Murder of Ann Ogilby

The murder of Ann Ogilby, also known as the "Romper Room murder", took place in Sandy Row, south Belfast, Northern Ireland on 24 July 1974. It was a punishment killing, carried out by members of the Sandy Row women's Ulster Defence Association (UDA) unit. At the time the UDA was a legal Ulster loyalist paramilitary organisation. The victim, Ann Ogilby, a Protestant single mother of four, was beaten to death by two teenaged girls after being sentenced to a "rompering" (UDA slang term for a torture session followed by a fatal beating) at a kangaroo court. Ogilby had been having an affair with a married UDA commander, William Young, who prior to his internment, had made her pregnant. His wife, Elizabeth Young, was a member of the Sandy Row women's UDA unit. Ogilby had made defamatory remarks against Elizabeth Young in public regarding food parcels. Eight weeks after Ogilby had given birth to Young's son, the women's unit decided that Ogilby would pay for both the affair and remarks with her life. The day following the kangaroo court "trial", they arranged for the kidnapping of Ogilby and her six-year-old daughter, Sharlene, outside a Social Services office by UDA man Albert "Bumper" Graham.
A group of UDA women then followed the minibus which took Ogilby and Sharlene to a disused bakery in Hunter Street, Sandy Row; this empty building had been converted into a UDA club and "romper room". After Sharlene was sent by Graham to a shop to buy sweets, Ogilby was made to sit on a bench and a hood placed over her head. Two teenagers, Henrietta Cowan and Christine Smith, acting on the orders previously given them by the unit's leader, Elizabeth "Lily" Douglas, proceeded to savagely beat Ogilby to death with bricks and sticks. As Ogilby screamed and pleaded for her life, Sharlene, who had already returned from the shop, overheard her mother being beaten and killed. A later autopsy report revealed that Ogilby had sustained 24 blows to the head and body, 14 of which caused a "severe fracture to the bulk of the skull".
Within weeks of the killing, ten women and one man were arrested in connection with the murder. They were convicted in February 1975. All but one, a minor whose sentence was suspended, went to prison. The murder caused widespread revulsion, shock and horror throughout Northern Ireland and remained long in the public psyche even at a time when bombings and killings were daily occurrences. The Ann Ogilby murder was investigated by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) which was established by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) to investigate the most controversial killings carried out during the Troubles.
Events leading to the murder.
Ann Ogilby.
Ann Ogilby (born c.1942/1943 and sometimes referred to as Anne Ogilby), a young Protestant woman, moved to Belfast from Sion Mills, County Tyrone on a date that has not been firmly established. She was one of 13 children from a poor family. Described as a "very attractive girl with dark-brown silky hair and blue eyes", and a slender figure, she embarked on a transient lifestyle, regularly changing her address and employment. The jobs she held were mostly low-paid positions in offices and shops, and she was often evicted for failing to pay the rent. Her striking good looks made her popular with men. In about 1968 she became a single mother, having been made pregnant by a married British soldier stationed in Northern Ireland who had abandoned her and their child after he was transferred to another duty station. She started socialising with a rough crowd, and in August 1972, she met William Young, a married high-ranking member of the then-legal Ulster Defence Association (UDA) with whom she fell deeply in love and began living with him in south Belfast. Young came from the loyalist Donegall Pass area and was a local UDA commander. He told Ogilby his marriage had already broken up and that his divorce hadn't been finalised. Ogilby by that time had three children by two different men: Sharlene, and twins Stephen and Gary. The boys had been put up for adoption after their birth, leaving only the eldest child, her daughter Sharlene, in her care.
When Young was interned inside the Maze Prison in 1973, she often visited him. He complained that his estranged wife, Elizabeth never sent him food parcels, despite her having been provided with money by the Loyalist Prisoners' Association (LPA). The LPA was unaware of the Young couple's estrangement. The delivery of food parcels by women to imprisoned members was a long-established practice by the UDA and a "particular source of pride for the organisation". Ogilby was required to make up and send him the food parcels herself which she felt was an imposition as these had to come out of her own money, although she was almost destitute. When Ogilby mistakenly repeated Young's complaint in a Sandy Row pub, the local Sandy Row women's UDA unit (of which Elizabeth was a member) overheard her words and became violently angry, especially as Elizabeth was able to prove that she had been sending her husband food parcels. Ogilby's comments were regarded by the women's UDA as a grievous insult to its integrity, as the unit was responsible for the assembly and distribution of the parcels. The group was already antagonistic due to Ogilby's affair with Young, and her defamatory remarks only added fuel to their wrath. The women considered her behaviour in public immoral, ostentatious, and extremely unconventional because she frequented clubs and pubs on her own instead of with female friends which was the custom in Sandy Row. Furthermore, they believed her loud, outspoken and maverick personality, status as an unmarried mother, and habit of what was described by a local as "flaunting herself" was a cultural infraction that brought shame upon their community.
Social milieu.
Sandy Row is an Ulster Protestant working class enclave just south of Belfast city centre closely affiliated with the Orange Order whose 12 July parades are gaudy, elaborate events made notable by the traditional Orange Arches erected for the occasion. Prior to late 20th-century urban redevelopment beginning in the 1980s, rows of 19th-century terraced houses lined the streets and backstreets that branched off the main commercial thoroughfare. Loyalist paramilitaries have had an active presence there since the early days of the Troubles. By 1974, the violent ethno-political conflict waged between the Protestant unionists and Catholic Irish nationalists was six years old and showed no sign of abating; bombings, shootings, sectarian murders, intimidation, security alerts and military patrols were a daily feature of life in Belfast and the rest of Northern Ireland. There was no family in working-class areas of Belfast that remained unscathed by the Troubles or insusceptible to the effects of the disorder, tension and carnage. The Provisional Irish Republican Army's bombing campaign had escalated sharply in 1972 and began to increasingly target Belfast city centre, often with lethal consequences such as on Bloody Friday on 21 July 1972, when the Provisional IRA exploded 22 bombs across the city, killing nine people and injuring over 100. This led to the erection of steel gates, manned by the British Army, thus effectively putting a security cordon or "ring of steel" around the city centre, which resulted in both Protestants and Catholics retreating further into segregated neighbourhoods, which rapidly fell under the sway of local paramilitary groups who exerted a strong influence in their respective districts. These groups also assumed the role of policing their communities and rooting out what they described as anti-social elements. In the February 1974 edition of "Ulster Loyalist", a UDA publication, the UDA warned that it intended to take firm action against teenaged criminals and vandals in the Sandy Row and Village areas.
Robert Fisk, Belfast correspondent for "The Times" between the years 1972-75, regarded the Sandy Row UDA as having been one of the most truculent of all paramilitary outfits in Belfast. Their bellicose stance over the street barricades they erected during the Ulster Workers Council Strike in May 1974 almost led them into direct confrontation with the British Army and they had even made preparations to fight if the latter had smashed the UDA roadblocks. The Sandy Row UDA's commander during this volatile period was Sammy Murphy who used as his headquarters the local Orange Hall. In addition to Sandy Row, Murphy had overall command of the South Belfast UDA and was referred to as a community leader in the British Army's press releases although his name and paramilitary affiliation were not mentioned. To defuse the explosive situation, Murphy engaged in talks with the Army which proved successful. According to journalists Henry McDonald and Jim Cusack, the Sandy Row and Donegall Pass UDA were almost completely out of control by this time; both the male and female members were caught up in violence and drunkenness and already inured to beatings and killings. Drinking clubs or shebeens where alcohol was obtained cheaply were common features in the area. Author David M. Kiely suggested that by this stage the women's unit was more about gangsterism and mob rule than adhering to a political cause.
The Sandy Row unit was not the only women's unit within the UDA. There was a particularly active women's group on the Shankill Road which had been established by Wendy "Bucket" Millar as the first UDA women's unit. A number of the members were highly visible due to the beehive hairstyles they typically wore. Although each unit was independent of the others, Jean Moore and later Hester Dunn served as the overall leaders of the UDA's women's department at the UDA headquarters in Gawn Street, east Belfast. Tanya Higgins and Nancy Brown Diggs observed in their book "Women Living in Conflict" that the loyalist paramilitary women were "angrier and more militant" than their male counterparts. Another analysis was provided by Sandra McEvoy in her report "Women Loyalist Paramilitaries in Northern Ireland: Duty, Agency and Empowerment - a Report from the Field" in which she suggested that by joining paramilitary groups like the UDA, loyalist women were provided with a sense of freedom and personal and political power that had previously been denied them in the domestic sphere; furthermore by taking up "the gun", the women proved they were willing to go to prison for their beliefs and the loyalist cause.
The commander of the Sandy Row women's unit was Elizabeth "Lily" Douglas, described by Kiely as having revered power above everything else in her life. As leader of that particular unit she exerted a great deal of control over the lives of other women within the area that included intimidation and moral policing. The middle of three daughters, Douglas was born and raised in an impoverished working-class family. She married at the age of 17 and had four children. By 1974, Douglas (aged 40) who lived in a terraced house in Sandy Row's City Street had a criminal record dating back over ten years for various offences which included smuggling, forgery, assault, inflicting bodily harm and running a brothel. When Ogilby had publicly denounced the women's UDA over the food parcels, she was not fully aware of Douglas' violent character and the considerable amount of authority she wielded in Sandy Row.
Kangaroo court.
On 23 July 1974, eight weeks after Ogilby gave birth to a premature son, Derek, fathered by Young, five UDA women, including her lover's wife Elizabeth Young (32), Kathleen Whitla (49, the second-in-command), Josephine Brown (18), Elizabeth Douglas (19), led by the latter's mother, commander Lily Douglas, abducted Ogilby from a friend's house in the Suffolk housing estate. They took her back to Sandy Row and put her before a kangaroo court held inside the disused Warwick's Bakery in 114 Hunter Street between Felt Street and Oswald Street, which had been converted into a UDA club. Ogilby had often frequented the club with Young on previous occasions prior to his internment; according to Kiely she had enjoyed the company of the other patrons and being part of the camaraderie of loyalists "against the Fenians". A total of eight women and two men presided over this "trial"; Elizabeth Young, however, had by then absented herself as she was not part of Douglas' "Heavy Squad". The "Heavy Squad" were the members of the Sandy Row women's UDA unit who meted out punishment beatings by Douglas' orders. Ogilby was grilled for an hour over her affair with Young and regarding her calumnies over the food parcels. At some stage, Douglas told her, "We have rules here. We all stick to them and I expect anybody new to do the same". Ogilby, by now frightened at the predicament in which she found herself, was additionally informed that if found guilty, she would be subjected to a "rompering". The notorious UDA "romper rooms" had been invented in the early 1970s by UDA North Belfast Brigadier Davy Payne. Named after the children's television programme, these "romper rooms" were located inside vacant buildings, warehouses, lock-up garages, and rooms above pubs and drinking clubs. Once inside, a victim would be "rompered" (beaten and tortured) before being killed. Although most of the victims were Catholics, many Protestants were also consigned to the "romper rooms".
Despite the UDA women having found Ogilby guilty, the two UDA men present at the "trial" couldn't reach a verdict and gave orders that she be released. The women drove her to the Glengall Street bus station where she got on a bus headed for the YWCA hostel she had moved to on the Malone Road. The women then "rearrested" her. It was alleged that this decision came about after she sarcastically remarked in reference to Douglas, "Who does she think she is? The Queen?" which had freshly infuriated Douglas and the others. Blocking the bus as it pulled out of the station into the street, Douglas and her "Heavy Squad" then boarded the bus and dragged her off into the waiting car for a further grilling. Minutes later, after being alerted by the bus station staff, the car was stopped by the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC). Although Douglas claimed they were on their way to a party, the querying policeman told the women about the report of one of them having been forced off the bus. In an attempt to mollify Douglas, Ogilby then spoke up admitting that she was the person who had been removed from the bus but that "It was nothing. Just a couple of us fooling around". The police however remained unconvinced of their claims and the eight women and Ogilby were taken into the RUC Queen Street station for questioning. All of the women were asked for their names and addresses; the majority lived in the Sandy Row area. Fearing the grisly fate that typically befell informers, Ogilby did not say anything to the RUC about the UDA kangaroo court or threats against her. Therefore, she and the eight other women were released without being charged the following morning at 2.00 a.m. Ogilby returned to the police station a few hours later, visibly frightened, but was sent home in a taxi after refusing to give the reason for her distress. That same day inside a Sandy Row pub, Douglas told the other women that Ogilby was a troublemaker who had to die, and she speedily made arrangements to facilitate the murder.
"Romper room" beating.
