Manuel Salazar (artist)

Manuel Salazar, is the noted Death Row artist whose acclaimed paintings brought him international attention and a dramatic reprieve from execution in 1996.
Early life.
Manuel Salazar was born in Joliet, Illinois on 20 February 1966 to Mexican parents. On September 12, 1984, the 18-year-old Manuel "Junior" Salazar was just one member of a carload of four young Latinos and a Black teenager traveling on the east side of Joliet when their car was stopped by local police. The group had an unlicensed gun in a bag - a minor offence, but a fact that triggered panic in the young group. Salazar ran from the car with the gun bag. Police Officer Murrin, his gun drawn, took off after him down an alley. Salazar reached a fence, tossed the gun bag over but could not get away himself. With no where to run, Salazar surrendered. Murrin then punched Manuel in the eye, knocked him down and kept on hitting. Manuel yelled "I give, I give," but Murrin didn't stop. After a moment Salazar pushed Murrin away and fearing for his life, grabbed at the policeman's weapon. A brief struggle ensued, the gun fired, leaving Police Officer Murrin mortally wounded.
Abduction & Death Row.
Salazar escaped to Mexico after a 'shoot to kill' order was issued by Chicago police. In violation of an International extradition treaty between the United States and Mexico, Salazar was abducted and returned to Illinois by CIA operatives and paid agents to stand trial. The evidence that Salazar had acted in self-defence was not satisfactorily argued in the trial and Salazar's lawyer, unbeknown to the Salazar family, was at the same time facing charges for bribing a police witness in another case. After a trial that lasted only four days, Salazar was sentenced to death by lethal injection. Salazar's case was largely ignored for over ten years - impounded on Death Row in an Illinois State Pentitentiary and supported solely during this period by a small tenacious group of local community activists.
International Attention.
In 1994, Salazar's situation started to attract International attention after a series of his Death Row paintings, released from the penitentiary in that year, openly toured in the United Kingdom. The tour represented a new campaign initiative organised by his latest Chicago Attorney, Marlene Kamish and documentary producer and human rights campaigner Christopher Templeton. Salazar quickly discovered that painting was a way of expressing his self-worth and frustrations of innocence. Paintings continued to flourish over a relatively short period of time, each remarkable in their maturity of style. Collected together within a formal exhibition, the paintings received immediate critical acclaim. The impact made all the more great because Salazar had never before lifted a brush. A personal statement from Salazar at this time (1994) read: ""They say that this is the land of opportunity and justice for all. They tell us to be all that we can be and aim for the stars for no dreams are impossible. But it isn't as equal and as just as they proclaim. For life has shown me a different story. Without knowing it, many of us are aiming at shattered dreams"."
Release from Death Row.
International pressure and significant press coverage continued throughout 1994-95 and culminated on 10 June 1996 in an Early Day Motion, signed by 47 MPs in the House of Parliament in the UK drawing attention to Salazar's legal predicament and insisting upon his release. The cumulative action of the UK Campaign, Amnesty International, eminent legal figures like Alun Jones QC, academics like Prof. Rodolfo Acuña and even Pope John Paul II, finally brought Salazar his retrial. The jury took only seven hours to come to their verdict. After spending over twelve years at the Pontiac Correctional centre, the Court had found Salazar guilty of the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter. Having already served more than the maximum five-year sentence, he had in effect, been a free man for over seven years. Upon his release, Salazar's first action was to donate his Death Row paintings to Mexican Schools.


Gabriel Lund

Gabriel Lund (4 October 1773 – 3 November 1832) was a Norwegian merchant and representative at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly.
Biography.
Gabriel Jochumsen Lund was born in Farsund in Vest-Agder, Norway. He graduated with a degree in theology in 1795 but did not join the ministry. He was engaged in trade in Farsund with his father, merchant, trader and shipowner Jochum Brinch Lund (1743-1807) He subsequently took over the trading house and ran it until 1830. Later he served as postmaster in Trondheim. He represented Lister amt at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly in 1814. He was a member of the Finance Committee and supported the independence party ("Selvstendighetspartiet").
He was a member of the Parliament of Norway from 1827 to 1830 representing Lister and Mandals amt (now Vest-Agder).
He was married to Gidsken Edvardine Røring (1781-1841) with whom he had seven children. The family resided at Husan Manor in Farsund which had been built by Jochum Brinch Lund ca 1800. The original wooden structure was partially destroyed by fire in 1940. It was later restored and is now in use as the Farsund City Hall ("Husan, Farsunds rådhus"). In 1990, the city of Farsund received the “Europa Nostra” prize for the successful restoration of the former manor house.


Removal of the Federal Government

Much of Washington, D.C. was destroyed in the Burning of Washington on August 24, 1814 during the War of 1812. Following the destruction of Washington US leadership considered removing the Federal Government from D.C., but eventually choose to reconstruct the seat of government in D.C.
The Debate on Removing the Federal Government from D.C..
From the beginning of the founding of the Nation, a heavily debated, political issue was the location of the governing body and subsequent capital of the United States. After many years, multiple relocations, rehashing of the argument, compromises, policy and one fire, the Burning of Washington, August 24, 1814, part of the War of 1812 it was concrete that the capital of America would long be Washington D.C. However, before Congress made the decision to keep the capital in Washington it debated to uproot it.
Compromise of 1790.
The location of the federal government was a result of the Compromise of 1790, the agreement that the capital would be placed below the Mason–Dixon line as a compromise to states assuming the Federal Government's Revolutionary war debt. The Compromise of 1790 was arranged between then Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, Congressman James Madison, and Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson in June 1790. The compromise resulted in moving the capital from New York to Philadelphia (for ten years) and finally to Washington D.C.. Hamilton agreed to provide the votes in Congress for the capital while Jefferson and Madison ensured enactment of Hamilton's plan for the assumption of the Revolutionary War debts of the states by the federal government.
Locations of the Capital.
Prior, the capital shifted up and down the northeast coast of the United States. Initially, the First Continental Congress met in Philadelphia in 1774. After this, the body moved to Baltimore, Lancaster, PA, and York, PA. Between 1781 and 1788, Congress met in Philadelphia, Princeton, New Jersey, Annapolis, Maryland, Trenton, New Jersey, and New York. After Congress was legitimized by the Constitution, it met in New York, Philadelphia[5] and then finally after 1800, Washington D.C.
Debates between 1800-1808.
Between 1800 and 1808 Congressmen made several attempts to remove the federal government from D.C. At this time when travel was difficult and time consuming. Many congressmen felt that the capital should be somewhere “with greater security and less inconvenience” as well as being a more accessible location via a water way. A majority of both houses wanted to move the seat of government to Pennsylvania, either Philadelphia, a centrally located gateway to the West, or Lancaster.
In 1804, Senator Robert White (judge) made the first motion to relocate the capital to Baltimore, MD. However, John Quincy Adams questioned the constitutionality of it. Adams claimed that the Constitution did not give Congress the power to “relocate the seat of government, only to govern it” and that to do so would be in direct violation of the formal clauses of the Compromise of 1790 - formally titled as “The Residence Act”.
In 1808, Representative James Sloan (congressman) of New Jersey argued that the cosmetics and atmosphere of Washington was not indicative of the nation as a whole and that Philadelphia, a shining political and social hub on the east coast, should be named the capital. In contrast, critics claimed, Washington was ill-planned with public buildings constructed poorly and faraway from each other. Moreover, it was poorly populated and lacked the romantic metropolitan aesthetic that New York and Philadelphia had at this time. After much debate, the motion for failed 51-35.
Destruction of Documents and Buildings.
The British invasion on the capital in August 1814, created the opportunity to revisit the pros and con of removing the government from Washington. Crucial buildings and documents were destroyed that were vital to the governing of the nation. A portion of the Capitol Building was destroyed, and the U.S. Treasury was in ashes. The War and State Departments as well as the Navy Yard were scorched and infamously the White House was destroyed. At the Navy Yard, clerks were ordered to torch ships and ammunitions to prevent the British from seizing them. This collective blaze was reportedly seen as far away as Baltimore. The original library of the United States Congress was also destroyed in the fire. All 3,000 of the books housed in the library were destroyed. Less than a month later, Thomas Jefferson offered his private collection of 6,487 books as a replacement to Congress. The United States purchased his library for $23,950 in 1815, and it became the foundation of the modern collection of the Library of Congress.
Congress created the national archives in 1934. Prior, it required each executive department to keep its own archives.
For example, the Department of State was in charge of preserving the nation's early state papers including the records of the Confederation and Continental Congresses, George Washington's papers as commander of the Continental Army, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution. The papers were stored in boxes and trunks in attics of public buildings scattered throughout the city - at risk to weather, water, neglect, fire, theft. At the Department of State, clerks John Graham, Stephen Pleasanton, and Josias King saved the documents in custody. Bringing bags and trunks to load onto carts, they saved books and papers of the State Department, unpublished secret journals of Congress, George Washington's commission and correspondence, the Articles of Confederation, the papers of the Continental Congress, and treaties, laws, and correspondence dating back to 1789. Along with these early records, the clerks also saved the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and Bill of Rights.
First Lady Dolley Madison saved numerous Cabinet papers as well as Gilbert Stuart's famous Landsdowne portrait of George Washington.
Yet a, majority of the archives of Congress stored in the Capital were destroyed. Due to lack of resources, people and time, it was simply too late. Some were spared, however. House clerks Samuel Burch and J. T. Frost moved House papers to a secret location and Senate clerk Lewis Machen took Senate documents to his farm in Maryland. The salvaged documents included military numbers and logistics, the Senate's history over the past quarter century, and various confidential papers.
Debate and Reconstruction.
In order to rebuild and move forward, President Madison wrote to the Senate in September 1814. He authorized that Congress would convene in the Patent and Post Office building as it was the only government building to escape the attack: “The destruction of the Capitol by the Enemy having made it necessary that other accommodations should be provided for the meeting of Congress, chambers for the Senate and for the House of Representatives…have been fitted up…in the Public Building heretofore allotted for the Post and other Public Offices.” Congress met there from September 1814 until December 1815.
As soon as Congress convened, discussions on removing the government resumed. The Clerk of the Special Council, Thomas Bedfordfree[, pushed to remove the government temporarily to Philadelphia. However, the proposal was ultimately defeated by the House when it was put to a vote on September 26, 1814. Simultaneously, Philadelphia's city government offered their resources to the government and was willing to house them offering, “suitable places for their accommodation, as well as that of the other departments.”.
A House committee was formed to investigate whether or not Washington was secure enough to house the government and if it was financially viable to rebuild. The committee ruled that a move to Philadelphia, either temporarily or permanently, would be “inexpedient.” On October 3, 1814, there was a vote to change the deciding word from “inexpedient” to “expedient”, the vote was split, 68–68, and Speaker of the House Henry Clay, broke the tie ultimately deciding that Washington D.C. would remain the nation's capital. District citizens built a temporary brick Capitol on the site of the present day Supreme Court of the United States for Congress to meet in.


