text:
CHOTEAU V. HARVEY.
of the present case, for if it be conceded that the coupons payable January 1, 1888, were presented before the expiration of the days of grace, it suffices to enable the plaintiff to recover that those payable Jnly 1, 1887, were also presented January 2, 1888. The holder of commercial paper is not required in an action against the maker or acceptor to aver or prove presentment, but it devolves upon the maker to show non-presentment as matter of defense by proof that he was ready to pay the paper at the time and place of payment, and was always ready afterwards to do so. Foden v. Sharp, 4 Johns. 183; Wolcottv. VanSantvoord, 17 Johns. 248; Wallace v. McConnell, 13 Pet. 136. The same rule applies to actions upon coupons. Walnut v. Wade, 103 U. S. 683. It does not follow, however, that it is not incumbent upon the plaintiff to make presentment of the coupons in order to charge the defendant with a breach of the condition in question. By the terms of the bonds the default of 90 days in payment of interest, by which the whole principal is to become'payable immediately, is a default in the payment "when such interest shall become payable, and be demanded." This language makes the default depend upon a 'precedent demand of the interest. It does not require a demand to be made on the very day the interest becomes payable. It means that the obligor shall not be liable beyond the amount of interest due until a specific demand of the interest is made by the bondholder. If the bondholder does not demand the interest, he can, nevertheless, maintain an action upon the coupons, which can only be defeated by proof on part of the obligor that the coupons wonld have been paid at any time upon presentment at the proper place. If he does demand payment of the interest when it becomes due, or at any time thereafter, the demand implies that he intends no longer to waive his rights, but insists'upon the strict fulfillment of the condition. Upon this construction of the contract the 90 days commenced to run January 2, 1888, as to the July interest previously due. The demurrer is sustained.
CHOTEAU 'V. HARVEY. SAME
UNION PAC.
«(Jircuit Court,
w: n. Mi88ouri, w: n.
November 9, 1888.)
DOWER-AssIGNMENT-LIMITATION OF ACTIONS.
An action for the assignment of dower is an action to recover real estate, within the meaning of the Missouri statute of H:l47, (Rev. St. Mo. 1879, § 3219,) and is barred by the 10-years limitation of that act.
SAME-STATUTES-RETROSPECTIVE OPERATION. .
The limitation law of 1847 was in force at the time of the adoption of the Missouri Code of 1849, and the provision of said Code (Laws Mo. 1849, art 2, p. 74, § 1,) that" this article shall not extend to actions already commenced, or to cases where the right of action has already accrued; but the statute now in force shall be applicable to such cases," etc., had reference to the limitation law of 1847, so as to bring within its purview an action for the assignment of dower accruing prior to its adoption.
. FEDHRALREPORTER.
. Actions .for the assignmellt of dower, instituted by Berenice F. Choteau against William Harvey and the Union Pacific Railway Company. Slaughter & ,Taylor, for plaintiff. . Karnes & KrauthojJ, for William Harvey. John W. Beebe, and Charles Monroe, for Union, Pacific Railway Company. Before BREWER, Circuit Judge, and PHILIPS, DisL·jot Judge.
PHILIPS, J.. This is an action for the assignment of dower. The plaintiff's husband is alleged to have died seizeU of theJand in qUE:'stion in 1838, at which time plaintilrs right of dower attached so as to have been asserted in thi!'! form of action,' had she chosen to do so. The above facts appearing on the face of the petition, the defendant demurred on the ground that the action was barred by the statute of limitations. The question.to be decided is, does the statute of limitations prescribed by the statute of this state apply to this action? .. Section 3219, Rev. St. Mo. 1879, declares that "no action for the recoverv of any lands, etc., or for the recovery of the possession thereof, shall be commenced, had. or maintained by aoy person, * * * unless it appear that the plaintiff, his ancestor, predeoessor, grantor, or other person, under whom he claims, was seized or possessed of the premises in question within ten years before the commencement of such action." This statute was enacted in 1847, and has continued in this form in the successive revisions to this date. It has long been a mooted question in this state as to whether or not this statute applies to the action for the assignment of dower. It, perhaps, is not too much to say that it was the prevailing opinion of the profession, based upon adjudications of the courts, that there is no statutory- limitation as to such action; but the que!'!tion has recently been reviewed and Q.'<ltermined by the supreme court of this state in the case of Robinson v. Ware, 94 Mo. 678, 8 8. W. Rep. 153, in which it is held that the action for assignment of dower is, in effect, an action to recover real eBtate, and is barred by the 10-vears limitation. It is important in relation to the question here presented to briefly advert to the argument and ground of that decision. It holds under the statute respecting the action for dower; where the widow, as in this case, shall be deforced 'thereof, that it is an aetion for the recovery of real estate, and that the action performs the double office of the allotment of the dower interest and of ejectment for the possession thereof; that the proceeding "comes literally within the words, 'an action for the recovery of lands, or for the recovery of the possessioa thereof.'" After alluding to the fact that under statutes prior to 1849 it was supposed that the statute of limitations did not apply to such actions, it is asserted that the practice act adopted in 1849 "abolished all distinctions between actions at law and suits in equity,and declared that thereafter there should be in this state but one form of action, which is denominated a 'civil action. '" This Cbde repeals certain sections of the Revised Statutes of 1845 concerning the limitation of personal actions, and substitutes others. It is then maintained that "this history of the legislation shows clearly
At taw.
ClIOTEAU tJ. HARVEY.
that it'was the policy of the legislature of 1849 to fix a period of limitation for all civil actions," and, of consequence, as dower iil a civil action, it mUdt subject to the operation of the 10-years limitation. The of action under cOTlsideratlOn, in that case, having accrued after the statute of 1849, was subject to its operation·. 'The federal courts, in construing state statutes, as a general rule, where no newly-acquired interests or rights have attached upon earlier rulings on the statute, will follow the .constructioll given by the higheilt courts of the statewhere such statute has been enacted. The plaintiff, while recognizing the binding force of this decision, undertakes to except from its operation this action on the ground that her cause of action accrued in 1838, long prior to the adoption of the limitation law of 1847 and the practice act of 1849. This contention rests upon the ground that in the act of 1849 (section 1, ari.2, p. 74; Laws Mo. 1849) it is expressly provided that "this areele shall not extend to actions already commenced, or to cases where the right of action has already accrued; but the statute now in force shall be applicable to cases, according to the eubject of the action, and without regard 1;0 the form." This exception has, in effect, been carried forward and incorporated in every succel"ding revision of the statute. The argument of plaintiff's coullsel is that, as prior to the act of 1849 there was no statute in force in this state placing any limuupon the right of action for assignment of dower, the right remained intact and wholly unaffected by any subsequent statute of limitations. It is to be conceded to this contention that t4ere a,re decisions in other jurisdictiolls which seem to support it. Libbett v. Maultsby, 71 N. C. 345; O'Mulcahy v. F1mf/l', 27 Minn. 449,8 N. W. Rep. 166. But, giving effect to the phraseology of the Missouri statutes, and the construction repeatedly placed thereon by the supreme court of the state, we do not feel at liberty to follow the cases cited. As already stated, the statute limiting real actions, in the form as it now appears in the latest revision, appeared in the laws of Missouri, 1847, p. 94, § 1, in an act entitled" An act to quiet vexatiolls)and litigation." That act contained no reservation saving the right of actions already commenced, or which had accrued; but it must be kept in mind that, according to the present holding of the supreme colirt in Robinson v. Ware, supra, the language of this statute, being the same as the present statute, did in its terms and effect cover the action Of dowel' as one" for the recovery of lands." Without stopping here to consider whether that statut.e would have applied to the plaintiff's cause of action. which had not then run 10 years, or whether she would have had 10 years thereafter in which to bring her action, it is sufficient to say that. this section of the statute of 1847 was in force at the time of the adoption of the Code of 1849, and that the language "but t!le statutes now in force shall be applicable to such cases" evidently had reference to the statute of 1847, which was in force at the time of the adoption of the act of 1849. It is true that, in Littleton v. PattfJ1'son,32 Mo. 357, the court held that the action for dower was not· barred by the act of 1847. No attention was given to the act of 1849 in this decision, but it was predicated solely of the act of 1847. The 10-
KEPORTER.
years limitation, when the action was brought,had not run under the act of 1849, but had run under the act of 1847, as the husband died January 4, 1849, and the suit was hegun Fehruary 23, 1859. It is not apparent to our mlnd, as !'uggested by counsel for plaintiff, that Judge BLACK, who deHvel'ed the opinion in Robinson v. Ware, concedes thatthe act of 1847 was rightly consl,ued in lJitueton v. Patterson, for he says: "We believe such an action would have been held to have been barred in the case of Littleton v. Patte1'son, supra, either by the first section of the act of 1847, or this general clause in the act of 1849, had the court been called upon to consider the statutes as Ilo whole." And it will be perceived that the whole line of argument in the opinion in Robinaon v. Ware was opposed to that pursued by the court in Littleton v. Patterson, predicated of the .constructi.on given to the statute of 1847, wh ich was supposed to have been modeled after the statute of Hen. VIII., and James 1., for the opinion says: " As a general rule. when we adopt a statute from another jurisdiction, we take it with the construction which has been given to it in that jurisdiction; but where one or more sections are formulated after these old English utes, we must construe our own enactments in the light of the whole body of our statute law upon the same general subject." The opillion then proceeds to show that, by the practice act of 1849, the scheme and policy of the act was to make the statute of limitations applicable to all civil actions, and the period of 10 years prescribed in the then existing law applicable to all actions for the recovery of real eState or any intorest therein. In the revision of 1855, which was re-enacted in 1857, (Laws Mo. 1856-7, pp. 76-80,) thi.s statute of limitations was continued, and the saving clause was expressed in section 15, art. 3, as follows: "The provisions of this act shall not apply to any action commenced, nor to any cases where the right of action or of entry shall have accrued before tbe time when this act takes effect, but the same shall remain subject to the laws then in force." In this form this provision continues in the statute to this day. ,Again,. however, itis contended, with zeal-and ability, on the part of plaintiff's counsel, that the expression "the same shall remain subject to the laws then in force" has reference to thA time when the cause of action accrued. On the part of the defendant it is contended that the word "then" has reference to the law in force at thetimewhen the act of 1855 \oak effect. This contention of defendant is, we think, well sustained, both upon the grammatical construction of the provision, as well as the repeated decisions of the supreme court. Judge SCOT'!." delivering the opinion of the supreme court in Callaway Co. v. NoUey, 31 Mo. 398, said: "The construction Pllt upon t he existing statute of limitations as to real ·actions is that, where ten years have elapsed from the taking effect of the act, tbe acttop is! barred. although it first accmed under some act of limitations which gave a longer period in which to bring it."
