Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution

Text.

The amendment as proposed by Congress in 1789 reads as follows:

Background.

After several years of comparatively weak government under the Articles of Confederation, a Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia proposed a new constitution on September 17, 1787, featuring a stronger chief executive and other changes. George Mason, a Constitutional Convention delegate and the drafter of Virginia's Declaration of Rights, proposed that a bill of rights listing and guaranteeing civil liberties be included. Other delegates—including future Bill of Rights drafter James Madison—disagreed, arguing that existing state guarantees of civil liberties were sufficient and that any attempt to enumerate individual rights risked implying that the federal government had power to violate every other right (this concern eventually led to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments). After a brief debate, Mason's proposal was defeated by a unanimous vote of the state delegations. In the final days of the convention, North Carolina delegate Hugh Williamson proposed a guarantee of trial by jury in federal civil cases, but a motion to add this guarantee was also defeated.  However, adoption of the Constitution required that nine of the thirteen states ratify it in state conventions. Opposition to ratification ("Anti-Federalism") was partly based on the Constitution's lack of adequate guarantees for civil liberties. Supporters of the Constitution in states where popular sentiment was against ratification (including Virginia, Massachusetts, and New York) successfully proposed that their state conventions both ratify the Constitution and call for the addition of a bill of rights.  One charge of the Anti-Federalists was that giving the U.S. Supreme Court jurisdiction "both as to law and fact" would allow it to deny the findings of jury trials in civil cases. Responding to these concerns, five state ratification conventions recommended a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to jury trial in civil cases.

Proposal and ratification.

In the 1st United States Congress, following the state legislatures' request, James Madison proposed twenty constitutional amendments based on state bills of rights and English sources such as the Bill of Rights 1689. Among them was an amendment protecting findings of fact in civil cases exceeding a certain dollar value from judicial review. Madison proposed that this amendment should be added directly to Article III, though Congress later determined to add the proposed Bill of Rights to the end of the Constitution, leaving the original text intact. Congress also reduced Madison's proposed twenty amendments to twelve, and these were proposed to the states for ratification on September 25, 1789.  By the time the Bill of Rights was submitted to the states for ratification, opinions had shifted in both parties. Many Federalists, who had previously opposed a Bill of Rights, now supported the Bill as a means of silencing the Anti-Federalists' most effective criticism. Many Anti-Federalists, in contrast, now opposed it, realizing that the Bill's adoption would greatly lessen the chances of a second constitutional convention, which they desired. Anti-Federalists such as Richard Henry Lee also argued that the Bill left the most objectionable portions of the Constitution, such as the federal judiciary and direct taxation, intact.  On November 20, 1789, New Jersey ratified eleven of the twelve amendments, rejecting an amendment to regulate congressional pay raises. On December 19 and 22, respectively, Maryland and North Carolina ratified all twelve amendments. On January 19, 25, and 28, 1790, respectively, South Carolina, New Hampshire, and Delaware ratified the Bill, though New Hampshire rejected the amendment on Congressional pay raises, and Delaware rejected the Congressional Apportionment Amendment. This brought the total of ratifying states to six of the required ten, but the process stalled in other states: Connecticut and Georgia found a Bill of Rights unnecessary and so refused to ratify, while Massachusetts ratified most of the amendments, but failed to send official notice to the Secretary of State that it had done so.  In February through June 1790, New York, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island ratified eleven of the amendments, though all three rejected the amendment on Congressional pay raises. Virginia initially postponed its debate, but after Vermont was admitted to the Union in 1791, the total number of states needed for ratification rose to eleven. Vermont ratified on November 3, 1791, approving all twelve amendments, and Virginia finally followed on December 15, 1791. Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson announced the adoption of the ten successfully ratified amendments on March 1, 1792.

Judicial interpretation.

The Seventh Amendment is generally considered one of the more straightforward amendments of the Bill of Rights. Scholar Charles W. Wolfram states that it has usually "been interpreted as if it were virtually a self-explanatory provision".  Unlike most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights, the Seventh Amendment has never been applied to the states. The Supreme Court stated in "Walker v. Sauvinet" (1875), "Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Bombolis" (1916) and "Hardware Dealers' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. of Wisconsin v. Glidden Co." (1931) that states were not required to provide jury trials in civil cases. Nonetheless, most states voluntarily guarantee the right to a civil jury trial, and they must do so in certain state court cases that are decided under federal law.

Historical test.

The first judicial opinion issued on the amendment came in "United States v. Wonson "(1812), in which the federal government wished to retry the facts of a civil case it had lost against Samuel Wonson. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, acting as a circuit court judge, ruled for Wonson, stating that to retry the facts of the case would violate the Seventh Amendment. Regarding the amendment's phrase "the rules of common law", Story wrote:  Beyond all question, the common law here alluded to is not the common law of any individual state, (for it probably differs in all), but it is the common law of England, the grand reservoir of all our jurisprudence. It cannot be necessary for me to expound the grounds of this opinion, because they must be obvious to every person acquainted with the history of the law.  Wonson's ruling established the "historical test", which interpreted the amendment as relying on English common law to determine whether a jury trial was necessary in a civil suit. Applying the historical test in "Parsons v. Bedford" (1830), for example, the Supreme Court found that jury trials were not constitutionally guaranteed for cases under maritime law, an area in which English common law did not require juries. The Court further clarified this rule as a "fixed historical test" in "Thompson v. Utah "(1898), which established that the relevant guide was English common law of 1791, rather than that of the present day. In "Chauffeurs, Teamsters, and Helpers Local No. 391 v. Terry" (1990), the Court explained that the right to a jury trial provided by the Seventh Amendment encompasses more than the common law forms of action recognized in 1791 (when the Bill of Rights was ratified), but rather any lawsuit in which parties' legal rights were to be determined, as opposed to suits that involve only equitable rights and remedies.  In "Galloway v. United States" (1943), the Court permitted a directed verdict (a verdict ordered by a judge on the basis of overwhelming lack of evidence) in a civil suit, finding that it did not violate the Seventh Amendment under the fixed historical test. The Court extended the amendment's guarantees in "Beacon Theatres v. Westover" (1959) and "Dairy Queen, Inc. v. Wood" (1962), ruling in each case that all issues that required trial by jury under English common law also required trial by jury under the Seventh Amendment. This guarantee was also further extended to shareholder suits in "Ross v. Bernhard" (1970) and to copyright infringement lawsuits in "Feltner v. Columbia Pictures TV "(1998).  In "Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc." (1996), the Court ruled that many parts of patent claims are questions of law rather than of fact, and that the Seventh Amendment guarantee of a jury trial therefore does not necessarily apply.  Lawsuits against the federal government itself do not receive Seventh Amendment protections due to the doctrine of sovereign immunity. In "Lehman v. Nakshian" (1981), the Court ruled that "the plaintiff in an action against the United States has a right to trial by jury only where Congress has affirmatively and unambiguously granted that right by statute."

Jury size.

The Supreme Court has held that the Seventh Amendment's guarantee of a jury trial also guarantees a jury of sufficient size. The Court found a six-member jury sufficient to meet the amendment's requirements in "Colgrove v. Battin" (1973).

Twenty Dollars Clause.

Little historical evidence exists to interpret the Twenty Dollars Clause, which was added in a closed session of the Senate, and is often omitted in judicial and scholarly discussion of the amendment. A "Harvard Law Review" article described it as "mysterious... of shrouded origin and neglected for two centuries", stating that "no one believes that the Clause bears on the right protected by the Seventh Amendment." According to law professor Philip Hamburger, this clause was intended to become obsolete by inflation, so that its application to more cases would be phased out gradually ($20 in 1800 is ).  Congress has never extended federal diversity jurisdiction to amounts that small. Under federal law (28 U.S.C. §1332), the amount in dispute must exceed $75,000 for a case to be heard in federal court based on diversity of the parties' citizenship (the parties are from different states or different countries). However, civil cases may arise in federal court that are not diversity cases (e.g., in places like the District of Columbia that are federal jurisdictions), in which case the Twenty Dollars Clause may apply.

Re-examination of facts.

The Re-Examination Clause of the Seventh Amendment states: "In suits at common law,... no fact tried by jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law." This clause forbids any court from reexamining or overturning any factual determinations made by a jury guaranteeing that facts decided by that jury cannot be reexamined at a later date. Exceptions to this prohibition are possible if it is later determined that legal errors were made or evidence submitted was insufficient in some way. In such cases the reexamination is conducted by another jury so that the decision is still left in the hands of the people. The clause applies only to cases where private rights—i.e., rights that exist between private citizens—have been violated. The Re-Examination Clause applies not only to federal courts, but also to "a case tried before a jury in a state court and brought to the Supreme Court on appeal."  Justice Samuel Nelson wrote the opinion of the Supreme Court in "The Justices v. Murray", 76 U.S. 9 Wall. 274 (1869), in which he quoted Justice Joseph Story to explain the modes to reexamine facts tried by juries according to common law: "Mr. Justice Story [...] referring to this part of the amendment, observed [...] that it was 'a prohibition to the courts of the United States to re-examine any facts tried by a jury in any other manner [than according to Common Law].' [...] He further observed that 'the only modes known to the common law to re-examine such facts was the granting of a new trial by the court where the issue was tried, or the award of a venire facias de novo, by the appellate court, for some error of law that had intervened in the proceedings.'"  As common law provided, the judge could set aside (or nullify) a jury verdict when the judge decided that the verdict was contrary to the evidence or the law. Common law precluded the judge from himself entering a verdict; a new trial, with a new jury, was the only course permissible. In "Slocum v. New York Insurance Co." (1913), the Supreme Court upheld this rule. Later cases have undermined "Slocum", but generally only when the evidence is overwhelming, or if a specific law provides narrow guidelines by which there can be no reasonable question as to the required outcome, may the court enter "judgment as a matter of law" or otherwise set aside the jury's findings.

The Seventh Amendment (Amendment VII) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. This amendment codifies the right to a jury trial in certain civil cases and inhibits courts from overturning a jury's findings of fact.

