wartime levels. High tariffs were a policy designed to encourage rapid industrialisation and protect the high American wage rates.

The policy from 1860 to 1933 was usually high protective tariffs (apart from 1913 to 1921). After 1890, the tariff on wool did affect an important industry, but otherwise the tariffs were designed to keep American wages high. The conservative Republican tradition, typified by William McKinley was a high tariff, while the Democrats typically called for a lower tariff to help consumers but they always failed until 1913.

In the early 1860s, Europe and the United States pursued completely different trade policies. The 1860s were a period of growing protectionism in the United States, while the European free trade phase lasted from 1860 to 1892. The tariff average rate on imports of manufactured goods was in 1875 from 40% to 50% in the United States against 9% to 12% in continental Europe at the height of free trade.

In 1896, the Republican Party platform pledged to "renew and emphasize our allegiance to the policy of protection, as the bulwark of American industrial independence, and the foundation of development and prosperity. This true American policy taxes foreign products and encourages home industry. It puts the burden of revenue on foreign goods; it secures the American market for the American producer. It upholds the American standard of wages for the American workingman".

In 1913, following the electoral victory of the Democrats in 1912, there was a significant reduction in the average tariff on manufactured goods from 44% to 25%. However, the First World War rendered this bill ineffective, and new "emergency" tariff legislation was introduced in 1922, after the Republicans returned to power in 1921.

According to economic historian Douglas Irwin, a common myth about United States trade policy is that low tariffs harmed American manufacturers in the early 19th century and then that high tariffs made the United States into a great industrial power in the late 19th century. A review by the Economist of Irwin's 2017 book Clashing over Commerce: A History of US Trade Policy notes:Political dynamics would lead people to see a link between tariffs and the economic cycle that was not there. A boom would generate enough revenue for tariffs to fall, and when the bust came pressure would build to raise them again. By the time that happened, the economy would be recovering, giving the impression that tariff cuts caused the crash and the reverse generated the recovery. Mr Irwin also methodically debunks the idea that protectionism made America a great industrial power, a notion believed by some to offer lessons for developing countries today. As its share of global manufacturing powered from 23% in 1870 to 36% in 1913, the admittedly high tariffs of the time came with a cost, estimated at around 0.5% of GDP in the mid-1870s. In some industries, they might have sped up development by a few years. But American growth during its protectionist period was more to do with its abundant resources and openness to people and ideas.

The economist Ha-Joon Chang disagrees with the idea that the United States has developed and reached the top of the world economic hierarchy by adopting free trade. On the contrary, according to him, they have adopted an interventionist policy to promote and protect their industries through tariffs. It was their protectionist policy that would have allowed the United States to experience the fastest economic growth in the world throughout the 19th century and into the 1920s.

Tariffs and the Great Depression
Most economists hold the opinion that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in the United States did not greatly worsen the Great Depression:

Paul Krugman writes that protectionism does not lead to recessions. According to him, the decrease in imports (which can be obtained by introducing tariffs) has an expansive effect, that is, it is favourable to growth. Thus, in a trade war, since exports and imports will decrease equally, for everyone, the negative effect of a decrease in exports will be offset by the expansionary effect of a decrease in imports. Therefore, a trade war does not cause a recession. Furthermore, he points out that the Smoot-Hawley tariff did not cause the Great Depression. The decline in trade between 1929 and 1933 "was almost entirely a consequence of the Depression, not a cause. Trade barriers were a response to the Depression, partly as a consequence of deflation."

Milton Friedman held the opinion that the tariffs of 1930 did not cause the Great Depression, instead he blamed the lack of sufficient action on the part of the Federal Reserve. Douglas A. Irwin wrote: "most economists, both liberal and conservative, doubt that Smoot–Hawley played much of a role in the subsequent contraction".

Peter Temin, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, explained that a tariff is an expansionary policy, like a devaluation as it diverts demand from foreign to home producers. He noted that exports were 7 percent of GNP in 1929, they fell by 1.5 percent of 1929 GNP in the next two years and the fall was offset by the increase in domestic demand from tariff. He concluded that contrary the popular argument, contractionary effect of the tariff was small.