That same Wednesday 24 July 1974 at 3:30 pm, outside the Social Services office in Shaftesbury Square, Ogilby and her daughter were kidnapped by 25-year-old UDA man Albert "Bumper" Graham, while members of Lily Douglas' "Heavy Squad" waited at the nearby Regency Hotel lounge bar overlooking the office. They knew beforehand that Ogilby had an appointment that afternoon at the Shaftesbury Square office. Using the pretext that a UDA commander wished to speak with her, Graham was able to abduct Ogilby and her daughter Sharlene as they left the office; Ogilby, taken in by Graham's words, willingly got into his blue minibus. Having made a pre-arranged signal to the watching women, Graham drove the two females away to the UDA club in Hunter Street, Sandy Row, which had been turned into a "romper room". When the UDA women, led by Douglas, arrived on the scene, Ogilby tried to escape, but was grabbed and forcibly detained. After Graham sent Sharlene to a corner shop to buy sweets, Ogilby was ordered by Douglas to be dragged inside the former bakery and forced upstairs to the first floor where she was made to sit on a wooden bench, blindfolded and a hood placed over her head. By this stage, Ogilby was so intimidated and terrorised by the "Heavy Squad", she no longer put up any resistance. "Sunday Life" newspaper suggested that she was bound to a chair instead of a bench. Ciarán Barnes, a journalist writing for the paper, had conducted an interview with Sharlene Ogilby in 2010. Retired RUC detective, Alan Simpson, who devoted a chapter to the Ann Ogilby murder in his 1999 book "Murder Madness: True Crimes of The Troubles", instead affirmed that Ogilby was forced by her captors to sit on a wooden bench. Although hooded and blindfolded, her hands remained untied.
Acting under earlier instructions by Douglas, who had remained downstairs, to give Ogilby a "good rompering", two members of the "Heavy Squad", teenagers Henrietta Piper Cowan (17) and Christine Smith (16), both of whom were wearing masks, proceeded to attack Ogilby. Cowan punched her forcefully in the face, knocking her to the floor. Ogilby was then kicked in the face, head, and stomach by both girls before blows from sticks were rained down upon her. When the two teenagers began battering Ogilby's face and head with bricks which had been lying about the dismantled bakery, Albert Graham and "Heavy Squad" member Josephine Brown (who was also masked), saw Ogilby's blood staining the hood and realising things had gone too far, started to panic and remonstrated with the girls to discontinue the beating. Cowan and Smith did stop, to smoke cigarettes and make plans to attend a disco that evening. Simpson suggested that during the attack, Ogilby had placed her hands inside the hood in a futile attempt to protect her face from the force of the bricks.
Meanwhile, Ogilby's daughter, Sharlene, had returned from the shops; she entered the club, climbed the stairs to the first floor and began banging on the door and crying for her mother. Although by this stage Ogilby had sustained severe head injuries from the brutal assault, Sharlene heard her screaming and pleading with her assailants for mercy while they danced to blaring disco music. Ignoring the injured woman's pleas for her life and Sharlene's cries, Henrietta Cowan, once again wielding a brick, resumed beating Ogilby on the head with renewed vigour until she lay dead on the floor. The beating session had lasted for over an hour. Ogilby received (according to the later autopsy report) a total of 24 blows to the head and body with a blunt object, 14 of which had caused "a severe fracture to the bulk of the skull".
Albert Graham took Sharlene out of the building and drove her back to the YWCA hostel; as he left her on the doorstep he reassured the little girl that her mother was inside waiting for her. Sharlene was looked after by the hostel staff until she was placed in the care of the Social Services. Back at the UDA club, Cowan removed the bloodstained hood and saw by her appalling head wounds and badly-bruised, disfigured face that Ann Ogilby was obviously dead; the body was then wrapped up in a brown sack and carried downstairs. The killers went to have a drink with Lily Douglas to whom they recounted the details of the fatal beating as she had remained on the ground floor the entire time. Afterwards, Cowan and Smith got dressed up and went out to the disco as planned.
Immediate aftermath.
Douglas arranged for the body's disposal and unnamed UDA men later loaded it onto a van and dumped it in a ditch in Stockman's Lane near the M1 motorway. It was discovered five days later on 29 July by motorway maintenance men. The RUC were immediately called to the scene which was then photographed and mapped. Ogilby, clad in a red jumper, grey trousers and wearing just one shoe, was lying on her back partly submerged in 18 inches of stagnant water with her blackened and battered face visible and her arms outstretched. Her missing shoe and a large brown sack were discovered not far away from her body at the top of the ditch. There were no identifying documents found on her. The press, along with local television and radio news bulletins, released details regarding her physical appearance and the distinctive rings on her fingers. Hours later, a social worker from the Shaftesbury Square Social Services office, who had been scheduled to meet with Ann Ogilby on 24 July, contacted the RUC telling them that Ogilby and her daughter Sharlene had arrived at the office late for the appointment but left without explanation before the social worker could speak with Ann. She informed the RUC that Ogilby had not been seen since that afternoon. The social worker was then taken to the mortuary where she confirmed that the dead woman inside was Ann Ogilby. One of Ogilby's brothers later positively identified her. The police were told Sharlene was in the care of Social Services.
Due to the location of the body, the murder investigation was allocated to the RUC B Division (West Belfast), based at the Springfield Road station where CID Detective Alan Simpson served. He formed part of the CID team set up to investigate the Ogilby killing. After Sharlene was located in a children's home, she was interviewed by a female detective; she clearly remembered the events of 24 July. It was arranged for Sharlene to accompany three CID detectives in a car to Sandy Row and she was able to direct them to the disused bakery in Hunter Street. A Scenes of Crime Officer was sent to the scene to examine the building's interior and collect the evidence. Forensics later showed that the bloodstains police detectives found on the floor and on the items retrieved from inside the UDA club matched Ogilby's blood group. Documents were also found on the premises bearing William Young's name. By that time the suspects had already been rounded up and taken in for interrogation. These were the eight women who had been inside the car with Ogilby on the evening of 23 July following the fracas outside the Glengall Street bus station.
Ogilby, aged 31 or 32 at the time of her death, was buried in Umgall Cemetery, Templepatrick, County Antrim. Her children Sharlene and Derek were put into care. The Ogilby family received only £149 compensation from the State to cover her funeral expenses. It was later revealed that Ogilby had planned to relocate to Edinburgh, Scotland as soon as her infant son, Derek, was released from hospital (on account of his premature birth).
Reactions.
Ogilby's murder caused widespread revulsion and shock throughout Northern Ireland, even though it had taken place during the most turbulent period of the Troubles when bombings and sectarian killings had become commonplace. Protestants were especially appalled that Ogilby, herself a Protestant, had become a victim of loyalist violence and angrily denounced the UDA. Journalist Ciarán Barnes described it as being one of the most brutal murders of the Troubles; adding that its sheer savagery and the fact that it was carried out by women against another woman within earshot of her child left a lasting impression upon the public psyche. The UDA leadership had not sanctioned the killing; and there was general condemnation from the UDA prisoners inside the Maze Prison. According to Ian S. Wood, the UDA's commander Andy Tyrie had not sufficient control over the many units that comprised the UDA to have been able to prevent the punishment beating from being carried out. A spokesman for the UDA released a statement condemning the killing and the women's unit that carried it out which was first published in the "Irish Times" on 8 February 1975:
We have completely disowned them [Sandy Row women's UDA]. We think the whole affair was foul and sickening. Ogilby was cleared by the UDA of an allegation about her private life long before she was killed. The killing was an act of jealousy by a group of women.
Following the Ogilby attack, the Sandy Row women's UDA unit was permanently disbanded by the UDA leadership. None of the other UDA women's units had consented to or been aware of the fatal punishment beating until it was reported in the news. Additionally, the Sandy Row women's unit notwithstanding, UDA "romper rooms" were more commonly used by male members of the organisation than by their female counterparts.
Journalists Henry McDonald and Jim Cusack described Ogilby's death as typical of the "brutish ... culture" that dominated the UDA and other paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland. In reference to this attack and other cases of "rompering", the authors argue that "rape and the beating and humiliation of women in working-class Belfast was as routine as gunfire but was subsumed in the maelstrom of violence engulfing the North".
Convictions.
Within weeks of the killing, the RUC had arrested ten women and one man in connection with the murder; this group contained Douglas' entire "Heavy Squad". Most of the women were unemployed and at least three had male relatives imprisoned for paramilitary offences. On 6 February 1975 at the Belfast City Commission, teenagers Henrietta Cowan and Christine Smith pleaded guilty to murder. They were now aged 18 and 17 respectively. Characterised as having been "without feeling or remorse", they were convicted of carrying out the murder and sentenced to be detained at Armagh Women's Prison for life at the pleasure of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Smith was not the only member of her family to be involved in loyalist paramilitary activity. Her elder brother, prominent South Belfast UDA member Francis "Hatchet" Smith (28), was shot dead in Rodney Parade, off Donegall Road, by the IRA in January 1973 after he, as part of a UDA unit, gunned down Peter Watterson, a 15-year-old Catholic boy, in a drive-by sectarian shooting at the Falls Road/Donegall Road junction. A roofer by trade who was married with one child he was (despite his wife having been Catholic), the local UDA commander in the Village area where he lived.
Described to the court as the leader of the Sandy Row women's UDA unit, Lily Douglas who had ordered the fatal punishment beating, pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The charge of murder was withdrawn on the grounds that she had not actually intended for her "Heavy Squad" to kill Ogilby and she was subsequently sentenced to ten years' imprisonment in Armagh Prison. She received two further sentences (which were to run concurrently with her 10 years) of three years each, for intimidation and detaining Ogilby against her will. The exact motive for the murder was not established in court. During police interrogation, Douglas maintained that Ogilby's killing was the result of a personal vendetta, stating "It was not a UDA operation, they had nothing to do with it. It was just a move between a lot of women, a personal thing". In his book "The Protestants of Ulster" which was published in 1976, Geoffrey Bell stated that the women murdered her as punishment for her affair with William Young. Henry McDonald and Jim Cusack suggested that jealousy and bloodlust were the motives for the murder. The others received lesser sentences: Albert Graham and Josephine Brown, after pleading guilty, were sentenced to three years imprisonment on charges of being accessories after the fact and causing grievous bodily harm to Ann Ogilby; the Crown withdrew the murder charge against the pair after recognising their attempt to prevent Cowan and Smith from continuing with the fatal beating. The unit's second-in-command, Kathleen Whitla was given two years for intimidation; Maud Tait (21), Anne Gracey (28), Elizabeth Douglas, Jr (19) and Marie Lendrum (23), were all sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for intimidation, and an unnamed 16-year-old was given an 18-months suspended sentence for intimidation. The convictions resulted in the largest single ingress of loyalist women into a Northern Ireland prison.
Denouncing the UDA, the trial judge, Mr. Justice McGonigle stated, "What appears before me today under the name of the UDA is gun law, a vicious, brutalising organisation of persons who take the law into their own hands and who, by kangaroo courts and the infliction of physical brutality, terrorise a neighbourhood through intimidation". During the trial, it emerged that plans to kill Ogilby had been formulated by the UDA unit several months before her kangaroo court "trial". Lily Douglas was lambasted by Justice McGonigle, "You ordered and directed the punishment of this girl. You chose and chose well those who were to carry out your directions. When you heard what had happened you organised the cover-up and disposal of the body. Your concern was that these happenings should not come to light. You were the commander of these women; your responsibility was great. You are no stranger to crime. You have a record of smuggling, forgery, assault and actual bodily harm and aiding and abetting the keeping of a brothel. Though the last of these was in 1961 it is an indication of your character." The Northern Irish press dubbed Elizabeth "Lily" Douglas "the Sandy Row executioner".
Aftermath.
Sharlene Ogilby later married and has three children of her own. After her mother's murder, she was taken to live in Sion Mills by an uncle and aunt. For a while she kept in touch with her brother Gary but has since lost contact; she has no knowledge of what happened to her other brothers Stephen and Derek. Lily Douglas died shortly after being released from Armagh Prison on compassionate grounds in 1979; Kathleen Whitla is also deceased. Henrietta Cowan and Christine Smith were both released from Armagh in December 1983 after serving nine years. They returned to the Sandy Row area. Loyalist sources claimed Smith "deeply regretted" the part she played in Ogilby's murder. Graham, following his release from prison, also returned to south Belfast. To the present day he has steadfastly refused to discuss the murder. The rest of the women involved in Ogilby's murder are to date living in Sandy Row or the Village. William Young died in 2007.
The disused bakery in Hunter Street has since been demolished.
Belfast poet Linda Anderson wrote a poem, "Gang-Bang Ulster Style", based on the Ogilby killing. It was published in the August 1989, no. 204 edition of "Spare Rib". Ann Ogilby's murder also featured in a Gavin Ewart poem entitled, "The Gentle Sex" (1974). The murder was investigated by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET), which was established by the PSNI to inquire into the most controversial killings perpetrated during the Troubles.