This precise question came up for consideration and determination again in BiUion v. Walsh, 46 Mo. 492. After quoting said section, the court say: "What are the laws here referred to? The laws in force at the time the act took effect, or at the time the right of action accrued? The plaintiff assumes the latter position. and claims that her right of action accrued in 1832. upon the death of Connell, when the limitation act of 1825 was in force, giving twenty years in which to SUe, after the removal of disabilities, and that this latter act is the one that fixes the rights of parties. The position assumed is not sustainable. It is at variance with the letter and spirit of the law. and the whole tendency of legislation on this sUbject for the last generation." After adverting to the various limitation statutes the court conclude by saying that the term "then" in section 15 of the act of 1855 "is the law in force at the time of its enactment, [and is] to govern when the right of action had then already accrued. * * * The legislature, not wishing to disturb the law of 1847, instead of enacting that the law of 1845 should govern in cases where the right of action had then already accrued, enacted that the law in force at the time the revised act should take effect should apply to and govern such cases. The law of 1847 was then in force, and consequently must control in all cases where the right of action had accrued at the time the subsequent act went into operation, provided the period limited in the act had run after its passage." So BLISS, J., in Gilkerv. Brown, 47 Mo. 110, 111, held that said section 15 "can have no reference to any acts of limitation beyond the act of 1847." Evidently for the reason that that law was then in force. We have not overlooked the line of decisions cited by counsel holding tbat, where the statute of limitations in force at the time the cause of. action accrued gave, for instance, 10 years in which to bring snit, and' the subsequent statute shortened the period, the former period of 10 years was secured to the party by virtue of the saving clause in said section 15. Neilson v. Chariton Co., 60 Mo. 386; Abernathy v. Dennis, 49 Mo. 469; School Directors v. Goerges, 50 Mo. 194; McCartney v. Alderson, 54 Mo. 320. The holding in these cases comes clearly within the construction already given to said section 15, as the statute under which the causes of action accrued in those cases was the statute or law in force at the time of the enactment of the new statute. It is a non sequitur, however, that as, at the time the plaintiff's cause of action arose, there was no statute of limitation as to the action for assignment of dower, the right remains unlimited by reason of the saving provision of said section 15. As already attempted to be shown, the act of 1849, having declared, in effect, that all civil actions for the recovery of land, which includes the action for dower, shall be subject to the limitations now imposed by statute, i. e., the statute of 1847, the legal effect was the same as if, in 1849, the legislature had in express words declared that causes of action for the recovery of dower interests accrued anterior to 1849 should be subject to the period of limitation prescribed in section 1 of the act of 1847. It may be conceded to plaintiff's contention that the act could not be 1'etroin its operation under the state constitution. It was so far prov.36F.no.9-35
spectivein its effect as to allow to the party whose cause of action arose prior thereto 10 years from the date of the statute in which to bring her action. This position is fortified, we think, bytne authority cited by couDsel, Sayre v. Wisner, 8 Wend. 661. The legislature having enacted that a widow should demand her dower within 20 years after the death of her husband, it was held that the limitation did not apply where the husband died previous to the new statute going into effect. Bt- t at the same time it was held to be "strictly within the reason of the rule of construction above alluded to to say that it may be applicable to cases of previous death, but not till twenty years after the statute takes effect." The plaintiff in this case at bar has slept upon her rights nearly 30 years sinc.e the act of 1849, and, while the conclusion reached in this opinion is not freefrom doubt, it seems to us to accord with the recent decision of the supreme court in Robinson v.Ware, and other cases citedj and, so holding, the, demurrer to the petition is sustained.
BREWlm,
J., concurs.
RISCH.
(Diltrict Court, E.
Texas. 1888.)
EXTRADlTION-INTERNATIONAL-EvIDENCE 011' CRIME.
Under the treaty between the governments of the Germanic confederation and the United States, made in the year 1852, providing for the extradition of criminals, which stipulates for ,the delivery of persons charged with crime upon such evidence of criminality as, according to the laws of the place where the fugitive ill found, would justify his apprehenSIOn and commitment for trial, if the crime had there been committed, it is sufficient that a prim/ljacis case be made. such as, in the absence of explanation, would justify conviction, or such evidence as, in case of trial and conviction thereon, would sustain the verdict. '
SAME-HOMICIDE-MURDER.
Upon application for the extradition of prisoner as a fugitive from Germany, charged with murder, it was proved that prisoner was a near neighbor of deceased, knowing his financial condition; that deceased was on the day prior tohis disappearance engaged in moving his property to prisoner's honse, to leave it in his charge during an intended journey, and to prevent seizure by creditors; that he was last seen in night at prisoner's house with him and his sons; that a servant sleeping in the'house was awakened by sounds indio eating the use of violence tO,and the distress of, a human being; that there were opportunities for thll r,emoval of the body from the house to a forest, where, eight months after,jtwas found, bearing indubitable marks of death by violence, and that such death· occurred about the date of disappearance; that prop'erty of deceased known to have been in prisoner's possession never was for; that deceased had a considerable sum of money, which there was evidence to indicate was in prisoner's possession; and that, in a few days after deceased's disappearance, prisoner unexpectedly left for Amer· ica, where he purchased a home. spending money, but not as much as he was supposed to have obtained from deceased, livin!; frugally with his family, bearing a good reputation, but going under an assumed name, until his ar·
IN BE Br8(,1I.
rllPt. Held. that under the treatr with Germany of '1852, a.nd statntesof the Unit,ed States extradition, tie evidence was sufficient to hold the prisoner for dtllivery to the German authorities. '
At Law. Application for extradition of Ludwig Risch, Rischkee, or Ludwig Rischky. M. E. Kleberg, for the German Empire. Burna Burns, for
SABIN, J. The defendant and one Louis Risch, alias Rischkee, or Rischky, are charged with the murder of Franz Schmalinsky, allegedto hl1ve been committed by them on the 23d day of April, A. D. 1883, at Griesel, in the district of Crossen, in the kingdom of Prussia, in the empire of Germany, to which he has pleaded not guilty; and his extradi.. tion is sought for the trial thereof under the treaties of 1852 between the United States and Prussia and other states of the Germanic confederation, and in pursuance of the laws of the United States for extradition. The first question presented for my decision is as to whether a person may be extradited upon a prima facie showing; and it is claimed that the presumption of law as to a man's innocence is a stand-off as against a prima facie showing of guilt. This might be so, and would probably be so acted on, where the 'prima facie showing was light; but when the evidence not only creates the presumption of guilt, but creates such a volume of strength, from the evidence, of the guilt of the party charged that it would seem unreasonable to SUPPOSA such party innocent, then, in such case, it would seem the plain duty of the magistrate to make the order for holding for extradition. The treaty provides for extradition "upon such evidence of criminality, as, according to the laws of the place where the fugitive is found, would justify his apprehension and commitment for trial, if the crime had there been committed." And, further, that" if on such hearing the evidence be deemed suffident to sustain the charge, it shall be the duty of the examining judge or magistrate to certify the same to the proper executive authority." I take it that this lattercJause requires thejudge to be satisfied that the evidence before him is sufficient to sustain the charge were the same on trial before him. If a verdict of gLilty were rendered upon the evidence, would he feel it his duty to set it aside? That seems to me to be the reasonable rule. In other words, the evidence should be such as to fairly prove the charge, and caB upon the defendant to explain the facts adduced, and without which explanation the charge would stand proven. I think that is the rule by which I should be governed in the decision of this case. In 1883 there were three mills on the Griesel river, in the kingdom of Prussia, known as the "upper mill," the "middle mill," and the "lower" or "back mill." The defendant was the proprietor of the middle mill, and afterwards his son, Louis Risch; while the deceased wasthe proprietor of the lower or back mill. These mills were in a thickly-settled country, and near which were several villages and good-sized towns, and near there was a forest on the Bentnitz road" known as a "fir preser,ve." ,It
was for the growtb and preservation of these trees. Franz Schmalinsky, the deceased, on and prior to April 22, 1883, was an industrious andenterprisingmiller, and at times thrifty, and enjoyed the confidence of those with whom he dealt to a considerable extent; but in the spring of that year he became embarrassed to a great extent, and availed himself of the confidence he enjoyed to obtain money, as alleged, by forgeries, and also by converting many of his available assets into money, and unquestionably had in hand from $1,600 to $3,000, probably in the neighborhood of $2,500; but as his creditors would soon likely be upon him with writs, and as the supposed forgeries might soon come to light, he took one further step of transferring all his available means, household furnihue, cattle, horses, buggies, and hay to the defendant, and, with the except i on of a load or so of hay, the whole of those things were removed to the house and mill of the defendant, as early as April 22, 1883, in which both parties took part, and engaged in the transfer and removal with an energy that showed that time was an important element of the transaction in hand. The 22d was on Sunday. Among the things so removed was a large-sized fir wardrobe, capable of holding a man inclosed therein; and when it was moved over to defendant's, a distance of about threequarters of a mile or less, one witness says it was full of clothes, aud another that it contained all of the best clothes of the deceased. That the deceased contemplated a movement of some kind is evident, not only from these facts, but from the fact that he had frequently announced his intention ofgoing to Poland to buy cattle. He had made such trips several times before in previous years. In the afternoon of the 22d he sent his servant, with his money satchel, to defendant, informing his servant that it contained money, and to deliver it to defendant, which she did, but whether it contained any money or not was unknown to witness. Some time early in April the defendant recalled from service in a neighboring place one of his daughters, with the view of keeping house for his son Louis, at the mill, and \ in whose name the mill property stood. She reached home April 3, 1883, and some seven days prior to April 23. 1883, that being the day of the tragedy, defendant engaged tickets for himself, wife, and four children, one of them, his ward, being also a child by adoption, he paying say $20 thereon by way of earnest money to secure the tickets, the vessel being to sail about the 29th or 30th of April, whereupon the ticket agent, as was his duty, gave notice of such transaction to the local police. The defendant left his home for the steamer on the 29th of April, 1883, and for America, with all of his family above stated, leaving only his son Louis and a daughter remaining at the mill, which stood in the name of Louis, who had recently returned from a three-years service in the army. The defendant and the five members of his family arrived in America in due course, reaching San Antonio, Tex., from New York, by "ail, where he bought a lot shortly after his arrival, paying $200 down and the balance of $300 on time, and erected by himself a small shedhouse, and afterwards, by arrangement with a building association, a larger and more comfortable dwelling, in all, however, not exceeding in
IN RE RISCH.
present value the sum Of from $1,500 to $2,500 for lot and improv&ments. His life has been frugal, and he has maintained good habits, and is well esteemed by all who know him in San Antonio, Tex. His name in Germany was Ludwig Risch, and he was so known. On coming to America he claims an additional given name, "Martin." He also changed his name from" Risch" to "Rischki," and signs his name" M. Ludwig Rischki." Since here he has been overwhelmed by misfortnne in the loss by death in 1883 of his son Otto, and afterwards by the death of his wife, and also of his daughter Anna. In October, 1883, his daughter left by him at the mill left for America, and joined him at San Antonio, and afterwards his son Louis did likewise, his daughter, however, coming first, and alone. His daughters went at once to service, and have contributed to his aid in living and acquiring the homestead; and such was the case up to the time of the arrest herein, on which day the one last arriving here was to have been married. The property of Schmalinsky, moved over to defendant's mill, was left there by defendant, in the hands of his son Louis, and was mostly taken back by Mrs. Schmalinsky or redelivered to her. There was one notable exception; however, and that was the clothes of Schmalinsky. When the wardrobe came back through the aid· of her former guardian, it was empty of clothing. It is time now to go back to the mill, and review the tragic occurrences of the 23d of April, and those connected therewith. The middle mill, defendant's residence, was a large stone building, with one roof covering the mill and the dwelling. It was two stories, with a hall in the center above, which was reached from below in front by means of steps. On the left side of thE: hall, in the upper story, was the residence of defendant, with a door entering from the hall into the sitting-room, behind which was the sleeping-room and a pantry. On the right-hand side of the hall was the mill used for grinding grains and all the business .incident to the mill. Over all this was a garret, where persons en. gaged in the mill sometimes slept. The door on the right-hand side entered into the mill, while that on the left entered into the sitt.ing-room. Below the mill, hall, and residence portion, or on the lower floor, was a kitchen, and what was called a "mill-room," used for grinding linseed, and making oil, wherein also was an oven, and it was also used for a sleeping-room for defEmdant's sons Louis and Otto, and claimed by the witness Brunzel to have been the place where he slept. On Sunday, April 22, 1883, everything was made lively at the lower mill and at the middle mill by the parties and their servants in moving Schmalinsky's things and chattels to the middle mill. The defendant and his servant, August Brunzel, as well as several members of defendant's fumily, were busy in hauling·or receiving things. In the night of that. day, say 10 P. Y., the deceased was seen by his wife for the last time, in her bedroom, and in the presence of defendant, and no mention of any imm&diate departure was spoken of. Later on the last load was hauled that night, and there was attached to the load or wagon the buggy of the d&ceased, to be hauled to the defendant's mill; and while so proceeding, Brun.-