Jacques Sapir explains that the crisis has other causes than protectionism. He points out that "domestic production in major industrialized countries is declining...faster than international trade is declining." If this decrease (in international trade) had been the cause of the depression that the countries have experienced, we would have seen the opposite". "Finally, the chronology of events does not correspond to the thesis of the free traders... The bulk of the contraction of trade occurred between January 1930 and July 1932, that is, before the introduction of protectionist measures, even self-sufficient, in some countries, with the exception of those applied in the United States in the summer of 1930, but with negative effects. very limited. He noted that "the credit crunch is one of the main causes of the trade crunch." "In fact, international liquidity is the cause of the trade contraction. This liquidity collapsed in 1930 (-35.7%) and 1931 (-26.7%). A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research  highlights the predominant influence of currency instability (which led to the international liquidity crisis) and the sudden rise in transportation costs in the decline of trade during the 1930s .

Calculation of customs duty
Customs duty is calculated on the determination of the 'assess-able value' in case of those items for which the duty is levied . This is often the transaction value unless a customs officer determines assess-able value in accordance with the Harmonized System.

Harmonized System of Nomenclature
For the purpose of assessment of customs duty, products are given an identification code that has come to be known as the Harmonized System code. This code was developed by the World Customs Organization based in Brussels. A 'Harmonized System' code may be from four to ten digits. For example, 17.03 is the HS code for molasses from the extraction or refining of sugar. However, within 17.03, the number 17.03.90 stands for "Molasses (Excluding Cane Molasses)".

Customs authority
The national customs authority in each country is responsible for collecting taxes on the import into or export of goods out of the country.

Evasion

Evasion of customs duties takes place mainly in two ways. In one, the trader under-declares the value so that the assessable value is lower than actual. In a similar vein, a trader can evade customs duty by understatement of quantity or volume of the product of trade. A trader may also evade duty by misrepresenting traded goods, categorizing goods as items which attract lower customs duties. The evasion of customs duty may take place with or without the collaboration of customs officials.

Duty-free goods
Many countries allow a traveller to bring goods into the country duty-free. These goods may be bought at ports and airports or sometimes within one country without attracting the usual government taxes and then brought into another country duty-free. Some countries specify 'duty-free allowances' which limit the number or value of duty-free items that one person can bring into the country. These restrictions often apply to tobacco, wine, spirits, cosmetics, gifts and souvenirs.

Deferment of tariffs and duties

Products may sometimes be imported into a free economic zone (or 'free port'), processed there, then re-exported without being subject to tariffs or duties. According to the 1999 Revised Kyoto Convention, a "'free zone' means a part of the territory of a contracting party where any goods introduced are generally regarded, insofar as import duties and taxes are concerned, as being outside the customs territory".

Economic analysis

Neoclassical economic theorists tend to view tariffs as distortions to the free market. Typical analyses find that tariffs tend to benefit domestic producers and government at the expense of consumers, and that the net welfare effects of a tariff on the importing country are negative due to domestic firms not producing more efficiently since there is a lack of external competition. Therefore, domestic consumers are affected since the price is higher due to high costs caused due to inefficient production or if firms aren't able to source cheaper material externally thus reducing the affordability of the products. Normative judgments often follow from these findings, namely that it may be disadvantageous for a country to artificially shield an industry from world markets and that it might be better to allow a collapse to take place. Opposition to all tariff aims to reduce tariffs and to avoid countries discriminating between differing countries when applying tariffs. The diagrams at right show the costs and benefits of imposing a tariff on a good in the domestic economy.

Imposing an import tariff has the following effects, shown in the first diagram in a hypothetical domestic market for televisions:
Price rises from world price Pw to higher tariff price Pt.
Quantity demanded by domestic consumers falls from C1 to C2, a movement along the demand curve due to higher price.
Domestic suppliers are willing to supply Q2 rather than Q1, a movement along the supply curve due to the higher price, so the quantity imported falls from C1−Q1 to C2−Q2.
Consumer surplus (the area under the demand curve but above price) shrinks by areas A+B+C+D, as domestic consumers face higher prices and consume lower quantities.
Producer surplus (the area above the supply curve but below price) increases by area A, as domestic producers shielded from international competition can sell more of their product at a higher price.
Government tax revenue is the import quantity (C2 − Q2) times the tariff price (Pw − Pt), shown as area C.
Areas B and D are deadweight losses, surplus formerly captured by consumers that now is lost to all parties.