Women during the Reconstruction era

Women during the Reconstruction era dating from 1863 to 1877 acted as the heads of their households due to the involvement of men in the war, and presided over their farm and family members throughout the country. Following the war, there was a great surge for education among women and to coincide with this, a great need for women to find paid employment. As the educational opportunity began involving women, illiteracy declined and women were able to attain education. Soon after, many women became newspaper editors and journalists and began being more heavily involved within the community and local and national politics. Women began increasing their efforts towards suffrage and influencing public policy. African American women were also heavily involved in suffrage and with their involvement in the Methodist Episcopal Church South and the Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU).
Education.
Prior to the 1830s, women in the New England area began to have more opportunities to receive education due to changes in public policy. In 1840, literacy was nearly universal for women, with a one hundred percent increase from sixty years earlier. Women began receiving greater opportunities for education as seen through the expansion of free education, the professional training of teachers, and the organization of higher educational opportunities for women. Women received great opposition to educational opportunities during the late 18th and early 19th century as well, as women were only allowed to receive schooling during the summer period, prioritized enrollment in schooling for men, as well as the exclusion of females from grammar schools, teaching both Latin and Greek. In addition, women were often faced with beliefs in opposition to furthering their education, such as the universal belief at that time that women's brains were smaller in capacity and therefore inferior to the male brain.
Vassar, Wellesley and Smith, and Bryn Mawr colleges were founded during the Reconstruction Era with the intent of creating greater opportunities for women in higher education. These women's colleges offered encouragement in scientific investigation, and tasks requiring patience and delicate manipulation—the work often thought of that men refused to do. Educational opportunities for women consisted of embroidery, painting, French, singing, and the playing of instruments. Though women were provided increased opportunities, they were often still seen as assistants and aid to men. In 1868, the Woman's infirmary Medical School was opened and began making innovations in the field of medicine. Education for African American varied to some degree. For many women they stopped at the primary grades. For African American women, education was difficult because they struggled with illiteracy, were seen as outsiders, and were needed for domestic labor to support their families. Between 1860 and 1910 the birthrate declined by one-third. The founding of the Mount Hermon Seminary in Mississippi in 1875 created an opportunity for African American women to receive a quality education. By 1890 only thirty Negro women had received college degrees.
Employment.
Social change began taking place between 1780 and 1835, and as a result made shifts in women's patterns of work. The norm for adult women during this time remained household occupation. Leading up to the Reconstruction Era, the growth of school teaching became expansive and allowed women a non-domestic occupation. As populations grew in large cities, improvements in transportation were made, and markets focused on the consumer's needs began thriving, the importance of women's work within the home declined. In the 1860s, the number of children per white woman was just over five and by 1910 it had dropped to under three and a half. In 1870, two percent of office workers were women, and by 1920 that number had increased to 45 percent with 92 percent of stenographers; a large majority of individuals in these positions were native-born, white women. Though the birthrate began dropping, women began working in jobs uncommon ten years prior. The birthrate for African American women declined by one-third between 1860 and 1910. With their husbands away at war, women began working in retail establishments, manufacturing plants, and became plantation owners. Women's involvement in unions also begin increasing. The first two national unions to admit women to membership was the cigar makers in 1867 and the printers in 1869. Women participated in numerous unions throughout the country, including the Knights of Labor, American Federation of Labor, Working Women's Association, National Labor Union, Ironmolders Union, and countless others. They lead out in the shoemakers strike of 1860 and also took part in the bread riots that occurred in 1863 and 1864, causing high prices and food shortages. Women desiring to practice law also faced difficulty in that in 1873 citizenship did not confer the right to practice law. In 1874, the Illinois legislature passed legislator that provided that no one could be prevented from any occupation, profession or employment (except the military) on account of sex. Women factory workers were common in the mid-nineteenth century. From 1860 to 1870, women factory workers rose from 270,987 to 323,370, as thousands of women were forces into the labor market when the men went off to war.
Publishing.
Eliza Jane Poitevent, also known as Pearl Rivers, the owner of the "New Orleans Picayune", along with other women such as Elia Good Byington, Mary Ann Thomas, Florence Williams, Addie McGrath, published papers primarily devoted to women's rights and were all very influential among the general public. The "New Orleans Picayune" published a series of opinions on the great number of women needing work and the conditions that Southern Women must face in the work place. Labor reform was often a topic of discussion among editorials. In 1866, a book entitled "The Last Ninety Days of the War in North Carolina," by Cornelia Phillips Spencer, was published offering opinions of work allotted to women and their place in society. Her publication gained great popularity and her opinion began being sought by public officials throughout the state of North Carolina and by administrators at the University of North Carolina. Though it held little political influence, Louisa May Alcott's Little Women was published 1868 and had an influence among women challenging women's socialization into home life. In 1882, Elizabeth Stuart Phelps published a novel entitled, "Doctor Zay" and was a novel about women doctors of that period, with the intent to portray women as being able to "have it all", having both a successful career and marriage. Between 1870 and 1890 thirty-three suffrage periodicals existed. "The Women's Journal", published in 1870 by Lucy Stone, was yet another way to achieve women advocacy and was a pathway for women to gain further support for suffrage movements. This periodical was said to have been the most influential of all the suffrage publishings as it had over thirty thousand readers by 1883.
Suffrage.
During the Civil War, women's rights movements had been pushed to the side. However, with the ending of the war and the start of Reconstruction, women began to advocate for their rights, and especially so for women's suffrage. On May 14, 1863 Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, women's rights activists, organized a meeting of "The Loyal Women of the Nation" located in New York. The meeting was held in support of the thirteenth amendment, knowing it would assist in the woman's desire and ability to vote. At the closing of the meeting, the National Woman's Loyal League was established and though the organization disbanded a little over a year later, the women were able to gather over 400,000 signatures in support of the thirteenth amendment. This organization allowed women to see the effect organizations could have and laid the foundation for many other suffrage and women organizations throughout the country.
The congressional passage of the Enforcement Act in May 1870 to strengthen the Fifteenth Amendment was an opportunity for women to vote. With the intent to allow greater voting freedoms to citizens, women used it as their pathway to suffrage. Women took to the polls in groups, including a group of fifty women who attempted to vote with Susan B. Anthony. Women's attempts to register and to vote were usually denied, resulting in many women, including Virginia Minor and Ellen Van Valkenberg, suing election officials.
During the late 1860s there were secret suffragists scattered throughout the south and following the end of the war began becoming vice-presidents of the Equal Rights Association in states such as Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Florida and Tennessee. White women soon realized that in order to reconcile with the white in the South and work towards suffrage, they would need to abandon African American women efforts towards suffrage and equal rights.
Victoria Woodhull was a prominent figure in the women's suffrage movement during the 1870s and also an example of female political involvement within the United States. In 1870, pushing the limits of female citizenship, She announced her candidacy for president and was the first women to run for president. She advocated the importance of popular sovereignty, and argued that women were included in the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment as citizens. She asked to present before Congress in 1871 on women's suffrage, but was rejected by a majority vote. Despite her loss, Woodhull's presentation was significant in that she was the first woman to present before a congressional committee. Additionally, her presentation began spreading the interest in women suffrage beyond the average women, and her dedication made way for other women to become involved in politics, such as Mary Elizabeth Lease, and even mended the rivalry of two suffrage organizations and lead to the dedication of the National American Woman Suffrage Association.
Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the founders of the National Woman Suffrage Association and Lucy Stone and Julia Ward Howe, the founders of the American Woman Suffrage Association, though often at conflict with one another, were able to mend their disagreements due to Victoria Woodhull's great efforts. Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stantons's involvement in suffrage and politics, was seen through their countless efforts of speeches, publications, the founding of the National Woman Suffrage Association, as well as actions of civil disobedience seen by them wearing revealing dresses, demanding the right to vote at polls, participating in the Underground Railroad, and refusing to pay legal fees when they felt them unnecessary. These women's work paved the way for the passing of the 19th amendment and freedoms for women for years to come.
Following Woodhull's, Anthony's, and Stanton's example, other women presented suffrage arguments in government, including Hannah Tracy Cutler and Margaret V. Longley presenting before the Kentucky legislature in 1872.
African American women.
Church involvement.
In the 1870s, Methodist, Baptist, and Presbyterian women all over the south, predominantly African American women, organized missionary societies that studied geography, raised money, and recruited individuals to travel globally in support of women empowerment. These missions acted as training schools for women's involvement in public life and a greater involvement in politics. In pursuit of greater women empowerment, women actively sought to preach and gain status within the Methodist Episcopal Church South and churches all throughout the south. Baptist and Methodist male leaders agreed that it was forbidden for women to act in leadership roles within the church and strongly opposed the action. Despite this opposition, with continued female persistence, in 1878 the Southern Methodist General Conference authorized the organization of a Women's Board of Foreign Missions, comprising 218 societies and 5,890 members. This society lead to tens of thousands of women involvement in school boards, hospitals and local city organizations all around the country.
The progress of women's involvement within the Baptist and Methodist church lead to greater self-confidence and independence for women and was the foundation of the Women's club movement and subsequent club organizations and ultimately lead to political involvement within the United States for women.
In addition to their efforts within the Baptist and Methodist church, one of the most successful organizations in rallying women together was that of Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU). Founded in 1874, the WCTU was one of the first organizations to welcome African American women in their efforts within the Temperance Movement.
Political involvement.
African American women became politically involved during Reconstruction including: the establishment of Civic Improvement Leagues, the fight for abolition of child labor, involvement in prohibition, the pursuit of educational rights for women, and, critically, women's suffrage. While the right to vote was only given to black men, black women also took a part in voting and political activism. Voting was seen as a family matter, so often freedmen would not submit their ballots without their wives' approval and opinion. African American women additionally played a large role in organizations such as the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) and the American Equal Right Association (AERA). Though they were heavily involved within the NWSA, clubwomen often distanced themselves from African American women due largely to influx of newcomers who had not been involved in the anti-slavery movement unlike their white predecessors. They attended political rallies and would show support for candidates or protest others, using their voices to impact public opinion. Many freedwomen even attended the polls. They would go with male family members to oversee how they voted, and some women attempted to vote themselves. In 1870, five black women were arrested for voting in South Carolina. The political activism of African American women, especially in the South, led to increased racial violence against them. Black women who took an interest in politics were at risk of violence from white men, and some were killed. Despite the violence they faced, Africa American women remained active in politics throughout the Reconstruction Era.
Southern women.
Southern white women became increasingly involved in politics during Reconstruction. Women worked as liaisons between the Federal government and their male family members. Women would petition for husbands, sons, fathers, and brothers who were arrested for participation in the Confederacy or crimes committed against federal soldiers and freedmen. This led to Southern women gaining a deep knowledge of laws and political processes, unlike before when these women rarely played a role in issues outside of their homes. Women would go before the courts, and some even petitioned directly to President Andrew Johnson. They used strategies such as using their gender to play on the sympathy of men to free their family members. These women also supported white male efforts to disenfranchise freedmen. They saw black men gaining political power as a threat to their own political and physical security. When a male family member was charged for violence against freedmen, women would defend them by denying or reinterpreting the accusations against them. White women took up roles as the heads of their homes and kept them in order when fathers and husbands were arrested. By the turn of the century a large majority of southern women were employed.


