The sun was striking in at the great windows of the court, through the glittering drops of rain upon the glass, and it made a broad shaft of light between the two-and-thirty and the Judge, linking both together, and perhaps reminding some among the audience how both were passing on, with absolute equality, to the greater Judgment that knoweth all things, and cannot err. Rising for a moment, a distinct speck of face in this way of light, the prisoner said, "My Lord, I have received my sentence of Death from the Almighty, but I bow to yours," and sat down again. There was some hushing, and the Judge went on with what he had to say to the rest. Then they were all formally doomed, and some of them were supported out, and some of them sauntered out with a haggard look of bravery, and a few nodded to the gallery, and two or three shook hands, and others went out chewing the fragments of herb they had taken from the sweet herbs lying about. He went last of all, because of having to be helped from his chair, and to go very slowly; and he held my hand while all the others were removed, and while the audience got up (putting their dresses right, as they might at church or elsewhere), and pointed down at this criminal or at that, and most of all at him and me.
GINGUENÉ, PIERRE LOUIS (1748-1815), French author, was born on the 27th of April 1748 at Rennes, in Brittany. He was educated at a Jesuit college in his native town, and came to Paris in 1772. He wrote criticisms for the _Mercure de France_, and composed a comic opera, _Pomponin_ (1777). _The Satire des satires_ (1778) and the _Confession de Zulmé_ (1779) followed. _The Confession_ was claimed by six or seven different authors, and though the value of the piece is not very great, it obtained great success. His defence of Piccini against the partisans of Gluck made him still more widely known. He hailed the first symptoms of the Revolution, joined Giuseppe Cerutti, the author of the _Mémoire pour le peuple français_ (1788), and others in producing the _Feuille villageoise_, a weekly paper addressed to the villages of France. He also celebrated in an indifferent ode the opening of the states-general. In his _Lettres sur les confessions de J.-J. Rousseau_ (1791) he defended the life and principles of his author. He was imprisoned during the Terror, and only escaped with life by the downfall of Robespierre. Some time after his release he assisted, as director-general of the "commission exécutive de l'instruction publique," in reorganizing the system of public instruction, and he was an original member of the Institute of France. In 1797 the directory appointed him minister plenipotentiary to the king of Sardinia. After fulfilling his duties for seven months, very little to the satisfaction of his employers, Ginguené retired for a time to his country house of St Prix, in the valley of Montmorency. He was appointed a member of the tribunate, but Napoleon, finding that he was not sufficiently tractable, had him expelled at the first "purge," and Ginguené returned to his literary pursuits. He was one of the commission charged to continue the _Histoire littéraire de la France_, and he contributed to the volumes of this series which appeared in 1814, 1817 and 1820. Ginguené's most important work is the _Histoire littéraire d'Italie_ (14 vols., 1811-1835). He was putting the finishing touches to the eighth and ninth volumes when he died on the 11th of November 1815. The last five volumes were written by Francesco Salfi and revised by Pierre Daunou. Entry: GINGUENÉ
The acceptance by Bismarck of the principle of Protection and his alliance with the Catholic Centre were followed by the disruption of the National Liberal party and a complete change in the parliamentary situation. Already the Liberal ministers, Falk and Hobrecht, had resigned, as well as Max von Forckenbeck the president, and Stauffenberg the vice-president of the Reichstag; in their place there were chosen a Conservative, and the Catholic Baron von Franckenstein. The whole party had voted against the Franckenstein Clause, but a few days later fifteen of the right wing left the party and transferred their support to the government. For another year the remainder kept together, but there was no longer any real harmony or co-operation; in 1880 nineteen, including most of the ablest leaders, Lasker, Forckenbeck, Bamberger and Bunsen, left the party altogether. The avowed cause of difference was commercial policy; they were the Free Traders, but they also justly foresaw that the reaction would extend to other matters. They took the name of the _Liberale Vereinigung_, but were generally known as the _Sezessionisten_; they hoped to become the nucleus of a united Liberal party in which all sections should join together on the principles of Free Trade and constitutional development. At the elections of 1881 they secured forty-seven seats, but they were not strong enough to maintain themselves, and with great reluctance in 1884 formed a coalition with the Progressives (_Freisinnigen_), who had gained greatly in strength owing to the breach among the government parties. They did so reluctantly, because they would thereby condemn themselves to assume that attitude of purely negative criticism which, during the great days of their prosperity, they had looked down upon with contempt, and were putting themselves under the leadership of Eugen Richter, whom they had long opposed. The