The overall change in welfare = Change in Consumer Surplus + Change in Producer Surplus + Change in Government Revenue = (−A−B−C−D) + A + C = −B−D. The final state after imposition of the tariff is indicated in the second diagram, with overall welfare reduced by the areas labeled "societal losses", which correspond to areas B and D in the first diagram. The losses to domestic consumers are greater than the combined benefits to domestic producers and government.

That tariffs overall reduce welfare is not a controversial topic among economists. For example, the University of Chicago surveyed about 40 leading economists in March 2018 asking whether "Imposing new U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum will improve Americans' welfare." About two-thirds strongly disagreed with the statement, while one third disagreed. None agreed or strongly agreed. Several commented that such tariffs would help a few Americans at the expense of many. This is consistent with the explanation provided above, which is that losses to domestic consumers outweigh gains to domestic producers and government, by the amount of deadweight losses.

Tariffs are more inefficient than consumption taxes.

A 2021 study found that across 151 countries over the period 1963–2014, "tariff increases are associated with persistent, economically and statistically significant declines in domestic output and productivity, as well as higher unemployment and inequality, real exchange rate appreciation, and insignificant changes to the trade balance."

Optimal tariff
For economic efficiency, free trade is often the best policy, however levying a tariff is sometimes second best.

A tariff is called an optimal tariff if it is set to maximise the welfare of the country imposing the tariff. It is a tariff derived by the intersection between the trade indifference curve of that country and the offer curve of another country. In this case, the welfare of the other country grows worse simultaneously, thus the policy is a kind of beggar thy neighbor policy. If the offer curve of the other country is a line through the origin point, the original country is in the condition of a small country, so any tariff worsens the welfare of the original country.

It is possible to levy a tariff as a political policy choice, and to consider a theoretical optimum tariff rate. However, imposing an optimal tariff will often lead to the foreign country increasing their tariffs as well, leading to a loss of welfare in both countries. When countries impose tariffs on each other, they will reach a position off the contract curve, meaning that both countries' welfare could be increased by reducing tariffs.

Political analysis

The tariff has been used as a political tool to establish an independent nation; for example, the United States Tariff Act of 1789, signed specifically on July 4, was called the "Second Declaration of Independence" by newspapers because it was intended to be the economic means to achieve the political goal of a sovereign and independent United States.

The political impact of tariffs is judged depending on the political perspective; for example, the 2002 United States steel tariff imposed a 30% tariff on a variety of imported steel products for a period of three years and American steel producers supported the tariff.

Tariffs can emerge as a political issue prior to an election. The Nullification Crisis of 1832 arose from the passage of a new tariff by the United States Congress, a few months before that year's federal elections; the state of South Carolina was outraged by the new tariff, and civil war nearly resulted. In the leadup to the 2007 Australian Federal election, the Australian Labor Party announced it would undertake a review of Australian car tariffs if elected. The Liberal Party made a similar commitment, while independent candidate Nick Xenophon announced his intention to introduce tariff-based legislation as "a matter of urgency".

Unpopular tariffs are known to have ignited social unrest, for example the 1905 meat riots in Chile that developed in protest against tariffs applied to the cattle imports from Argentina.