Southern Cameroons Restoration Forces

The Southern Cameroons Restoration Forces, also known as Southern Cameroons Defence Forces (SCDF; not to be confused by its namesake, SOCADEF), is an Ambazonian separatist militia. Mainly active in the Boyo Division in Northwest Region, it commanded an estimated 100 fighters as of 2019. The group is led by Nso Foncha Nkem.
In January 2020, the Southern Cameroons Restoration Forces was involved in one of the most serious cases of separatist infighting to date. General Chacha posted a video where he demanded that all separatist militias merge into the Southern Cameroons Defence Forces, threatening to attack separatist militias that opposed him. Around the same time, Chacha's militia abducted 40 fighters from the Ambazonia Defence Forces, six of whom were subsequently murdered.
The infighting came to an abrupt end a week after the abduction incident, when General Chacha and some 20 other fighters were killed when Cameroonian troops attacked their base in Kumbo; this came shortly after an ultimatum issued by Cameroonian Brigadier General Valere Nka. The Cameroonian Army maintained its momentum in Kumbo on the days following the assassination, attacking a number of camps belonging to the Restoration Forces and pursuing retreating fighters.


Western Conservative Summit

The Western Conservative Summit is an annual conference of influential U.S. conservatives, held in Denver, Colorado since 2010. It is organized by the Centennial Institute and Colorado Christian University. It has grown each year, and now includes a Young Conservatives Leadership Conference, which is led by radio host Hugh Hewitt.
Past events.
2011.
In 2011, Herman Cain was the winner of the presidential nomination straw poll. Syndicated columnist and talk show host Dennis Prager was among the speakers.
2012.
In 2012, speakers included Glenn Beck and Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. Over 1,500 people attended.
2013.
The 2013 Western Conservative Summit was themed "Freedom's New Day", and took place July 26–28. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker was the keynote speaker, calling for optimism within the Republican Party and increased activity in reaching voters.
Also among the speakers were Mia Love, mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah; former U.S. Senator Bill Armstrong, president of Colorado Christian University; Texas Senator Ted Cruz; former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee; Jonah Goldberg, a conservative columnist and author; and former Florida Representative Allen West. About 2,000 people attended the four-day summit.
Cruz won a straw poll for the Republican presidential nominee, with 225 votes (45% of votes cast). Cruz' speech included a call to "abolish" the Internal Revenue Service, and urged attendees to explain the Republican Party's message more clearly in the future.
2014.
The 2014 Western Conservative summit was themed "America at its Best" and took place in Denver Colorado July 18–20. The 666 voters at the conference favored Ben Carson (22%), Ted Cruz (13%) and Sarah Palin (12%) in a straw poll for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.
2015.
The theme of the 2015 Western Conservative Summit is "Your Story: Freedom Alive". The summit drew criticism when it barred the participation of the Colorado Log Cabin Republicans, a Republican organization that advocates for equal rights for gays and lesbians. Centennial Institute head John Andrews explained that their "worldview and policy agenda are fundamentally at odds with what Colorado Christian University stands for" and that the summit additionally has a policy of not allowing vendors who advocate for higher taxes or about climate change.