Der 7. Zusatzartikel zur Verfassung der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika, das Seventh Amendment, der wie der erste bis sechste und der achte bis zehnte Verfassungszusatz zur sogenannten Bill of Rights gehört, garantiert, dass bestimmte Zivilprozesse vor "Jurys" stattfinden und beinhaltet das Verbot für Gerichte, von Geschworenengerichten befundene Sachverhalte zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt nochmals zu prüfen (die sogenannte Reexamination Clause). Der Oberste Gerichtshof der Vereinigten Staaten hat den Geltungsbereich des siebten Verfassungszusatzes durch den 14. Verfassungszusatz im Falle des Rechts auf Geschworenengerichte in Zivilsachen durch den Fall Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis, 241 U.S. 211 (1916) nicht auf die US-Bundesstaaten ausgedehnt, wie er es mit vielen anderen Teilen der Bill of Rights getan hat. Allerdings hat er den Geltungsbereich der Re-Examination Clause im Fall The Justices v. Murray, 76 U. S. 274 (1869), auf die US-Bundesstaaten ausgedehnt.


Life.

Antonio Rizzo was the son of Rizzo di ser Giovanni of Osteno. He completed his apprenticeship on the site of the Certosa di Pavia. From 1457, he worked in Venice, in Antonio Bregno's workshop.  Around 1469, Rizzo lived in a house belonging to the Benedictine nunnery of Santa Zaccaria, after his marriage to Maria, the daughter of the administrator of the nunnery. There is also evidence of a son, Simplicio, who was likely the Venetian goldsmith documented as active in Rome in the beginning of the 16th century.  In 1474 and 1478, Rizzo was sent to Scutari as a military engineer. Both times (during the First Venetian-Ottoman war), the Ottoman Turks had besieged the town. He was to improve the fortifications there. He was lauded for "continuously doing his patriotic duty", and received injuries. Although the citadel was lost, Rizzo was awarded a monthly pension of 1 ducat for twenty years for himself and his family.  In 1484, Rizzo was appointed as "proto" or chief architect for the restoration of the Doge's Palace. His successful career came to a sudden end in 1498 when he was found guilty of embezzlement of between 10,000 and 80,000 ducats. He sold his house and fled first to Ancona, then to Foligno, and finally to Cesena, where he is believed to have died shortly thereafter.

Career.

Till the 1960s, the accepted history of Rizzo's early years was that he was the supplier of columns, capitals and bases for the Certosa di Pavia's large cloister, which led to the attribution of the arcades of the cloister to him, and that in the 1460s he had been influenced by Lombard sculpture. This consensus was based on a payment document to "Magistro Ricio de Verona" dated 1465-1467, but was overturned in the 1970s when it was realised that the Ricio was more likely to have been Rizzo's father (though no proof of blood relationship has been found).  Rizzo's premier patron in Venice was the Doge Cristoforo Moro, who commissioned him to create altars for the basilica of San Marco, after which he became "the chosen sculptor and architect of the Venetian Signoria". This suggests that Rizzo already had a considerable reputation by the time he arrived in Venice. It is likely that Gregorio Correr, a Venetian noble, who had been his patron as well as Mantegna's in Verona, had recommended Rizzo to Moro to introduce the new Renaissance style into the basilica.  Influenced by Bregno's gothic sensibility, in around 1464, Rizzo sculpted the figures of the "Annunciation", the "Allegories" and the "Virtues" for the funerary monument of the Doge Francesco Foscari located in the Church of Santa Maria dei Frari.  Towards 1467, Rizzo decorated the portal of the Church of Sant'Elena with a work "Vittore Cappello genuflecting before Saint Helena". While this was attributed by Francesco Sansovino to a "Antonio Dentone", there is an acceptance that Dentone is none other than Rizzo. This work is characterized by a vibrant realism, with Cappello's face a depiction of tense pleading, and his neck distorted and strained. However, Saint Helena's figure, noticeably in different material and style, is attributed to a coworker of Rizzo's rather than to the sculptor.  A budding Renaissance style becomes evident in his statues (such as "Mars") for the crown of the Arco Foscari at the Doge's Palace, which he worked on between the early to mid 1460s.  Rizzo executed a spiral staircase with pulpit decorated with figurative reliefs at the Scuola Grande di San Marco in 1476. Its design was by Gentile Bellini. A fire in 1485 destroyed these works.  Influenced by Antonello da Messina, Rizzo's style evolved to a geometrization of forms and clearer volumes. The statues of "Adam" and "Eve" in the Arco Foscari, and the "Monument to the Doge Tron" are outstanding. Rizzo based his statues on nude models, working in a naturalistic fashion, with neither the muscle-bound Adam nor the broad-hipped Eve subscribing to classical conceptions of human proportions. Rizzo's "Adam" and "Eve" may have influenced Albrecht Dürer, who was present in Venice between 1490-1495. For instance, Dürer's niche motif of Fortuna was inspired by the narrow niches of Venetian funereal monuments, though this derivation has been questioned.  Rizzo's final style is represented by the sculptures in the internal facade of the Doge's Palace. After its damage by fire on 14 September 1483, he redesigned a new east wing on the courtyard, planned a new apartment for the Doge, and executed the "Scala dei Giganti". These stemmed from his appointment as "proto" or chief architect of the Doge's Palace, a full-time job but grossly underpaid, about which he complained bitterly, as he was unable to take on any other commission. These works occupied him between 1484 and 1498.  The Venetian Senate ordered the reconstruction of the Doge's apartment and made the appointment of Rizzo as architect. There is no evidence of any prior architectural work by Rizzo at this point, although his sculptural works were well-known, so it not immediately clear why he was chosen for the prestigious role of "proto", except possibly because of his distinguished exploits at Scutari.  Rizzo's east wing was the first complete element in the Renaissance style at the Doge's Palace. His visually striking "Scala dei Giganti" lead up to a platform, beneath which appear reliefs of "Victories". These have been called the supreme achievements of his latter career, and are remarkable for their mimicry of "sfumato", a painterly technique, as well as the effects of reflected light off the broken surfaces.  It has also been argued that the bronze statues of the Moors of St Mark's Clocktower in the Piazza San Marco, cast in 1497, can be assigned to Rizzo.

Antonio Rizzo (Osteno, c. 1430 – Cesena, c. 1499) was an Italian architect and sculptor, one of the greatest active in Venice in the latter half of the fifteenth century. Among his designs are the "Scala dei Giganti" ("Staircase of the Giants"), the stairs leading to the State Apartments of the Doge's Palace.

Antonio Rizzo (* um 1430 in Claino con Osteno; † nach 1499 in Foligno?) war ein italienischer Bildhauer und Architekt der Frührenaissance.


History.

In 1726, King John V of Portugal acquired three estates in the parish of Belém: one became the Palace of Belém; on the second parcel an Oratory, which was eventually expanded, becoming the Palace of Necessidades; and the third reserved for a summer residence that never materialized during his reign.  On 1 November 1755, the day of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake, the Royal Family was in Belém, and escaped the destruction of Lisbon by the earthquake and tsunami. Perturbed by the events, King Joseph refused to live under a residence of masonry, and took refuge in a wooden cabin next to the Palace of the Counts of Óbidos (packed with tapestries from the "Quinta de Baixo"). As the Royal family continued to fear for the viability of the Ribeira Palace in Lisbon, the King ordered the construction of a more permanent wooden building in the heights of Alto da Ajuda; the architects Petrónio Mazzoni and Veríssimo Jorge began building an elaborate structure from wood collected from the Vale de Figueira pinery. The "Real Barraca" ("Royal Tent"), or "Paço de Madeira" ("Wooden Palace") was completed on 20 September 1761 (and the first baptism was held in its chapel), but, owing to risk of collapse, the theatre (which was considered a risk by architect João Carlos Bibiena) was reconstructed from 1767 to 1786 by Giacomo Azzolini. The court remained at this site for nearly three decades, in a luxurious atmosphere of the golden age of enlightened despotism, until the King's death in 1777. Since his successor, Queen Maria I of Portugal lived with Peter III in the Palace of Queluz at the time of Joseph's death, the "Royal Barraca" was vacated.  In November 1794, during the reign of Queen Mary I and the Prince-Regent, the "royal tent" was destroyed by fire, although the fire-fighters were able to save the library and church. A more permanent dwelling was conceived by the architect José da Costa e Silva. Starting on 17 July 1795 the rubble and terrain was cleared, which continued on 27 July under the direction of António Vicente. The first cornerstone was laid on 9 November under the direction of Manuel Caetano de Sousa (with a secondary project under the supervision of German Xavier de Magalhães). It was conceived as a Baroque-late Rococo building, but the construction was interrupted shortly after. As of 19 May 1796 the project was supplied by the masons Francisco António and Joaquim Baptista, who brought in stone from Monsanto (Idanha-a-Nova), sand from Alfeite, calcium oxide cooked in Alcântara, tile from the Alhandra, with limestone provided from Pêro Pinheiro, Belas, Vila Chã and Monsanto. The intervention of many architects resulted in a royal decree (9 December 1801) that stated that alterations to the project could only be made in agreement with Manuel Caetano de Sousa, Joaquim de Oliveira, José da Costa e Silva and/or Francisco Xavier Fabri (as long as it economized on the project costs). But, Manuel Caetano de Sousa designed an overcomplicated and intricate Baroque building (which was later criticized by Costa e Silva and Fabri in 1801). But, with mounting confusion and difficulties between the architects and contractors, on 21 January 1802, José da Costa e Silva and Fabri were invited by the Crown to present a new project, in conjunction with António Francisco Rosa and Manuel Joaquim de Sousa, while excluding Manuel Caetano de Sousa.  In 1802 Manuel Caetano de Sousa died, and by 26 June, Costa e Silva and Fabri were appointed official architects. Costa e Silva and Fabri respected what was already constructed, but introduced necessary alterations to change the Royal Palace into a more dignified, serious and majestic building. Consequently, the plan was simplified and reduced to a core structured around two courtyards, with the same level of ornamentation, but now much more refined.  On 2 July 1802, the monarch solicited the Marquis of Alorna to study the future paintings that would occupy its walls. Domingos Sequeira and Vieira Portuense were contracted to paint the property, accompanied by Joaquim Gregório da Silva Rato, Manuel Prieto, Taborda, Fuschini and Calisto, while Italian decorators Manuel da Costa and Giuseppe Viale were hired to decorate the mansion. Similarly, sculptors Machado de Castro (who created three sculptures), Carlo Amatucci (some), João José de Aguiar, and his assistant Gregório Viegas (executed ten statues), Joaquim José de Barros Laborão and Manuel Joaquim Laborão (completed six statues), while Faustino José Rodrigues and his son, Francisco Assis Rodrigues, were contracted to complete three sculptures. In 1803, Carlos Amatucci completed the sculpture of "Liberdade".