Arguments favouring tariffs

Protection of infant industry
Postulated in the United States by Alexander Hamilton at the end of the 18th century, by Friedrich List in his 1841 book  and by John Stuart Mill, the argument made in favour of this category of tariffs was this: should a country wish to develop a new economic activity on its soil, it would have to temporarily protect it. In their view, it is legitimate to protect certain activities by customs barriers in order to give them time to grow, to reach a sufficient size and to benefit from economies of scale through increased production and productivity gains. This would allow them to become competitive in order to face international competition. Indeed, a company needs to reach a certain production volume to be profitable in order to compensate for its fixed costs. Without protectionism, foreign products which are already profitable because of the volume of production already carried out on their soil would arrive in the country in large quantities at a lower price than local production. The recipient country's nascent industry would quickly disappear. A firm already established in an industry is more efficient because it is more adapted and has greater production capacity. New firms therefore suffer losses due to a lack of competitiveness linked to their 'apprenticeship' or catch-up period. By being protected from this external competition, firms can therefore establish themselves on their domestic market. As a result, they benefit from greater freedom of manoeuvre and greater certainty regarding their profitability and future development. The protectionist phase is therefore a learning period that would allow the least developed countries to acquire general and technical know-how in the fields of industrial production in order to become competitive on international market.

According to the economists in favour of protecting industries, free trade would condemn developing countries to being nothing more than exporters of raw materials and importers of manufactured goods. The application of the theory of comparative advantage would lead them to specialise in the production of raw materials and extractive products and prevent them from acquiring an industrial base. Protection of infant industries (e.g., through tariffs on imported products) would therefore be essential for developing countries to industrialise and escape their dependence on the production of raw materials.

Economist Ha-Joon Chang argues that most of today's developed countries have developed through policies that are the opposite of free trade and laissez-faire. According to him, when they were developing countries themselves, almost all of them actively used interventionist trade and industrial policies to promote and protect infant industries. Instead, they would have encouraged their domestic industries through tariffs, subsidies and other measures. In his view, Britain and the United States have not reached the top of the global economic hierarchy by adopting free trade. In fact, these two countries would have been among the greatest users of protectionist measures, including tariffs. As for the East Asian countries, he points out that the longest periods of rapid growth in these countries do not coincide with extended phases of free trade, but rather with phases of industrial protection and promotion. Interventionist trade and industrial policies would have played a crucial role in their economic success. These policies would have been similar to those used by Britain in the 18th century and the United States in the 19th century. He considers that infant industry protection policy has generated much better growth performance in the developing world than free trade policies since the 1980s.

In the second half of the 20th century, Nicholas Kaldor takes up similar arguments to allow the conversion of ageing industries. In this case, the aim was to save an activity threatened with extinction by external competition and to safeguard jobs. Protectionism must enable ageing companies to regain their competitiveness in the medium term and, for activities that are due to disappear, it allows the conversion of these activities and jobs.

Protection against dumping
States resorting to protectionism invoke unfair competition or dumping practices:
 Monetary manipulation: a currency undergoes a devaluation when monetary authorities decide to intervene in the foreign exchange market to lower the value of the currency against other currencies. This makes local products more competitive and imported products more expensive (Marshall Lerner Condition), increasing exports and decreasing imports, and thus improving the trade balance. Countries with a weak currency cause trade imbalances: they have large external surpluses while their competitors have large deficits.
 Tax dumping: some tax haven states have lower corporate and personal tax rates.
 Social dumping: when a state reduces social contributions or maintains very low social standards (for example, in China, labour regulations are less restrictive for employers than elsewhere).
 Environmental dumping: when environmental regulations are less stringent than elsewhere.

Free trade and poverty
Sub-Saharan African countries have a lower income per capita in 2003 than 40 years earlier. Per capita income increased by 37% between 1960 and 1980 and fell by 9% between 1980 and 2000. Africa's manufacturing sector's share of GDP decreased from 12% in 1980 to 11% in 2013. In the 1970s, Africa accounted for more than 3% of world manufacturing output, and now accounts for 1.5%. In an Op ed article for The Guardian (UK), Ha-Joon Chang argues that these downturns are the result of free trade policies, and elsewhere attributes successes in some African countries such as Ethiopia and Rwanda to their abandonment of free trade and adoption of a "developmental state model".