Nagorno-Karabakh Declaration

In the Nagorno-Karabakh Declaration (more formally, The Declaration of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Armenia and the Russian Federation), signed 2 November 2008 in the Meiendorf Castle in Moscow Oblast, the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia stated their intention to "contribute to a healthier situation in the South Caucasus and the establishment of regional stability and security through a political settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on the basis of the principles and norms of international law and adopted in the framework of decisions and documents".
It reaffirmed the importance of continuing the mediation efforts of the OSCE Minsk Group in the light of the Madrid document dated 29 November 2007, and subsequent discussions.
The parties reached an agreement that "reach a peaceful settlement that must be accompanied by a legally binding international guarantees all its aspects and stages".
According to the Russian co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, Yuri Merzlyakov, the main value of the declaration is that it was the first since 1994, agreed to in the settlement of the Karabakh conflict, and concluded "directly between the two conflicting parties".


Thai cultural mandates

The cultural mandates or state decrees (; ; literally "state fashion" or "state customs') were a series of 12 edicts issued between 1939 and 1942 by the government of Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsonggram during his first term as prime minister and military dictator of Thailand. The mandates aimed to create a uniform and "civilized" Thai culture at the time when the country was allied with the Axis powers. Many of the practices initiated in the mandates were a result of Thailand entering World War II and remain in effect.
Mandate 1.
The first mandate, "On the name of the country, people and nationality", issued 24 June 1939, cited "public preference" for changing the name of the country. It consisted of one item: "The country, people and nationality are to be called 'Thai'."
One result of this mandate was that organizations with "Siam" in the name were forced to change their names. Well-known examples include the Siam Society, which became the Thailand Research Society, Siam Commercial Bank, renamed Thai Panich Bank, and Siam Cement, which became Thai Cement. After Pibulsonggram was deposed the first time in 1944, Siam Society reverted both its Thai and English names, while the latter two reverted only the English version of their names.
Mandate 2.
"On preventing danger to the nation", issued 3 July 1939, consisted of five items:
Mandate 3.
"On referring to the Thai people", issued 2 August 1939, reinforced Mandate 1 by forcing the public to stop using group names like "northern Thais", "southern Thais", or "Muslim Thais":
Mandate 4.
"On honouring the national flag, national anthem, and royal anthem", issued 8 September 1939, consists of five items:
Mandate 5.
"On using Thai products", issued 1 November 1939, consisted of five items:
Mandate 6.
"On the music and lyrics of the national anthem", issued 10 December 1939, consisted of two items:
Mandate 7.
"Urging the Thai people help build the nation", issued on 21 March 1940,
Mandate 8.
"On the royal anthem", issued 26 April 1940, shortened the lyrics of the royal anthem, and replaced the word "Siam" with the word "Thai":
Mandate 9.
"On language and writing and the duty of good citizens", issued 24 June 1940, consisted of four items:
Mandate 10.
"On Thai dress", issued 15 January 1941, consisted of two items:
Mandate 11.
"On daily activities", issued 8 September 1941, consisted of five items:
Mandate 12.
The final mandate, "On protecting children, the elderly and the handicapped", issued 28 January 1942, consisted of two items:
21st century cultural mandates.
In 2018 the Thai government created a "soft power" campaign called "Thai Niyom" (Thai-ism) (; ) to reinforce the notion of Thai exceptionalism. It includes "12 Core Values", reminiscent of the earlier Thai cultural mandates. The campaign has been criticized by some academics as "mere state propaganda".


Peerage Bill

The Peerage Bill was a 1719 measure proposed by the British Whig government led by James Stanhope, 1st Earl Stanhope and Charles Spencer, 3rd Earl of Sunderland which would have largely halted the creation of new peerages, limiting membership of the House of Lords.
It was inspired by a desire to prevent a repeat of the 1711 creation of twelve Tory peers, known widely as "Harley's Dozen", in order to secure the passage of the peace treaty with France through the Whig-dominated Lords. Following the Whig Split of 1717 there was also a wish to stop Prince George, once King, from packing the house with his own supporters.
The proposal had an attraction to existing aristocrats both Tory and Whig. However, Robert Walpole rallied opposition to it and successfully appealed to MPs by arguing the bill would deny them and their families the opportunity of ever being allowed to join the aristocracy. He also mocked Stanhope, who had recently been made a Lord, for being "desirous to shut the door after him". Tories also strongly opposed the measure, including Robert Harley who criticised the proposal as potentially undermining Britain's constitution.
The Bill led to a public dispute between Joseph Addison and Richard Steele, former friends and collaborators and both Whig members of the Kit-Kat Club. Addison supported the Bill while Steele opposed it.
The proposal was finally defeated in the House of Commons on 8 December 1719. The following year Walpole and his opposition Whig allies rejoined the government, ending the party's split.


Robert Resha

Robert Resha (1920-1974) was a South African journalist and political dissident. He served in the African National Congress as a member of the Youth League and the National Executive Committee.
Early life.
Robert Resha was born in Bolotwe in 1920. He completed eight years of school and then went to work as a miner.
Journalism.
After acquiring a reputation for being a troublemaker, he took up freelance journalism, writing for various progressive newspapers. He moved to Johannesburg in 1940.
African National Congress.
Resha joined the African National Congress in 1939, as an active member of the Youth League. He was jailed for participating in the 1952 Defiance Campaign, along with his wife Maggie Resha. For these contributions, he was accepted into the National Executive Committee in December 1952, serving as acting President in 1954-55 after a ban was placed on the former President Joe Matthews.
Resha was involved in many ANC-directed protests and strikes, including the Sophiatown Anti-Removal Campaign and the Colonial Youth Day Rally.
1956 Treason Trial.
Resha was one of the accused in the 1956 Treason Trial, charged for high treason. His case was the most serious, since he had called for the "murder" of whites in a speech to the ANC National Executive. He was acquitted in March 1961. During the trial, he launched a boycott in 1959. Afterwards, he was banned from attending any ANC events and restricted to Johannesburg.
In exile.
After the Treason Trial, Resha left South Africa in order to serve as an ANC ambassador, serving mainly in Algiers. He spoke as a representative of the ANC before the United Nations several times. In 1974, Resha died in exile in London.