Peninsular Wars.

By 1807, the painters, sculptors and decorators had been contracted, but the arrival of Junot's forces immediately stopped the build as the Royal Family fled to Brazil (Rio de Janeiro). Yet, Junot insisted that the building should continue. But in 1809, the French invasion of the Portuguese territory finally caused the suspension of the project. By 1812, Francisco Fabri returned to chef the project, since José da Costa e Silva had also joined the Royal Family in Brazil. Fabri's model was based on the Palace of Caserta in Naples, designed by Luigi Vanvitelli. He envisioned an ample palace design, directed South, towards the Tagus River, with four main towers at its angles: the works restarted in 1813.  In 1814 and 1815 work progressed in the rooms and staircases that were completed, with Taborda, Fuschini, Calisto, Cyrillo Volkmar Machado (and his assistant Oliveira Góis), and Máximo Paulino dos Reis as painters, while decorator Manuel Piolti took over the interior layout. In 1814, Cyrillo painted the "Sala do Dossel". In April 1815, the quarry of Lameiras was appointed to extract rock for the columns of the main floor.  Manuel Caetano da Silva Gaião joined the project in 1815 to assist the team. In 1817, Francisco Fabri died, and was replaced by his assistant, António Francisco Rosa, who was forced by the Royal Treasury to curb the scope of the project. Several individual projects were completed in 1818: Domingos Sequeira returned to direct the painting of the palace; the model for the south tower, authored by José Joaquim de Sousa was completed; on 26 September the vaulted ceiling was erected in the vestibule; and on 12 November, the decorative works in the "Sala dos Embaixadores" ("Ambassador’s Hall") were cleaned by contractors Severiano Henrique Pereira and Francisco de Paula.  King John VI, still in Brazil, began to show interest in the project, and presented the designs to his local architects Grandjean de Montigny and João da Silva Moniz. When António Francisco Rosa took over the work in 1818, the project progressed at a slightly accelerated pace, on the assumption that the Royal Family would return. But, the "Cortes" were insecure about the expenses in completed Ajuda.  On 11 January 1819, ten new flourishments in the "Ambassador’s Hall" were executed by António Joaquim de Faria and the contractors Francisco de Paula, Severiano Henrique Pereira and Leandro Gomes. On 15 February, in the "Sala dos Archeiros" ("Archer's Hall"), the painters Vicente Paulo Rocha and João de Deus Moreira, painted the base boards, following the designs of Manuel Piolti (since José Francisco Ferreira quit the project). By May, Cyrillo proposed a new eastern façade, with a triangular apex and allegorical sculptures, alluding to the expulsion of the French during the Peninsular Wars, but the project was dropped. Between 1819 and 1920, sculptures of "Justice" and "Prudence" were completed by João José de Aguiar; the ceilings of the "Archer's Hall" and "Cane Concierge's Hall" by José da Cunha Taborda (1766–1836) were completed, its doors first started by Manuel Piolti (1770–1823); the metal shields on the doors were provided by the Army arsenal; the ceiling of the "Hall of Spanish Tapestries" by Cyrillo Volkmar Machado, with perspectives by Manuel Piolti, figures by Joaquim Gregório da Silva Rato and ornamentation by André Monteiro da Cruz; skirting by bronzer and gilder Pierre Philippe Thomire (1751–1843); the ceiling of the antechamber of the "Sala do Despacho" ("Order Room") was completed by André Monteiro da Cruz and José da Cunha Taborda. In 1820, a new project for the south and eastern façades was authorized, which included a system of ramps and staircases created by António Francisco Rosa. Metalsmiths João Pereira and Manuel António, and carpenter José Joaquim de Sousa completed the project.  On 27 July 1820, a meeting was held by the Royal Palace inspector, Joaquim da Costa e Silva, Cyrillo Volmar Machado, Germano António Xavier de Magalhães, António Francisco Rosa and Manuel Caetano da Silva Gayão to decide upon the first design for the eastern façade, or a new composition by Volkmar Machado. During these meetings the project for the vestibule was approved; the decoration of the "Sala da Tocha" ("Torch Room"), its access ramps and staircase; and the painting designs for the rooms by Manuel Piolti, which were executed by Anacleto José Narciso, Eugénio Joaquim Álvares, Eusébio de Oliveira, João de Deus, José António Narciso, José Tomás and Vicente Paulo.  By 1821, when John VI of Portugal returned from Brazil, the Palace had not yet been completed, and only permitted some state and ceremonial protocols (such as John's investiture in the Order of the Garter in 1823). Consequently, John VI decided to live in the Bemposta Palace. With a new simplification of the plans, architect António Francisco Rosa continued the structural works. During this phase, painters José da Cunha Taborda, Sebastião José Alves, José Joaquim de Sousa, Bernardino de Sena Lemos da Rocha, Arcangelo Fuschini, Máximo Paulino dos Reis, Joaquim Gregório da Silva Rato, Manoel Piolti, João Pereira, José Pedro de Carvalho, and mason António Joaquim de Faria worked at the palace. In 1823, the staircase was decorated by painter Norberto José Ribeiro, and in 1825 Joaquim Rafael became head painter.  The palace began to be used as a Royal Residence in 1826, when the Infanta Isabel Maria, Regent on behalf of the young Queen Maria II, moved in. It was proposed to the architects that the project's scale be reduced, encompassing only one-third of the original design, making the eastern façade the main entrance and erecting a tower at the southern end. Its plan now reduced in half, it included one block, the construction of which was immediately interrupted by the Liberal victory in 1833.  In 1827, Piolti dies, leaving behind the decorative painter António Inácio Vieira in charge of the interior design. Work on site began, and quickly ended in 1828, by the English mason John Johnston. He was responsible for the"English staircase", but was mysteriously removed from the project to be replaced by Nicolau Pires. In 1830, António Joaquim de Faria, responsible for many of the stonework within the palace, also died. Similarly, three years later, Sebastião José Alves died, being succeeded by Joaquim José Ventura Alves.  During the second half of the 19th century, new works in the Palace were specifically done to adapt the existing space to a permanent Royal Family residence: the windows in the antechamber of the "Sala do Despacho" were completed by Paul Sormani; new lace draperies from Switzerland were hung in the windows; the "Quarto de D. Luís" ("D. Luís Room") was partitioned, with a lowered ceiling, and used as an office space with washroom; the "Sala de Trabalho do Rei" ("King's Study") was decorated with a new rug, produced by the English firm Thomas Bontor & Company, which also produced new rugs for the "Sala Chinesa" ("Chinese Hall"); also, the older "Sala de Bilhar" ("Billiard Room") was divided into two rooms: the "Sala Chinesa" ("Chinese Room") and the "Sala Império" ("Imperial Hall").

Liberal Wars.

These changes were primarily due to the increase use of the palace. In 1828 Miguel of Portugal was acclaimed by the Portuguese Estates General in the "Cortes Hall" (today the "Dining Room"). Miguel also inhabited the palace for six months as the royal residence, the Palace of Necessidades, underwent remodelling.  The move of the Royal Court to Queluz in 1829, and the death of the architect Rosa, resulted in a slowing of the project, and the affected the north wing which fell into ruin.  With the start of Liberal and Absolutist factionalism, the country entered into a period of fragile stability, and the project, already moving slowly, stopped in 1833 with the entry of liberal forces in Lisbon.  With the restored Liberal regime, Peter IV took over as Regent until his daughter's age of majority, swearing allegiance to the Constitutional Charter in the throne room on 30 August 1834. Peter attempted to complete the palace, under the revised plan of Joaquim Possidónio Narciso da Silva, but was unsuccessful. Yet, some projects continued inside the building: in 1836, the antechamber of the "Sala do Despacho" with scenes of Diana by André Monteiro da Cruz was completed; in 1837, several paintings were repaired by Joaquim Rafael; in 1844, busts of the monarchs in wax were ordered, by Joaquim Rafael; and the sculpture of "Inocência" by Benedetto Delisi was executed in 1860.

Royal residence.