new party, the _Deutschfreisinnige_, had no success; at the election of 1884 they secured only sixty-seven seats, a loss of thirty-nine; they were subjected to all inconveniences which belonged to opposition; socially, they were boycotted by all who were connected with the court or government; they were cut off from all hope of public activity, and were subjected to constant accusations for _Bismarck Beleidigung_. Their only hope was in the time when the crown prince, who had shown great sympathy with them, should succeed. They were popularly known as the crown prince's party. Lasker soon died; others, such as Forckenbeck and Bunsen, retired from public life, unable to maintain their position at a time when the struggle of class interests had superseded the old conflicts of principle. At the election of 1887 they lost more than half their seats, and in 1893 the party again broke up. Entry: A
If there are no redundant members in the frame there will be only two members abutting at the point of support, for these two members will be sufficient to balance the reaction, whatever its direction may be; we can therefore draw two triangles, each having as one side the reaction YX, and having the two other sides parallel to these two members; each of these triangles will represent a polygon of forces in equilibrium at the point of support. Of these two triangles, shown in fig. 67 c, select that in which the letters X and Y are so placed that (naming the apex of the triangle E) the lines XE and YE are the lines parallel to the two members of the same name in the frame (fig. 66). Then the triangle YXE is the reciprocal figure of the three lines YX, XE, EY in the frame, and represents the three forces in equilibrium at the point YXE of the frame. The direction of YX, being a thrust upwards, shows the direction in which we must go round the triangle YXE to find the direction of the two other forces; doing this we find that the force XE must act down towards the point YXE, and the force EY away from the same point. Putting arrows on the frame diagram to indicate the direction of the forces, we see that the member EY must pull and therefore act as a tie, and that the member XE must push and act as a strut. Passing to the point XEFA we find two known forces, the load XA acting downwards, and a push from the strut XE, which, being in compression, must push at both ends, as indicated by the arrow, fig. 66. The directions and magnitudes of these two forces are already drawn (fig. 67 a) in a fitting position to represent part of the polygon of forces at XEFA; beginning with the upward thrust EX, continuing down XA, and drawing AF parallel to AF in the frame we complete the polygon by drawing EF parallel to EF in the frame. The point F is determined by the intersection of the two lines, one beginning at A, and the other at E. We then have the polygon of forces EXAF, the reciprocal figure of the lines meeting at that point in the frame, and representing the forces at the point EXAF; the direction of the forces on EH and XA being known determines the direction of the forces due to the elastic reaction of the members AF and EF, showing AF to push as a strut, while EF is a tie. We have been guided in the selection of the particular quadrilateral adopted by the rule of arranging the order of the sides so that the same letters indicate corresponding sides in the diagram of the frame and its reciprocal. Continuing the construction of the diagram in the same way, we arrive at fig. 67 d as the complete reciprocal figure of the frame and forces upon it, and we see that each line in the reciprocal figure measures the stress on the corresponding member in the frame, and that the polygon of forces acting at any point, as IJKY, in the frame is represented by a polygon of the same name in the reciprocal figure. The direction of the force in each member is easily ascertained by proceeding in the manner above described. A single known force in a polygon determines the direction of all the others, as these must all correspond with arrows pointing the same way round the polygon. Let the arrows be placed on the frame round each joint, and so as to indicate the direction of each force on that joint; then when two arrows point to one another on the same piece, that piece is a tie; when they point from one another the piece is a strut. It is hardly necessary to say that the forces exerted by the two ends of any one member must be equal and opposite. This method is universally applicable where there are no redundant members. The reciprocal figure for any loaded frame is a complete formula for the stress on every member of a frame of that particular class with loads on given joints. Entry: 34