Protectorate of the Western Regions

The Protectorate of the Western Regions () was an imperial administration imposed by Han China – between the 2nd century BCE and 2nd century CE – on many smaller and previously independent states, which were known in China as the "Western Regions" ().
"Western Regions" referred mostly to areas west of Yumen Pass, especially the Tarim Basin. These areas were later regarded as Altishahr (southern Xinjiang, excluding Dzungaria). Previously, "western regions" was used more generally with Central Asia and sometimes even included parts of South Asia.
The protectorate was the first direct rule by a Chinese government of the area. It comprised various vassal protectorates, under the nominal authority of a Protector-General of the Western Regions, appointed by the Han court.
History.
In the Han–Xiongnu War of the 2nd Century BCE the Chinese state established a military seat at Wulei (near present-day Cedaya 策达雅, in Bugur/Luntei County). They aimed to control the diverse peoples and cultures of the Western Regions at the time, including several groups who originated in Western Eurasia and/or who spoke Indo-European languages. These peoples included the Tocharian-speaking city-states, such as "Ārśi" (Arshi; later Agni/Karasahr), "Kuča" (Kucha), "Gumo" (later Aksu), "Turfan" (Turpan), Loulan (Krorän/Korla). By controlling the Western Regions, the Chinese would also keep the Xiongnu away from Inner China. The peoples of oasis city-states of Khotan and Kashgar spoke the Saka language, one of the Eastern Iranian languages.
The seat was later shifted to Taqian (or Tagan; near modern Kucha), during the Eastern Han dynasty.
Officially established in 59 or 60 BCE, Protector-General was the highest military position in the west during its existence. During its peak in 51 BCE, the Wusun nation was brought under submission. After at least 18 different protector generals, of whose names only 10 of their names are known, the post was abandoned, by the time of Wang Mang's Xin dynasty in 23 CE.
In 74 CE, Emperor Ming of Han and his successor awarded the position (now with administrative obligations as well) to general Chen Mu. From 83 CE and the appointment of Ban Chao, the Protector-General was known as the Chief Official of the Western Regions.
On 29 July 107, a series of Qiang uprisings in the areas of Hexi Corridor and Guanzhong forced the abandonment of the post, although it was resumed in 119.
In the 7th century, a successor administration, the Protectorate General to Pacify the West was established at Xizhou (Turpan) and moved later to Kucha.
Coins from the period, with inscriptions in both Chinese and the Kharoshthi script used by local Indo-European languages, have been found in the southern Tarim Basin.