Following the tragic deaths of members of the Royal Family in 1861 from typhoid fever, there were many who counselled King Luís to abandon the Palace of Necessidades. After being acclaimed King (22 December 1861), Luís moved temporarily with to the Palace of Paço de Arcos, while remodelling occurred at Ajuda to adapt the building to become the new Royal Residence. At the same time, a match was made between Luís and Maria Pia of Savoy, daughter of King Victor Emmanuel II of Italy, who were married in 1861; on 16 April 1862, the new King and his wife, moved into the Palace transforming it into the formal Royal Residence.  In order to become liveable, the King directed Possidónio da Silva and Costa Sequeira to renovate and remodel the building, primarily based on the tastes of the Queen. The old "Sala do Dossel", the audience hall, was renamed the "Sala das Tapeçarias Espanholas", because of the Spanish three crystal chandeliers were installed in the hall on the occasion of the marriage of Luís and Maria Pia of Savoy. An interior vestibule was transformed into a "Winter Garden"(). Possidónio da Silva also covered the ceiling murals with a painted ceiling covered in genies, sphinx and chimeras, on which were later applied agate and chalcedony stones (gifts from the Viceroy of Egypt) in addition to Portuguese marble. The "Sala do Fumo" ("Smoking Room") was constructed in carved wood. The "Sala Azul" ("Blue Room") was decorated tapestries found in the space (which were produced by the "Real Fábrica de Santa Bárbara de Madrid" with designs by Francisco de Goya). These tapestries were a gift from Spain in 1785, in honour of the royal wedding of the Prince John VI and Carlota Joaquina. Similarly, the as a reception room, and the workers tore up gold wallpaper and replaced the painted cornice with a real one. In the office adjacent to the "Winter Garden", the walls were lined in pink velvet to house a collection from Saxony and the ceiling stucco was painted with representations of birds and views of Italy and Lisbon, by Giuseppe and Cinatti Achille Rambois, while the furniture was selected by Krieger, Suc. Racault of Paris. The "Sala Verde" ("Green Room") received new ceiling stucco with bas-relief ornamentation and gold-leaf. Renovations also proceeded in the palace chapel, Queen's washroom and dining room by Leandro Braga, who was also assisted by Atelier responsible for the King's painting studio and personal library. It was during this remodelling that the painting "Chegada de D. João VI", in the ballroom by the artist Fuschini disappeared.  In the meantime, on 28 September 1863, the Infante Carlos (later King Carlos of Portugal) was born in the "Sala Verde" ("Green Room").  Other additions to the palace followed in subsequent years: in 1863, a bust of Maria Pia was executed by Santo Varni; an inlaid table was completed by Focentino Eugenio Azgnani (a wedding gift to Maria Pia, from the city of Faenza); in 1865,the execution of the sculpture by Musidora Odoardo Fantachiotti (1809–1877); Maria Pia solicited Possidónio da Silva to substitute the painting in the ceiling of the "Sala de Música" ("Music Room"), the allegorical scene painted by José da Cunha Taborda and Arcangelo Fuschini, was substituted by one commissioned by Felisberto António Botelho; the "Sala Azul" ("Blue Room") was lined in silk; in 1866, a marble statue, "Tangedoura do Pandeiro"was completed by Giovanni Dupré (1817–1882); in 1867, the parquet floor in the "Sala do Despacho" and "Sala dos Contadores" was completed by Godefroy, a joiner in the Belgian Royal House; the execution of the sculpture "Mulher com bilha à cabeça" by Anatole Calmels; the execution of a bust of King Luis, also by Anatole Calmels; in 1869, the execution of the sculpture "Leda" by Césare Sighinolfi; a painting of the King was also completed of the King by the painter António Rodrigues da Silva; in 1870, "Maria Pia mascarada" by Joseph Layraud; in 1873, work on the parquet floor in the "Sala Azul" ("Blue Room") by Joseph Godefroy; in 1874, paintings of the Princes Carlos and Afonso in the "Sala Rosa" ("Pink Room") were completed by Joseph Layraud.  By the end of the 19th century, new exterior restorations had begun, under the direction of Domingos Parente da Silva, while new additions continued within the interior: in 1875, a sculpture of Maria Pia was completed by Césare Sighinolfi; in 1876, a painting in miniature of Luís and Maria Pia by Michele Gordigiani; in 1879, a new parquet floor in the "Sala do Archeiros" ("Archer's Hall") and the "Sala do Porteiro da Cana" by Mardel Magalhães was begun; a painting of a canvas representing Humberto I by A. Jangiovanni was also installed in the same year; in 1881, the sculpture "O Saltimbanco" by Simões de Almeida was executed; in 1886, the a sculpture of Victor Emmanuel II, by Joaquim Santos; in 1887, paintings over the doors of the Queen's vanity by Ernesto Condeixa; in 1890, the portrait of Infante Carlos for the ante-chamber of the "Sala do Despacho" was completed by José Malhoa; in 1891, a new marble floor for the "Sala dos Embaixadores" ("Ambassador's Hall") commission by António Moreira Rato & Filhos was installed;  After the death of her husband, Queen Maria Pia continued to live in the palace with her son, the Infante Afonso. Although King Carlos of Portugal began to reside in the Palace of Necessidades, the palace (although residence of the Queen Mother) was reserved for official ceremonies, including banquets and receptions, such as those in honour of Edward VII of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Alfonso XIII of Spain, German Emperor Wilhelm II and President Emile Loubet of France. Carlos made few changes to the Palace, although he was responsible for ordering two large pots in Berlin from the Parisian factory of the Duke d'Angoulême, for the "Sala do Trono" ("Throne Room"). Similarly, on the occasion of the King Edward VII's visit, he also ordered new chairs for "Sala da Ceia" ("Dining Room"). Manuel II remained in residence at the Palace of Necessidades following the death of the King and Crown Prince in the Lisbon Regicide, during the tumultuous years before the revolution.

Republic.

With the 5 October 1910 Revolution all work on the Palace ceased and was closed, beginning a new phase of neglect that would later result in the flooding of the library by rainwater in 1925.  In 1934, Duarte Pacheco commissioned Raul Lino to develop a plan to complete the building, which was deferred owing to the costs associated with the project. But the Republican government did inventory many of the furniture and artwork, and along with many of artefacts from other Palaces, stored them in the Ajuda Palace. In 1938 the Palace was opened as a museum, and in 1954 the "Casa Forte" ("Vault") was opened in order to exhibit the Portuguese Crown Jewels and silverware of the Royal Household.  Another attempt to renovate the Palace was proposed in 1944, in a new project by Raul Lino, but never materialized, and in 1956, Arantes e Oliveira commissioned Raul Lino, once again to elaborate a new project. The "Serviços dos Monumentos Nacionais" ("National Monument Services") branch examined the building to determine its condition (in 1956), which also predicted a large investment to completely restore the palace. After a period of restricted access (between 1940 and 1968), when only people who had an authorization card from the "Direcção Geral da Fazenda Pública" ("General Directorate of the Treasury"), the palace was opened to the public on 20 August 1968.  A new green-space was created to enhance the front (eastern) façade of the building in 1961, but in 1974 a fire destroyed a significant part of the north wing. Between 23–24 September the fire consumed King Luís' painting gallery and part of the north wing, which included 500 paintings, including a self-portrait by Rembrandt. It was partially transformed into a museum in 1968, and served as the headquarters of the Ministry of Culture (), IPPAR and IPM.  In 1989, the president of the IPPC, invited civil engineer Garcia Lamas and architect Gonçalo Byrne to elaborate a project to finish the Palace. The designers created two maquettes and various plans, which envisioned the completion of the uncompleted wings and the extension of the gardens to the "Jardim das Damas" ("Lady's Garden"). The plan would also include the construction of two residential zones nearby that would cover 75% of the work.  On 26 May 1992 the palace was assigned to the "Portuguese Institute of Architectural Heritage" (), under Decree-Law 120/92. The palace's bibliothèque is the namesake for the Cancioneiro da Ajuda.

Architecture.

The Ajuda National Palace is located on a hilltop of the central part of the parish of Ajuda overlooking the historic centre of Lisbon and Tagus River, south of the Monsanto Forest Park. Its main access way in the"Largo da Ajuda" on the eastern side of the property, but it is also transited by the "Calçada do Mirante à Ajuda" (north) and "Rua dos Marcos" (west). Although the Palace occupies a block on the heights of Ajuda, its delineated space extends to several gardens and lands around the main building. This includes: the "Jardim das Damas" ("Lady's Garden") fronting the northern façade of the Palace; the "Sala da Fisica" ("Physics Hall"), in the north-eastern corner fronting the Palace; the clock-tower, also known as the "Torre do Galo" ("Rooster's Tower"), isolated in front of the Palace; and the larger "Jardim Botanico" ("Botanical Garden"), southwest and across the street from the Palace.

Exterior.

One of the earliest neoclassical buildings in Lisbon, the palace is an irregular rectangular building, divided into four wings (with the western wing being incomplete) around a large quadrangle, paved with Portuguese calçada in geometric designs. Each wing is occupied by distinct entities: the eastern and southern wings are occupied by museum exhibitions of the Palace of Ajuda; the northern wing belongs to the installations of the "Instituto de Museus e Conservação" ("Institute of Museums and Conservation"), the "Instituto de Gestão do Património Arquitectónico e Arqueológico" ("Institute for Architectural Management and Archaeological Heritage"), part of the "Secretaria-Geral do Ministério da Cultura" ("General Secretariat of the Ministry of Culture"), the Ajuda Library and a gallery for temporary exhibits.  The building evolved to a two-three storey structure, on an inclined plot of land, with a façade of ashlar limestone. The main symmetrical façade is oriented towards the east, with a central body and tympanum, extending to two lateral towers. This façade is two floors high, the inferior level marked by three arches, surmounted by (and separated by) Tuscan-Ionian columns supporting the secondary floor/veranda. On the second floor of the main body, the space is protected by balusters protecting the three Roman arch-windows, surmounted by a frieze of garlands, and divided by six Tuscan-Ionic columns.  Between the central body and towers are eight panels consisting of two-floors and a mezzanine, each panel divided by two orders of columns: on the first floor Tuscan and on the second floor Tuscan-Ionic columns. The first floor windows are moulded and trimmed sills with cornices, while a similar number of windows on the upper floor have veranda-like railings, surmounted by smaller square windows. The three-storey towers are also divided by Tuscan and Tuscan-Ionic columns: the first floor, have three windows and sills with angular cornices on the outside and rounded cornices on the interior; the intermediary floor has a comparable number of windows, while the third floor windows are surmounted by smaller windows (much like on the panels). The southern lateral façade has three storeys, with 19 windows in succession, comparable to the main entrance, although there are a series of niches at the base. The uncompleted western façade show signs of vestiges of various dependencies with a wall of open window sills/arches with Tuscan pillars and access to the central courtyard by three rounded arches. Embedded in the vast foyer with a vaulted edge supported by Tuscan columns, has twenty-two marble statues, some signed and dated.  The vestibule is the main access to the Palace, the Library and Exhibition Gallery, which by is made through the vestibule, through a monumental staircase and rounded arches. The ample courtyard is paved in Portuguese calçada, and is surrounded by two four-storey tall wings (north and south): the main floor, with central arch and doorway is flanked by rectangular windows surmounted by smaller square windows; and the superior floors, are composed of veranda-windows with simple frames and cornices and balusters/guardrails.

Interior.

The interior is laid out with interconnecting halls, with a central corridor of staircases and elevators.  On the main floor entrance hall, with a succession of the museum in lateral directions, there is a staircase beside two niches with the figures of "Justiça" and "Prudência", which access the "Sala dos Archeiros" ("Archers Hall") completed by Joaquim Machado de Castro and his disciples. On this floor, in a linear path, the visitor follows through the following chambers and halls:

Second floor.