Marine algae are usually mounted on tough smooth white cartridge paper in the following manner. Growing specimens of good colour and in fruit are if possible selected, and cleansed as much as practicable from adhering foreign particles, either in the sea or a rocky pool. Some species rapidly change colour, and cause the decay of any others with which they come in contact. This is especially the case with the _Ectocarpi_, _Desmarestiae_, and a few others, which should therefore be brought home in a separate vessel. In mounting, the specimen is floated out in a flat white dish containing sea-water, so that foreign matter may be detected, and a piece of paper of suitable size is placed under it, supported either by the fingers of the left hand or by a palette. It is then pruned, in order clearly to show the mode of branching, and is spread out as naturally as possible with the right hand. For this purpose a bone knitting-needle answers well for the coarse species, and a camel's-hair pencil for the more delicate ones. The paper with the specimen is then carefully removed from the water by sliding it over the edge of the dish so as to drain it as much as possible. If during this process part of the fronds run together, the beauty of the specimen may be restored by dipping the edge into water, so as to float out the part and allow it to subside naturally on the paper. The paper, with the specimen upwards, is then laid on bibulous paper for a few minutes to absorb as much as possible of the superfluous moisture. When freed from excess of water it is laid on a sheet of thick white blotting-paper, and a piece of smooth washed calico is placed upon it (unwashed calico, on account of its "facing," adheres to the sea-weed). Another sheet of blotting-paper is then laid over it; and, a number of similar specimens being formed into a pile, the whole is submitted to pressure, the paper being changed every hour or two at first. The pressure is increased, and the papers are changed less frequently as the specimens become dry, which usually takes place in thirty-six hours. Some species, especially those of a thick or leathery texture, contract so much in drying that without strong pressure the edges of the paper become puckered. Other species of a gelatinous nature, like _Nemalion_ and _Dudresnaya_, may be allowed to dry on the paper, and need not be submitted to pressure until they no longer present a gelatinous appearance. Large coarse algae, such, for instance, as the _Fucaceae_ and _Laminariae_, do not readily adhere to paper, and require soaking for some time in fresh water before being pressed. The less robust species, such as _Sphacelaria scoparia_, which do not adhere well to paper, may be made to do so by brushing them over either with milk carefully skimmed, or with a liquid formed by placing isinglass (¼ oz.) and water (1½ oz.) in a wide-mouthed bottle, and the bottle in a small glue-pot or saucepan containing cold water, heating until solution is effected, and then adding 1 oz. of rectified spirits of wine; the whole is next stirred together, and when cold is kept in a stoppered bottle. For use, the mixture is warmed to render it fluid, and applied by means of a camel's hair brush to the under side of the specimen, which is then laid neatly on paper. For the more delicate species, such as the _Callithamnia_ and _Ectocarpi_, it is an excellent plan to place a small fruiting fragment, carefully floated out in water, on a slip of mica of the size of an ordinary microscopical slide, and allow it to dry. The plant can then be at any time examined under the microscope without injuring the mounted specimen. Many of the fresh-water algae which form a mere crust, such as _Palmella cruenta_, may be placed in a vessel of water, where after a time they float like a scum, the earthy matter settling down to the bottom, and may then be mounted by slipping a piece of mica under them and allowing it to dry. _Oscillatoriae_ may be mounted by laying a portion on a silver coin placed on a piece of paper in a plate, and pouring in water until the edge of the coin is just covered. The alga by its own peculiar movement will soon form a radiating circle, perfectly free from dirt, around the coin, which may then be removed. There is considerable difficulty in removing mounted specimens of algae from paper, and therefore a small portion preserved on mica should accompany each specimen, enclosed for safety in a small envelope fastened at one corner of the sheet of paper. Filamentous diatoms may be mounted like ordinary sea-weeds, and, as well as all parasitic algae, should whenever possible be allowed to remain attached to a portion of the alga on which they grow, some species being almost always found parasitical on particular plants. Ordinary diatoms and desmids may be mounted on mica, as above described, by putting a portion in a vessel of water and exposing it to sunlight, when they rise to the surface, and may be thus removed comparatively free from dirt or impurity. Owing to their want of adhesiveness, they are, however, usually mounted on glass as microscopic slides, either in glycerin jelly, Canada balsam or some other suitable medium. Entry: HERBARIUM
LOUIS VI. (1081-1137), king of France, surnamed "the Fat," was the son of Philip I. of France and Bertha of Holland. He was also surnamed the "Wide-awake" and "the Bruiser," and lost none of his energy when he earned the nickname by which he is known in history. In 1098 Louis was made a knight, and about the same time was associated with his father in the government, which the growing infirmities of Philip left more and more to his son, in spite of the opposition of Bertrada, the queen, whose criminal union with Philip had brought the anathema of the church. From 1100 to 1108 Louis by his victorious wars on the English and brigands had secured the army on his side, while the court supported Bertrada. Unable to make headway against him in war she attempted to poison him, and contemporary chroniclers attributed to this poison the pallor of his face, which seems to have been in remarkable contrast to his stalwart, and later his corpulent