Clarence Carnes

Clarence Victor Carnes (January 14, 1927 – October 3, 1988), known as The Choctaw Kid, was a Choctaw man best known as the youngest inmate incarcerated at Alcatraz and for his participation in the bloody escape attempt known as the "Battle of Alcatraz".
Early life.
Clarence Carnes was born in Daisy, Oklahoma, the oldest of five children. He was raised in poverty, and his criminal activities began as a child, stealing candy bars from his school. He was sentenced to life imprisonment at the age of 16 for the murder of a garage attendant during an attempted hold-up. In early 1945, he escaped from the Granite Reformatory with a number of other prisoners, but was recaptured and sentenced to an additional 99 years for a kidnapping carried out while he was on the run. He was recaptured in April 1945 and sent to Leavenworth, but made another attempt to escape while in the custody of the United States Marshals Service and was transferred to Alcatraz along with an additional 5-year sentence. There, he was assessed by psychiatrist Romney M. Ritchey and found to have a psychopathic personality, and to be emotionally unstable with an I.Q. of 93.
Alcatraz.
Carnes arrived on Alcatraz on July 6, 1945. On May 2, 1946, Carnes and five other inmates participated in a failed attempt to escape from Alcatraz which turned into the bloody "Battle of Alcatraz", so-called because three inmates and two prison officers died. After the escape failed, he was tried for murder along with the two other survivors, Sam Shockley and Miran Edgar Thompson, and was found guilty of participating in the plot. Shockley and Thompson were sentenced to death, however Carnes was not executed because he had not directly participated in the murders of the officers, instead being sentenced to an additional 99 years. Some corrections officers who had been taken hostage testified that he had refrained from following instructions to kill them.
Carnes remained on Alcatraz until its closure in 1963, spending most of the time there in the segregation unit. He claimed that he had received a postcard from Frank Morris and the Anglin brothers, John and Clarence, which read "Gone fishing", which was a code word that their escape had succeeded. No material evidence of such a postcard has been found.
Parole, re-incarceration, death.
Despite having been given a life sentence in Oklahoma for murder, as well as a sentence of 203 years on federal charges, Carnes was paroled in 1973 at the age of 46. However, his parole was revoked twice due to parole violations and he was sent back to prison with BOP# 61805-132. He died of AIDS-related complications on October 3, 1988, at the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, and was buried in a paupers' grave.
In 1989, Massachusetts organized crime figure James J. "Whitey" Bulger, who had befriended Carnes while on Alcatraz, paid for his body to be exhumed and reburied on land in the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. Bulger reportedly bought a lavish $4,000 bronze casket and paid for a car to transport Carnes' remains from Missouri to Oklahoma. Carnes is buried at the Billy Cemetery in Daisy, Oklahoma.
In popular culture.
Carnes' life was dramatized in the 1980 Telepictures Corporation TV movie "". The film, which aired in two 95 minute parts, starred Michael Beck as Clarence Carnes.
The Battle of Alcatraz was dramatized in the 1987 TV movie "Six Against the Rock", based on the novel by Clark Howard. While most of the characters were given the names of the real inmates (such as Bernard Coy and Miran Thompson), Carnes' character was renamed Dan Durando, portrayed by Paul Sanchez.
Carnes' life was interpreted in Rolling Way the Rock, a performance piece by Tim Tingle, also a Choctaw man, which premiered in 2006 at the International Symposium of Artists of Conscience in Victoria, British Columbia.


Peder Anker

Peder Anker (8 December 1749 – 10 December 1824) was a prominent Norwegian landowner, businessman and politician. He served as Prime Minister of Norway from 1814 until 1822.
Biography.
Peder Anker was a member of a Danish-Norwegian noble family. He was born in Christiania, the son of the wealthy merchant Christian Ancher. He had three brothers Iver (1745-1772), Bernt (1746-1805) and Jess (1753-1798). Following education in Christiania and a year as student at the University of Copenhagen, Peder Anker and his brothers spent five years traveling with private tutors in Great Britain, France, Germany, and Italy. They were pupils of the noted Swedish naturalist Carl von Linné at Uppsala University in 1764. He was granted Danish nobility in 1778 and was awarded the title of General War Commissioner in 1788.
Peder Anker bought Bogstad Manor with additional forest land and extended the existing house to make a splendid mansion. Bogstad had for about 100 years belonged to members of the Leuch family, his grandmother's family. He also acquired iron mines and foundries, notably Bærums Verk and Hakadal Verk. The Vækerø manor ("Vækerø gård") near Oslo was established as a port for the export of lumber. Anker rose to become one of Norway's richest individuals.
Peder Anker was a delegate to the Norwegian Constituent Assembly at Eidsvoll in 1814, representing Akershus Amt. He distinguished himself as a "unionist", whose members opposed complete independence for Norway. On 18 November 1814 he was appointed Prime Minister of Norway to Stockholm after the Union between Sweden and Norway was established, and remained in this office until 30 June 1822.
Honors.
Peder Anker was decorated with the Royal Order of the Seraphim and the Order of Charles XIII. He was awarded the Grand Cross of the Order of Dannebrog in 1812. In 1815, he was elected a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
Legacy.
Several roads in Norway have been named in honor of Peder Anker including "Peder Ankers vei" in Jar, "Peder Anker gate" in Halden, and "Peder Ankers Plass" in Oslo.
Related Reading.
Holmøyvik, Eirik (2012) "Maktfordeling og 1814" (Bergen, Fagbokforlaget)


Pavel Parasca

Pavel Parasca (born July 8, 1939) is a historian from the Republic of Moldova.
Biography.
Pavel Parasca was born on July 8, 1939 in Brînzenii Vechi and graduated from the Moldova State University in 1967. Then he worked as redactor for "Enciclopedia RSS Moldovenesti" and teacher in Congo-Brazzaville (1967–1968, 1971–1972). He returned for good in Chişinău, where he had academic positions in the Facultatea de Istorie of Moldova State University, Institutul de Istorie of Academy of Sciences of Moldova, Facultatea de Stiinte Umanistice a ULIM. On June 18, 1989, Parasca Pavel Fiodorovici was a founder of the Association of Historians of Moldova (); he was director of the association for four years.
Pavel Parasca is a member of the Commission for the Study of the Communist Dictatorship in Moldova. The commission was instituted by the President of Moldova Mihai Ghimpu to investigate the Communist regime and provide a comprehensive report.
References.
[[Category:1939 births]]
[[Category:People from Telenești District]]
[[Category:Living people]]
[[Category:Moldova State University alumni]]
[[Category:Moldovan historians]]
[[Category:Members of the Commission for the Study of the Communist Dictatorship in Moldova]]


Washington County Courthouse (Minnesota)

The historic Washington County Courthouse in Stillwater, Minnesota, United States, is one of the oldest standing courthouses in Minnesota. It was the center of Washington County government for over a century, from the building's completion in 1870 until 1975. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1971 for having state-level significance in the themes of architecture and government/politics. It was nominated as Minnesota's oldest functioning courthouse and one of its few surviving examples of monumental public architecture from the mid-19th century.
History.
The courthouse was designed by Augustus Knight of St. Paul, in the Italianate style. When the courthouse opened in 1870, the county was doing a booming business in the lumber industry. The courthouse reflected the county's wealth and overlooked the city from atop Zion's Hill. The foundation is built of limestone, and the building has a brick facade and is topped with a prominent dome, cupola, and flagpole. It cost $60,000 to construct, .
When the county offices were moved to the new Washington County Government Center in 1975, efforts began to reuse the structure. Restoration has been funded through donations from local businesses and community groups, as well as grants from foundations. The historic courthouse is still in operation and serves as a gathering place and as a venue for community, cultural, and private events. The mission statement states, "The purpose of the operation of the Washington County Historic Courthouse is to preserve, re-adapt, restore and interpret this historic landmark for current and future generations, especially those from Washington County." To this end, the county works with local groups to preserve and maintain the courthouse and grounds, conducts tours and provides historic interpretation of the county's heritage. The facility is also available for rental, which offsets some of the expenses of maintaining the structure.


District of Columbia v. John R. Thompson Co.

District of Columbia v. John R. Thompson Co. Inc., 346 U.S. 100 (1953), is a United States Supreme Court case which began on April 30, 1953 over the validity of the local Washington Acts of 1872 and 1873. The Acts prohibited segregation in public places within the District. With the court's support, the legal ramifications of the 1872 and 1873 Acts could once again be enforced. The case transpired during growing racial tension in the nation's capital. Throughout Washington, the black community had grown tired of unfair treatment regarding housing, businesses, and education. But, change came soon enough through the courts. On June 8, 1953, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the segregating policies practiced by Thompson's Cafeteria were illegal, marking a huge victory for the national black community.
Context.
This challenge to segregation initially came from an African American activist, Mary Church Terrell. At 87, she was the chair of Washington's Coordinating Committee, which fought for desegregation across the city. Thanks to research by Howard University Law School Librarian Mercer Daniel, lawyers from the D.C. Lawyers Guild such as Charles Hamilton Houston, Joseph Forer, and David Rein were able to notify Terrell that a number of laws from the Reconstruction Era that outlawed segregation, while not enforced, had technically never been repealed. Consequently, on January 27, 1950, Terrell and a small group of friends walked through the doors of Thompson's diner and requested a table. After the manager promptly refused to serve them, the Coordinating Committee thrust the issue of segregated eating establishments onto the legal and social stage of the nation's capital.
Given its long list of civil rights all-stars including Walter E. Washington, William Hastie, Robert C. Weaver, and Annie Stein, the Coordinating Committee obtained media attention and put pressure on local officials. Normally when it was presented with segregated eating establishments, its actions included boycotts, protests, and silent negotiations. The group also amassed and distributed a wildly-popular list of preferred restaurants that served both blacks and whites as a means of putting economic pressure on more- reluctant restaurant owners. In this instance, the Committee decided to use Thompson's diner on 14th Street as the example to challenge in court. After the restaurant manager rejected Terrell and her friends, the Committee pressed the District Commissioners to look more closely at the restaurant for failing to comply with the Acts of 1872 and 1873.
Lower courts.
Noticing that the Acts had clearly never been repealed, the City Commissioners immediately sided with Terrell. However, Thompson's manager was still unwilling to budge on his stance. Consequently, the District sued it on Terrell and the committee's behalf, and the case was brought to the local Municipal Court in July 1950. The Board of Trade, a notoriously-white elitist group that actively lobbied for Congress to uphold segregation, came to the legal aid of the restaurant. The Municipal Court quickly rejected the District's claim that the Reconstruction laws were still in effect stating that the laws "had been repealed by implication on the enactment by Congress of the Organic Act of June 11, 1878." That Act restructured the local government to contain only three presidentially-appointed commissioners. Therefore, the Court argued that since the former laws had been put in place by an obsolete government, they no longer applied. A lengthy appeals process followed.
In May 1951, Washington's Municipal Court of Appeals overturned the original ruling. In discussing the 1872 and 1873 laws, the Appeals Court stated that "the former Act insofar as it applied to restaurants, had been repealed, but the latter act was still in effect." Therefore, the 1873 Act was still valid because there were no laws that automatically repealed measures put in place by former officials. However, the victory was short-lived because the verdict did not go into effect until all appeals had been heard. In January 1953, the federal U.S. Court of Appeals overruled the lower-level verdict by one vote: 5–4. Given the contradicting verdicts from various judges, the case soon found itself on the docket of the US Supreme Court. On April 30, 1953, the Supreme Court began its review of the case.
Supreme Court decision.
The Supreme Court found flaws in the arguments put forth on Thompson's behalf. For one, the Court stated that "the failure of the executive branch to enforce a law does not result in its modification or repeal." Essentially, although the city did not enforce the 1873 Act for roughly eight decades, it was still in effect. In addition, the Supreme Court reinforced that only Congress had "the power to pass laws which would alter or repeal the Acts of the Legislative Assembly." The Court referenced how Congress, in the Organic Act of 1878, took away all legislative power from the local municipal government in Washington. Therefore, only Congress thereafter had the ability to repeal the 1873 Act, which protected the rights of all races in public places. Since Congress did not act on its power to appeal the Act, it was technically still in effect. Finally, the Supreme Court also touched on the controversy over the Code of 1901, which gave the local, Washington government more autonomy. The Court stated that "even if we assume that after the Code of 1901 the Commissioners had the authority to replace these anti-discrimination laws with others ones, we find no indication that they ever did so."
Consequently, on June 8, 1953, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Appeals Court and ruled in favor of the District of Columbia.
Aftermath.
Terrell stated, "I will die happy to know that the children of my group will not grow up thinking they are inferior because they are deprived of rights which children of other racial groups enjoy." At the age of 90, she was ecstatic to have not only the privilege but also the right at last to be served anywhere in the nation's capital. Along with "Hurd v. Hodge" and "Bolling v. Sharpe", the case helped end institutionalized segregation in Washington.