During State functions or celebrations, invited guests would enter via the vestibule and ascend the main staircase to the second floor of the Palace by way of the "Escadaria Nobre". The enclosed staircase, is decorated with flourish carvings on the ceiling from the lower floor, which zigzags to the upper landing decorated with rounded stained glass with the royal coat of arms and painted ceiling. On the second floor of the palace lies:

The Palace of Ajuda (, ) is a neoclassical monument in the civil parish of Ajuda in the city of Lisbon, central Portugal. Built on the site of a temporary wooden building constructed to house the Royal family after the 1755 earthquake and tsunami, it was originally begun by architect Manuel Caetano de Sousa, who planned a late Baroque-Rococo building. Later, it was entrusted to José da Costa e Silva and Francisco Xavier Fabri, who planned a magnificent building in the modern neoclassical style.

Der Palácio Nacional da Ajuda ist ein historisches portugiesisches Baudenkmal und heute ein Museum. Während der Zeit des Königreiches (1139–1910) war er Wohnstätte der königlichen Familie.


Early life.

Henry was born in exile at the Palazzo Muti in Rome on 6 March 1725 and baptised on the same day by Pope Benedict XIII, 37 years after his grandfather James II and VII lost the throne, and ten years after his father's failed attempt to regain it. His father was James Francis Edward Stuart, known to his opponents as "the Old Pretender". His mother was the Princess Maria Klementyna Sobieska, granddaughter of the Polish King and Lithuanian Grand-Duke, John III Sobieski. Henry was apparently an intelligent child who could spell and write better than his older brother Charles. More introverted than Charles and more cautious in his approach to problems, Henry is described as pious and mild-mannered.  Henry went to France in 1745 to help his brother, Prince Charles Edward Stuart ("Bonnie Prince Charlie", or "the Young Pretender") prepare the Jacobite rising of 1745. Attached to the French army, he was in nominal command of a cross-channel invasion force of some 10,000 men that never made it out of Dunkirk, and subsequently served under Maurice de Saxe at the siege of Antwerp. After the defeat at Culloden, Henry Stuart returned to Italy.

Ecclesiastical career.

On 30 June 1747 Pope Benedict XIV conferred him with tonsure and created him Cardinal-Deacon of Santa Maria in Campitelli in a special consistory held on 3 July 1747. On 27 August 1747 he was promoted through the four minor orders by Benedict. He received the subdiaconate on 18 August 1748 and diaconate on 25 August 1748. His elder brother Charles, who was in France at the time, was not in favor of the ecclesiastical honors as he believed they would only serve to further religious prejudice against the Stuarts.  As the cardinalate was a rank rather than one of the priestly orders, Charles hoped that Henry might yet make a politically fortuitous marriage, and was dismayed to discover that his brother had been ordained a priest on 1 September 1748. Later that month, Henry was made Cardinal-Priest, retaining his diaconal church. In 1751, he was made Arch-Priest of the Vatican Basilica.  In December 1752 his titular seat was changed to Santi Apostoli; and in 1758 the Pope named him Camerlengo of the Sacred College of Cardinals. The responsibilities of this office included administering all property, fees, funds and revenue belonging to the College of Cardinals, celebrating the requiem Mass for a deceased cardinal, and charge of the registry of the "Acta Consistoralia". He participated in the conclave of 1758, which elected Pope Clement XIII. In October of that year he was made titular Archbishop of Corinth. The following year, he resigned the title of Santa Maria in Campitelli to assume that of Santa Maria in Trastevere; however, he retained the Church of Santi Apostoli "in commendam".  He was made Cardinal-Bishop of Frascati on 13 July 1761. He was appointed Dean of the Sacred College of Cardinals on 26 September 1803, then also succeeding to the See of Ostia and Velletri. He lived and worked in Frascati for many years, descending each afternoon in his carriage to Rome, where his position as vice-chancellor entitled him to the Palazzo della Cancelleria.  Henry was the last claimant to the British throne to touch a person to cure them from the King's Evil.  Henry is described as a beatific, abstemious, wealthy, celibate aesthete who lived to a great age, 'inoffensive and respectable' to the end.

French Revolution and later life.

At the time of the French Revolution, he lost his French Royal benefices and sacrificed many other resources to assist Pope Pius VI. This, in addition to the seizure of his Frascati property by the French, caused him to descend into poverty. The British Minister in Venice arranged for Henry to receive an annuity of £4,000 from George III of Great Britain. Although the British government represented this as an act of charity, Henry and the Jacobites considered it to be a first installment on the money which was legally owed to him. (For many years the British government had promised to return the English dowry of his grandmother, Mary of Modena, but never did so.)  The Vatican had recognised James III and VIII as the King of Great Britain and Ireland. After his death in 1766 the Vatican did not recognise Henry's brother Charles, who had converted to Anglicanism in 1750. The Vatican had not, however, overtly recognised the Hanoverian monarchs. However, in November 1792 the Vatican first referred to George III as the King of Great Britain and Ireland instead of the Elector of Hanover. This resulted in a protest by Henry who suggested the insult would result in him not visiting Rome again.  Henry returned to Frascati in 1803. In September of that year he became the Dean of the College of Cardinals and hence Cardinal Bishop of Ostia and Velletri, though he still lived in the episcopal palace at Frascati. He died there on 13 July 1807, aged 82.

Personal relationships.

Historians have drawn upon contemporary perceptions to explore the suggestion that Henry was homosexual. These accounts include the writings of Hester Lynch Thrale (1741–1821), and the diplomat and writer Giuseppe Gorani (1740–1819). Gorani admitted to having gathered evidence insufficient to confirm his suspicions either way, but drew attention to the number of handsome clerics that were to be found in Henry's palace. The historian Andrew Lang alluded to James's comment that his younger son would never marry although many marriages had been planned for him.  The writer Gaetano Moroni provides the lengthiest account of Henry's close attachment with his majordomo Monsignor Giovanni Lercari (1722–1802), whom Henry was said to have "loved beyond measure". This closeness led to serious tensions between the cardinal and his father who in 1752 eventually tried to have Lercari dismissed from service and sent from Rome. Henry reacted by attempting to separate his household finances from those of his father, and refused himself to return to Rome from Bologna without Lercari by his side. A public scandal was only narrowly avoided after the personal intervention of Pope Benedict XIV who acted as peace-maker. It was agreed that Lercari would leave the household and with Henry's influence was later made Archbishop of Genoa.  Things became easier after the death of James in 1766. From 1769 onwards Henry remained close to Monsignor Angelo Cesarini, a nobleman from Perugia, who thanks to Henry's protection, won various honours, was made canon of the cathedral in Frascati, and finally in 1801 became Bishop of Milevi. When Henry died, Cesarini was still at his side, as he had been for 32 years. Cesarini was later buried in the church of Santa Maria in Vallicella.  Caution should nevertheless be given against assuming any active sexual relationships, even if they may have had a romantic element, because equally clear in contemporary sources is York's horror of all impropriety.

Legacy.

Under his will, which he signed as "Henry R", he was succeeded in all his claimed British rights by his nearest blood-relative and friend, Charles Emmanuel IV of Sardinia. Charles neither asserted nor renounced his Jacobite claims, like his successors. Charles Emmanuel, and the following Kings of Sardinia, had other vital interests in their Italian environment to which championing a hopeless cause in Britain would have been detrimental.  Contrary to popular belief, he did not leave the Crown Jewels to the Prince of Wales, afterwards George IV of the United Kingdom. All his property was entrusted to Monsignor Angelo Cesarini, for distribution. Cesarini sent the Prince of Wales several jewels from Henry's private collection. These included a "Lesser George" (thought to have been worn by Charles I at his execution, and now at Windsor Castle) and a St Andrew's Cross (now at Edinburgh Castle), which are insignia of the orders of the Garter and the Thistle, and also a ruby ring. Even so, the act of sending them to the Hanoverian Prince of Wales should not be construed as renunciation of the Jacobite claim.  Henry Benedict, his brother, his father and his mother are buried in the crypt of St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican. There is a monument to the Royal Stuarts on one of the columns in the basilica proper, designed by Antonio Canova. The monument was originally commissioned by Monsignor Angelo Cesarini, executor of Henry Benedict's estate. Among the subscribers, curiously, was George IV, who became an admirer of the Stuart legend.  The monument was restored at the expense of the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother.

Titles, styles, honours and arms.

Titles as cardinal.

During his life, Cardinal Stuart was assigned the following "Diaconia" and "Tituli":  In March 1774 he became Sub-dean, and on 15 September 1803 – Dean of the Sacred College of Cardinals.  He was a cardinal elector in the papal conclaves of 1758, 1769, 1774–75 and 1799–1800.

Arms.

During the pretence of his father and brother, Henry claimed a coat of arms consisting of those of the kingdom, differenced by a "crescent argent" or white crescent.

Henry Benedict Thomas Edward Maria Clement Francis Xavier Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York (6 March 1725 – 13 July 1807) was a Roman Catholic cardinal, as well as the fourth and final Jacobite heir to claim the thrones of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland publicly. Unlike his father, James Francis Edward Stuart, and brother, Charles Edward Stuart, Henry made no effort to seize the throne. After Charles's death in January 1788 the Papacy did not recognise Henry as the lawful ruler of England, Scotland, and Ireland, but referred to him as the Cardinal Duke of York.

Henry Benedict Stuart (* 6. März 1725 in Rom; † 13. Juli 1807 in Frascati), gemeinhin Kardinalherzog von York genannt, war ein Kurienkardinal der römisch-katholischen Kirche und ein katholischer Thronprätendent auf den britischen Königstitel. Sein Großvater war König Jakob II. von England, der aufgrund seines katholischen Glaubens während der Glorious Revolution abgesetzt worden war.


History.

In 1204, Philip II of France had forced King John out of continental Normandy enforcing his 1202 claim that the lands were forfeit. Despite the 1217 Treaty of Lambeth, hostilities continued between the successive Kings of France and England until 1259.  Under the Treaty, Henry acknowledged loss of the Duchy of Normandy. However, Philip had failed in his attempts to occupy the Norman islands in the Channel. The treaty held that "islands (if any) which the King of England should hold", he would retain "as peer of France and Duke of Aquitaine" (these islands came to be collectively called the Channel Islands, consisting of Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, Sark and some smaller islands).  Henry agreed to renounce control of Maine, Anjou and Poitou, which had been lost under the reign of King John, but remained Duke of Aquitaine and was able to keep the lands of Gascony and parts of Aquitaine, but only as a vassal to Louis.  In exchange, Louis withdrew his support for English rebels. He also ceded to Henry the bishoprics and cities of Limoges, Cahors and Périgueux and was to pay an annual rent for possession of Agenais.