zel driving, the deceased was seen by Brunzelwalking behind and talking with defendant about the sale of his things to him, but was missed by Brtmzel about the time they reached a point of the road near the fir cannot preserve. Brunzel, Risch, and his son Louis or state which-proceeded on to the house of defendant, where the horses were unhitched, Risch directing them to be fed, and informing Brunzel that they would have to start early again in the morning, at 3 A. M., in order to get another load of hay, so as to get in ahead of others, the creditors of deceased; after which the defendant, Risch, went into his sittingroom. There was a light burning. It was usual to burn a light all night in that room. Just after the horses were unhitched, Bruniel saw a man coming across the meadow from the direction of the Schmalinsky mill towards the rear of the house of defendant, and witness stopped and looked and soon saw the deceased come up. who accosted him, and went on up into the mill by the back stairs, towards the dwelling of Risch. Defendant and' several members of his family had been in the sittingroom a few moments before. This was about 1 A. lIL, and was the last ever seen of deceased alive on this earth. Brunzel went into his sleeping plaae under the house to bed, and went to sleep for a half hour, or perhaps an hour, when he was awakened by noises overhead as if the moving of furniture, and the stepping of men with boots on, and the gargling or rattling sound as if of some one in the last gasps of death; but after a little he went to !Sleep again until he was awakened in the morning about 4 A. M. by defendant, who claimed to have overslept himself, when they went to the lower or back mill for another load of hay, and found others already there on the same mission, but the deceased was missing, and defendant informed witness that deceased had gone to Poland to buy cattle. But on the next day, and afterwards, defendant claimed, not only to Brunzel, but to others, that deceased had gone to America, and would never come back; and also stated to some one that he was a bad man to have left his wife in that way. It was generally supposed and believed that deceased had gone to America until January 31, 1884, when his body was found in a thicket of the "fir preserve" in the rear of his former residence and mill, dead, and his body in such a state of decay as was consistent with the time of his disappearance and finding,-his head off, four front teeth out of the upper jaw I also corner tooth, without 'watch or ring or other valuable, and in his ordinary miller's clothes, such as he wore in life. His skull had been fractured, and bore the impress of a heavy blow by some hard instrument, which left a blood-stain in the bone of the skull, showing that the blow had been struck while he was in life, and of a character that would have caused death. Now who did it? His life was gone, his money was gone, and his clothes were gone. Who took thf'm away? He was last seen in the very early morning entering defendant's mill, in which defendant then was. The defendant was in possession of his money satchel; what became of it? The wardrobe contained all his clothing; what became of them? Can the mind lead up to any other conclusion than t.hat he was killed at defendant's.mill by his aid and as-
IN BE RISCH.
sistance, at least, on the moming of the 23d of April, 1883? My niind is led to that conclusion. And I might stop here and close, but there are many other facts in evidence that, while they have relevancy to the foregoing, yet they relate more to theories of how the body was removed than fully proving that it was done in any given way. It is sufficient for the purposes of this investigation that the evidence shows that the body or person of the deceased was removed from defend;. ant's house, and that defendant and his confederates, one or more, had ample means and opportunity for so removing it. The defendant had the team and buggy of the deceased, as well as his own, with which he could have removed him or it, between the time when BrunzeLheard the noise and gargling sounds· and when he was called at 4 in the morning. Again, it was possible that the deceased was stuffed in the wardrobe with his clothes, and taken off in that on the 24th or 25th. The testimony on that subject is that on tpe 24th or 25th defendant ordered Brunzel and his son Louis to help load the wardrobe upon awagon, and that Brimzel remarked that it was very heavy, and that defendant replied that it was certainly heavy; that defendant said he was going to. take it to Bentnitz, to some one to whom he had sold or was· going to sell it, and that defendant and Louis drove off with it on that road, which would be the proper "ne to take to reach the place where the body was finally deposited, as well as the one which led to Bentnitz; and that, after a brief period, but long enough for them to have gone to Bentnitz and retarn, they returned with the wardrobe, and, by the aid of the witness, returned it to the place where it had formerly stood in the sitting;. room; that Brunzel noticed that it was still heavy, but whether lighter than before he could not state. While this shows that the body might' have been so moved, yet it does not prove tL:tt it was so moved. The wardrobe wall locked when moved. Whether it waBlocked when brought to the defendant, is not shown. When returned to Mrs. Schmalinsky, it was empty. I might allude to the fact that defendant exhibited a amount of money in the presence of Mrs. l£rnestine Deckert,' and of his son Louis, as she believes, before leaving for America, which, while it shows that he had money, yet its exhibition openly would perhaps indicate innocence, rather than guilt. As to the stenches smelled in the house about the 8tl} of May, they indicate nothing as to the body; and if they relate to the burning of the clothes,-of which there is no evidence,-they are too remote and indefinite, and so also of the blood-stains found in the house. . The only solid facts with which I have to deal are Lllat just prior to the killing defendant was acquainted with the financial condition and embarrassments of the deceaseil, and aided him therein; that deceased came to defendant's mill, after midnight, and in the early morning of April 23, 1883; that defendant was there, also some members of his family; that shortly thereafter unusual noises were heard in tIle residence portion of defendant's dwelling, as of moving of furniture, the stepping of men with boots on, and the gargling sounds as of some one in the gasps of death; that deceased disappeared, and was no more heard of
untn his body was found January 31 l 1884, in a "fir preserve" situated without, but to the rear of, the mill of the deceased, and in a state of dE'composition consistent with the length of time of its disappearance and surroundings; that on the morning of the disappearance, and before the awakening of Brunzel by defendant, defendant had ample time and means to remove the body to the "fir preserve," where it was found; that defendant had possession of tne money satchel of deceased, and also of all his clothing contained in the wardrobe; that deceased had considerable money on hand, whether in his satchel or elsewhere; that the clothing, satchel, and money have not been heard of since the disappearance of the deceased, and that deceased was found dead as the result of a heavy blow on the skull; that his body was identified; that defendant had taken steps to remove to America shortly previous to the murder; that on the occasion of the murder he was aided by one or more co-principals; that defendant left for America quietly, and that his leaving was not generally known; that it was in the' nature of a sudden disappearance; that he had money to reach San Antonio, Tex., and pay $200 on land; that defendant was seen with a considerable amount of money shortly before he left, exhibited by him to Mrs. Ernestine Decker, in presence of his wife, and against his wife's remonstrances, and in the presence also of his son Louis, as Mrs. Decker believes. I might state here that I have not disregarded the attempted contradiction of-th-e witness Brunzel as to his sleeping-place; but whether he had a sleeping-place at the stable, or one which might have been used as such, yet I am satisfied that, as his evidence is supported in so many different instances by other witnesses upon different subjects, as well as by the certificate of the judge, together with the explanation of the witness as to the little importance attached by him at the time to the noises heard by him, and to his fear of heing suspecteu. himself, that I aUl incHned to, and have given entire credence to, his statements. Without referring to the numerous other matters presented by the evidence, I am convinced that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the charge made against the defendant herein, Ludwig Rische, alia8 Rischkee. or Rischky, by Julius Runge, consul for the German empire, that said Risch, alias Rischkee, or Rischky ,had committed the crime of murder ofand upon one Franz Schmalinsky, on the 23d day of April, 1883, at Griesel, in the district of Crossen, in the kingdom of Prussia, in the empire of Germany, and within their jurisdiction and government. and deem the same amply adequate and sufficient to sustain the said charge under the provisions of the treaty between the United States of America and Prussia, and of uther German states, parties thereto, of date June 16, 1852, and of that of November 16,1852, and that Prussia is now a part of the German empire; and I therefore order and adjudge-; and it is ordered and adjudged by me, that the said Ludwig Risch, n,li{/,8 Rischkee, or Rischky, be held in custody by the marshal of the United States of America for the Eastl:'rIl district of Texas, and confined in the county jail of Galveston connty, Tex., for extradition, in accordance with said treaties and the laws of the United States, as contained in the Revised Statute!? 0f the
IN RE WY SHII\G.
United States, tit. 66, "Extradition," pp. 1021-1023, and that a warrant issue to carry this order into effect; and that the evidence, or a copy thereof, be immedi.ately, or as soon as may be, transmitted to the secretary of state of the United States, to the end that such action may be had by him in the premises as justice may require. And it is so ordered.
In re Wy ln re
. «(Jif'6ult (Jourt,
SRING.
WONG GAN·
N. D. Oalifornia. November 8, 1888.)
CHINESE-CHILDREN BORN IN UNITED STATES-CITIZENSHIP-FoURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
A person born in the United States of Chinese parents residing therein. and not engaged in any diplomatic or official capacity under the government of China or other foreig-n power. is born snbject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and he is a citizen thereof, under the fourteenth amendment to the national constitntion'! The Chinese restriction acts of 1882 and 1884, and the exclusion act of1888, are not applicable to citizens of the United States, though of Chinese parentage.!
SAME-ExCLUSION ACTS-CONSTRUCTION.
No citizen can be excluded from the United States, except in punishment for crime. (Syllabus by the Oourt.)
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-RIGHTS OF CITIZENS.
Habea8 CorpU8. Wy Shing was born in San Francisco, Cal., of Chinese parents, who had intermarried at Marysville, in the state of California. After his birth petitioner's parents returned to Marysville, where his mother died when he was three years old. When petitioner was six years old hi,8 fathersent him to China in charge of an elder brother of the father, where he remained till thirteen years old, when he returned to California. In 1885 he went to China again, and remained there till September, 1888, when he took passage a second time for California, before the passage of the late exclusion act. He arrived at San Francisco October 7,-1888, after the approval of said exclusion act, on October 1, 1888. The collector refused hin1 permission to land, on the ground that he was a Chinese laborer, who had departed from the country, and that he was prohibited from returning by the provisions of said act. His father was, and he still is, a laborer, and he was in no way in the service of .peroror government of China at the time of the birth of petitioner or at any other time. . He still resides in California, and he has never been baGk to China or left the state of California since the. birth (If petitioner.
ante. 437.
1 See, to'
the same effect, Ex parte Chin King, 35 Fed. Rep. 354; In re Yung . .
Hee,