The poor countries that have succeeded in achieving strong and sustainable growth are those that have become mercantilists, not free traders: China, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan. Thus, whereas in the 1990s, China and India had the same GDP per capita, China followed a much more mercantilist policy and now has a GDP per capita three times higher than India's. Indeed, a significant part of China's rise on the international trade scene does not come from the supposed benefits of international competition but from the relocations practiced by companies from developed countries. Dani Rodrik points out that it is the countries that have systematically violated the rules of globalisation that have experienced the strongest growth.

The 'dumping' policies of some countries have also largely affected developing countries. Studies on the effects of free trade show that the gains induced by WTO rules for developing countries are very small. This has reduced the gain for these countries from an estimated  in the 2003 LINKAGE model to  in the 2005 GTAP model. The 2005 LINKAGE version also reduced gains to 90 billion. As for the "Doha Round", it would have brought in only  to developing countries (including China...) according to the GTAP model. However, it has been argued that the models used are actually designed to maximise the positive effects of trade liberalisation, that they are characterised by the absence of taking into account the loss of income caused by the end of tariff barriers.

John Maynard Keynes, tariffs and trade deficit

The turning point of the Great Depression
At the beginning of his career, Keynes was an economist close to Alfred Marshall, deeply convinced of the benefits of free trade. From the crisis of 1929 onwards, noting the commitment of the British authorities to defend the gold parity of the pound sterling and the rigidity of nominal wages, he gradually adhered to protectionist measures.

On 5 November 1929, when heard by the Macmillan Committee to bring the British economy out of the crisis, Keynes indicated that the introduction of tariffs on imports would help to rebalance the trade balance. The committee's report states in a section entitled "import control and export aid", that in an economy where there is not full employment, the introduction of tariffs can improve production and employment. Thus, the reduction of the trade deficit favours the country's growth.

In January 1930, in the Economic Advisory Council, Keynes proposed the introduction of a system of protection to reduce imports. In the autumn of 1930, he proposed a uniform tariff of 10% on all imports and subsidies of the same rate for all exports. In the Treatise on Money, published in the autumn of 1930, he took up the idea of tariffs or other trade restrictions with the aim of reducing the volume of imports and rebalancing the balance of trade.

On 7 March 1931, in the New Statesman and Nation, he wrote an article entitled Proposal for a Tariff Revenue. He pointed out that the reduction of wages led to a reduction in national demand which constrained markets. Instead, he proposes the idea of an expansionary policy combined with a tariff system to neutralise the effects on the balance of trade. The application of customs tariffs seemed to him "unavoidable, whoever the Chancellor of the Exchequer might be". Thus, for Keynes, an economic recovery policy is only fully effective if the trade deficit is eliminated. He proposed a 15% tax on manufactured and semi-manufactured goods and 5% on certain foodstuffs and raw materials, with others needed for exports exempted (wool, cotton).

In 1932, in an article entitled The Pro- and Anti-Tariffs, published in The Listener, he envisaged the protection of farmers and certain sectors such as the automobile and iron and steel industries, considering them indispensable to Britain.

The critique of the theory of comparative advantage
In the post-crisis situation of 1929, Keynes judged the assumptions of the free trade model unrealistic. He criticised, for example, the neoclassical assumption of wage adjustment.

As early as 1930, in a note to the Economic Advisory Council, he doubted the intensity of the gain from specialisation in the case of manufactured goods. While participating in the MacMillan Committee, he admitted that he no longer "believed in a very high degree of national specialisation" and refused to "abandon any industry which is unable, for the moment, to survive". He also criticised the static dimension of the theory of comparative advantage, which, in his view, by fixing comparative advantages definitively, led in practice to a waste of national resources.

In the Daily Mail of 13 March 1931, he called the assumption of perfect sectoral labour mobility "nonsense" since it states that a person made unemployed contributes to a reduction in the wage rate until he finds a job. But for Keynes, this change of job may involve costs (job search, training) and is not always possible. Generally speaking, for Keynes, the assumptions of full employment and automatic return to equilibrium discredit the theory of comparative advantage.