Aftermath.

Doubts about interpreting the Treaty began almost as soon as it was signed. The agreement resulted in the fact that the English kings had to pay homage liege to the French monarchs for territories on the continent. The situation did not help the friendly relationship between the two states, as it made two sovereigns of equal powers in their countries in fact unequal. According to professor Malcolm Vale, the Treaty of Paris was one of the indirect causes of the Hundred Years' War.

The Treaty of Paris (also known as the Treaty of Albeville) was a treaty between Louis IX of France and Henry III of England, agreed to on 4 December 1259, ending 100 years of conflicts between the Capetian and Plantagenet dynasties.

Der am 4. Dezember 1259 verkündete Vertrag von Paris zwischen Heinrich III., König von England, und Ludwig IX. von Frankreich sollte die langjährigen territorialen Streitigkeiten beilegen, die seit der Bildung des sogenannten angevinischen Reiches unter König Heinrich Plantagenet von England hundert Jahre zuvor entstanden waren.


Symptoms and signs.

In late spring, chlorotic spots appear on tree leaves. These develop into brown-black lesions, retaining the yellow border. The lesions continue to grow, and by the end of summer form leaf spots that look like tar. The spot can grow up to in diameter. A microscopic sign of the pathogen are the stroma, mats of hyphae found in the lesions. These lesions can cause senescence of leaves but are mostly of cosmetic importance.

Affected species.

"Rhytisma acerinum" can occur in many tree species, with the most commonly affected genus being "Acer". Specific varieties affected most commonly by the disease are Norway maple ("Acer platanoides"), silver maple ("Acer saccharinum") and sycamore maple ("Acer pseudoplatanus").

Disease cycle.

"Rhytisma acerinum" is the teleomorph of tar spot. In the spring, needle-shaped ascospores are released from overwintering apothecia in fallen leaf debris. These spores are disseminated by the wind and have a sticky coat to attach to new healthy leaves. Once on the leaves, the spores germinate and penetrate through the stoma. The subsequent infection causes chlorosis of the leaves in localized yellow spots. As the season continues into summer, apothecia begin to form, giving rise to brown-black leaf lesions that resemble spots of tar. Leaves retain their yellow border from the initial chlorosis. Apothecia survive in the fallen plant debris over winter, releasing spores when the temperature is warm again. The infection of Tar Spot is localized to the chlorotic areas on the leaves and is mostly a cosmetic issue, rather than an economically detrimental disease.  The anamorph of tar spot is "Melasmia acerina". In late summer, conidiophores are formed in the mass of fungal tissue called the stroma. Stroma is located in the black lesions of the infected leaves. Conidiophores form non-infectious conidia that are released both in conditions of wetness and drought. The most favorable environment for the pathogen is when there is an extended period of moisture such as fog or rain, which prevents the leaves from drying out. Young trees growing in shade are therefore more susceptible. Under these conditions, conidiophores excrete a milky substance of conidia. In times of drought, the conidia stick together as one unit and form yellowish tendrils. Because the conidia are not infectious, this stage is not seen as often as the teleomorph, and it is not certain why the spores are produced.

Geographical occurrence.

Tar spot is most commonly found in Europe and North America. It was thought to be a useful pollution indicator because it is not found in areas with high amounts of sulfur dioxide. However, while sulfur dioxide is toxic to the fungus in laboratory studies (Sulfur dioxide prevents stroma from causing subsequent infections), no correlation was found between pollution levels and the disease. Instead, it was found that in urban areas fallen (infected) leaves were more likely to be swept up and removed, thus removing a source of infection for the plants  As mentioned previously, the disease appears in the summer especially in times of wetness, but can also develop through a dryer season.

Disease control.

Tar spot is a localized disease that causes mostly cosmetic symptoms and is therefore not a highly controlled disease. One of the best ways to manage the pathogen is through proper sanitation techniques. Because the fungus overwinters in diseased leaf debris, removing the debris in fall can help reduce the occurrence of the disease. In certain severe cases, fungicides can be implemented to help with control. Copper fungicides sprayed in early spring when leaves are budding and twice more throughout the season help reduce the disease. However, chemical control is not normally used because this disease is mostly cosmetic. Resistant varieties are unknown. Also, because the affected tree species are of low economic value, yield reduction is of little concern to growers. By far the most important practice is to keep a clean yard and remove as much debris as possible.

Significance.

Tar spot has been recognized since 1794, when it was discovered in Europe by Christiaan Hendrik Persoon, a prominent mycologist of that time. Tar spot has little historical importance because of its cosmetic nature. However, equine atypical myopathy has been associated with the ingestion of tar spot infected maple leaves. This disease causes the complete degeneration of muscle fibers and subsequent death in horses.

Rhytisma acerinum is a plant pathogen that commonly affects sycamores and maples in late summer and autumn, causing tar spot. Tar spot does not usually have an adverse effect on the trees' long-term health. "R. acerinum" is an Ascomycete fungus that locally infects the leaves of trees and is a biotrophic parasite. The disease is cosmetic and is therefore usually controlled only with sanitation methods.

Der Ahorn-Runzelschorf ("Rhytisma acerinum") ist eine Pilzart aus der Gruppe der Schlauchpilze. Diese Art löst bei Ahorn-Arten die Teerfleckenkrankheit aus.


Composition.

MMCs are made by dispersing a reinforcing material into a metal matrix. The reinforcement surface can be coated to prevent a chemical reaction with the matrix. For example, carbon fibers are commonly used in aluminium matrix to synthesize composites showing low density and high strength. However, carbon reacts with aluminium to generate a brittle and water-soluble compound AlC on the surface of the fiber. To prevent this reaction, the carbon fibers are coated with nickel or titanium boride.

Matrix.

The matrix is the monolithic material into which the reinforcement is embedded, and is completely continuous. This means that there is a path through the matrix to any point in the material, unlike two materials sandwiched together. In structural applications, the matrix is usually a lighter metal such as aluminum, magnesium, or titanium, and provides a compliant support for the reinforcement. In high-temperature applications, cobalt and cobalt–nickel alloy matrices are common.

Reinforcement.

The reinforcement material is embedded into a matrix. The reinforcement does not always serve a purely structural task (reinforcing the compound), but is also used to change physical properties such as wear resistance, friction coefficient, or thermal conductivity. The reinforcement can be either continuous or discontinuous. Discontinuous MMCs can be isotropic and can be worked with standard metalworking techniques, such as extrusion, forging, or rolling. In addition, they may be machined using conventional techniques, but commonly would need the use of polycrystalline diamond tooling (PCD).  Continuous reinforcement uses monofilament wires or fibers such as carbon fiber or silicon carbide. Because the fibers are embedded into the matrix in a certain direction, the result is an anisotropic structure in which the alignment of the material affects its strength. One of the first MMCs used boron filament as reinforcement. Discontinuous reinforcement uses "whiskers", short fibers, or particles. The most common reinforcing materials in this category are alumina and silicon carbide.

Manufacturing and forming methods.

MMC manufacturing can be broken into three types—solid, liquid, and vapor.

Residual stress.

MMCs are fabricated at elevated temperatures, which is an essential condition for diffusion bonding of the fiber/matrix interface. Later on, when they are cooled down to the ambient temperature, residual stresses (RS) are generated in the composite due to the mismatch between the coefficients of the metal matrix and fiber. The manufacturing RS significantly influence the mechanical behavior of the MMCs in all loading conditions. In some cases, thermal RS are high enough to initiate plastic deformation within the matrix during the manufacturing process.

Applications.

MMCs are nearly always more expensive than the more conventional materials they are replacing. As a result, they are found where improved properties and performance can justify the added cost. Today these applications are found most often in aircraft components, space systems and high-end or "boutique" sports equipment. The scope of applications will certainly increase as manufacturing costs are reduced.  In comparison with conventional polymer matrix composites, MMCs are resistant to fire, can operate in wider range of temperatures, do not absorb moisture, have better electrical and thermal conductivity, are resistant to radiation damage, and do not display outgassing. On the other hand, MMCs tend to be more expensive, the fiber-reinforced materials may be difficult to fabricate, and the available experience in use is limited.

A metal matrix composite (MMC) is composite material with at least two constituent parts, one being a metal necessarily, the other material may be a different metal or another material, such as a ceramic or organic compound. When at least three materials are present, it is called a hybrid composite. An MMC is complementary to a cermet.

Metallmatrix-Verbundwerkstoffe (engl. "metal matrix composite", MMC) bestehen aus einer zusammenhängenden Metallmatrix mit einer diskontinuierlichen keramischen oder organischen Verstärkung in ihrem Inneren, häufig in Form von Fasern oder Whiskern. Auch so genannte Preform-MMCs, bei denen beide Phasen kontinuierlich sind, werden häufig als MMCs bezeichnet. Eine der ersten Anwendungen war der Einsatz im Space Shuttle-Programm ca. 1975. Dabei handelte es sich um einen sehr leichten (ca. 1,8–3,5 g/cm3), schwer zerspanbaren Werkstoff mit guter Wärmeleitfähigkeit und geringer Wärmeausdehnung. Auch andere Eigenschaften lassen sich bei der Herstellung den Anforderungen entsprechend gezielt einstellen.


Signs and symptoms.

Bardet–Biedl syndrome is a pleiotropic disorder with variable expressivity and a wide range of clinical variability observed both within and between families. The main clinical features are rod–cone dystrophy, with childhood-onset visual loss preceded by night blindness; postaxial polydactyly; truncal obesity that manifests during infancy and remains problematic throughout adulthood; specific learning difficulties in some but not all individuals; male hypogenitalism and complex female genitourinary malformations; and renal dysfunction, a major cause of morbidity and mortality.  There is a wide range of secondary features that are sometimes associated with BBS including

Relation to other rare genetic disorders.