Paul Peterson Paus

Sir Paul Peterson Paus (born 1625 in Vinje, died 1682 in Hjartdal), also rendered as Povel Pedersson Paus, was a Norwegian cleric and a signatory of the 1661 Sovereignty Act, the new constitution of Denmark-Norway, as one of the 87 representatives of the Norwegian clerical estate, one of the two privileged estates of the realm in Denmark-Norway. He is known as the author of the 1653 poem "In memoriam Domini Petri Pavli", a loving poem in Latin in memory of his father Peter Paulson Paus. Paul Paus was reputed to be a learned and contemplative personality. His descendants include the playwright Henrik Ibsen.
Life and work.
After attending Oslo Cathedral School and the University of Copenhagen, he served as parish priest of the district of Hjartdal from 1649 to 1682. Magnus Brostrup Landstad describes Paul Peterson Paus as a learned and pious priest, well versed in Latin, who unusually held on to Catholic customs in post-Reformation Norway even in the anti-Catholic and strictly Lutheran climate of his lifetime. He had a habit of walking around on the cemetery after sunset. "He went back and forth, up and down, deep in thought, or stood quietly with his head bowed and his hands folded over his chest. When one asked him why he did this, he replied that he was praying for all the departed souls that burned in purgatory. Since he was no longer allowed to celebrate requiem mass for them inside the church, he had to do it outside, and it could certainly be needed, he believed."
Paul Peterson Paus is noted for his 1653 poem "In memoriam Domini Petri Pavli," a loving poem in Latin in memory of his father Peter Paulson Paus, the provost of Upper Telemark. Paul Peterson Paus was the father of parish prist of Kviteseid and poet Hans Paus and of district judge of Upper Telemark Cornelius Paus, and was the 4th great-grandfather of playwright Henrik Ibsen. He used a seal, e.g. on the Sovereignty Act, with a reversed crane in its vigilance.


Henry Keogh

Henry Vincent Keogh (born 1954) is an Australian who was convicted of murder but was eventually released twenty years later on appeal. He grew up in Adelaide, South Australia and was educated at Saint Ignatius College and briefly at the School of Dentistry at The University of Adelaide.
In 1995, he was sentenced to 26 years in prison for the 1994 murder of his 29-year-old fiancée, Anna-Jane Cheney, then head of Professional Conduct at the Law Society of South Australia: it was alleged that Keogh had planned the murder for over two years.
Mr Keogh and his family have always claimed his innocence, and raised their doubts regarding some of the evidence upon which the conviction was based.
Keogh admitted to signing five life insurance policies on behalf of Cheney. Whereas the prosecution alleged the combined value of $1.15 million AUD was motive for the murder, Keogh claimed that these were submitted to prevent insurance agencies he had established from lapsing, and that the amount eligible to claim was closer to $400,000. The prosecution conceded during the trial that Cheney was aware of at least two of these policies.
The conviction was overturned on 19 December 2014.
The third trial was set for March 2016 but a key prosecution witness fell ill. On 13 November 2015 the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) announced they had entered a nolle prosequi and would not be proceeding with a retrial at this stage.
Petitions and appeals.
In a petition lodged in 2002, Keogh's legal team, led by Kevin Borick QC, provided material in support of a substantial number of complaints. Keogh's key complaint was against then chief forensic pathologist Colin Manock's handling of the autopsy on Cheney and his evidence in the trial.
South Australian Deputy Premier Kevin Foley said that after considering the report of the Solicitor General, delivered after an exhaustive examination over two and a half years of the 37 complaints contained in Mr Keogh's third petition, he formed the opinion that it did not disclose any arguable basis on which the Supreme Court could find that there had been a miscarriage of justice.
In May 2007, Mr Keogh applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of South Australia. The appeal was dismissed on 22 June 2007.
On 16 November 2007, the High Court of Australia rejected Keogh's application for special leave to appeal against a decision by the South Australian Court of Criminal Appeal that it did not have jurisdiction to reopen his appeal.
On 4 February 2009, a fourth petition was lodged by Henry Keogh with the Governor of South Australia. It alleges that his conviction was obtained by fraud, deceit and manifest error. The petition has been referred by the Governor to the Attorney-General of South Australia. Previously, the Attorney-General has stated that in the event of a further petition being lodged, he would ensure that it was assessed and determined by an Acting Attorney-General (not himself) in view of his published comments about Keogh's conviction.
Complaints raised by the petitions.
Keogh's defence team had raised a number of complaints concerning evidence that has come to light since Keogh's final appeal.
No presence of bruise.
Manock, when photographing the body, saw what he believed to be four bruises on the left calf of Cheney, caused by what he believed to be a grip mark. When a sample was taken of the thumb bruise and examined for bruising, the result was negative. Despite this, this apparent bruise was used in Manock's proposed theory that Keogh had gripped Cheney's legs to hold her underwater in the bath, drowning her.
When asked about the age of the bruises during the trial, he responded: "I could find no evidence of white blood-cell migration into the areas and therefore, I felt they were peri-mortem. In other words, they’d occurred close to the time of death. I felt that was probably within 4 hours."
The Prosecution stated during the trial: "But there are two things, you might think, that are crucial to this case. If those four bruises on her lower left leg were inflicted at the same time, and that time was just before she died in the bath, there is no other explanation for them, other than a grip. If it was a grip, it must have been the grip of the accused. If it was the grip of the accused, it must have been part of the act of murder."
Manock has since stated that the bruise could have occurred up to a number of days prior to Cheney's death.
Infeasibility of drowning scenario.
The method of drowning proposed by Manock was not possible when the physical location of the bath against the wall was considered, requiring an attacker to be positioned where a wall was located. Manock did not visit the scene until three months after the drowning theory was proposed.
Maciej Henneberg, Professor of Anatomy at the University of Adelaide, South Australia, has stated that it would be impossible to drown someone by holding his or her legs over his or her head, as the power of the extensor muscles in a woman’s leg would always be greater than the power which a man could exert through a fingertip grip of the woman’s calf as proposed by Manock.
Lack of review of autopsy.
Cheney's body was released for cremation on the same day that her death was considered a murder. The body was not examined by anybody other than Manock.
Lack of consideration of other possibilities by Manock.
Manock stated at the committal hearing in Mr Keogh’s case that: “I was at no time looking or thinking that the death was accidental because I could find no explanation as to why she would drown.” Photographs taken at the scene reportedly show marks and swelling which may indicate the possibility of a severe allergic reaction. Manock did not at any stage review the medical records of Cheney.
No control of scene of death.
The scene of Cheney's death was not cordoned off nor controlled by police, and photos taken at the scene reportedly appear to show that Cheney's body had been 'tidied up'. Keogh's defence claim that this is evidence that the body was tampered with. Only three days following Cheney's death was the death considered suspicious.
Successful appeal and release.
On 19 December 2014 the conviction was quashed after the Full Court of the Court of Criminal Appeal set aside his conviction for murder. Keogh was released on bail on 22 December 2014. He was to be arraigned for retrial on 2 February 2015.
After initially announcing it would proceed with a retrial in early 2016, the DPP announced it would not be proceeding with a retrial at this time.