Politics of the Empire of Brazil

Politics of the Empire of Brazil took place in a framework of a quasi-federal parliamentary representative democratic monarchy, whereby the Emperor of Brazil was the head of state and nominally head of government although the President of the Council of Ministers was effectively the "de facto" head, and of a multi-party system. Executive power was exercised by the government. Legislative power was vested in both the government and the two chambers of the General Assembly (or Parliament). The Judiciary was independent of the Executive and the Legislative. The Empire of Brazil was divided into 20 provinces and the Neutral City, capital of the country.
State structure.
Monarchy.
Upon gaining independence from Portugal in 1822, the Brazilian nation as a whole was almost entirely in favor of a monarchical form of government. There were a variety of reasons for this political choice. There was fear among various social groups of the possibility that Brazil would fall into the same political, social, and economic chaos experienced by most of the former Spanish American colonies: territorial dismemberment, coups, dictatorships and the rise of "caudillos". The perceived necessity was for a political structure that would permit the Brazilian people not merely to enjoy the advantages of liberty, but also that would guarantee the country's stability, in conformance with the liberalism of the time. Only a neutral entity, completely independent of parties, groups or opposing ideologies, could achieve this end. And there was "always a powerful ideological element remaining from independence as the result of a great national union over particular interests." The Brazilian monarchy was "a form of government that assured a Brazil that would include the whole of the old Portuguese dominion, in a climate of order, peace, and freedom."
There was also another reason for adoption of the monarchy, or more precisely, its maintenance. The Europeans, as much as the Africans and the Native Americans, came from monarchical societies. To remain under this form of government was a way of maintaining the traditions and identity of the Brazilian people, a people descended from those three distinct ethnic groups. The choice of a member of the House of Braganza came not just from the historical moment, but also from the fact that Prince Pedro descended from the pure male line of the Portuguese kings. The House of Braganza originated with Afonso, 1st Duke of Braganza, an illegitimate son of John I of the House of Aviz who, in turn, was the son of Peter I of the House of Burgundy, which was founded 300 years earlier in 1143 by Afonso Henriques, first king of Portugal. Thus, the strong popular appeal of the monarchy, and a tradition of more than three hundred years (or seven hundred if Portuguese history is considered), enabled Prince Pedro to take on the role of a symbol of national unity. The monarchical regime maintained on Brazilian soil "was a force of continuity and tradition".
A third element in the choice of monarchy was the necessity to comply with the powers of the era, all located in Europe. The possibility, quite real at the time, of European countries seeking to dominate the young American nation, strengthened the desire to prevent the adoption of the republican form at all costs and to avoid any territorial dismemberment into small republics, weak and in constant rivalry with one another. Given that other Latin American countries and also Portugal were becoming easy prey to European (mainly British) greed, maintaining the monarchy with a monarch of European origin acted as a deterrent and allowed Brazil to ensure the predominance of its international interests. And in fact, "after the phase of the regency, turbulent but transitory by its very nature, the imperial order dominated from above, assuring internal peace and external prestige."
For the reasons cited above, Brazil chose a representative constitutional monarchical system. The imperial regime was based on the idea that sovereignty resided in the Nation, not the State, symbolically represented by the emperor. While the Nation wished to experience freedom and prosperity, the State, in turn, wanted "permanence, duration and existence." In this form, the Constitution expressed in its text that both the Emperor and the General Assembly were representatives of the Brazilian nation. The monarch represented the constant, general interests of the nation as a whole, while the Assembly represented particular, ephemeral, momentary interests. However, the Emperor was not sovereign of the country; the sovereign was the Brazilian Nation, who delegated this role to the Emperor, as they did to the General Assembly.
Parliamentary system.
A major difference between parliamentarism and presidentialism is that in the first, the Head of State and of the Government are distinct individuals, while in the second, both roles reside in a single individual. Under the Brazilian monarchy, nonetheless, the emperor was head of both the State and the Government. This basic characteristic of presidential republicanism was transplanted by the Brazilian Constitutional Order. The Constitution of 1824 was rather less parliamentary than the draft prepared by the Constituent Assembly. In fact, it was for all purposes a peculiar and unique regime: a presidential monarchy. That did not mean, by any means, that the Brazilian monarch had prerogatives resembling those of a tyrant or dictator. The individual guarantees that guarantee human liberty and dignity were inserted into the articles of the Charter and were respected. The Emperor would not act in areas reserved to the legislative branch and the judiciary, such as to create laws or to judge and sentence. Still, the creation of the Moderating Power () and natural evolution of Brazilian representative system enabled a transition from presidential to the parliamentary model, which "would give the Empire a position of illustrious companion next to the British lion" [the United Kingdom]. It was unnecessary to modify the letter of the law in order to transmute one system of government into another: the Constitution itself in its elasticity (in terms of legal interpretation of the Charter) enabled this.
The first step in the parliamentary institution occurred in 1824, with the award of the first Brazilian constitutional charter, allowing the General Assembly (Parliament) to take a leading role in policy guidance of the nation. The second step was in 1826 when a minority deputy Bernardo Pereira de Vasconcelos successfully demanded that the ministers of state had to present the government's financial accounts before the Chamber of Deputies. The third step, the most important, was taken in 1847 when Francisco de Paula Souza demanded the creation of the office of the President of the Council of Ministers (equivalent to the Prime Minister, and holding executive power). These steps resulted in the consolidation of Brazilian parliamentarism, in the same manner as the consolidation of British parliamentarism, as it would facilitate the distinction between Executive Power and Moderating Power."
The Brazilian Parliament became increasingly important, as all the great political decisions took place there, providing occasion for memorable debates. By 1881, it was already a custom of the Ministers of State to present government financial accounts to the Parliament, make annual reports on their activities and attend to answer criticism by the Deputies and Senators. These acts allowed great freedom for parliamentary interplay. This did not pass without observation by foreigners. Surprising, Brazil was criticized for its broad freedom of speech and its "exaggerated parliamentarism" as it was called by the French ambassador Amelot, Count of Chaillou. In the view of foreigners, Brazilian parliamentarism was not behind its European equivalents. The Empire was "from its outset a crowned democracy, in which the executive prevailed at first, and the legislative ended up predominating"."
In the Imperial Parliament there were "solid and competitive parties, an active parliament, a free press, open debate", traditions that the Old Republic did not maintain. Both the emperor and the ministers of state always sought to act with attention to Parliament, making a sincere effort to improve the country's political system by adopting characteristics inherent in Parliamentarianism. For example: the definition of the cabinet's governmental program was drafted by the President of the Council of Ministers, and was, in turn, presented by the monarch every year at the opening of the Chamber of Deputies. Another example was the emergence of the possibility that Parliament, when deemed necessary, would submit a motion of no confidence against the cabinet of ministers. This provided a mode of defense (used at exceptional moments) of the parliamentary minority against the cabinet formed by the majority, were they to act inappropriately.
Federalism.
The imperial Constitution of 1824 made Brazil a highly centralized country, aiming to facilitate control by the central government over the provinces and thereby prevent eventual territorial dismemberment. Nonetheless, the local governments had a certain autonomy, because municipal assemblies elected by the population had their own prerogatives. This framework would be changed when the 1840 Additional Act created the Provincial Assemblies to legislate on issues related to local administration. The Act also created an "economic and local government" that made possible to cities to "neutralize in a certain way the absolute power exercised over the provinces by their presidents". A supposed reversal occurred in this area due to the Law of Interpretation, which would have restricted the autonomy gained by the 1834 Act. Historian Maria de Fatima Silva Gouvêa wrote of the view widely held among historians, regarding the non-existence of federalism in the Empire:
 Apart from some few studies published in recent years—in particular the work of Miriam Dohnikoff and Maria Fernanda Martins—very little has been produced on the subject, there remains a strong historiographical perception of the period as being marked by the existence of a monarchic State, centralized, instituted from the will and the dictates of a plantation and slaveocratic elite, over the will of the imperial Brazilian society as a whole.”"
Nonetheless, even after the revision of 1840, the Brazilian State retained certain characteristics of federalism, despite the fact that these were not foreseen in its founding in 1822. Because federalism was the principal change proposed by the republicans in the 19th century, scholars of the subject give the impression that federalism did not exist under the monarchy. William H. Riker, one of the main theoreticians about federalism, considered that the Brazilian monarchy adopted a federalist model after the 1834 Additional Act. His view is that federalism would consist of a "division of competencies between the general government and the regional governments." The principal characteristic of federation is the mutual existence of two autonomous levels of government, in this case central and regional. This was reality during the monarchy, which would be considered a "de facto" federation were it not for the fact of the presidents of the provinces (same as governors of states) being appointed by the Emperor and the Senator having a lifelong tenure. The prussian officer Max von Versen who visited Brazil in 1867 wrote that the Emperor "shares the sovereignty with a Senate and a Chamber of Deputies [House of Representatives] that are assemblies elected by universal suffrage. In fact the Crown does have only the ability to execute decisions of the Legislative. It is so great the administrative autonomy of the provinces, so predominant is the function of the Parliament as it is small the sphere of political attributions of the Emperor". Mirian Dohnikoff concludes that:"
The constitutional division of competencies between provincial governments and the central government, guaranteeing the autonomy of the former, which could not be unilaterally revoked by the central government; the capacity of the provincial governments to make decisions autonomously about matters relative to taxation, the police force, public works, jobs, etc.; the constant negotiation between provinces and the center in parliament to reduce tensions and confrontations between divergent interpretations about the sphere of the competence of each; the attribution of the central government to respond to national unity, provided the tools necessary for both; and its coexistence with autonomous provincial governments, which accounted for strategic regional issues, were federalist factors that prevailed in nineteenth century Brazil. The defeat in the negotiations of reforms in 1832, which resulted in the maintenance of the lifelong character () of membership in the Senate, and the fact of the president of the province being appointed by the central government prevented the full adoption of a federal model. On the other hand, as I have tried to demonstrate, the [centrally appointed] president had limited powers, of a type that did not constitute an obstacle to the exercise of provincial autonomy. The president did not have the power to present legislative projects, and the right to veto laws approved by the Assembly was only one of suspension. It could be exercised for a limited time, only ten days, and returned then to the same Assembly that approved the law, where it could be overruled by two-thirds of the legislators.