In July 1933, he published an article in the New Statesman and Nation entitled National Self-Sufficiency, in which he criticised the argument of the specialisation of economies, which is the basis of free trade. He thus proposed the search for a certain degree of self-sufficiency. Instead of the specialisation of economies advocated by the Ricardian theory of comparative advantage, he prefers the maintenance of a diversity of activities for nations. In it he refutes the principle of peacemaking trade. His vision of trade became that of a system where foreign capitalists compete for new markets. He defends the idea of producing on national soil when possible and reasonable and expresses sympathy for the advocates of protectionism.
He notes in National Self-Sufficiency:

He also writes in National Self-Sufficiency:

Later, Keynes had a written correspondence with James Meade centred on the issue of import restrictions. Keynes and Meade discussed the best choice between quota and tariff. In March 1944 Keynes began a discussion with Marcus Fleming after the latter had written an article entitled Quotas versus depreciation. On this occasion, we see that he has definitely taken a protectionist stance after the Great Depression. He considered that quotas could be more effective than currency depreciation in dealing with external imbalances. Thus, for Keynes, currency depreciation was no longer sufficient and protectionist measures became necessary to avoid trade deficits. To avoid the return of crises due to a self-regulating economic system, it seemed essential to him to regulate trade and stop free trade (deregulation of foreign trade).

He points out that countries that import more than they export weaken their economies. When the trade deficit increases, unemployment rises and GDP slows down. And surplus countries exert a "negative externality" on their trading partners. They get richer at the expense of others and destroy the output of their trading partners. John Maynard Keynes believed that the products of surplus countries should be taxed to avoid trade imbalances. Thus he no longer believes in the theory of comparative advantage (on which free trade is based) which states that the trade deficit does not matter, since trade is mutually beneficial.
This also explains his desire to replace the liberalisation of international trade (Free Trade) with a regulatory system aimed at eliminating trade imbalances in his proposals for the Bretton Woods Agreement.

Trade liberalisation can sometimes result in large and unequally distributed losses and gains, and can, in the short run, cause significant economic dislocation of workers in import-competing sectors.

Arguments against tariffs

Modern tariff practises

Russia
The Russian Federation adopted more protectionist trade measures in 2013 than any other country, making it the world leader in protectionism. It alone introduced 20% of protectionist measures worldwide and one-third of measures in the G20 countries. Russia's protectionist policies include tariff measures, import restrictions, sanitary measures, and direct subsidies to local companies. For example, the government supported several economic sectors such as agriculture, space, automotive, electronics, chemistry, and energy.

India
From 2017, as part of the promotion of its "Make in India" programme to stimulate and protect domestic manufacturing industry and to combat current account deficits, India has introduced tariffs on several electronic products and "non-essential items". This concerns items imported from countries such as China and South Korea. For example, India's national solar energy programme favours domestic producers by requiring the use of Indian-made solar cells.

Armenia
Armenia, a country located in Western Asia, established its custom service in 1992 after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. When Armenia became a member of the EAEU, it was given access to the Eurasian Customs Union in 2015; this resulted in mostly tariff-free trade with other members and an increased number of import tariffs from outside of the customs union. Armenia does not currently have export taxes. In addition, it does not declare temporary imports duties and credit on government imports or pursuant to other international assistance imports. Upon joining Eurasian Economic Union in 2015, led by Russians, Armenia applied tariffs on its imports at a rate 0-10 percent. This rate has increased over the years, since in 2009 it was around three percent. Moreover, the tariffs increased significantly on agricultural products rather than on non-agricultural products. Armenia has committed to ultimately adopting the EAEU's uniform tariff schedule as part of its EAEU admission. Until 2022, Armenia was authorised to apply non-EAEU tariff rates, according to Decision No. 113. Some beef, pork, poultry, and dairy products; seed potatoes and peas; olives; fresh and dried fruits; some tea items; cereals, especially wheat and rice; starches, vegetable oils, margarine; some prepared food items, such as infant food; pet food; tobacco; glycerol; and gelatin are included in the list.
Membership in the EAEU is forcing Armenia to apply stricter standardisation, sanitary, and phytosanitary requirements in line with EAEU—and, by extension, Russian—standards, regulations, and practices.  Armenia has had to surrender control over many aspects of its foreign trade regime in the context of EAEU membership.  Tariffs have also increased, granting protection to several domestic industries.  Armenia is increasingly beholden to comply with EAEU standards and regulations as post-accession transition periods have, or will soon, end.  All Armenian goods circulating in the territory of the EAEU must meet EAEU requirements following the end of relevant transition periods.