Robert Elmer Kleason

Robert Elmer Kleasen (September 20, 1934 – April 21, 2003) was an American who was convicted and sentenced to death in 1975 for the murder of two Mormon missionaries near Austin, Texas. The murders have popularly, albeit inaccurately, been cited as an inspiration for the horror film "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre".
Kleasen's conviction was later overturned and Kleasen immigrated to the United Kingdom, where he remarried and was eventually imprisoned on gun violations. Kleasen died in the UK while fighting extradition back to the US for retrial on the murder charges.
Early life.
Robert Elmer Kleasen was born on September 20, 1934 in Buffalo, New York. He was the only child of a store clerk and his wife. Guns and hunting were a passion of the boy as well as his mentally ill father.
In 1950, 16-year-old Kleasen stepped on a rusty nail while hunting in the woods and his mother took him to the hospital. While waiting impatiently for doctors to see him, he hit his mother, got a gun from her car, and returned to the emergency room shooting. No one was hurt, but the outburst landed him in a psychiatric facility until 1952. In 1971, a year after gaining a sociology degree, he shot off a man's toe in a dispute. He later jumped bail in the state and moved to Texas.
Texas.
Upon arrival in Austin, Texas, Kleasen made a multitude of wild claims to his acquaintances, most notably that he was a Korean War veteran and former CIA operative. He also used several aliases, at least one of which has been speculated to have been a dissociated personality.
Kleasen was baptized into a local congregation of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In December 1973, he was arrested for rustling bison and became angered when the church did not send a lawyer to get him out of jail. After his release, members of Kleasen's church became increasingly uneasy with his behavior. Two Mormon missionaries, Gary Darley (20) and Mark Fisher (19), routinely visited Kleasen, who lived in a trailer behind a taxidermist's shop in Oak Hill, on Austin's southwestern outskirts. Despite being warned by their bishop to stop their visits due to Kleasen's behavior, Darley and Fisher decided to see Kleasen one final time.
On October 28, 1974, Darley and Fisher disappeared in Oak Hill. Police investigation of the disappearance led to the scenario that the missionaries were shot dead after having agreed to meet Kleasen for dinner. Police discovered Fisher's bloody watch and bullet-punctured name tag in Kleasen's trailer but bodies never were found. Investigators also discovered blood and tissue on a bandsaw in the taxidermy shop where Kleasen worked. Prosecutors at Kleasen's 1975 murder trial alleged he dismembered the victims and buried the remains. Kleasen was believed to have held a grudge against the LDS Church after he felt church members did not support him during a poaching trial.
Kleasen was convicted and sentenced to death. But in 1977, after two years on Texas' death row, an appeals court overturned Kleasen's conviction. The appeals court ruled that the search warrant for his home was improper and that key evidence should have been excluded. Authorities opted to not retry Kleasen.
Immigration to the UK.
After his release from Texas prison, Kleasen relocated to New York, where he was later imprisoned on assault charges. He lived for a time in a Buffalo, New York charity mission. He drew attention from the local media, and police had to be posted near the mission for Kleasen's protection. He only congregated with the other people living in the mission during church services prior to eating. During this time, the local Buffalo TV channels updated the story every night on their news broadcasts.
In 1990, Kleasen moved to Barton-upon-Humber, Lincolnshire, England. He married local woman Marie Longley, who he met as a pen pal while living in the US. He ingratiated himself with local residents, and began to amass a huge gun collection. A firearms license officer became suspicious of Kleasen's claims of being a decorated military veteran and CIA agent, and confirmed from U.S. military officials that Kleasen had never served in the U.S. armed forces. This information was passed on to police, resulting in a more thorough background check on Kleasen.
English authorities learned of Kleasen's U.S. murder conviction, which he had unlawfully omitted from his residency application. The investigation also uncovered several gun law violations. He was given a three-year prison term in 2000 for possession of illegal firearms and munitions and began to serve time in an English prison.
His wife found out about his criminal background and at one point, Kleasen threatened her with death if she tried to leave him. Being too scared to leave she stayed for almost a decade, only to come up with an escape plan with a close friend. His wife was briefly considered a missing person, possibly killed by Kleasen, until authorities learned she had fled her home during the investigation into his gun law violations.
Extradition battle and death.
In 2001 while imprisoned in the UK on the guns violations, Texas authorities began the process of extradition. DNA analysis and other forensic tools were used to obtain new evidence in the 1974 murders of Darley and Fisher, specifically by matching Darley's DNA to blood found near Kleasen's residence . Extradition was agreed in principle subject to the UK requirement of binding assurances not to impose the death penalty. Before he could be extradited, Kleasen died on April 21, 2003 of heart failure. He was 68 years old.
Media.
Ken Driggs wrote a book about the murders, "Evil Among Us: The Texas Mormon Missionary Murders". The book was published by Signature Books, a Salt Lake City, Utah company that specializes in Mormon-related topics.
Kleasen was the subject of a 2003 British documentary titled "The Real Texas Chainsaw Massacre."


Starostwo

Starostwo (, "eldership"; ; ; ), administrative units established from the 14th century in the Polish Crown and later in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth until the partitions of Poland in 1795. They were jointly referred to as the crown lands ("królewszczyzna").
Each starostwo was administered by an official known as starosta. The starosta would receive the office from the king and would keep it until the end of his life. It usually provided a significant income for the starosta. His deputy was variously known as podstarosta, podstarości, burgrabia, włodarz, or surrogator.
There were several types of starosta:
When Poland regained independence in 1918 (until the beginning of the 2nd World War in 1939) and in 1944–1950, the starosta was the head of county (powiat) administration, subordinate to the voivode. Since the local government reforms, which came into effect on 1 January 1999, the starosta is the head of the county (powiat) executive board ("zarząd powiatu"), and the head of the county administration ("starostwo powiatowe"), being elected by the county council ("rada powiatu").


George Mathews (judge)

George Mathews Jr. (September 30, 1774 – November 14, 1836), was a Judge of the Superior Courts of the Territory of Mississippi and the Territory of Orleans, and Presiding Judge of the Louisiana Supreme Court from 1813 until his death in 1836. His ruling in "Marie Louise v. Marot" was cited as precedent by dissenting U.S. Supreme Court Justice John McLean in the 1856 landmark "Dred Scott v. Sandford" case.
Early life.
Mathews was born in Augusta County, Virginia, on September 30, 1774, the son of a planter and Revolutionary War officer, George Mathews and his wife, Polly. The elder Mathews would later serve twice as Governor of Georgia. In 1785, the elder Mathews moved himself and his whole family to Wilkes County, Georgia, to land that today is in Oglethorpe County.
Mathews returned to Virginia for his education at Liberty Hall Academy (which later became Washington and Lee University). He originally set out to become a physician but was persuaded by his father to study law under his brother, John Mathews, in Augusta, Georgia. He married Harriet Flowers in 1809 and they resided near St. Francisville, Louisiana, at her family's Butler Greenwood Plantation.
George and Harriett Mathews raised indigo, cotton, sugar cane, and corn on the plantation, shipping the crops from their own dock on Bayou Sara and extending their land holdings to include a sugar plantation in Lafourche Parish that, according to Lewis Gray's figures, placed them among the top 9% of sugar planters in the state in the 1850s.
The Mathews owned slaves, and used their labor on their plantation. In an 1826 report, George Mathews relayed in family correspondence that his slaves in the field were picking 126 pounds of cotton, each.
Career on the bench.
In 1804 Mathews was appointed by President Thomas Jefferson to be judge of the Superior Court of the newly created Territory of Mississippi. He served for two years on that court before being appointed judge of the Superior Court for the Territory of Orleans in 1806.
When Louisiana became a state in 1813, the territorial courts were replaced by a new Supreme Court. Mathews was appointed by Governor William C.C. Claiborne as judge of that new high court on February 23, 1813. He served alongside Judges Dominic Augustin Hall, Pierre Derbigny and Francois Xavier Martin. He reputedly learned both French and Spanish as much of the law of the State of Louisiana was rooted in the traditions of the land's previous colonial overlords and many lawyers spoke one of the two languages but not English.
"Dred Scott v. Sandford" precedent.
In the early 1830s, a Louisiana family went to France with their young slave girl, Josephine Louise. When the family returned home, the slave girl's mother sued to obtain a declaration of immediate emancipation as a result of the girl being transported to a country that did not recognize the institution of slavery. The 1835 case, "Marie Louise v. Marot" (1836) was heard by the Louisiana state district court and appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court. The Court held that a slave who is taken to a territory prohibitive of slavery cannot be again reduced to slavery on returning to a territory allowing of slavery. Mathews, speaking for the court, stated that "[b]eing free for one moment...it was not in the power of her former owner to reduce her again to slavery."
21 years later, his precedent was relied upon by US Supreme Court Justice John McLean, who dissented from the court's Dred Scott ruling that a slave was a piece of property that could by transported by his owner from a Southern state into a territory that forbade slavery without losing his slave status. Six of 8 justices did not abide by the precedent in what has been considered the worst decision ever made by the Supreme Court.
Legacy and honors.
Mathews died in St. Francisville on November 14, 1836 and was buried at Grace Episcopal Church. He left a very large fortune at his death, and his will was successfully attacked; one of its dispositions being annulled by the Louisiana Supreme Court.
The Louisiana Historical Association celebrated the Centenary of the Louisiana Supreme Court in 1922 and at that time Mathews was remembered as, "short, rotund, placid, even-tempered, and genial, with a touch of humor and pleasantry in his intercourse with men and on the bench. His disposition crops out in his opinions which, moreover, are fine specimens of taste and learning."
Mathews, Louisiana, is named in his honor.


Police Council

The Police Council was a national United Kingdom body for discussing police pensions, pay and service conditions.
It was formed in 1920, with Dorothy Peto joining as its first female member in 1931. It was abolished in 1978, with its functions taken over two years later by the Police Negotiating Board.