text:
package jsettlers.main.android.gameplay.controlsmenu.goods;

import jsettlers.common.map.partition.IPartitionData;
import jsettlers.common.material.EMaterialType;

/**
 * Created by tompr on 28/09/2017.
 */

public class InventoryMaterialState {
	private final EMaterialType materialType;
	private int count;

	public InventoryMaterialState(EMaterialType materialType, IPartitionData partitionData) {
		this.materialType = materialType;
		this.count = partitionData.getAmountOf(materialType);
	}

	public EMaterialType getMaterialType() {
		return materialType;
	}

	public int getCount() {
		return count;
	}
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Factbox: What Are the Rules Airbus Admits to Breaking in U.S.? (excerpt)
(Source: Reuters; published Oct 31, 2017)
By Tim Hepher
Airbus says it has discovered and reported to U.S. authorities certain inaccuracies in past declarations to the State Department over the sale of defense goods and services under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).
ITAR is the official name for a 40-year-old set of rules governing the export of defense goods and data perceived to have implications for U.S. national security.
The rules were conceived in the Cold War mainly to prevent sensitive U.S. arms technology being sold or re-exported to countries deemed to be a risk, or covered by arms embargoes.
Countries currently on the ITAR blacklist include Belarus, China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria and Venezuela.
A further set of countries including Afghanistan and Iraq generally face restrictions, but may have ITAR-friendly export licenses issued on a case-by-case basis.
Aside from this main function, the ITAR rules impose secondary requirements for transparency and disclosure.
Companies dealing in ITAR-controlled goods must declare the use of sales agents or the payment of political contributions over $5,000 or commissions over $100,000 to the State Dept's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC).
These are set out in Part 130 of the ITAR regulations, the section of the rules that Airbus says it may have breached. (end of excerpt)
Click here for the full story, on the Reuters website.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Affordable House Plans with Basements Unique Affordable House Plans with Basements Elegant House Plans Affordable is a part of 28 New Of Affordable House Plans with Basements Stock pictures gallery. To download this Affordable House Plans with Basements Unique Affordable House Plans with Basements Elegant House Plans Affordable in High Resolution, right click on the image and choose "Save Image As" and then you will get this image about Affordable House Plans with Basements Unique Affordable House Plans with Basements Elegant House Plans Affordable.
This digital photography of Affordable House Plans with Basements Unique Affordable House Plans with Basements Elegant House Plans Affordable has dimension 788 × 1024 pixels. You can see another items of this gallery of 28 New Of Affordable House Plans with Basements Stock below. Get interesting article about 28 New Of Affordable House Plans with Basements Stock that may help you.


text:
Delivery room drama
Khloe Kardashian will now allow Tristan Thompson in the delivery room amid cheating scandal
By Marisa Laudadio Wonderwall 6:26am PDT, Apr 12, 2018
Khloe Kardashian is feeling benevolent.
Despite learning that Tristan Thompson had cheated on her with multiple women after his antics were captured on video, the pregnant and due-any-day-now reality TV star and denim designer has decided she'll allow him to be present in the delivery room when she gives birth to their daughter, an April 12 report from TMZ claims.
Randy Holmes/ABC
Sources tell TMZ that yes, Khloe, 33, is devastated by the infidelity revelations but feels it's important that Tristan, 27, be there to see his daughter's arrival. "We're told Khloe doesn't want her personal feelings to ruin one of the most important moments in a person's life… the birth of a child," TMZ writes.
She believes that the bond between father and child can be "cemented in the delivery room," TMZ adds, so is willing to have the NBA player — who was booed at the Cleveland Cavaliers game on April 11 — there despite his heartbreaking behavior.
TMZ previously reported that Khloe started having early contractions hours after the news broke that Tristan had spent time with strip club bartender Lani Blair over the April 7 weekend, when Lani was also photographed arriving at and leaving his New York City hotel, and after video surfaced from October 2017 showing Tristan kissing and being intimately groped by another women at a hookah bar near Washington D.C.
Jerritt Clark/Getty Images for Remy Martin
TMZ's report contradicts an X17 report from one day earlier that claims Khloe has banned Tristan from the delivery room and that her momager, Kris Jenner, is consulting with lawyers about Khloe gaining full custody of her daughter.
"Khloe is devastated and humiliated. She's trying to keep it together for the sake of the baby's health, but she's done with him. She has changed her birth plan and no longer will allow Tristan to be in the room when she gives birth," a source told X17. "Immediately after, she plans on leaving Cleveland and never returning."
X17 also reported that Khloe ordered her team to start moving her things out of the Ohio home she shares with Tristan.
"Kris has been working on coordinating a private jet with a medical staff to get Khloe and the baby safely from Cleveland to L.A.," an insider told X17. "She's also talking to their lawyers about Khloe filing for sole custody of the child. She's in absolute disbelief that Tristan has done this to her daughter, and now she's out for blood."
X17 has claimed that Khloe plans to give birth on Friday, April 13, via a scheduled C-section.
According to TMZ, Kris flew to Cleveland on Wednesday, April 11, to be by Khloe's side and sister Kim Kardashian West is also headed to Ohio to lend support.
'Wolf Pack' is here! See star Sarah Michelle Gellar's best '90s looks Share Tweet
Oscar nominees Paul Mescal, Colin Farrell and more of our favorite Irish celebrities Share Tweet
J.Lo reveals the real reason she and Ben Affleck eloped before their big, traditional wedding, more stars who got married in Las Vegas Share Tweet
Katey Sagal turns 69: See her with 'Tell Me Lies' actor son Jackson White, plus more stars who've worked with their kids Share Tweet