Recent findings in genetic research have suggested that a large number of genetic disorders, both genetic syndromes and genetic diseases, that were not previously identified in the medical literature as related, may be, in fact, highly related in the genetypical root cause of the widely varying, phenotypically observed disorders. BBS is one such syndrome that has now been identified to be caused by defects in the cellular ciliary structure. Thus, BBS is a ciliopathy. Other known ciliopathies include primary ciliary dyskinesia, polycystic kidney and liver disease, nephronophthisis, Alström syndrome, Meckel–Gruber syndrome and some forms of retinal degeneration.

Pathophysiology.

The detailed biochemical mechanism that leads to BBS is still unclear.  The gene products encoded by these "BBS" genes, called BBS proteins, are located in the basal body and cilia of the cell.  Using the round worm "C. elegans" as a model system, biologists found that BBS proteins are involved in a process called Intraflagellar transport (IFT), a bi-directional transportation activity within the cilia along the long axis of the ciliary shaft that is essential for ciliogenesis and the maintenance of cilia. Recent biochemical analysis of human BBS proteins revealed that BBS proteins are assembled into a multiple protein complex, called "BBSome". BBSome is proposed to be responsible for transporting intracellular vesicles to the base of the cilia and to play an important role in the ciliary function.  Since abnormalities of cilia are known to be related to a wide range of disease symptoms including those commonly seen in BBS patients, it is now widely accepted that mutated BBS genes affect normal cilia function, which, in turn, causes BBS.  A theory that photoreceptor cells are nourished by the IFT of retinal cilia now offers a potential explanation for the retinal dystrophy common in BBS patients after their early years of life.  Genes involved include:

Diagnosis.

The diagnosis of BBS is established by clinical findings and family history. Molecular genetic testing can be used to confirm the diagnosis. Multigene panels offer the most effective approach in achieving molecular confirmation of BBS.

Eponym.

The syndrome is named after Georges Bardet and Arthur Biedl. The first known case was reported by Laurence and Moon in 1866 at the Ophthalmic Hospital in South London. Laurence–Moon–Biedl–Bardet syndrome is no longer considered as valid terms in that patients of Laurence and Moon had paraplegia but no polydactyly or obesity, which are the key elements of the Bardet–Biedl syndrome. Laurence–Moon syndrome is usually considered a separate entity. However, some recent research suggests that the two conditions may not be distinct. , 14 (or 15) different BBS genes had been identified.

Bardet–Biedl syndrome (BBS) is a ciliopathic human genetic disorder that produces many effects and affects many body systems. It is characterized principally by obesity, retinitis pigmentosa, polydactyly, hypogonadism, and kidney failure in some cases. Historically, slower mental processing has also been considered a principal symptom but is now not regarded as such.

Das Laurence-Moon-Biedl-Bardet-Syndrom ("LMBBS"), auch Laurence-Moon-Biedl-Syndrom, ist eine angeborene und unheilbare Entwicklungsstörung auf der Grundlage einer autosomal-rezessiv vererbbaren Genmutation an zwölf möglichen Genen. Es wurden früher zwei Syndromtypen unterschieden: Laurence-Moon-Syndrom und Biedl-Bardet-Syndrom. International wird inzwischen in die Typen 1 bis 12 eingeteilt, je nach dem welches Gen betroffen ist. Das mit hormonellen, insbesondere Gonadotropine betreffende, Störungen zusammenhängende Syndrom gehört zur Gruppe der Ziliopathien.


History and architecture.

The search for a design for the Law Courts was by way of a competition, a then-common approach to selecting a design and an architect. The competition ran from 1866 to 1867 and the twelve architects competing for the contract each submitted designs for the site. In 1868 it was finally decided that George Edmund Street was the winner. Building was started in 1873 by Messrs Bull & Sons of Southampton. Its masons led a serious strike at an early stage which threatened to extend to the other trades and caused a temporary stoppage of the works. In consequence, foreign workmen were brought in – mostly Germans. This aroused bitter hostility on the part of the men on strike, and the newcomers had to be housed and fed within the building. However, these disputes were eventually settled and the building took eight years to complete; it was officially opened by Queen Victoria on 4 December 1882. Street died before the building was opened, overcome by the work. Much of the preparatory legal work was completed by Edwin Wilkins Field including promotion of the Courts of Justice Building Act of 1865 and the Courts of Justice Concentration (Site) Act of 1865. A statue of Field stands in the building. Parliament paid £1,453,000 for the site upon which 450 houses had to be demolished. The building was paid for by cash accumulated in court from the estates of the intestate to the sum of £700,000. Oak work and fittings in the court cost a further £70,000 and with decoration and furnishing the total cost for the building came to under £1 million.  The dimensions of the building (in round figures) are: from east to west; from north to south; from the Strand level to the tip of the fleche.  Entering through the main gates on the Strand, one passes under two elaborately carved porches fitted with iron gates. The carving over the outer porch consists of heads of the most eminent judges and lawyers. Over the highest point of the upper arch is a figure of Jesus; to the left and right at a lower level are figures of Solomon and Alfred the Great; that of Moses is at the northern front of the building. Also at the northern front, over the Judges entrance are a stone cat and dog representing fighting litigants in court.  On either side are gateways leading to different courts and to jury and witness rooms from which separate staircases are provided for them to reach their boxes in court. During the 1960s, jury rooms in the basement area were converted to courtrooms. At either end of the hall are handsome marble galleries from which the entire Main Hall can be viewed.  The walls and ceilings (of the older, original courts) are panelled in oak which in many cases is elaborately carved. In Court 4, the Lord Chief Justice's court, is an elaborately carved wooden royal coat of arms, salvaged from the fire that destroyed the original Palace of Westminster. Each court has an interior unique to itself. The grand hall is magnificent in architectural style and huge in size.  In addition to the waiting rooms are arbitration chambers, consultation chambers and robing rooms for members of the bar and solicitor advocates.

Extensions to the building.

The first extension was the West Green building, for which plans were drawn up in 1910; the space was for extra divorce courts. They were the first rooms at the Courts to have modern air conditioning and tape recording in their original design. The architect was Sir Henry Tanner.  The next new building was the Queen's Building, opened in 1968, providing a further 12 courts. This building used to contain cells in its basement. It was intended that these courts could be used for criminal matters; however they are now primarily used for family proceedings.  The 11-storey Thomas More Building was built to house the Bankruptcy and Companies Courts with associated offices. When the courts of the Chancery Division moved to the new Rolls Building, it was taken by the Central London County Court. A semi-panorama is possible from the top floor to St Paul's Cathedral and the Central Criminal Court (the Old Bailey) in the City of London.  Further courts are at the Rolls Building, a short distance away just off of Fetter Lane  The Thomas More Courts are 12 courts for the Chancery Division, which opened in January 1990. The Thomas More Building has become the County Court at Central London, in the lower tier of hierarchy, not part of the High Court or Court of Appeal. Vacant land for horizontal extensions is minimal and proximity to natural light from various windows, coupled with a long-standing consensus to remain relatively low-rise among the older Courts, restricts vertical extension. Full refurbishment of the east block took place during 1994–95, which provided 14 extra courts for the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal and two extra large courts which are unassigned and will be used for cases having multiple parties or an unusually large number of documents and books.  Anyone is allowed to watch, free of charge, most of the trials and hearings that are taking place; the main exception is family cases such as proceedings concerning children which are held in private.

Courtrooms.

The original conditions for the competition for the design of the law courts required separate entry and circulation systems for the public, the lawyers and the judges. The great circular towers on either side of the front entrance (now closed) gave access to the public galleries at the back of the court rooms. The main front entrance gave access to the lawyers, who were expected to circulate and confer in the great hall as they had in Westminster Hall (although they did not, in fact, tend to do so) when not in court. The main entrances for judges were two doors in Carey Street (to the north of the site) and two doors from entrance courts on the west and east (now known as West Green and the Quadrangle respectively). Since the site slopes dramatically down (towards the river Thames) from north to south, the court rooms are at ground level when approached from the north entrances in Carey Street and at first floor level when approached from the main entrance in the south on to the Strand. Originally, access from the main central hall to this level was by circular staircases well back from the hall, but this was inconvenient and an early modification was the construction of steep flights of stairs to first floor (court) level directly from the concourse of the main hall on its west and east sides, and a new staircase on the north west side.  The decades during which designs for the law courts were being commissioned, judged, modified and put into construction were times of great change in the organisation of the English civil courts which were the principal courts to be housed there. Thus, originally, it was expected that equity court rooms would be different in appearance from chancery court rooms, but after construction began and before it was completed these courts were fused. Street took the opportunity to make every individual court room different in its internal decoration, instead of grouped into styles common to several. This remains the case; with every court having its own design of panelling, window lead designs, and carving, both in wood and stone.  Since the opening of the law courts, there has been further change from time to time in the organisation and location of courts from the various divisions of the High Court within and (in the later 20th and early 21st centuries, notably with the construction of the Rolls Building) outside the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand. Hence, the courtrooms have housed different types of hearing during their history. One which has remained relatively stable is Court 4, which remains particularly associated with the court of the Lord Chief Justice and is the main court used for ceremonial occasions such as the admission of new silks (Queen's Counsel) and the swearing in of newly appointed High Court judges.  A snapshot of the numbering and allocation of the court rooms is contained in Sir Robert Megarry's article in "Real Property, Probate and Trust Journal", Vol. 6, No. 2 (Summer 1971), pp. 274-280 entitled "A Visiting Lawyer's London: A Note". This records that in 1970 the courts were renumbered from 1-50, the numbering starting at the north centre point of the main building (the nearest to the Carey Street entrances in the north and the furthest from the main entrance in the Stand) and working round clockwise. This numbering has been retained.  Megarry notes that Courts 1 to 19 are the original courts which Queen Victoria opened in 1882, with one added later by conversion. They lie on the four sides of a rectangle round the great Main Hall of the Law Courts, at first floor level.  He notes that Courts 20 to 25 were opened in 1963. They were formed in spaces previously occupied by jury rooms, the number of jury trials having dropped considerably after the First World War (jury trials now almost never take place in civil actions). They are of a much plainer appearance that the original Street courtrooms and, because of their location, have no natural light, whereas the Street courtrooms are lit both from the top and the sides by skylights and stone windows.  Megarry notes that Courts 33 to 38 are in the Western Extension, now known as West Green Building, and were opened in 1913. They are therefore the oldest courts after the original Courts 1-19.  He records that Courts 39 to 50 are in the new Queen's Building directly north of the West Green Building and are on 3 floors of that building. They were opened by Queen Elizabeth II in 1968.  That leaves 7 courts which Megarry notes as then (1970) being outside the main blocks of the courts around the main hall, and the courts in the West Green Building and the Queen's Building. They were Courts 26 and 27 (described by Megarry as "in "temporary" wooden structures in the East Quadrangle"), Courts 28-30 (on upper floors of the main block), and Courts 31 and 32 (on upper floors of the West Green Building). However, since 1970, new courts have been constructed in the East Block adjoining Bell Yard (a north-south street marking the eastern boundary of the law courts' precincts) from areas originally used only for administrative offices.  At the time of Megarry's article, Courts 1-6 were used by the Court of Appeal (which is now housed in the new courts in the East Block, except when hearing criminal appeals), Courts 7-14 and 20-23 and 26 were used by the Queen's Bench Division, and Courts 15-19 and 27 were used by the Chancery Division, including Court 15 which is designated as the Lord Chancellor's Court and Court 16 which is designated as the Vice Chancellor's Court. However, the Chancery Division later moved to the Thomas More Building and is now housed in the Rolls Building; the Lord Chancellor no longer sits as a judge and the Vice Chancellor (redesignated as the Chancellor) is now based with the other Chancery judges in the Rolls Building. Megarry noted that the other courts used by Chancery judges in 1970 were Courts 24 and 25 (the former jury areas), 27 (an East Quandrangle temporary structure), and 39 and 40 (in the Queen's Building).  Megarry noted that the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal usually used Court 4 (the Lord Chief Justice's Court) and one other court. The Civil Division of the Court of Appeal used Court 3 (the Master of the Rolls' Court) and three other courts.  Megarry records that Courts 28-30 were in 1970 used by three Official Referees. Their work is now done by the Technology and Construction Court which sits in the Rolls Building.  Courts 33-38 in the West Green building and Courts 39-50 in the Queen's Building (except the Chancery courts then accustomed to sitting in Courts 39 and 40) were recorded by Megarry as in use by the Probate Divorce and Admiralty Division and are still used by its successor, the Family Division.  The courts around the main hall of the Royal Courts of Justice are now used mostly by judges in the Queen's Bench Division, hearing Queen's Bench and Administrative Court cases, and (in and around Court 4) by the Court of Appeal Criminal Division and the Divisional Court. The courts in the Queen's Building and West Green Building are mostly used by judges in the Family Division. The courts in the East Block are used by the Court of Appeal civil division.  A special court now designated as Court 37 hears urgent, unlisted cases (the Interim Applications Court) before a High Court Judge, usually of the Queen's Bench Division. These cases were formerly heard in chambers (rooms occupied by judges and masters, including for hearing, but not set up for witnesses or jurors) around the Bear Garden (at first floor level at the south east end of the great hall) but were then moved to a court in the Queen's Building so that the judge would be further away from the litigants, often in person, for security reasons. Court 37 now takes these cases in a location in a basement of the Queen's Building which is close to the desk from which urgent applications have to be issued.