Port Royal Experiment

The Port Royal Experiment was a program begun during the American Civil War in which former slaves successfully worked on the land abandoned by planters. In 1861 the Union captured the Sea Islands off the coast of South Carolina and their main harbor, Port Royal. The white residents fled, leaving behind 10,000 black slaves. Several private Northern charity organizations stepped in to help the former slaves become self-sufficient. The result was a model of what Reconstruction could have been. The African Americans demonstrated their ability to work the land efficiently and live independently of white control. They assigned themselves daily tasks for cotton growing and spent their extra time cultivating their own crops, fishing and hunting. By selling their surplus crops, the locals acquired small amounts of property.
Among the Northerners who arrived as teachers were Mary Lambert Allen and her husband William Francis Allen from West Newton, MA. Detailed descriptions of their daily life are provided in his diaries which have been transcribed. Admiration for the hard work ethic of the former slaves is mentioned, as well as the urgent need for a basic education of which they had been deprived. Allen also took notes on the language, songs and music he heard which he later published. In 1862, General Ormsby M. Mitchel helped African Americans to found the town of Mitchelville on Hilton Head Island. In 1865 President Andrew Johnson ended the experiment, returning the land to its previous white owners.
In February 1862, a report was made to the Treasury Dept. which gives an indication of the territory held in the Port Royal Experiment:
 An estimate of the number of plantations open to cultivation, and of the persons upon the territory protected by the forces of the United States, if only approximate to the truth, may prove convenient in providing a proper system of administration. The following islands are thus protected, and the estimated number of plantations upon each is given:
Or about two hundred in all.
There are several other islands thus protected, without plantations, as Otter, Pritchard, Fripp, Hunting and Phillips. Lemon and Daw have not been explored by the agents engaged in collecting cotton. The populous island of North Edisto, lying in the direction of Charleston, and giving the name to the finest cotton, is still visited by the rebels. A part near Botany Bay Island is commanded by the guns of one of our war vessels, under which a colony of one thousand negroes sought protection, where they have been temporarily subsisted from its stores. The number has within a few days been stated to have increased to 2300.
---E. L. Pierce, "The Negroes at Port Royal: Report of E. L. Pierce, Government Agent, to the Hon. Salmon P. Chase, Secretary of the Treasury", 1862
In the summer of 1862, Union troops protecting coastal colonies began to withdraw to reinforce Union General George B. McClellan who was engaged in the Peninsula Campaign, a series of battle between March and July. Many of the colonies were consolidated. One example was the migration of camps at Edisto Island to St. Helena Island.
Education.
A special education commission was established by Secretary of Treasury Salmon P. Chase. E. L. Pierce was the Government Agent overseeing the experiment. The committee was looking for teachers who were not only sent to educate the former slaves but to aid them on how to govern themselves in normal society. The candidate was also responsible for intellectual, moral and religious instruction. Boston Educational Commission for Freedmen was established in response to a call made by E.L. Pierce, it was a philanthropic organization. Around the same time, the Port Royal Relief Committee of Philadelphia was formed. A New York organization united with the Boston organizations to provide relief and education for the former slaves. Many more relief organizations were established from different parts of the country. Hundreds of teachers were sent to different parts of the South.
Around March 14, 1862, more than one hundred and fifty candidates applied for the special position to the special education commission. Thirty-five candidates were initially chosen. One of the candidates was prominent educator from Ohio John Celivergos Zachos. Salmon P. Chase was familiar with Zachos because he was Senator and Governor of Ohio.
The Phonic Primer and Reader was a book published by John Celivergos Zachos. The book was intended to educate the freed slaves. John Zachos and Susan Walker traveled to Port Royal from Ohio. The Boston and New York Education Commissions sent Professor Zachos to prove the former slaves could be educated. Zachos was on Parris Island on March 13, 1862, and he was in command of 400 freed slaves on a plantation. Zachos spent a total of 16 months at Parris Island. While he was at Parris Island he took on many roles, he was an Army Surgeon, Teacher, Store Keeper. Zachos was in charge of the military stronghold under General Rufus Saxton.
John Celivergos Zachos tried to teach the former slaves and studied their ability to learn. The professor realized that older slaves had a hard time due to years of psychological abuse and torture. Zachos noted it was easier to educate the younger slaves. Towards the end of 1863, Zachos traveled back to Boston. In early 1864, Zachos assembled a group of uneducated immigrants. The group consisted of Irish and German subjects both male and female. The test subjects did not speak or read English.
Zachos assembled a curriculum to instruct the test subjects based on the needs of the former slaves and their ability to learn. Early on, the professor did not have a book, he was forced to use charts and the chalkboard. The pupils had to wait until March 1864 to receive the first book which had an extremely long title " The Phonic Primer and Reader, A National Method of teaching Reading by the Sounds of the Letters without altering the Orthography. Designed Chiefly for the Use of Night-Schools Where Adults are Taught, and for the Myriads of Freed Men and Women, Whose First Rush from the Prison-House of Slavery is to the Gates of the Temple of Knowledge".
The experiment concluded that the technique created during his time at Port Royal was effective enough to teach adults. It was a simple method that used a unique phonic teaching method of teaching English reading by sounds of letters. The research was presented to the Boston and New York Education Commissions and published in the "Journal of The Massachusetts Teachers Association". That same year an official book was published to educate the former adult slaves. "Phonic Primer and Reader". Thus was coined the phrase: The Port Royal Experiment. After his work Salmon P. Chase gave Zachos an extraordinary recommendation.
The Port Royal Experiment initiated a systematic outcry for the education of the freed slaves. A massive number of organizations were established and continued educating the freed people. On March 3, 1865, roughly two months before the end of the Civil War the Freedmen's Bureau was established. Within the next five years, the organization established 4239 schools, employed 9307 teachers, and instructed 247,333 students. The higher education of African Americans was the responsibility of the bureau. In many instances there was opposition among the white people of the south; moreover, in one state the opposition became widely organized. At the same time, many former slave masters reportedly assisted in establishing schools for the slaves and became their teachers.
On May 16, 1866, a convention was held in Cleveland Ohio and formed the American Freedman's Union Commission. The Boston Educational Commission became the New England Branch and the New York National Freedmen's Relief Association became the New York Branch. Many other such philanthropic organizations also merged into different branches of the American Freedman's Union Commission with the intention of the proliferation of the education of African Americans.


First All-Belarusian Congress

The First All-Belarusian Congress () was a congress of Belarusian political organisations and groups held in Minsk in December 1917. The congress gathered 1872 delegates from all regions of Belarus and was violently dispersed by Bolshevik military.
The congress played an important role in the consolidation of the Belarusian national liberation movement after the October Revolution in Russia. The council that was selected at the congress formed the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic and on 25 March 1918 declared the independence of Belarus as the Belarusian Democratic Republic.
Background.
By early 1917, Belarus has been part of the Russian Empire. Following the February and October Revolutions in Russia, the Bolsheviks who came to power have promised free self-determination to all nations living in the former Russian Empire, including possibility to gain full independence. Belarusian political organizations, representing regions with a Belarusian majority population, decided to hold a conference in order to work out a solidary position regarding the future of Belarus. The Supreme Belarusian Council, a central platform consolidating Belarusian organizations, was the organizer of the conference.
The congress.
A total of 1872 delegates came to the conference. They represented all regions of Belarus. The delegates were representatives of various social and political organizations, local governments, trade unions, as well as of refugees to Russia, soldiers of the Russian army and diasporas in Petrograd and Moscow
The congress has elected the "Council of the First All-Belarusian Congress" of 71 members under the leadership of Jan Sierada. The Council, in turn, formed an executive committee which was to serve as the organizing body in the process of establishing a modern constitutional democratic Belarusian state.
There were active discussions on various topics of the future of Belarus, with the main question being the future form of state of Belarus. Right wing leaning delegates and many delegates from western Belarus insisted on immediately declaring full independence of Belarus from Russia. Left-leaning delegates and delegates from the eastern regions of Belarus opposed this idea. Many of them proposed a status of Belarus as an entity within a democratic Russian Federation.
In the night of 18 December 1917, the delegates adopted the first items of the final resolution, declaring Belarus a democratic republic but without yet defining its status in relation with Russia. At this point the Bolshevik soldiers violently interrupted the conference and arrested several participants.
Aftermath.
The executive committee of the congress' council managed to maintain its activity in the underground up until Minsk was taken over by German forces in February 1918. It later transformed into the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic (Rada BNR) and declared the independence of Belarus in March 1918. The Rada BNR later held negotiations with various foreign governments regarding the international recognition of the independence of Belarus and still exists in exile today.
According to Belarusian authors, the congress has managed to bring the question of Belarus on the international agenda. In particular, the Soviets were criticized for dispersing the conference at the Soviet-German Brest-Litovsk peace conference and in a few articles in German, Swiss and Russian non-Bolshevik media.
According to a widespread view in Belarus, the conference had a pivotal meaning for the Belarusian independence movement, the future establishment of the Belarusian Democratic Republic and later the Belarusian Soviet Republic.
In February 1919, the Bolsheviks held their own conference with an almost identical name, the First All-Belarusian Congress "of the Soviets of Worker, Peasant and Red army Soldier Deputies", at the same venue as the First All-Belarusian Congress. The Soviet Congress adopted the constitution of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Belarus.


Commonwealth v. Aves

Commonwealth v. Aves, 35 Mass. 193 (1836), was a case in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on the subject of transportation of slaves to free states. In August 1836, Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw ruled that slaves brought to Massachusetts "for any temporary purpose of business or pleasure" were entitled to freedom. The case was the most important legal victory for abolitionists in the 1830s and set a major precedent throughout the North.
History.
In 1836, Mary Aves Slater of New Orleans went to Boston to visit Thomas Aves, her father. She brought with her a six-year-old girl named Med who, under Louisiana law, was considered the property of Slater's husband, Samuel Slater. When members of the Boston Female Anti-Slavery Society learned that an enslaved girl was staying in Boston, they hired attorney Rufus Choate to bring the matter to court. Choate was joined by abolitionist attorneys Ellis Gray Loring and Samuel E. Sewall.
A writ of "habeas corpus" was served on Thomas Aves, the owner of the house where Med was staying. It was served in the name of a male abolitionist, Levin H. Harris, because it was considered unseemly in those days for women to take part in public affairs. On August 21, 1836, the case was brought before Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Benjamin Robbins Curtis, later known for his dissent in the "Dred Scott" decision, represented Aves. Curtis argued that the doctrine of comity required Massachusetts to respect the laws of Louisiana, and therefore Mrs. Slater should be allowed to bring Med home with her.
Loring argued that the comity principle did not apply "in doubtful cases," and that there was no consensus on slavery; England and several other European nations had a policy of "disregarding the "lex loci" in the case of slaves," giving them "immediate and entire liberty" when they were brought there from another country. He characterized slavery as immoral, and expounded on the commonwealth's longstanding commitment to liberty.
When giving his opinion, Shaw discussed several precedents in international law, including the British case of "Somerset v. Stewart" (1772), and the abolishment of slavery in Massachusetts. The only people who could be treated as slaves in Massachusetts, he reasoned, were fugitive slaves, and then only because the U.S. Constitution specifically required it. Therefore, Med had become free as soon as her alleged owner voluntarily brought her to Massachusetts. He cited several cases demonstrating that even in Southern states it was understood that a slave became free when voluntarily brought to a free state.
"Commonwealth v. Aves" was later used as a precedent in other Northern states. Connecticut used it in "Jackson v. Bulloch" (1837); New York and Pennsylvania used it in legislation declaring that slaves became free when brought to those states; and Ohio courts began using it in 1841. By the start of the Civil War, every Northern state other than Indiana, Illinois, and New Jersey granted freedom automatically to any slave brought within its borders.
Med was placed in the custody of the abolitionist women, while her mother and siblings remained enslaved in New Orleans. The women renamed her Maria Somerset, after Maria Weston Chapman and the Somerset case. At some point later she was moved to an orphanage.