The event takes place this Sunday, August 16 at 9:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.
He fears he or she would repeat that error.
Other newspapers allow a not much more space for lauding writer of content.
And why not when that meant hella wad of cash?
I would have been better off, making her feel more important than putting him in his place.
Computers, software, hardware and so on, but all ought to be put somewhere.
I worked for one architect 1 year, without working for anyone else.
Who, what, where, when, and, maybe, why, and just how.
Society will never be the same and really should probably get sucked in of thought.
Stated like it but, you do have to accept the concept. It is during those situations when a parent can be a true folk.
Information is more important than your whole life. Trouble think tony horton created an interview so I just talked and joked with the boss.
Download This Revolutionary New Market and keyword research Tool!It doesn't cost anything to look, or use!
This provides a view of the man behind the carefully polished political client.
Mobile 3 is the machines that has placed brand new strain phone in stores.
MPEG-2 is capable for both standard definition TV and HDTV.
Kat Von D would probably not be famous if not for her body creative art.
Later, I was an electrical power seller on eBay, before it begun how to hack somebody's facebook messenger implode.
Notice your mate's behavior and reaction rrn your news.


It's been six months since my last favorite quotes post so I have over 160 to share! But I'll break it up into a couple posts so as not to overwhelm TOO much :) I've done Part Une, Part Deux, Part Trois, Part Quatre, Part Cinq, Part Six, and Part Sept of my favorite quotes found on Pinterest and here is Part Huit ("eight" in French - in hindsight I shoulda done these in German huh?) Sometimes I'm moved by these quotes, other times they are pretty to look at, and others make me laugh out loud.
Add two letters to Paris and it's Paradise.
Wise words from an 8 year old!
I LOVE so many of these! Thank you for sharing!
I like, "Always make time for fun"


Cord blood is increasingly being used to treat fatal or debilitating diseases, prompting the American Academy of Pediatrics to release a policy statement that calls for renewed emphasis and education about the advantages and need for public cord blood banking.
The policy statement, "Cord Blood Banking for Future Transplantation," published in the November 2017 issue of Pediatrics, serves as an update to the Academy's 2007 policy and references the latest research on clinical outcomes from cord blood transplants. The statement, to be published online Oct. 30, observes that a growing number of states are requiring universal newborn screening for diseases that could be treated with stem cell transplantation.
"Most parents will never need cord blood for their own family's use, but they can donate this precious life-saving gift to benefit others," said William T. Shearer, MD, PhD, FAAP, lead author of the policy statement. "We expect the need for these therapies that rely on stem cell transplantation to grow, and would like families to understand the choices they have."
Cord blood, taken from the placenta of healthy newborn infants, was routinely discarded until it was discovered to be an excellent source of stem cells for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for some diseases. By 2013, worldwide, more than 30,000 stem cell transplants had been performed using cord blood, according to research.
Cord blood is used most often in transplantation in infants and children with fatal diseases such as malignancies, blood disorders, immune deficiencies and metabolic disorders.
Donating cord blood is safe for the baby and it doesn't interfere with labor and delivery. Because families must register ahead of time -- so a collection kit can be sent and used after the baby's delivery -- the AAP recommends that physicians talk with families during an early prenatal visit.
Also recommended is that physicians discuss the value of cord blood and the difference between public cord blood banks versus private, for-profit cord blood banks.
Public cord blood banks serve patients worldwide by matching individuals in need. Private banks store the cord blood for the donor family's potential self use, although there is little evidence supporting this use unless a family shares a known genetic defect.
Donation to a public cord blood bank is free. Private cord blood banks charge a placement fee of $1,350 to $2,300 and an annual maintenance fee of $100-$175.
Public cord blood banks are highly regulated by oversight accrediting institutions. Private cord blood banks may not meet stringent requirements, which can cause cord blood to be of lesser quality.
The rate that cord blood stems cells are utilized from a public bank is 30 times higher compared with private cord blood banks. Yet more cord blood donations from ethnic/minority populations are needed to meet increasing need.
"The research is evolving in this area, which is exciting news for patients whose lives may someday depend on a donation of cord blood," Dr. Shearer said. "The hope is that more doctors will discuss the options with expectant parents well in advance of their baby's birth, so they understand the tremendous potential to help others in medical need."
Parents can find information at HealthyChildren.org.


text:
Q: Support two different validation messages per field/rule with unobtrusive validation We are building an ASP.NET MVC3 web site using Fluent Validation with support for unobtrusive validation. Our UX team has asked if we can support two separate messages for validation, per field and per rule: one that would show next to the field, and a different one that would show in the summary.
For example:

Please address the following issues:
  - Please provide a First name
  - Please provide a Birth date
First name: __________________ < First name is required >
  Birth date: __________________ < Birth date is required >

Notice the field-level and summary-level validation messages are different.
My first option was to extend the built-in validation to allow a second message, but I don't think this is easily accomplished because everything is hard-wired into ModelError which only supports one ErrorMessage.
So the only other thing I could think of was to hack it (yes, this solution smells) by combining the two messages into one string, and modifying the helpers/jquery to parse the two messages out of these (but I'm having problems doing that too).
This solution needs to work with client-side unobtrusive validation (using data- attributes), as well as server-side of course.
I would love to hear of another way to do this.
Update
Here is my view
@using (Html.BeginForm())
{
    @Html.ValidationSummary()

        @Html.EditorFor(m => m.UserName)
        @Html.ValidationMessageFor(m => m.UserName)

        @Html.EditorFor(m => m.BirthDate)
        @Html.ValidationMessageFor(m => m.BirthDate)

    <input type="submit" />
}

And here's what it renders:
<!DOCTYPE html>

    <title></title>
    <link href="/Content/Site.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />

    <form action="/" method="post">

        <input class="text-box single-line" data-val="true" id="UserName"
               name="UserName" type="text" value=""
               data-val-required="The User name field is required." />

        <input class="text-box single-line" data-val="true" id="BirthDate"
               name="BirthDate" type="text" value=""
               data-val-required="The Date of birth field is required." />

    <input type="submit" />
    </form>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


If you have questions about your personal data please contact David@CreasyCPARichmond.com.
Our email marketing is permission based. If you received an email from us, our records indicate that (a) you have expressly shared your email address for the purpose of receiving information in the future ("opt-in"), or (b) you have done business or otherwise have an existing relationship with us. We respect your time and attention by controlling the frequency of our mailings.
When you register for our email newsletter, we ask for your name, email address, zip code and company (optional). Knowing your name helps us communicate with you in a more personable way. Knowing your zip code and company help us share articles that may be more useful to our subscribers or let you know about something coming up of interest in your part of the country or that we should reach out to you if we are traveling your way.
Simply click on the unsubscribe link at the end of any newsletter or email us a request to be removed from future mailings. You will be immediately unsubscribed and will receive only one final email confirming that we've removed your email address from our list.
We will never share, sell, or rent individual personal information with anyone else for their promotional use without your advance permission or unless required by law or an order of a court. Information submitted to us is only available to employees managing this information for purposes of contacting you and to contracted service providers for purposes of providing services relating to our communications with you.
If you post a comment to one of our articles, we will ask for your name, your email address, and your website (optional) so we can determine whether to approve posting your comment, email you for clarification, or engage in a dialogue with you about issues you raise.
When you visit our website, our web host collects various information to provide us with aggregate, non-personally identifying information about visits to our site. This aggregate, non-personally identifying information includes data such as number of visits to our site, the pages from which visitors clicked to get to our site, the pages and posts visitors viewed. "Cookies" are used by our web host to obtain some of this data. No personal information is provided to us. We may use this non-personally identifying information for purposes that we deem useful, such as to better design our web site or improve our content. However, in these instances we do not disclose anything that could be used to identify you.
If you email, post a comment, or call us or participate in an online survey, any information you provide may be collected by us. We may use this information to contact you, we may share it with our third party service providers in order to provide a service or information you have requested, and we may use it to offer our services and solutions to you.
Information from other sources. We may obtain additional information about you by using your name, email address, or other information, to directly, or through one or more services, search over the internet, or elsewhere. We thereby obtain information that appears to be related to your email address or other information, such as a name, company, and participation in social media websites. We may use this supplemental information to better understand possible issues of interest to people reading our newsletter or visiting our website, and we may use this information to offer our services and solutions to you.
WE DO NOT KNOWINGLY COLLECT INFORMATION ABOUT CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 13. WE DO NOT KNOWINGLY REQUEST, SOLICIT OR COLLECT PERSONAL INFORMATION FROM ANY PERSON WE KNOW TO BE UNDER THE AGE OF 13 WITHOUT PRIOR VERIFIABLE PARENTAL CONSENT. If we receive actual knowledge that we have collected or received information from anyone under the age of 13 without the requisite and verifiable parental consent, we will delete that information from our database as soon as practicable.