figure. Louis' reign is one of the most important in the history of France. He is little less than the second founder of the Capetian dynasty. When the feeble and incompetent Philip I. died (29th of July 1108) Louis was faced by feudal barons as powerful as himself, and ready to rise against him. He was forced to have himself hurriedly crowned at Orleans, supported by a handful of vassals and some ecclesiastics. As king he continued the policy he had followed during the previous eight years, of securing the roads leading to Paris by putting >down feudal brigands and destroying their strongholds in the Île-de-France. The castle of the most notorious of these, Hugues du Puiset, was three times taken and burned by the king's men, but Hugues was spared to go back each time to his robber life, until he died on a crusade. In the north, Thomas de Marle, son of Enguerrand de Coucy, carried on a career of rapine and murder for almost thirty years before the king succeeded in taking him prisoner (1130). Twenty-four years of continuous war finally rooted out the robber barons who lived on the plunder of the roads leading to Paris: the lords of Montlhéri, who commanded the roads to Orleans, Melun and the south, those of Montmorency near St Denis on the north (who had to restore what they had robbed the abbey of St Denis), those of Le Puiset toward the west, on the way to Chartres, and many others. Parallel with this consolidation of his power in the ancestral domains Louis met energetically the Anglo-Norman danger, warring with Henry I. of England for twenty-five years. After the victory of Tinchebray (1106) Louis supported the claims of William Clito, son of Robert, duke of Normandy, against Henry I. A ruthless war followed, in which Louis was at times reduced to the sorest straits. In 1119, at a council held at Reims under the presidency of Pope Calixtus II., the enemies were reconciled; but William Clito's claims were not satisfied, and in 1123 war began again on a larger scale. Henry I. induced the emperor Henry V. to join in the attack upon France; and, his heir having been drowned in the loss of the "White Ship," won the count of Anjou by marrying his only daughter Matilda to Geoffrey, the Angevin heir (1127). The invasion of Henry V. was met by something like a national army, which gathered under Louis at Reims. "For a few days at least, the lord of the Île-de-France was truly a king of France" (Luchaire). Suger proudly gives the list of barons who appeared. Henry V. came no farther than Metz. Royalty had won great prestige. Even Theobald, count of Chartres, the king's greatest enemy, the soul of feudal coalitions, came with his contingent. Shortly afterwards (1126), Louis was able to overawe the great count of Aquitaine, William IX., and force his vassal, the count of Auvergne, to treat justly the bishop of Clermont. In Flanders Louis interfered upon the assassination of Charles the Good. He caused the barons to elect as their count in Arras the same William Clito who claimed Normandy, and who was closely bound to the king. For a while Louis had Flanders absolutely at his disposal, but he had hardly left William alone (1127) when his brutal oppression roused both towns and nobles, who declared that Louis had no right to interfere in Flanders. The death of William Clito, and a savage war with his own seneschal, prevented Louis from effectually resenting this attitude; but Thierry of Alsace, the new count, consented in 1128 to receive from Louis the investiture of all his French fiefs, and henceforth lived on good terms with him. In all his wars--those mentioned are but a part of them--Louis fought in person. Proud of his strength, reckless in the charge as on the march, plunging into swollen rivers, entering blazing castles, he gained the reputation of a national hero, the protector of the poor, the church, the peasants and the towns. The communal movement grew during his reign, and he encouraged it on the fiefs of his vassals in order to weaken them; but the title "Father of the Communes" by which he was known in history is not deserved, though he did grant some privileges to towns on his domains. Neither was Louis the author of the movement for the emancipation of the serfs, as was formerly claimed. His attitude toward the movement was like that of his predecessors and contemporaries, to favour emancipation when it promised greater chance of profit, greater scope for exploitation of the peasants; otherwise to oppose it. He was a great benefactor to the church, aided the new, reformed monastic congregations of Cîteau, Prémontré and Fontevrault, and chose his two chief ministers from the clergy. Étienne de Garlande, whom Louis raised from obscurity to be archdeacon of Notre Dame at Paris, chancellor and seneschal of France, was all-powerful with the king from 1108 to 1127. His relatives monopolized the highest offices of the state. But the queen Adelaide became his enemy; both Ivo of Chartres and St Bernard bitterly attacked him; and the king suddenly stripped him of all his offices and honours. Joining the rebellious barons, Étienne then led a bitter war against the king for three years. When Louis had reduced him to terms he pardoned him and restored him to the chancellorship (1132), but not to his old power. Suger (q.v.), administrator of St Denis, enters the scene toward the close of this reign, but his great work belongs to the next. Louis VI. died on the 1st of August 1137, just a few days after his son, Louis the Young, had set out for the far south-west, the Aquitaine which had been won by the marriage with Eleanor. His wife was Adelaide, or Alice, daughter of Humbert II., count of Savoy, by whom he had seven sons and a daughter. Entry: LOUIS