The Republic of Armenia became a WTO member in 2003, which resulted in the Most Favored Country (MFC) benefits from the organisation.  Currently, the tariffs of 2.7% implemented in Armenia are the lowest in the entire framework. The country is also a member of the World Customs Organization (WCO), resulting in a harmonised system for tariff classification.

See also

Types

Trade dynamics

Trade liberalisation
  (GATT)

References

Sources

External links

Types of Tariffs
Effectively applied tariff by Country 2008 to 2012
MFN Trade Weighted Average Tariff by country 2008–2012
World Bank's site for Trade and Tariff
Market Access Map, an online database of customs tariffs and market requirements
WTO Tariff Analysis Online – Detailed information on tariff and trade data

Customs duties
International taxation
International economics

Tariff


Allerton Castle, also known as Allerton Park, is a Grade I listed nineteenth-century Gothic or Victorian Gothic house at Allerton Mauleverer in North Yorkshire, England. It was rebuilt by architect George Martin, of Baker Street, London in 1843–53.

It is  east of Harrogate and just east of the A1(M), at its junction with the A59 York-Knaresborough road and a late 20th-century block used for education and corporate functions.

Outside is St Martin's Church, Allerton Mauleverer.

History

Pre-1786
The Allerton estate belonged to the Mauleverer family from the time of the Norman Conquest. The nearby church of St Martin contains several tomb-monuments to them. When Richard Mauleverer died heirless in 1692, Allerton passed to his wife, who left the estate to Richard Arundell, her son by her second marriage.

Arundell remodelled the church in Norman revival style in 1745. The interior of the church remains unaltered to this day.

"The Grand Old Duke of York"

Following Richard Arundell's death in 1758, Allerton passed to his widow Lady Frances Arundell and on her death in 1769 to her nephew Viscount Galway. His son Robert Monckton-Arundell, the 4th Viscount, rebuilt the house about 1780 to designs attributed to William Lindley, but he sold it in 1786 to Prince Frederick, Duke of York, second son of George III and brother of George IV.

The Duke of York employed Henry Holland in 1788 to remodel the interior of the house, but sold the estate to Thomas Thornton shortly afterwards in 1789.

The Duke may also have constructed the Temple of Victory, which is today visible from the A1 on a  high hill. According to local legend, the ant-like activity of workers constantly ascending and descending to build this gigantic mound inspired the famous nursery rhyme concerning The Grand Old Duke of York and his 10,000 men.

1805–1983
The estate changed hands again in 1805 when purchased by the 17th Baron Stourton. The Hon Edward Stourton's family owned the house from 1805 to 1983 (the Lords Mowbray). The contents were sold in 1965.

It then became 'Stourton House', and the Catholic peer added a chapel in Gothic style. However, in 1843 his son demolished the Georgian house and engaged George Martin, to build the present house in a Tudor-Gothic style. In 1856 work came to a halt as there was not enough money to complete all the interiors.

The house was used by the Royal Canadian Air Force during the Second World War (for the headquarters of RAF Bomber Command's No. 6 Group RCAF) and in 1965.

The family ceased to live there after the death of the 22nd Baron Stourton.

1983–present
In 1983 the house was sold to Dr Gerald Rolph, an American businessman. The purchase included the house and gardens, but not the surrounding park which was retained by Lord Mowbray. Dr Rolph set about renovating the building to the highest standards, filling the house with furniture and pictures of appropriate scale and splendour.

The estate is now run by the Gerald Arthur Rolph Foundation for Historic Preservation and Education, and rooms are available to hire for corporate events and weddings.