text:
Washington's 2004 presidential primary set for 'Super Tuesday'
OLYMPIA — Washington's 2004 presidential primary has been set for March 2, the "Super Tuesday" date when California, New York and Ohio also will vote.
Secretary of State Sam Reed and state party leaders set the date yesterday, expressing hope that the Evergreen State will cash in on the media attention that surrounds the biggest single primary date on the election calendar.
Posted by Editor at June 5, 2003 10:40 PM
Choose a Month March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 November 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003


text:
Bill S.2110
SECTION 1. The Massachusetts General Laws are hereby amended by inserting the
following new chapter:
An Act to establish a Massachusetts Transportation Endowment Fund (MTEF).
1.) PURPOSES – Massachusetts has been a pioneer in developing, and expanding mass transportation for its population. In doing so, a consistent part of development, includes the continuing capital expenditures needed, to expand, and improve mass transit lines, particularly
the fixed rail lines, stations, and other facilities; and resources for such, which often appear weak; or in need of capital upgrading; and/or are non-existent.
2.) Thus, it is important to identify, secure, provide for, and expand sources of capital expenditures, and this Statute, is designed for that purpose.
3.) Each and every year, a sum of not less than $200,000,000, ($200 Million), shall be transferred to a Massachusetts Transportation Endowment Fund (MTEF).
4.) This money, shall become a permanent trust fund, operating as an endowment, with significantly described requirements, and provisions. Income from the fund, may be used, only for capital construction, and improvements, of mass transportation lines, stations, and facilities,
and needed additional directly related construction.
5.) Principal amounts, shall become fixed Endowment Principal, together with other specified amounts, to be further described.
6.) When the fund principal, exceeds $1,000,000,000 ($1 Billion) in Endowment Principal; the formula for use, shall change:
Half of the annual contribution of $200,000,000 ($200 Million) may be directed to capital expenditures; while $100,000,000 ($100 Million) is directed to increase in the Endowment Principal.
Half of the annual income, may be utilized for capital expenditures. New non-fare revenues, from businesses on transit properties, shall be apportioned, with half of such revenues going to Operations, and half to the Endowment Principal.
7.) A Capital Project Approval Board (CPAB), of five (5) members, shall review potential capital projects, establish a priority listing, and annually announce their decisions publicly.
8.) The five (5) members appointed shall be:
One (1) by the General Manager of the MBTA; one (1) by the Secretary of Transportation, one (1) by the Governor; one (1) by the State Treasurer; and one (1) by the Attorney General. Their terms shall be of five (5) years duration, with one new regular,
and renewable appointment, available each year.
9.) An Annual Report, publicly available, and generally publicized, shall be issued, detailing the current financial circumstances, and situation of the MTEF Fund, and the decisions made by its Capital Projects Approval Board, in its most recently completed year.


Dental Phobia – Has Your Fear Rubbed Off on Your Kids?
Does the sound of a dental drill send your kids running for cover? According to a nationwide survey conducted by Delta Dental, your children didn't develop dental fear on their own; they may have gotten it from you. Released in conjunction with National Anxiety Month in April, the study found that almost half of parents polled claim to be nervous before dental appointments. The same percentage of children shares the dread. Dr. Bill Kohn, DDS reminds parents that it's easy for children to pick up on a parent's anxiety, and it's important to stay calm and relaxed during visits to help put them at ease.
Routine dental exams are essential for oral health, but almost 36 percent of kids are afraid of getting them. According to parents participating in the Delta Dental survey, fear of pain is the most common reason for anxiety. Lesser concerns include long visit times and the possibility of needing further treatment. Some kids are worried they won't like the dentist. Fear of dentist equipment such as drills and suction devices can make things even worse. If children associate dentistry with negative feelings, it could cause them to avoid dental care throughout life. Following are tips to make dental visits less frightening.
Inform your dentist about your child's dental phobia before the visit.
Avoid negative talk. Never use words that will frighten your child when talking about the dentist. Focus on positive aspects of dental care.
Expose your child to dentistry early. Make the first appointment no later than his or her first birthday.
Practice at home. Before an appointment, pretend to be the dentist and count your child's teeth.
Managing your own dental phobia can help you avoid passing the fear of dentist issues down to your kids. There are several ways to ease your anxiety. First, make sure your dentist knows you are nervous, so he or she can help you relax. To avoid feeling anxious all day, book early morning appointments. Have a friend or loved one join you for the visit. Agree on a hand signal or other sign that lets your dentist know you are feeling overwhelmed or uncomfortable during treatment. If your dental fear is severe, talk to your dentist about sedation options, or seek counseling from a mental health professional.