Thus, it remained to the monarchic government to abolish the lifelong character of membership in the Senate and to allow the choice of presidents of the provinces by popular vote, to achieve a broader federalism. Such changes would occur in 1889, when the Viscount of Ouro Preto, President of the last Council of Ministers of the monarchy, presented his government proposals to the General Assembly. But, owing to the coup that installed the republic, these plans never came to fruition.
Government of the Empire of Brazil.
Moderating branch.
Emperor's role.
The role of the emperor of Brazil was to represent the nation. He represented that which the nation had "of oneness, of permanence, of stability. He represented the legal order, the unity of all Brazilians, as well as the variations of region, class, party, race, represented the nation in its totality." The monarch was in reality a type of "minister of a republic", in the philosophical sense of that last word, from "res publica", and not a sovereign by divine right. His function as a representative of the nation, of its legitimacy, derived not from being elected, but acclaimed, as had traditionally happened for centuries after the death of the previous monarch in homage to his successor. Acclamation was a popular designation that legitimated the role of the monarchy as representative of the Brazilian people. This in fact occurred at three distinct historic moments during the monarchical era: in 1822, when Pedro I was acclaimed, in 1831 and finally in 1840, when it was the turn of Pedro II be acclaimed in all the provinces. Acclamation was, in a certain way, a type of symbolic vote, equivalent to an informal plebiscite. It was popular acceptance that granted the legitimacy to Brazilian monarchs as representatives of the Nation.
Following the standard dictated by liberalism of the nineteenth century, the Constitution of 1824 granted the monarchy protection under a representative system and protected by the most important, innovative and original item in the constitutional text: the Moderating Power (). This fourth power was personal to the Emperor, acting as a "mechanism to absorb friction between the legislative and executive powers" and his role as the one who would maintain the balance between both powers would allow Pedro II throughout his reign the "worthy position that he exercised with so much pleasure and peace."
Tobias Barreto has analyzed the Moderating Power and the parliamentary government, explained as the reason for its adoption both the fact that "institutions that are not the daughters of custom, but only the product of theories, do not hold themselves for much longer against reality and they will soon ruin themselves when faced by facts." It would not matter if there were laws that would follow the customs and traditions of other nations (other than the Brazilians) that would be admirable in theory, but in practice, would become counterproductive to the point of creating cracks that over time would collapse the edifice of the country's constitutional order. Thus, thanks to the Moderating Power, Brazil was able to "open a valve through which parliamentary anarchy could escape", in other words, it would minimize eventual damage caused by disputes between rival political factions.
According to João Camillo Torres the idea behind the Moderating Power was "that a monarch, by virtue of dynastic continuity, took no part in factions, classes, had no regional links, did not owe his power to economic groups, did not have to fulfill electoral promises, did not need to think of his own future — the future of his family was guaranteed by the preservation of peace and national greatness — he was not subject to the temptation of taking advantage of a brief passage through the government to grant benefits and advantages for himself only at the cost of the nation´s welfare and leaving the onus to his successors" as he knows that his "successor will be his own son, knowing that history, many times, charges grandchildren with the crimes of their grandparents".
Emperor's prerogatives.
Article 99 of the Constitution of 1824 declared that the “person of the Emperor is inviolable and sacred; he is not subject to any responsibility”. This disposition was not characteristic only of the nineteenth century Brazilian constitutional regime. On the contrary, the lack of responsibility of the monarch continues to exist under present-day parliamentary monarchies. The powers reserved to the Moderating Power were to be exercised only after consulting the Council of State. Most of these powers (which were enumerated in Article 101) were identical to those reserved for monarchs today, such as: to summon the General Assembly (parliament) in the intervals between sessions; to sanction the decrees and resolutions of the General Assembly, for them to take on the force of law;
extend or postpone the General Assembly and dissolve the Chamber of Deputies (), convoking another immediately to replace the former; freely appointing and firing ministers of state; pardoning and modifying judicial sentences and granting amnesty.
The dissolution of the Chamber of Deputies should not be confused with shutting down a National Congress (or Parliament). The first refers to a legal measure that exist under Parliamentarism, while the second is a dictatorial act. There was a great care on the part of Brazilian monarchs at the time to exercise their prerogative to dissolve the Chamber of Deputies. For example, in the case of Pedro I, he did not dissolve the Chamber of Deputies or postponed the Parliament during his reign. While Pedro II, not once in his 58 years as Emperor that such dissolution occurred by his own initiative; instead, it was always solicited by the President of the Council of Ministers. There were various dissolutions during the period of his reign, eleven in all, and of these, ten occurred only after the Council of State was consulted on the matter, something that was not obligatory. The power to veto laws was not absolute, merely partial: if two consecutive legislatures presented the same legislation without modifications, the Emperor's signature would not be needed to pass it.
Among the other prerogatives of the emperor were: to suspend magistrates for complaints against their persons, but only after carrying through hearings with them, taking all the important information available, and consulting the Council of State (those magistrates effectively lost their jobs only after due process of law that resulted in a condenatory sentence after all possible appeals); approve or suspend resolutions (laws) of provincial councils and name Senators according to a list of the three candidates who had gained the majority of popular vote. The power to approve or suspend resolutions of provincial councils was extraordinary, it was the competence of the General Assembly and could only occur if that body, for some reason, was unable to meet (This prerogative was annulled by the 1834 Additional Act and the subsequent creation of the Provincial Assemblies).
As to the power of nominating Senators, that was not a characteristic peculiar to the Brazilian legal order, but to something common in all countries of that era. In the United Kingdom, the House of Lords was composed of life members and hereditary members and reserved solely to the nobility; similarly, in France, Senators, also with life terms, were named rather than elected; in the United States, a presidential republic, Senators were chosen by the state legislatures (until this was modified by the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913). None of these three countries, considered at that time to be democracies alongside Brazil, there was any popular participation in the selection of Senators. In contrast, in Brazil Senators were supposed to be named from a list of three candidates who had received the most votes from the Brazilian people.
Paulo Bonavides wrote that the Moderating Power "can only be appreciated for its role on the consolidation of national unity and the stability of the political system of the Empire" on “a continent politically flagellated by civil hatreds and pulverized into weak and rival republics.” For Galvão Sousa, the Moderating Power under Pedro II, “created the space for the famous 'dictatorship of honesty.' It soon became the personal power of the monarch, always exercised with a high public spirit”. The term "dictatorship" () used by the author does not have a pejorative connotation and merely exemplifies what he perceives as the force of morality and justice that Pedro II imposed in his role as constitutional monarch.
Executive branch.
According article 102 of the Constitution of 1824, "the Emperor is the Head of Executive Power, and exercises it by his Ministers of State". However, in 1847 the Emperor Pedro II created the office of the President of the Council of Ministers to hold executive power, although the Emperor still possesses executive powers currently common to the Prime Minister of a monarchy. In practice, both exercised the executive function in different aspects. Through this reform, the Emperor would still be responsible for sanctioning or vetoing laws passed by the General Assembly, "convening the new Ordinary General Assembly," appointing bishops, and providing ecclesiastical benefits, appointing magistrates, and awarding titles and honors. On the other hand, the President of the Council of Ministers was in fact the head of government and responsible for appointing ministers of state and to exercise their function through them, to be responsible for diplomacy, to issue decrees, instructions and regulations and to take care of everything that concerns this, "to provide everything that concerns internal and external security, and to administer the public accounts together with the cabinet and parliament.
The president of the Council owed his position to both his party and to the Emperor, and these could sometimes come into conflict. 19th-century abolitionist leader and historian Joaquim Nabuco said that the "President of the Council in Brazil was no Russian Chancellor, Sovereign's creature, nor a British Prime Minister, made only by the trust of the [House of] Commons: the delegation of the Crown was to him as necessary and important as the delegation of the Chamber, and, to exert with safety his functions, he had to dominate the caprice, the oscillations and ambitions of the Parliament, as well as to preserve always unalterable the favor, the good will of the emperor."
Legislative branch.
According to the Constitution, Legislative power is vested upon the General Assembly, a two-chamber legislature comprising the Imperial Senate and the Chamber of Deputies which in 1824 was composed of 50 senators and 102 general deputies, as the nation's representatives.
The General Assembly alone could enact, revoke, interpret and suspend laws under Article 13 of the Constitution. The legislature also held the power of the purse and was required to annually authorize expenditures and taxes. It alone approved and exercised oversight of government loans and debts. Other responsibilities entrusted to the Assembly included setting the size of the military's forces, the creation of offices within the government, monitoring the national welfare and ensuring that the government was being run in conformity to the Constitution. This last provision allowed the legislature wide authority to examine and debate government policy and conduct.
According to Article 16 of the Constitution of 1824, "each of the Chamber will have the Treatment of Augusts and Dignified Representatives of the Nation." Each legislature lasts four years and each annual session four months. The imperial opening session of the Assembly always takes place on May 3. Both the opening and closing ceremonies will happen with the presence of the Emperor in full imperial regalia in the form of the internal regiment and in the presence of all the members of both chambers. The appointment of the respective Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Secretaries of Chambers, verification of the powers of its members, oath, and its internal police, shall be carried out in the form of its Rules of Procedure. The Members of each of the chambers are inviolable for the opinions they give in the exercise of their functions and during their deputation, they can not be arrested by any authority, except by order of their respective chamber or in flagrant crime capital punishment. Senators and deputies may be appointed to the post of Minister of State, or Councilor of State, with the difference that the Senators continue to sit in the Senate, and the Deputy leaves vacant his place of the Chamber, and proceed to New election, in which he could be re-elected and accumulate both functions. They also accumulate the two functions, if they already exercised any of the mentioned positions, when they were elected. One can not be at the same time a Member of both Houses. The exercise of any Employment, with the exception of those of Counselor of State, the Minister of State, shall cease on an interim basis, while the duties of Deputy or Senator shall last.