Other areas.

The Bear Garden, at first floor level to the south west of the main hall, was designed as a waiting area for parties appearing in the judges' and masters' chambers adjacent to it and it is still used for that purpose.  Next to the Bear Garden is the Painted Chamber, with original decorations and a large fireplace designed by Street. This was originally intended as a Bar Common Room but is now an area for waiting and conferences used as an overspill from the Bear Garden which connects to it.  On the north side of the building, above the main entrance from Carey Street, is a vaulted library with murals of the arms of the Inns of Court (originally the Bar library) connected by a gallery to another library (originally the Probate library). Before photocopying, members of the Bar and other lawyers needed these libraries for books required for hearings but in the late 1980s most barristers' chambers relied on their own libraries, and photocopying, and the Bar ended its funding for these libraries in 1987. They were then adopted by the judges, who still maintain and use them as reference libraries.

The Royal Courts of Justice, commonly called the Law Courts, is a court building in London which houses the High Court and Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The High Court also sits on circuit and in other major cities. Designed by George Edmund Street, who died before it was completed, it is a large grey stone edifice in the Victorian Gothic style built in the 1870s and opened by Queen Victoria in 1882. It is one of the largest courts in Europe. It is located on Strand within the City of Westminster, near the border with the City of London (Temple Bar). It is surrounded by the four Inns of Court, St Clement Danes church, The Australian High Commission, King's College London and the London School of Economics. The nearest London Underground stations are Chancery Lane and Temple.

Die Royal Courts of Justice (RCJ) (Königliche Gerichtshöfe), allgemein Law Courts (Rechtshöfe) genannt, sind ein Gebäude in London, das den Court of Appeal (Berufungsgericht) und den High Court of Justice (Zivilgericht) von England und Wales beherbergt.


History.

The heat index was developed in 1979 by Robert G. Steadman. Like the wind chill index, the heat index contains assumptions about the human body mass and height, clothing, amount of physical activity, individual heat tolerance, sunlight and ultraviolet radiation exposure, and the wind speed. Significant deviations from these will result in heat index values which do not accurately reflect the perceived temperature.  In Canada, the similar humidex (a Canadian innovation introduced in 1965) is used in place of the heat index. While both the humidex and the heat index are calculated using dew point, the humidex uses a dew point of as a base, whereas the heat index uses a dew point base of. Further, the heat index uses heat balance equations which account for many variables other than vapor pressure, which is used exclusively in the humidex calculation. A joint committee formed by the United States and Canada to resolve differences has since been disbanded.

Definition.

The heat index of a given combination of (dry-bulb) temperature and humidity is defined as the dry-bulb temperature which would feel the same if the water vapor pressure were 1.6 kPa. Quoting Steadman, "Thus, for instance, an apparent temperature of 24°C refers to the same level of sultriness, and the same clothing requirements, as a dry-bulb temperature of 24°C with a vapor pressure of 1.6 kPa."  This vapor pressure corresponds for example to an air temperature of and relative humidity of 40% in the sea-level psychrometric chart, and in Steadman's table at 40% RH the apparent temperature is equal to the true temperature between and. At standard atmospheric pressure (101.325 kPa), this baseline also corresponds to a dew point of and a mixing ratio of 0.01 (10 g of water vapor per kilogram of dry air).  A given value of relative humidity causes larger increases in the heat index at higher temperatures. For example, at approximately, the heat index will agree with the actual temperature if the relative humidity is 45%, but at, any relative-humidity reading above 18% will make the heat index higher than.  It has been suggested that the equation described is valid only if the temperature is or more. The relative humidity threshold, below which a heat index calculation will return a number equal to or lower than the air temperature (a lower heat index is generally considered invalid), varies with temperature and is not linear. The threshold is commonly set at an arbitrary 40%.  The heat index and its counterpart the humidex both take into account only two variables, shade temperature and atmospheric moisture (humidity), thus providing only a limited estimate of thermal comfort. Additional factors such as wind, sunshine and individual clothing choices also affect perceived temperature; these factors are parameterized as constants in the heat index formula. Wind, for example, is assumed to be. Wind passing over wet or sweaty skin causes evaporation and a wind chill effect that the heat index does not measure. The other major factor is sunshine; standing in direct sunlight can add up to to the apparent heat compared to shade. There have been attempts to create a universal apparent temperature, such as the wet-bulb globe temperature, "relative outdoor temperature", "feels like", or the proprietary "RealFeel".

Meteorological considerations.

Outdoors in open conditions, as the relative humidity increases, first haze and ultimately a thicker cloud cover develops, reducing the amount of direct sunlight reaching the surface. Thus, there is an inverse relationship between maximum potential temperature and maximum potential relative humidity. Because of this factor, it was once believed that the highest heat index reading actually attainable anywhere on Earth was approximately. However, in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia on July 8, 2003, the dew point was while the temperature was, resulting in a heat index of.  The human body requires evaporative cooling to prevent overheating. Wet-bulb temperature, and Wet Bulb Globe Temperature are used to determine the ability of a body to eliminate excess heat. A sustained wet-bulb temperature of about can be fatal to healthy people; at this temperature our bodies switch from shedding heat to the environment, to gaining heat from it. Thus a wet bulb temperature of is the threshold beyond which the body is no longer able to adequately cool itself.

Table of values.

The table below is from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The columns begin at, but there is also a heat index effect at and similar temperatures when there is high humidity. For example, if the air temperature is and the relative humidity is 65%, the heat index is

Effects of the heat index (shade values).

Exposure to full sunshine can increase heat index values by up to 8 °C (14 °F).

Formula.

There are many formulas devised to approximate the original tables by Steadman. Anderson et al. (2013), NWS (2011), Jonson and Long (2004), and Schoen (2005) have lesser residuals in this order. The former two are a set of polynomials, but the third one is by a single formula with exponential functions.  The formula below approximates the heat index in degrees Fahrenheit, to within ±. It is the result of a multivariate fit (temperature equal to or greater than and relative humidity equal to or greater than 40%) to a model of the human body. This equation reproduces the above NOAA National Weather Service table (except the values at & 45%/70% relative humidity vary unrounded by less than ±1, respectively).  where  The following coefficients can be used to determine the heat index when the temperature is given in degrees Celsius, where  An alternative set of constants for this equation that is within ± of the NWS master table for all humidities from 0 to 80% and all temperatures between and all heat indices below is:  A further alternate is this:  where  For example, using this last formula, with temperature and relative humidity (RH) of 85%, the result would be:.

The heat index (HI) is an index that combines air temperature and relative humidity, in shaded areas, to posit a human-perceived equivalent temperature, as how hot it would feel if the humidity were some other value in the shade. The result is also known as the "felt air temperature", "apparent temperature", "real feel" or "feels like". For example, when the temperature is with 70% relative humidity, the heat index is.

Der Hitzeindex ("HI") ist eine in Einheiten der Temperatur angegebene Größe zur Beschreibung der gefühlten Temperatur auf Basis der gemessenen Lufttemperatur sowie vor allem der relativen Luftfeuchtigkeit. Sie geht auf die Arbeiten des US-Amerikaners Robert G. Steadman aus dem Jahre 1979 zurück. Ähnlich, jedoch einfacher, wird der in Kanada entwickelte und häufiger anzutreffende Humidex (humidity index) berechnet.