text:
Jackery Reviews – A MAGNIFICENT 45% OFF!
The Jackery is a multi-purpose tool with DC input, three output plugs, a small torch built into the end, and a display. Is the torch useful for most uses? It is certainly a novelty, but it is unnecessary to an item that weighs six pounds. But is it really worth the price? We'll find out in this product review. This handy tool is described in detail below.
If you're looking for a portable power source, the Jackery Explorer 1500 is the right choice. It has a 1488-watt-hour lithium-ion battery that can power up to 1,800 watts of load and trickle down to lower loads over long periods. The Jackery brand's motto is "Power Outdoors". This review will examine the pros and cons associated with the Explorer 1500. This portable power source is ideal for outdoor activities such as hiking, fishing, camping, and hiking.
The Jackery Explorer 1500 portable power station provides great power for backpacking and camping. It has the same design as other Jackery products. It is orange in color and has a sturdy handle. This portable power station can be charged at any time, making it useful for all outdoor activities. However, before you decide to buy one, we recommend reading our Jackery Explorer 1500 review.
The Explorer 1500 is the newer version of the power station. It is a bit more modern than its predecessor and has a port to charge Anderson solar panels. It also features an additional DC input port that allows up to four Jackery Solar panels of 100 watts to simultaneously recharge the Explorer 1500. It will take approximately four hours to fully recharge with this much power. If you plan on using the device for long periods, it can help you save money.
The Jackery 1500 Explorer is safe to use. It has a quality-built Battery Management System. It also features a single-button design. The Jackery 1500 Explorer comes with an upgraded MPPT solar regulator called Solarpeak Technology, which maximizes input and extracts solar energy under all conditions. This technology reduces the time it takes to charge your solar panels. Hence, the Jackery 1500 is the right choice for outdoor activities.
The Jackery Explorer 1500 portable power station can replace three outlets. This device has USB ports that can charge smartphones. It has enough battery capacity to power a small office. Pure sine wave technology ensures a high-quality output comparable to the power grid. The inverter power and battery capacity are sufficient for small businesses. The Jackery Explorer 1500 features an improved user interface that fixes previous problems. It can also accept higher input voltage making it an ideal portable source of power.
Another advantage of the Explorer 1500's fast-charging ability is its battery life. Two SolarSaga 100W solar panels allow the Explorer 1500 to be fully charged in as little as 13 hours. Two Jackery AC power adapters can be used to charge the battery quicker. It takes just four hours to charge the Explorer 1500 up to 80% capacity using two AC power adapters. A single AC power adapter, however, will take approximately six hours to fully recharge the Explorer 1500.
The Jackery Explorer 240 is one of the most popular portable solar chargers on the market today. Its maximum continuous output is 200 watts, which means that a fully charged Jackery 240/250 can run a 100W device for up to four hours. A typical mobile battery can last between 2.5 and 3 hours. A Jackery 240/250 would charge a mobile phone battery 20-25 times more efficiently.
This portable power station can also be used as an external power supply for tablets, smartphones, and laptops. Its battery management system and inverter technology deliver clean, balanced power to your devices. The Jackery 240's motor runs quietly indoors, so it won't affect the air quality. It has a large capacity and can be customized to your specific needs. It can also convert solar energy into usable power to power your gadgets.
The Jackery Explorer 240 is a versatile product, and it works great for tailgaters, campers, and emergency preparedness. It includes a 12V car outlet, two USB plugs, and a 110V AC socket. Although it is not waterproof, it is completely quiet and emits zero emissions. It also comes with a solar panel that can be purchased separately for about $200. The solar panels are not waterproof.
The Jackery Explorer 240 has plenty of empty space in its battery compartments. This is great for cooling. The 300 version, however, has more wattage as well as a larger batteries. It is a portable power station that weighs six pounds. This makes it heavy and bulky. It is a great choice for travelers, despite its portability. So long as you're aware of its limitations and potential drawbacks, this charger will serve you well.
The Jackery Explorer 240 portable solar panel can be recharged using a wall outlet, car outlet or solar panel. The Jackery Explorer 240 has an MPPT controller that can be used to manage the power output of portable devices. For those who need more power, the Jackery Explorer 500 or Sungzu 1000 Watts will suffice. The Jackery Explorer 240 is a great option for those on a tight budget who want to save money while camping.
It is important to know the power-to-size ratio. A device that measures higher Watts can run on more power. You need to ensure the power-to size ratio is right for your needs. The Jackery Explorer 240's surge power rating is 230W. That's pretty impressive, but it's only a short time compared to the power output of a standard household appliance.
In this Jackery Explorer 300 product review, we will cover the charging capabilities and battery life. The battery lasts for a long time, powering smartphones and laptops up up to 125W for as many as 30 charges. Drones can be charged for up six hours. This portable battery can last most people for at least a weekend. The device should be stored with a 70% – 90% charge level, which is more than enough for most people's needs.
The Jackery Explorer 300's charger can be charged using any USB-C PD adapter. The charging time will take longer if the charger is slower. Charging time is about 5.5 hours. This is significantly longer than average in this category. Keep in mind, however, that power stations can only charge at 80% to protect the batteries. A charge rate below 20 percent can dramatically reduce battery life. So, it's recommended that you use a power station with a higher power rating than the Jackery Explorer 300.
The Jackery Explorer is a great option if you need a portable power source that can power a variety of electronic gadgets. The Jackery Explorer produces 300W of pure sinewave electricity from a 293Wh rechargeable battery. While this might not be enough for a whole house, it's plenty for small appliances such as a toaster. Its power rating is enough to run a laptop or tablet, but you won't need much more.
The Jackery Explorer 300's charge time is surprising for such a small device. The Explorer 300 can be charged with a good PD USBC charger in just two hours. That's pretty impressive compared to the few minutes some smartphones boast. The battery's life span is impressive, but the charger's cost is outrageous. Additionally, the battery can't be removed.
The Jackery Explorer 300 has been a pioneer in the industry of portable power. Its sleek design can support up to six devices. Its 300 watts of power are sufficient to power most smartphones or tablets. Another benefit is the portability and ease of use. Its compact design makes it easy and portable. The Jackery Explorer 300 is a great option if you're in search of a portable, solar power station that can charge multiple devices.
The power station can charge your devices and allow you to recharge them even if you aren't connected to the grid. While the device isn't ideal for hiking or remote jobsites, it's still useful if you need to recharge your battery on the go. It can be used anywhere that you don't have access to extension cords or power outlets. It also runs silently so you won't hear it. The Jackery Explorer 300 has its advantages but also some drawbacks.
The Jackery Explorer 1000 portable power station is quiet, versatile, and affordable. It can provide clean power for your campsite. It can be used with solar panels, and it is completely silent. In this Jackery portable power station review, we'll go over the benefits of this product and discuss its pros and cons. This review is based upon my personal experience with the Jackery portable powerstation. It is highly recommended!
The Explorer 1000 portable power station comes with a battery and solar panels, but it's possible to expand it with more battery capacity or additional solar panels, as long as you have enough space. You can add more outlets to the system by adding USB Type-C ports. Its sturdy design makes it ideal for camping trips, yet it is still easy to move about with.
The modern, sturdy design of the power station makes it a strong and reliable unit. It is made of tough black plastic with grey trim. However it lacks waterproofing and ruggedness. It will need to be stored under cover to prevent it leaking. The noise level of the resulting unit will be lower than those powered by batteries, which can be quite loud.
While the Jackery 1000 is not a "whole house" solution, it can solve your problem of running water, communication, and heat if you're desperate for it. It's a good choice for camping, but it's important to know how much you'll use it and when. A 300-watt rice cooker, for example, can drain 4% of the battery's energy in just 15 minutes.
It's also compatible with solar panels
The company offers solar panels in addition to the Jackery portable powerstation. The SolarSaga 100Watt model is compatible with solar panels and features a charging station with two USB outlets. This unit ships in between two and three business day. Delivery time usually takes four to eight business day depending on where it is going. It is possible for transit times to be delayed and are subject to change.
The Jackery power station can handle solar panel amperage. If you wish to use your own panels, the connectors must be 8 mm. You will need an adapter cable that connects your solar panels to the Jackery unit. Renogy sells this cable. A similar cable is also available for Newpowa and Richsolar panels.
There are many Jackery portable power station types. Choose the one that best fits your needs. The Explorer 160 is great for charging mobile devices. The Explorer 1000 and 1500 can charge larger items and are compatible with solar panels. The Compact Explorer is smaller and more compact than the Explorer range. These units can be purchased in multiples and combined with solar panels to create the Ultimate Solarcharging station.
The Explorer 2000 Pro is the best choice for larger vehicles, jobsites, and backup power. It is not recommended for vanlifers or overlanders. The smaller units can charge up to eighty percent in as little as four hours. You can charge multiple solar panels simultaneously with the power station, maximizing its charging potential. While the Jackery Explorer 500 and the Jackery Explorer 1000 Pro are good options for larger vehicles, they have limited power and may need to be used in parallel configurations.
A portable power station has many benefits. It's quiet, silent, and doesn't require any gas. It can also be used to charge your electronic devices and power your RV's electrical outlets when the RV power goes out. The Jackery Explorer240 is a great choice for anyone who travels full-time or just for fun. This unit also has an integrated battery management system to ensure that your portable power station runs smoothly even when there is no power.
Another advantage is its small size. At about the size of a microwave, the Jackery Explorer 1000 portable power station can keep your electronics running for hours, if not days. The Jackery Explorer 1000's quietness means that you don't have worry about overheating or running out of power. Plus, you can use it wherever you need it, since it's compact and light enough to fit into your backpack or car.
The Jackery Explorer 240 also has four charging ports. Each one has two USB outlets to charge multiple devices. It also has an AC/DC port, and the Jackery is quiet. This feature is not available in all power stations but it is worth noting as some of them lack enough ports to support a laptop. If you're not using your laptop, a portable power station will be your best friend.
Jackery's portable power station is small, which is one of its best features. It's quite large, but it doesn't seem bulky. The Jackery Explorer 1000 is a great choice for anyone who wants something lightweight and portable, but still has all the features they need. Jackery portable power station is quiet
If you're on the move, the Jackery portable power station is an excellent backup plan. The Jackery portable power station is powered by a 240-watt lithium ion battery and can power up to four devices. Its lightweight design and push-button operation make it easy for anyone to carry. It can charge smartphones and tablets and even has an LED flashlight. Although some might find the flashlight too gimmicky for navigation, it is actually very useful.
The Jackery portable station doesn't daisy chain with other power sources, which is a drawback. This makes it more suitable for short-term travel than full-time vanlife. The station comes with a 2-year warranty and hassle-free returns. Jackery offers top-tier professional service, as well, which can help you with problems, repairs, or even replacements.
The Jackery Explorer 500 is another excellent option. It has many ports that can be used for most applications and can power multiple devices simultaneously. The Explorer 500, which can hold larger electronics and is 13 pounds in weight, is especially useful. It is much cheaper than other models and has a built-in handle that makes it easy to transport. If you're looking for a portable power station for camping, the Jackery Explorer 500 might be the best option for you.
One of the greatest benefits of the Jackery portable power station is that it can charge multiple devices at the same time. It's easy for you to take the Jackery portable power station on the road. You can also use it to charge your phone, tablet, and other small electronics. The 144-watt battery provides enough power to power most small electronic devices. It has an automatic shutoff that limits its output power at 500 watts.
It's huge
Jackery's portable power station is a great choice if you are looking for a portable power source. The Explorer weighs in at seven pounds and the EVO 300 is the largest. However, the Explorer is lightweight and is about the same size as a handheld radio. Both power sources work with most small electronics as well as mobile devices. If you are looking to purchase a smaller, lighter power source, the Jackery Explorer 300 might be a good choice.
The Jackery Portable Power Station provides a backup source for your RV's electrical power. This power source can power any RV or outdoor device. It is powerful enough for running a laptop, LED lights, a console and other electronic devices. It can also power outdoor activities, such as sports games and picnics. It doesn't require gasoline, so you can use it indoors or outside without worrying about the noise or exhaust.
The Jackery Explorer 1500 portable power station is a high-quality product that has received almost perfect 5-star reviews by real users. The device has a power output of more than one thousand watt-hours. The Power Station is quite expensive but still provides emergency power. Even the Jackery Explorer 1000, the largest power station in this line, is only 22 pounds.
The Explorer 1000 is an excellent product. It's also easy-to-use. It has all the connectors, ports, and connectors that you need for your portable power source. It can be charged with its AC/DC adapters. The Explorer 1000 weighs 22 lbs, making it easy for you to carry. It also includes a flashlight. Although some may find it a bit gimmicky this is a great feature to navigate in the dark.
The Jackery Solar Generator is portable power station that can plug into a car or wall outlet. It can also be charged by solar panels. The Jackery Solar Generator can also be used as a backup battery. These generators are 240 watts and 480 watts, respectively. If you are concerned about the size of the generator, you might consider buying a smaller model.
The Jackery Explorer is a portable power source that can be used outdoors. It has been designed with safety in view. It delivers enough power to run small electronics and recharge batteries. It can be used to charge small appliances, and also recharge it with optional solar panels. You can always plug it into the wall and let it recharge. That way, you can use it again. The Jackery Explorer's portable power is not only convenient, but it is also safe and easy to transport.
Although the Jackery 240 won't be able to replace your RVs electricals, it will power most gadgets. It also has a USB output that allows you to charge your smartphone and laptop from anywhere outside your RV. However, it doesn't solve all your van life problems. The Jackery 240, despite its efficiency, is not a replacement for your main electricals. It is a great second power source for RVs.
The Jackery solar panel generator of 240 watts is compatible with 60W and100W solar panels. To charge, it needs to be in direct sunlight and in good weather. It can be charged in 5.5 hours using the 100w panel or 7.5 hours using the 60W panel. This generator can be used for camping, hiking, and even on boats. But if you're not sure which one to choose, there are a lot of other choices available.
The 240 watts Jackery Explorer portable power station comes with a portable charger, an AC adapter, and a user manual. It's designed to recharge multiple USB devices at the same time. It is not recommended to use high-wattage devices such as phones, cameras, or laptops. The Jackery Explorer 240 should not be used in situations that your device requires more than 200W.
If you intend to use your adapter in a US campsite, you'll need one. American pedestals use the same socket connectors that are used in household mains. This means you don't need an adapter if you're camping in the UK, but if you are in doubt, you can buy one here. However, the charging cable measures only two meters in length, which could be a problem for long journeys.
The Jackery Explorer 240 pony is a one-trick pony that gives you hours of power. It is small in size but extremely durable and safe for outdoor riding. Jackery has partnered to Honda to sell identical power station under the "Honda by Jackery" label. Amazon has a Jackery Explorer 240 for $79.
The Jackery Explorer240's 240-watts can be recharged in 10 hours using optional solar panels ($200). To charge your 240-watt solar panel, you can also use a 12V car charger. Although the 240-watt Jackery is not waterproof, it's built to last for several years. It's also completely silent and emits zero emissions. If you have any questions about the 240-watt power source, make sure to check its compatibility with your vehicle.
Jackery Bolt – A MAGNIFICENT 45% OFF!
1000 Watt Jackery – A MAGNIFICENT 45% OFF!