A Constitutional balance of power existed between the General Assembly and the executive branch under the Emperor. The legislature could not operate alone and the monarch could not force his will upon the Assembly.
Judicial branch.
The independent Judiciary, and will be composed of judges, and jurors, who will have to log in this way in the civil, as in the crime in the cases, and by the way, that the Codes determine. The jurors pronounce on the fact, and the Judges apply the Law. The Emperor may suspend them for complaints against them, preceding a hearing of the same Judges, necessary information, and hearing the Council of State. All judges and bailiffs are responsible for possible abuses of power, and such as other crimes and illegal practices, can move a popular action against them that may end up disqualifying them from exercising law.
The Article 163 of the Constitution of 1824 says:
The constitutional determination stated that this court should be called the "Supreme Court of Justice" and was regulated by the Imperial Letter of Law of September 18, 1828 and installed on January 9, 1829 in operation in the House of the Senate and later in the Palace of Relation. The Supreme Court of Justice was the national court acting in all instances. All of its members were directly appointed by the Emperor. Each province has also its own Tribunal of Relations to try cases in the lower court.
The judiciary is completely independent even from the Emperor. However, although it can not interfere directly, the Emperor can commute applied penalties, such as the death penalty, which was no longer executed in 1876 by successive commutations of Emperor Pedro II.
Provincial and local governments.
When enacted in 1824, the Imperial Constitution created the "Conselho Geral de Província" (Provincial General Council), the legislature of the provinces. This council was composed of either 21 or 13 elected members, depending on the size of a province's population. All "resolutions" (laws) created by the councils required approval by the General Assembly, with no right of appeal. Provincial Councils also had no authority to raise revenues, and their budgets had to be debated and ratified by the General Assembly. Provinces had no autonomy and were entirely subordinate to the national government.
With the 1834 constitutional amendment known as the Additional Act, Provincial General Councils were supplanted by the "Assembleias Legislativas Provinciais" (Provincial Legislative Assemblies). The new Assemblies enjoyed much greater autonomy from the national government. A Provincial Assembly was composed of 36, 28 or 20 elected deputies, the number depending on the size of the province's population. The election of provincial deputies followed the same procedure as used to elect general deputies to the national Chamber of Deputies.
The responsibilities of the Provincial Assembly included defining provincial and municipal budgets and levying the taxes necessary to support them; providing primary and secondary schools (higher education was the responsibility of the national government); oversight and control of provincial and municipal expenditures; and providing for law enforcement and maintenance of police forces. The Assemblies also controlled the creation and abolishment of, and salaries for, positions within provincial and municipal civil services. The nomination, suspension and dismissal of civil servants was reserved for the president (governor) of the province, but how and under what circumstances he could exercise these prerogatives was delineated by the Assembly. The expropriation of private property (with due monetary compensation) for provincial or municipal interests was also a right of the Assembly. In effect, the Provincial Assembly could enact any kind of law—with no ratification by Parliament—so long as such local laws did not violate or encroach upon the Constitution. However, provinces were not permitted to legislate in the areas of criminal law, criminal procedure laws, civil rights and obligations, the armed forces, the national budget or matters concerning national interests, such as foreign relations.
The provincial presidents were appointed by the national government and were, in theory, charged with governing the province. In practice, however, their power was intangible, varying from province to province based upon each president's relative degree of personal influence and personal character. Since the national government wanted to ensure their loyalty, presidents were, in most cases, sent to a province in which they had no political, familial or other ties. In order to prevent them from developing any strong local interests or support, presidents would be limited to terms of only a few months in office. As the president usually spent a great deal of time away from the province, often traveling to their native province or the imperial capital, the de facto governor was the vice-president, who was chosen by the Provincial Assembly and was usually a local politician. With little power to undermine provincial autonomy, the president was an agent of the central government with little function beyond conveying its interests to the provincial political bosses. Presidents could be used by the national government to influence, or even rig, elections, although to be effective the president had to rely on provincial and local politicians who belonged to his own political party. This interdependency created a complex relationship which was based upon exchanges of favors, private interests, party goals, negotiations, and other political maneuvering.
The câmara municipal (town council) was the governing body in towns and cities and had existed in Brazil since the beginning of the colonial period in the 16th century. The Chamber was composed of vereadores (councilmen), the number of which depended on the size of the town. Unlike the Provincial General Council, the Constitution gave town councils great autonomy. However, when the Provincial Assembly replaced the Provincial General Council in 1834, many of the powers of town councils (including the setting of municipal budgets, oversight of expenditures, creation of jobs, and the nomination of civil servants) were transferred to the provincial government. Additionally, any laws enacted by the town council had to be ratified by the Provincial Assembly—but not by Parliament. While the 1834 Additional Act granted greater autonomy to the provinces from the central government, it transferred the towns' remaining autonomy to the provincial governments. There was no office of mayor, and towns were governed by a town council and its president (who was the councilman who won the most votes during elections)
Elections.
Overview.
According to the Constitution of 1824, one of the most liberal of its time, voting was obligatory and elections occurred in two steps: in first phase, voters chose Electors. The Electors then chose senators (members of the upper house), deputies (members of the lower house), provincial deputies (members of the Provincial Assemblies) and councilmen (members of the town's assembly). All the men 25 years of age or older could vote in the first phase with an income of at least Rs 100$000 per year or more, with some exceptions; married men 21 years of age or older could vote, as well. To be an Elector, it was necessary to have an income of at least Rs 200$000 per year.
The income requirement was much higher in the United Kingdom even after the 1832 reform. The only countries at the time that did not require a certain income to vote were France and Switzerland, where universal suffrage was introduced only in 1848. It is probable that no European country at the time had such liberal legislation as Brazil. The income requirement was low enough that, effectively, any employed male citizen could vote. For comparison, in 1876 the civil employee with the lowest wage at the time, a janitor working in the public sector, earned Rs 600$000 annually.
Most voters in Brazil had a low income. In 1876, for example, in the town of Formiga, in the province of Minas Gerais, the poor were 70% of the electorate and in Irajá, in the province of Rio de Janeiro, they were 87%. Ex-slaves couldn't vote, but their children and grandchildren could, as could the illiterate (which few countries allowed). In 1872, 13% of the free Brazilian population voted. For comparison, in 1870 in the UK, electoral participation was 7% of the total population; in Italy, it was 2%; in Portugal, 9%; and in the Netherlands 2.5%. In 1832, the year of the British electoral reform, 3% of the British voted. Further reforms in 1867 and 1884 managed to expand electoral participation in the UK to 15%.
Although electoral fraud was common, it did not pass unobserved by Pedro II, or the politicians and experts of that time, who considered it a great problem to be resolved. Some measures, like the electoral reforms of 1855, 1875 and 1881, had been taken with intention to eliminate, or at least to diminish, fraud.
Electoral reforms.
The Law of 19 September 1855 created the district vote and incompatibilities (also known as non-eligibility). The first one had as objective to make possible the representation of all the local factions, while the latter had the purpose of reducing the influence of the government (independent of what party was in power) in the result of the elections. Beyond these new features, it was forbidden that public officials campaign in their own districts, as a measure to prevent them from using public resources for their own political benefit. As a consequence, presidents of provinces, as well as provincial secretaries, military, judges and chiefs of police were prohibited from running in the district where they served, although they could still run in a different district. The positive results of the reform were already apparent in the immediate following elections, in 1856: prior to that time, such officials constituted the majority of new members of Parliament. The reduction in their numbers allowed the “real country"(the Brazilian people) to enter “directly into the Parliament"(that is, a true representative democracy), as was desired by Honório Hermeto Carneiro Leão.
The next reform occurred in 1875, when a mechanism was introduced that would make possible the representation of minorities (eliminating once and for all the ignominious unanimous assemblies): the system of the third, where the voters chose only 2/3 of the list of voters of the province, and in turn, the voters voted in 2/3 of the number of provincial deputies (provincial members of the house of representatives), thus allowing that the remaining 1/3 was filled by the votes of the opposition.
The last and the most important reform, known as "Saraiva Law" (in homage to the then Prime Minister, José Antônio Saraiva) brought significant changes, because it eliminated the election in two turns, introducing the direct and facultative vote and allowed the votes of ex-slaves, as well as of non-Catholics. Also, it extended the electoral incompatibilities (non-eligibility) of 1855, forbidding campaigning by entrepreneurs of public works and vicars and bishops in their own parishes, and established that elect public officials elected in other districts than their own could not exercise their public positions, receive wages or be promoted while their mandates lasted. The effects of the reform were felt immediately, because while in 1850 something like 48% of the members of the house of representatives were public officers, in the last legislature this percentage fell to only 8%. If, on one hand, the reform diminished corruption and electoral fraud, allowing the Brazilian parliamentary system to work better, it also had negative effects, as the illiterate were no longer allowed to vote. The people's participation in elections dropped from 13% of the total population to only 0.8% in 1886. However, in the first legislature after the reform, the conservative opposition had 39% of the seats. In the second, it had 44% while the republicans had 2%. In the third legislature, the liberals were opposition in that moment and had 18% of all seats.
In 1889 about 20% of the Brazilian population could read and write, so depriving the illiterate of the franchise does not explain the reason for the sudden fall of the electorate. Possibly, it occurred because voting was no longer obligatory, which, together with the lack of interest of the Brazilian people in exerting their rights of citizenship, may have resulted in the reduction in the number of voters (which would continue until the middle of the 1940s).
To many Brazilians at that time, the greatest issue about their elections was their belief that the illiterate didn't have capacity to vote, on the grounds that the illiterate were unaware of the notion of the meaning of a representative government, of the choice of somebody as its representative and were easily corruptible, usually selling their votes. To Pedro II, the best way to resolve the problem about the electoral fraud was not restricting the right to vote but, instead, improving education in the country. Even so, Brazil was capable of keeping uninterrupted elections from 1822 to 1889, strengthening the electoral process, as well the representative system, a record matched in the Americas only by the United States and Canada.