A severe fire in January 2005 caused substantial damage to the north aspect of the castle, including the main dining room, library, rear entrance hall, two bedrooms and adjoining dressing rooms and bathrooms and the Servants' Wing. Restoration work commenced in the spring of 2006 and is now more or less complete. The restoration work by specialist contractors consisted of substantial repairs to the ornate stonework and windows, the installation of new floors at first, second and attic levels, significant steelwork, and a new roof structure to match the existing roof. Electrical, plumbing and heating installations as well as plasterwork were also renewed.

Arrangement
A short drive leads past a late 18th-century stable-block before the visitor is confronted with the Tudor-Gothic Victorian building. The main block is built of dark-coloured stone, with a high tower rising above the entrance porch. The lower brick range to the right houses the Chapel of 1805, and behind are the lower buildings of the service courtyard, dating from the 18th century.

The interior of Allerton was designed on a vast scale, with late-Gothic decoration in the style of Pugin's work on the Palace of Westminster. The early-Victorian craftsmanship and the recent restoration work are of the highest quality.

The galleried great hall is one of the highest baronial halls in England, almost  high, lit from a huge lantern which rises from the centre of the main block. It is adorned by intricately carved oak panelling lit by stained glass windows, and has galleried landings whose walls are hung with full-length portraits including works by Michael Dahl and William Dobson.

The hall is central and gives access to the elegant drawing room, the blue-and-white ballroom, and the library with bookcases based on the original designs and restored in the on-site workshop. Most of the original bookcases, together with the books, were destroyed in the fire. The wallpaper was based on one of Pugin's designs for the Houses of Parliament and the ceiling has recently been repainted in the original colours.

The principal staircase opens off the great hall, under another vaulted ceiling hung with portraits of the Mowbray and Stourton families.

The library and dining room occupy the north side of the Hall. The dining room is panelled and has stained glass windows with the arms of the Mowbray and Stourton families. On the huge table, original to the house, are candelabra dating from 1848.

The drawing room has a magnificent plaster ceiling. On the walls are portraits by Michael Dahl and Charles Jervas, and vast rococo mirrors, made for Melton Constable Hall in Norfolk. The ballroom, in the west of the house, was left with bare masonry by Lord Mowbray and Stourton, but Dr Rolph has decorated it with a plaster vaulted ceiling.

On the entrance-side of the house are the Billiard Room, the Music Room, housing a collection of late-19th and early-20th century automatic musical instruments, and the Morning Room.

On a knoll to the west of the house is the Grade II* listed "Temple of Victory", a fine octagonal building of Palladian design.

References

External links

Allerton Castle web site

Grade I listed buildings in North Yorkshire
Royal residences in England
Gothic Revival architecture in North Yorkshire
Houses completed in 1853
Grade I listed houses
Grade I listed castles
Country houses in North Yorkshire

Allerton Castle


The Battle of Degsastan was fought around 603 between king Æthelfrith of Bernicia and the Gaels under Áedán mac Gabráin, king of Dál Riada. Æthelfrith's smaller army won a decisive victory, although his brother Theodbald was killed. Very little further is known about the battle. The location of the nominal Degsastan is not known, either; Dawstane in Liddesdale, Scotland, is a possibility.

According to Bede's account in his Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum (Book I, chapter 34), Æthelfrith had won many victories against the Britons and was expanding his power and territory, and this concerned Áedán, who led "an immense and mighty army" against Æthelfrith. Although Æthelfrith had the smaller army, Bede reports that almost all of Áedán's army was slain, and Áedán himself fled. After this defeat, according to Bede, the Irish kings in Britain would not make war against the English again, right up to Bede's own time (130 years later).

Áedán's army included the Bernician exile Hering, son of the former Bernician king Hussa; his participation is mentioned by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (manuscript E, year 603), and may indicate dynastic rivalry among the Bernicians. Áedán's army also included the Cenél nEógain prince Máel Umai mac Báetáin, who is said by Irish sources to have slain Eanfrith, brother of Æthelfrith.

Áedán survived as King of Dál Riata until 608 when he was succeeded by his youngest son Eochaid Buide. Æthelfrith died in battle in 616.

References

600s conflicts
603
Battles involving the Anglo-Saxons
Battles involving Dál Riata

Battle of Degsastan