The five centuries of Turkish rule (1396-1878) form a dark epoch in Bulgarian history. The invaders carried fire and sword through the land; towns, villages and monasteries were sacked and destroyed, and whole districts were converted into desolate wastes. The inhabitants of the plains fled to the mountains, where they founded new settlements. Many of the nobles embraced the creed of Islam, and were liberally rewarded for their apostasy; others, together with numbers of the priests and people, took refuge across the Danube. All the regions formerly ruled by the Bulgarian tsars, including Macedonia and Thrace, were placed under the administration of a governor-general, styled the beylerbey of Rum-ili, residing at Sofia; Bulgaria proper was divided into the sanjaks of Sofia, Nikopolis, Vidin, Silistria and Kiustendil. Only a small proportion of the people followed the example of the boyars in abandoning Christianity; the conversion of the isolated communities now represented by the Pomaks took place at various intervals during the next three centuries. A new kind of feudal system replaced that of the boyars, and fiefs or _spahiliks_ were conferred on the Ottoman chiefs and the renegade Bulgarian nobles. The Christian population was subjected to heavy imposts, the principal being the _haratch_, or capitation-tax, paid to the imperial treasury, and the tithe on agricultural produce, which was collected by the feudal lord. Among the most cruel forms of oppression was the requisitioning of young boys between the ages of ten and twelve, who were sent to Constantinople as recruits for the corps of janissaries. Notwithstanding the horrors which attended the Ottoman conquest, the condition of the peasantry during the first three centuries of Turkish government was scarcely worse than it had been under the tyrannical rule of the boyars. The contemptuous indifference with which the Turks regarded the Christian _rayas_ was not altogether to the disadvantage of the subject race. Military service was not exacted from the Christians, no systematic effort was made to extinguish either their religion or their language, and within certain limits they were allowed to retain their ancient local administration and the jurisdiction of their clergy in regard to inheritances and family affairs. At the time of the conquest certain towns and villages, known as the _voïnitchki sela_, obtained important privileges which were not infringed till the 18th century; on condition of [v.04 p.0781] furnishing contingents to the Turkish army or grooms for the sultan's horses they obtained exemption from most of the taxes and complete self-government under their _voïvodi_ or chiefs. Some of them, such as Koprivshtitza in the Sredna Gora, attained great prosperity, which has somewhat declined since the establishment of the principality. While the Ottoman power was at its height the lot of the subject-races was far less intolerable than during the period of decadence, which began with the unsuccessful siege of Vienna in 1683. Their rights and privileges were respected, the law was enforced, commerce prospered, good roads were constructed, and the great caravans of the Ragusan merchants traversed the country. Down to the end of the 18th century there appears to have been only one serious attempt at revolt--that occasioned by the advance of Prince Sigismund Báthory into Walachia in 1595. A kind of guerilla warfare was, however, maintained in the mountains by the _kaiduti_, or outlaws, whose exploits, like those of the Greek _klepkts_, have been highly idealized in the popular folk-lore. As the power of the sultans declined anarchy spread through the Peninsula. In the earlier decades of the 18th century the Bulgarians suffered terribly from the ravages of the Turkish armies passing through the land during the wars with Austria. Towards its close their condition became even worse owing to the horrors perpetrated by the Krjalis, or troops of disbanded soldiers and desperadoes, who, in defiance of the Turkish authorities, roamed through the country, supporting themselves by plunder and committing every conceivable atrocity. After the peace of Belgrade (1737), by which Austria lost her conquests in the Peninsula, the Servians and Bulgarians began to look to Russia for deliverance, their hopes being encouraged by the treaty of Kuchuk Kaïnarji (1774), which foreshadowed the claim of Russia to protect the Orthodox Christians in the Turkish empire. In 1794 Pasvanoglu, one of the chiefs of the Krjalis, established himself as an independent sovereign at Vidin, putting to flight three large Turkish armies which were despatched against him. This adventurer possessed many remarkable qualities. He adorned Vidin with handsome buildings, maintained order, levied taxes and issued a separate coinage. He died in 1807. The memoirs of Sofronii, bishop of Vratza, present a vivid picture of the condition of Bulgaria at this time. "My diocese," he writes, "was laid desolate; the villages disappeared--they had been burnt by the Krjalis and Pasvan's brigands; the inhabitants were scattered far and wide over Walachia and other lands." Entry: POLITICAL