Liu Song dynasty

The Liu Song dynasty (420–479 CE; ), also known as Former Song (前宋) or Southern Song (南朝宋), was the first of the four Southern Dynasties in China, succeeding the Eastern Jin and followed by the Southern Qi.
The dynasty was founded by Liu Yu (劉裕) (363–422 CE), whose surname together with "Song" forms the common name for the dynasty, the Liu Song. This appellation is used to distinguish it from a later dynasty of the same name, the Song dynasty (960–1279 CE, ruled by the House of Zhao). Although the Liu Song has also at times been referred to as the "Southern Song", the name is now mainly used to refer to the Song dynasty after 1127 CE.
The Liu Song was a time when there was much internal turmoil. A number of emperors were incompetent and/or tyrannical, which at least partially led to many military revolts. These rulers include Liu Shao, Emperor Xiaowu, Emperor Qianfei, Emperor Ming, and Emperor Houfei. Emperor Ming was especially vicious, murdering many of his brothers, nephews, and other male relatives — many of them children. Such internal instability eventually led to the dynasty's destruction. However, its founder Emperor Wu was considered one of the greatest generals during the Southern and Northern Dynasties period, and the reign of its third emperor, Emperor Wen, is known for its political stability and capable administration, not only of its emperor but its strong and honest officials. This is known as the Reign of Yuanjia (425–453) and one of the relative golden ages for the Southern Dynasties.
History.
Rise of Liu Yu.
Although he was a descendant of Emperor Gaozu of Han's younger brother Liu Jiao, he was still born into poverty. He joined the army at a young age, quickly distinguished himself in the army and was quickly promoted to the command of an army, the Beifu corps. Liu Yu was instrumental in fighting the rebel Huan Xuan. After Huan Xuan's fall, Liu Yu gained control of the Jin dynasty.
Campaigns of Liu Yu.
Regarded as one of the best generals of the Northern and Southern dynasties, Liu Yu started off by reclaiming much of the territory the Chinese had lost during the Sixteen Kingdoms era. He started off his career by campaigning against Southern Yan, which bordered Jin to the north and had adopted a policy of aggression and kidnapping citizens from the Jin. By spring of 410, he had captured the southern Yan capital at Guanggu, ending Southern Yan.
Afterwards, he campaigned against western Shu in modern Sichuan. Using a brilliant military manoeuver mentioned in the Art of War, Liu Yu instructed his generals to attack the capital of Shu by the Min River rather than the short route by the Fu river. Surprising the Shu forces, he quickly captured Chengdu and re-annexed that area back into Jin.
Following the death of the Later Qin Emperor Yao Xin, Liu Yu attacked the state of Later Qin, which controlled the valuable lands of Guanzhong, lands which had once housed the capital of the Qin, Han and Jin dynasties before the barbarian uprisings. After defeating the Later Qin army in several battles, as well as an army of Northern Wei troops which had crossed to assist the Later Qin, Liu Yu recaptured the vital cities of Chang'an and Luoyang, the former capitals of the Jin Empire. It is recorded that he engaged the Wei army by the use of spears launched by crossbows, panicking the Wei cavalry and allowing him to score a decisive victory.
After this success, it seemed that Jin would exterminate the remaining barbarian states in the north and reunify China. However, fortunes began to change for the Jin forces. Liu Mengzhi died and in order to secure his power, Liu Yu left for Jiankang (present-day Nanjing), abandoning the management of the North to his general Wang Zhen'e. After his departure, the state of Xia attacked Guanzhong and reoccupied it, and the loss of these lands prescribed Jin's frontier at the Yellow River. However, Jin retained its former eastern capital, Luoyang, as well as most of the Chinese heartland.
Following his return to Jiankang, Liu Yu ended the rule of the Jin and became emperor himself in 420, establishing the Liu Song dynasty. The name of the dynasty was taken from Liu's fief, which occupied roughly the same territory as the Spring & Autumn era State of Song. The Book of Song does not mention whether the Liu family had any blood relationship to the ancient state's ruling House of Zi, or by extension to the Shang dynasty. It is in any case noteworthy that Liu did not frame his new regime as a restoration of the Han dynasty, despite being demonstrably related to the Han imperial family. Liu died in 422 CE, and was succeeded by the incompetent Shaodi, who was quickly removed. His eventual successor would be his third son, Wendi.
Reign of Emperor Wen.
Under Emperor Wen, the Liu Song economy prospered during the rule of Yuanjia (), a period noted for its prosperity in the 400 years of conflict between the Han and Tang dynasties. However, the emperor's martial abilities were not equal to his father, and his inability to crush the remaining barbarian states allowed Northern Wei to complete the unification of the North, to the detriment of Liu Song. Afterwards, Northern Wei would remain a grave and permanent threat to the Liu Song.
War with Northern Wei.
Emperor Wen continued the campaigns of his father; nevertheless, he was unsuccessful. In 422 CE, the first year of his reign, he lost three commanderies to Wei. Under the able general Dao Yanzhi, however, Liu Song recovered the four cities of Luoyang, Hulao, Huatai and Qiao'ao south of the Yellow River. However, the emperor's unwillingness to advance past this line caused the destruction of the empire's ally, Xia, by the Wei. The emperor was to repeat this mistake as several barbarian states who had offered to ally with Liu Song against Wei were declined, eventually leading to Wei's unification of the North in 439 CE, to the detriment of the Chinese.
Towards the later part of his reign, Emperor Wen was less than able. He wrongfully executed the general Tan Daoji, who had hitherto commanded the Song armies, and took charge himself. The empire's decline was shown in 450 CE, where the emperor attempted to destroy the Northern Wei himself, and launched a massive invasion. Although initially successful, the campaign turned into a disaster. The Wei lured the Liu Song to cross the Yellow River, and then flanked them, destroying the Eastern army. As the Liu Song armies retreated, the provinces south of the Yellow River were devastated by the Wei army. Only Huatai, a fortified city, held out against the Wei. However, the economic damage was immense. The barbarian troops laid waste to the provinces they had temporarily occupied, as described by Sima Guang:
The Wei forces laid South Yan, Xu, North Yan, Yu, Qing, and Ji Provinces to waste. The Song deaths and injuries were innumerable. When Wei forces encountered Song young men, the forces quickly beheaded them or cut them in half. The infants were pierced through with spears, and the spears were then shaken so that the infants would scream as they were spun, for entertainment. The commanderies and counties that Wei forces went through were burned and slaughtered, and not even grass was left. When sparrows returned in the spring, they could not find houses to build nest on, so they had to do so in forests. Wei soldiers and horses also suffered casualties of more than half, and the Xianbei people were all complaining.
Sima Guang also pointed out the cause of Liu Song's disaster:
 Every time Emperor Wen sent generals out on battles, he required them to follow the complete battle plans that he had drafted, and even the dates for battles needed approval from the emperor. Therefore, the generals all hesitated and could not make independent decisions. Further, the non-regular troops that he conscripted were not trained, and they rushed to advance when they were victorious and scattered when they were defeated. These were the two reasons why he failed, and from this point on, the state was in recession, and the Reign of Yuanjia was in decline.
Another historian, Shen Yue, pointed out Emperor Wen was said to model his command on the great general Emperor Guangwu of Han, but he lacked the latter's command abilities.
Emperor Wen made another attempt to destroy Northern Wei in 452, but failed again. On returning to the capital, he was assassinated by the heir apparent, Liu Shao.
Reign of Emperor Xiaowu and Qianfei.
Liu Shao's assassination of his father in 453 CE raised indignation across the empire, as it disobeyed one of Confucianism's fundamental principles, that of filial piety. Quickly, his brother Liu Jun rose against him, defeated him, and beheaded him. Once Liu Shao was killed. Liu Jun ascended to the throne and became Emperor Xiaowu. However, he was regarded as immoral and committed incest with his cousins and sisters, and reputed to have even done so with his mother. Nevertheless, his reign was a relatively peaceful one.
Following his death in 464 CE, Liu Jun passed his throne to his son, Liu Ziye, who was generally regarded as a tyrant. He disrespected his father and was suspicious of his uncles, putting several of them to death. He continued the incestuous streak of his father, adopting several of his aunts and cousins as concubines. He was reputed to have ordered all of the princesses to come to his palace and have sexual intercourse with him. When one of his aunts refused, he executed her three sons. He also put to death a lady-in-waiting who bore a resemblance to a woman who cursed him in a dream. Eventually, one of his uncles could not bear it, rose up, and assassinated him.
Civil war and loss of Northern Commanderies.
The man who assassinated Qianfei quickly became emperor himself and declared himself emperor Ming. He ordered Liu Ziye's brother Liu Zishang and sister Liu Chuyu, who were reputed to have participated in the late emperor's sexual immorality and tyrannical governance, to commit suicide. However, his claim to the throne was not accepted by Liu Zixun, one of his nephews, who then rose against him.
The civil war at first was a great success for Liu Zixun, who quickly overran nearly the entire empire. However, he moved too slowly. Emperor Ming quickly sent an army westward, captured Kuaiji, a vital food supply. Another of his generals captured Qianxi and cut off Liu Zixun's supplies. Starving, his troops collapsed and Liu Zixun was killed, aged just 10.
However, Emperor Ming grew arrogant and refused to grant a pardon to those who had supported Liu Ziye. This action was extremely detrimental to Liu Song and its successors, as the governors of the northern commandries, fearing their lives, surrendered to Wei rather than face execution at Jiankang. This resulted in the loss of the Chinese heartland and the most fertile and cultivated lands at that time. This loss would eventually lead to the destruction of the southern regime, and resulted in North China languishing under a barbarian yoke for another 150 years. Although Emperor Ming attempted to recover them, his attempts were defeated.
Emperor Ming's later reign was extremely brutal. Suspicious of his nephews, he had them all executed. Afraid of usurpation from rival members of the royal family, he executed thousands of members of the royal family, which was greatly weakened. Upon his death, his son had to be assisted by the general Xiao Daocheng, as nearly all of Emperor Ming's brothers and nephews had been killed.
Fall of Liu Song.
The successor to the emperor Ming, emperor Houfei, was resentful of the control Xiao Daocheng had over him and announced openly several times he would kill him. Fearful of his demise, Xiao had him assassinated and placed Emperor Shun on his throne. In 479, Xiao took the throne himself and declared himself Emperor of Qi, ending Liu Song. The ex-emperor Shun and his clan were soon put to the sword.
Liu Hui (刘辉) was a descendant of Liu Song royalty who fled north to the Xianbei Northern Wei in exile and married the Xianbei Princess Lanling (蘭陵公主), daughter of the Xianbei Emperor Xiaowen of Northern Wei. More than fifty percent of Tuoba Xianbei princesses of the Northern Wei were married to southern Han Chinese men from the imperial families and aristocrats from southern China of the Southern dynasties who defected and moved north to join the Northern Wei.
Literature and culture.
Despite, and certainly to some extent because of, the chaotic warfare between the Northern and Southern dynasties, the Liu Song produced much poetry ("shi" 詩) notably the rhapsody, "fu" 賦. The imperial house sponsored many literary works, and many wrote themselves. The court of Emperor Wen was especially active in literary circles, with Liu supporting the compilation of a large collection of short prose anecdotes, "A New Account of the Tales of the World" ("Shishuo Xinyu"). The "Three Giants of Yuanjia," Bao Zhao (鮑照) (d.466), Xie Lingyun (謝霊運) (385–433 CE), and Yan Yanzhi (顏延之) (384–456 CE) are perhaps the best known poets of the Song, each of them being credited as the originators of the three major literary trends to follow.
Scientists and astronomers were also active during periods of relative peace. Buddhism also began to be better understood and more widely practised at this time, and some officials such as Xie Lingyun, were Buddhists.
Liu Song sculptors may have created a number of spirit way ensembles, generally characteristic of the Six Dynasties era, for the tombs of the dynasty's emperors and other dignitaries. However, according to a survey of the extant Six Dynasties' sculpture in the Nanjing and Danyang areas, only one of the extant Six Dynasties' tomb sculptural groups has been securely identified as belonging to the Liu Song: the Chuning Tomb of the first emperor of the dynasty. Two "qilin" statues of this tomb survive in the appropriately named Qilin Town in Nanjing's suburban Jiangning District.
Science.
Zu Chongzhi, a noted astronomer, lived during the Liu Song period. He was noted for calculating pi to seven decimal places and as the author of a variety of other astronomical theories.


Nicopolis (Roman)

Nicopolis (Born 150 BC) was a Greek "hetaira" active in Rome.
She is foremost known as the lover and benefactor of the young Sulla. She was a rich woman by the time Sulla became her lover. After her death, she left him her fortune. Their relationship and the benefit of her fortune has often been referred to in the history of Sulla.


2006 Jama Masjid bombings

On 6 June 2006, two explosions occurred in the courtyard of Jama Masjid, a 17th-century mosque in Old Delhi (India). The first blast took place at 17:26 local time right in the middle of the courtyard next to "Wazoo Khana" which comprises a pond where worshipers wash their hands and feet before offering prayers, and the second a few meters away seven minutes later. At least thirteen people were injured in the blasts. The blasts took place just before the call to prayer ("azaan"). The explosives were reportedly carried in plastic bags. There were around 1000 people in the mosque at the time of blasts as the day happened to be Friday, considered holy by the Muslims as well as being the first Friday after Mawlid, the birthday of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. The explosions did not cause any damage to the mosque. The Delhi government announced an ex gratia compensation of Rs. 50,000 to those with serious injuries and Rs. 25,000 to those with minor injuries.
Some sources claim that the mosque was almost empty with only 100–150 people in the premises when the blast took place. The first blast occurred near Gate No. 1, a place where people wash their hands before offering prayers. It was the first attack of its kind on the historic mosque. It is being speculated that these blasts might be linked with coincidental six grenade attacks in Srinagar, that took place the same day.
According to Delhi police, these were "low-intensity blasts" triggered by crude explosives. The police have not ruled out terrorist involvement. As of 7 June 2006, no terrorist group had claimed the responsibility of the blasts. The Delhi police have arrested four people and are questioning them for the blasts.
Another school of thought suggests that the explosions could be the handiwork of some office bearers of the mosque due to internal rivalry.


Publius Manlius Capitolinus

Publius Manlius Capitolinus was a Roman statesman who served as Dictator in 368 BC.
Family.
A member of the patrician "gens Manlia", Capitolinus was the brother of Marcus Manlius Capitolinus, consul in 392 BC.
Career.
In 368 BC, Capitolinus succeeded Marcus Furius Camillus as Dictator, who was forced to step down by the tribunes. Capitolinus successfully brokered a settlement between the plebeians and patricians. He appointed Gaius Licinius Stolo as "Magister Equitum", the first plebeian to hold the office.