With the impetus of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi on using technology to ensure transparency and improve efficiency, the government departments are taking steps for creating digital infrastructure for delivering government-to-citizen (G2C) and government-to-business (G2B) services digitally.
INFRACON has not only helped in bringing different stakeholders on one platform, it has also streamlined the tedious job of evaluation which earlier used to take several months.
With the impetus of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi on using technology to ensure transparency and improve efficiency, the government departments are taking steps for creating digital infrastructure for delivering government-to-citizen (G2C) and government-to-business (G2B) services digitally. Recently, the ministry of road transport and highways headed by Union minister Nitin Gadkari launched an online portal—INFRACON, to ensure transparency and efficiency in its infrastructure development programmes.
According to ministry officials, the portal that seeks to connect consultants and individual specialists for government projects has been made mandatory for hiring consultants in the projects of ministry, National Highways Authority Of India (NHAI), National Highways & Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd (NHIDCL), Indian Academy of Highway Engineers (IAHE) and state agencies working on national highway projects. "We believe that this would lead to reduction in paper work during bid submission and evaluation, and bring in transparency and accountability in the process. It will also substantially reduce time taken for evaluating the previous works of a particular company or individual specialist," Sanjay Jaju, director, NHIDCL, ministry of road transport & highways, told FE.
Basically, the concerned ministry undertakes a significant amount of project preparation and supervision work. For them a detailed and quality project report is central to any good project; it is also a key requirement before they bid the project out. The entire activity of preparing a detailed project report (DPR) is outsourced to external consultancy firms and consultants. These consultants are primarily highway engineers, bridge engineers, safety engineers, quantity surveyor etc. Their selection is done on a qualitative basis in which 80% weightage is given to technical expertise and 20% to financial capability. Technical aspects that include qualifications and number of years and kind of experience is very subjective and broadly it is based on individual or a firm's expertise. This loophole has been exploited in the past as people knew that the evaluation process takes a lot of time and was highly subjective; in short, it was seldom done in a systematic manner.
Interestingly, in order to attract people and firms to this portal, the government mulled over questions such as why would a consultant be interested to bring information to this portal. And, they decided to put projects on this portal for bidding. Now organisations like NHIDCL, NHAI, IAHE and the ministry bid out consultancy, supervision, DPR preparation projects through this portal. Since most of these projects are bid by a team, the portal provides an opportunity for individual specialists and consultancy firm to team-up. An individual specialist from any part of the country or a consultancy firm who may not know each other can form a team for bidding for the projects.
INFRACON has not only helped in bringing different stakeholders on one platform, it has also streamlined the tedious job of evaluation which earlier used to take several months. The system has been designed in such a way that the ministry is now able to get online evaluation done by click of few buttons. So far more than 3,000 consultants and over 500 consultancy firms have been registered. Close to 250 projects have been bid out through this portal. In fact, NHIDCL have completed the evaluation of more than 10 projects through the portal itself. It expects that over a period of time this would become a competency national database for individuals, consultants and firms.


It would be edible (for true Parmesano Reggiano, anyway), but it may not be very pleasant, as it is where most salt from the brining period will be, and it is dry and hard.
It is traditional to use pieces of it in soup to add flavor to the broth.
Someone mentioned adding to soups and stocks...I also save them for that purpose. However, a family favorite, is to insert, with other aromatics, in the cavity of a chicken that will be roasted. Remove when carving and serve with the chicken. It will be soft and delicious.
Absolutely edible, specifically goes well in hot dishes like soup.


text:
SUBMARINE R & D PROGRAMS
Jerry Holland
In the January 1988 issue, THE SUBMARINE REVIEW's editor suggests that "the Congress believes that the Navy's requested submarine R&D programs have not reflected the potentials of certain technologies which can markedly improve our submarines." He describes an array of issues, technologies, developments and ideas which are not funded to the degree that their supporters consider adequate. Prominent among the issues are submarine double-hulls, drag reduction techniques and satellite-based laser communications. The thrust seems to be that these developments have been ignored improperly in the allocation of development monies.
Recognizing that the historical precedents usually cited demonstrate that often the military services have been too conservative in adapting technological advances, I would like to offer another view of Captain Rube's issue based on my experience in having had to make hard choices between too many needs and too few dollars.
All submariners desire to dive deeper, go faster, turn tighter, detect the enemy more acutely, process more information faster, communicate easier in ships which can be manned by fewer men; all of these desires to be fulfilled at lower costs. In considering new developments which offer a significant improvement over present ships — already the best submarines in the world — priority has to be given to those which collective wisdom indicates have the highest returns for the technical and monetary investment, e.g. sound quieting, weapons capability and load, sensor size, shape and location, processing equipment, speed with endurance and maintainability.
Like those on the House Appropriations Committee list, all these items require R&D investment. All have merit but not equally so. And which is or more value than the other depends in great measure on one's experience, outlook and responsibilities. I would submit that the most biased judges or such tradeoff are in the R&D community — starting with the scientist who has the pride or invention extending through the manufacturer who seeks jobs and profits and Congressional advocates who often use new R&D efforts as an excuse to escape funding current needs.
Just as one ought not to change the set or the sails as soon as he relieves the watch, there is merit in the argument that existing systems ought to be treated with great care before radical changes are made for these are the product or a development process which examines in an orderly manner new ideas for military, technical, economic and political soundness as a matter or routine. In this process, new ideas must prove themselves.
Admiral Arnie Schade taught me that " . . . new ideas have a high mortality rate." Ev'n in the richest times, funds are never adequate to pursue all the R&D one would like. Tradeoffs must be continually and carefully made between basic research and advanced development, between incremental improvements of large numbers of existing systems for reasonable sums versus huge expenditures to gain small numbers with radical improvements, and similar competitive propositions.
Only occasionally in history are there technological developments which justify radical efforts and expenditures. Jet aircraft, nuclear power and the satellites are examples in our own time while gun powder, screw propulsion, rifled cannon, and central gun-laying could be cited as historical precedents. Not many developments can be categorized as this significant.
Incremental developments result in a great variety and range of improvements. Characteristic of such improvements has been the ability to adapt them to a wide range of equipments or platforms shortly after their initial development at relatively modest costs: homing torpedoes, sound quieting, digital sensing and processing, VLF radio and SATCOM. It is in the comparison of these incremental gains that lay the hard decisions on where to allocate R&D funds.
For example, no immediate substantive problem with communications to submarines was identified which the proposed space based laser communication system would correct. The CNO's staff identified the value of this system and our judgements were substantially different than the system's promoters. The CNO staff has to try to evaluate the incremental worth to battle effectiveness of any particular development and then weigh that against the resources needed to develop and deploy such a system. Estimating the value which can be reasonably expected to be gained in a development against the gains made with some other use of the funds is best done by knowledgeable skeptics. For the laser communication system, it meant comparing the cost-benefit gained by adding this system to several which already provided excellent service for submarine forces. This judgement then had to be balanced against use of resources to develop communications systems for which we have no current capability and which are absolutely necessary if naval battle forces are to be able to operate in a jammed environment. There is no argument that a laser system would be useful. But in a tradeoff of available funds, its merits have been outweighed by other needs.
My compatriots in the SSN development business wrestled with these similar problems although in a somewhat narrower scope since they did not have inter-platform tradeoffs to consider. As an occasional consultant and sometimes referee in parts of these arguments, I know that no one was in favor of slower, shallower, more costly submarines with fewer weapons and more people -which take longer to build. Each potential improvement for the near and far future had to face scrutiny as being achievable technology at the best cost and then prioritized against other requirements. When completed, these efforts represent a coherent package — a collection of what can be done at costs worth the effort. Reality means meeting the expected threat with machines that will do the job. We'd like a submarine that could fly, but we ought not to spend any money trying to get it.
During the process, promotion of new developments by their advocates must be viewed with suspicion. As submariners, we have a common experience with technical differences revolving about postulated ASW threats to our submarines. There are theorists who predict that technology will make the ocean transparent although oceanographers and submariners take a more realistic and skeptical view. Inventors, promoters and developera collectively and individually hardly ever acknowledge the limitations to their technology. As a scarred veteran of the Joint Tactical Information and Display System development, I have been a party to such limits and failure to acknowledge them. The need for this system to support a forward deployed battle force was clear and well established. There was universal agreement that the technology was "available." Unfortunately after a hundred million dollars was expended with out a product, the Secretary of the Navy terminated the program reluctantly.
Apropos to this problem of Congressional management and interference is former ASN(R&D) Gerry Cann's comment, also in the January issue, that " . . . it is almost impossible to put together a forward looking program because of the zealous oversight from those in the Pentagon and on the Hill." Great effort is expended by the Navy to construct programs so that they can sustain this scrutiny and survive such mischief as is made in them.
All of us have had the responsibility of being carefUl to spend the people's money where it counts. In doing this we occasionally spend some where it produces no gain and sometimes fails to exploit fully a technology which could provide benefit. However, I am convinced these are extremes. In the main, new ideas warranting attention get it. As is repeatedly argued, "Quality wins."
As defense funding stops increasing, arguments in and between the Services will get less objective and more acrimonious. In this environment of stringent resource limits, even more than in periods of plenty, advocates of new ideas in and out of the Service contribute to that collective wisdom by promoting the best facts they can in favor of their ideas. The whole selection and decision process is open and incremental. Required to support the President's budget submission, it is repeated every year or more often. So there are continuous opportunities to introduce new ideas and evidence.


This is a placeholder page for Jennie Diem, which means this person is not currently on this site. We do suggest using the tools below to find Jennie Diem.
You are visiting the placeholder page for Jennie Diem. This page is here because someone used our placeholder utility to look for Jennie Diem. We created this page automatically in hopes Jennie Diem would find it. If you are not Jennie Diem, but are an alumni of Monterey High School Monterey, TN, register on this site for free now.