Seventh Seimas of Lithuania

The Seventh Seimas of Lithuania was the parliament (Seimas) elected in Lithuania. Elections took place on 20 October 1996, with the second round on 10 November. The Seimas commenced its work on 25 November 1996 and served a four-year term, with the last session on 18 October 2000.
Elections.
In the elections in 1996, 70 members of the parliament were elected on proportional party lists and 71 in single member constituencies. Elections took place on 20 October 1996. In those constituencies where no candidate gained a majority of votes on 20 October, a run-off was held on 10 November.
The elections were won by the Homeland Union - Lithuanian Conservative Party, which gained 70 seats, followed by 16 seats won by Lithuanian Christian Democratic Party. Democratic Labour Party of Lithuania, which had decisively won the previous elections, ended up with only 12 seats.
Activities.
Vytautas Landsbergis was elected as the Speaker of the Seventh Seimas and served throughout the term.
The Seventh Seimas laid the foundations for parliamentary control in Lithuania. The Seimas and the Government also proceeded with the privatization of large public enterprises.
Composition.
Parliamentary groups.
During the first session of the Seimas the following parliamentary groups were registered: Homeland Union - Lithuanian Conservatives, Christian Democrats, Center, Democratic Labour Party of Lithuania, Social Democrats, Joint Group (Joint Group of the Peasants' party, the Christian Democratic Union and the National Party "Young Lithuania"), Independent Group and the Mixed Group of Members of the Seimas.
Several splits occurred during the term. In late 1998 Laima Andrikienė and Vidmantas Žiemelis were ejected from Homeland Union - Lithuanian Conservatives. They were followed by another 10 parliament members who formed the parliamentary group of Moderate Conservatives in 2000. In the same year, Modern Christian Democrats (4 members) split from the Christian Democrats and Social Democracy 2000s (4 members at the time) split from the Social Democrats. However, similarly to the Sixth Seimas, the Seventh Seimas saw few defections across ideological borders, due to the vast gulf between ruling and opposition parties.
By the end of the term of the Seimas, the following parliamentary groups were active.
Members.
A total of 151 members were elected to the Seventh Seimas (Virgilijus Bulovas and Naglis Puteikis were elected but did not take their seats), including 126 men and 25 women. Seimas had 137 members at the end of the term, as no new elections would take place in single-seat constituencies with less than 6 months of the term left.


Cahaly v. LaRosa

Cahaly v. LaRosa is a lawsuit filed in federal court in 2013 that challenged South Carolina's law prohibiting most types of unsolicited consumer and political calls made by Automatic Dialing and Announcing Devices (ADAD), also known as "robocalls". The plaintiff won in U.S. district court in June 2014, and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in part, while vacating part in August 2015.
Background.
On November 3, 2010, campaign consultant Robert Cahaly was arrested by the State Law Enforcement Division (SLED), being charged for making illegal robocalls to six state house districts. The automated opinion polling system asked whether U.S. Speaker Nancy Pelosi should be invited to campaign with six Democratic candidates for the South Carolina Legislature. Cahaly was arrested despite having a written opinion from the state attorney general stating that he had acted within the law. The charges were subsequently dismissed in October 2012. After the charges were dropped, Cahaly filed a suit against state officials (including SLED Chief Reginald Lloyd), claiming his constitutional right to free speech had been violated. U.S. district court judge, Michelle Childs ruled that the anti-robocall statute was a content-based restriction on speech and therefore unconstitutional.
Appeal.
The South Carolina Law Enforcement Division filed an appeal with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in response to the U.S. district court ruling. The case was argued on March 25, 2015 before Judges James A. Wynn, Jr., Albert Diaz, and Stephanie Thacker. Robert Cahaly was represented by Samuel Darryl Harms, III, and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division was represented by Kenneth Paul Woodington. A decision was issued on August 6, 2015.
Opinion of the court.
Judge Albert Diaz wrote the opinion striking down South Carolina's robocall prohibitions, with unanimous concurrence.
Acknowledgment was made by the court that restrictions on robocalls in Minnesota, , and federal law had been upheld by several other courts; notwithstanding, the statutes in those cases, as noted by the court, do not single out political or commercial robocalls, but prohibited all types of robocalls (with limited exceptions). The court also ruled that Cahaly lacked standing in order to challenge a provision of disclosure when making an automated call as compelled speech.
Potential effects on future campaign activity.
In reaction to the U.S. Court of Appeals ruling, several media outlets speculated that political campaigns, especially presidential, will lean much more heavily on the use of automated phone calls in order to reach voters and to push certain messages. This might include negative campaigning and so called "push" polls. A profound effect was expected and seen upon tactics used during South Carolina's "First in the South" primary in 2016 and in subsequent elections.


John Povey

Sir John Povey (1621–1679) was an English-born judge who had a highly successful career in Ireland, holding office as Baron of the Court of Exchequer (Ireland) and subsequently as. Lord Chief Justice of Ireland during the years 1673–9.
Background.
He was born at Woodseaves, near Market Drayton, Shropshire, eldest son of John Povey. Thomas Povey, the friend of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn, who features often in Pepys' Diary, was his cousin. He was educated at Trinity College, Oxford, and matriculated in 1636. He entered Gray's Inn in 1638 and was called to the Bar in 1645.
Career.
He is first heard of in Ireland in 1658, when he was acting as legal advisor to Sir John Barrington, 3rd Baronet, a politician and landowner who, although he was a relative of Oliver Cromwell, had refused to sit as one of the judges at the trial of Charles I. Povey went on the Munster circuit, did well at the Irish Bar, and brought his family to live in Ireland. He lived at Nicholas St. in Dublin, and later bought Powerstown House, Mulhuddart, outside Dublin city.
After the Restoration of Charles II, Povey continued to prosper: James Butler, 1st Duke of Ormonde, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland thought well of him, while his cousin Thomas was now Treasurer to the future Catholic King James II. He sat in the Irish House of Commons as member for Swords and was a Commissioner of Revenue Appeals. He was appointed third Baron of the Exchequer in 1663. One of his more notable judgments was to allow the indictment of several persons for aiding and abetting murder during the Irish Rebellion of 1641.
In 1673 the office of Lord Chief Justice fell vacant. The most highly qualified candidates, although both had serious health problems, were Povey and Sir Robert Booth. Arthur Capell, 1st Earl of Essex, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, supported Booth, but Charles II, who favoured a
considerable degree of toleration of Roman Catholics, rejected him as being too strong a Protestant. Povey, with his connection to the future James II's household, was an acceptable compromise. He was knighted, and given the Freedom of the City of Dublin. He earned praise for his service as Chief Justice, and it was suggested that he be might be transferred to the English Bench in 1675; but soon after his wife's death in 1677 his health began to fail. He went to France in hope of a cure, but died at Bordeaux early in 1679. His body was brought back to Ireland, and he was buried in St. Michan's Church, Dublin
Family.
In 1648 he married Elizabeth Folliott (died 1677), eldest daughter of Guthlake (or Guthlac) Folliott of Martin Hussingtree, Worcester, and his wife Elizabeth, and sister of Isabella Folliott Tomkins, to whom her father-in-law, the Welsh composer Thomas Tomkins, dedicated his work "Gaillard- the Lady Folliott's."
They had four children:


Jens Erichstrup

Jens Erichstrup (10 November 1775 – 18 August 1826) was a Norwegian jurist and elected official. He served as a representative at the
Norwegian Constitutional Assembly at Eidsvoll in 1814.
Jens Erichstrup was born in Skien in Telemark, Norway. He received an education in law and graduated as cand.jur. in 1798.
From 1801 to 1810 he worked in the Treasury ("Rentekammeret"), the first two years as copyist, later as proxy. He was appointed bailiff () of Lister in Vest-Agder during 1810. He was elected to the Norwegian Constituent Assembly in 1814, representing the constituency of Lister Amt, together with Gabriel Lund and Teis Lundegaard. At Eidsvoll, he supported the position of the union party ("Unionspartiet").
In 1818, he was appointed bailiff in Laurvig. He was also elected in 1818 as a representative from Lister og Mandals amt (now Vest-Agder) to the Norwegian Parliament where he served as secretary on the election and the budget committees. He subsequently became acting County Governor of Jarlsbergs og Laurvigs Amt. While serving there, he was elected to the Norwegian Parliament in 1821 as a representative from Laurvig Grevskab (now Larvik) and in 1824 representing Jarlsberg og Laurviks amt (now Vestfold). Erichstrup was then County Governor of Stavanger Amt (now Rogaland) from 1825 until his death.