Skip to Main Content - Keyboard Accessible
In classical economics, Say's law, or the law of markets, is the claim that the production of a product creates demand for another product by providing something of value which can be exchanged for that other zi255.com, production is the source of demand. In his principal work, A Treatise on Political Economy (Traite d'economie politique, ), Jean-Baptiste Say wrote: "A product is no. On March 6, , the Virginia House of Delegates voted in favor of the bill. On April 7, the Governor submitted slightly different version of the bill. It was enacted by the Legislature on April 23, The law took effect upon passage.
At the April sessionsof that court, six indictments were presented to, and found by, the grand jury against James Porter and George Wilson; one for obstructing the mail of the United States from Philadelphia to Kimberton, on the 26th day of November ; one for obstructing the mail from Philadelphia to Reading, on the 6th day of December ; one for the robbery of the Kimberton mail, and putting the life of the carrier in jeopardy, on the same day in November ; one for robbery of the Reading mail, and putting the life of the carrier in jeopardy, on the same 6th day of December ; one for robbery of the Kimberton mail, also on the 26th of November ; and one for robbery of the Reading mail, also on the 6th of December At the same sessions, two other indictments were presented to the grand jury, against the same defendants, in which they were severally charged with robbery of the Reading and Kimberton mail, and wounding the carrier, which were returned to the court as 'true bills, except as to wounding the carrier.
On the 26th day of Aprilthe defendants, James Porter and George Wilson, pleaded not guilty to the several bills upon which they were arrainged; and on the 1st of May, a verdict of guilty was rendered against them, what did the law of april 6 1830 do the indictment for robbery of the Reading mail, and putting the life of the carrier in jeopardy. Upon the 27th of MayGeorge Wilson withdrew the pleas of not guilty to all the indictments against him, except those on which a nolle prosequi was afterwards entered, and pleaded guilty to the same.
The indictment for robbery of the Reading mail, and putting the life of the driver in jeopardy, upon which James Porter and George What is hd broadcast in were tried and convicted, was in the following terms:. On the 14th of Junethe president of the United States granted the following pardon to George Wilson:. Given at the city of Washington this 14th day of June, A. And now, to wit, this 21st day of Octoberthe counsel for the defendant, George Wilson, appear before the court, and on behalf of the said defendant, waive and decline any advantage or protection which might be supposed to arise from the pardon referred to: and how to send transcripts to ncaa clearing house, the following questions or points were argued by the district-attorney of the United States, upon which the opinions of the judges of how to print shipping labels said circuit court were opposed: 1.
That the pardon referred to prout the same is expressly restricted to the sentence of death passed upon the defendant, under another conviction, and as expressly reserves from its operation the conviction now before the court.
That the prisoner can, under this conviction, derive no advantage from the pardon, without bringing the same judicially before the court by plea, motion or otherwise.
And the said judges being so opposed in opinion upon the points or questions above stated, the same were then and there, at the request of the district-attorney of the United States, stated, under the direction of the judges, and ordered by the court to be certified, under the seal of the court, to the supreme court, at their next session thereafter, to be finally decided by the said supreme court.
And the court being further of opinion, that other proceedings could not be had in the said case, without prejudice to its merits, did order the same to be continued over to the next sessions of the court. The Attorney-General contended, that the other indictments against the defendant, and the proceedings on them, formed no part of the proceedings or evidence in this case; and they are not offered in evidence, either by the United States or George Wilson.
This court could judicially notice, perhaps, that such indictments were upon the records of the circuit court. But whether it was the same Wilson, or the act constituting the offence the same act, and whether it was pardoned, were matters of how to fix brother printer, and not matters of law. Neither one of these facts was pleaded by either of the parties, nor in any form alleged, nor any evidence offered to establish either of them.
The question is, can the court, without the allegation of either party, and without what did the law of april 6 1830 do offered, decide the facts, that he is the same person; that the act pardoned is the same with the one now charged; and that he has been pardoned for that act? This is not a statute pardon. The pardoning power in the constitution is the executive power.
Waiving, for the present, the identity of the person and the act, and conceding that the pardon would discharge him, it is insisted:. That the court cannot give the prisoner the benefit of the pardon, unless he claims the benefit of it, and relies on it by plea or motion. The form in which he may ask it, is not material to this inquiry; but the claim must be made in some shape by him.
It is a grant to him; it is his property; and he may accept it or not, as he pleases. The ancient doctrine was, that his plea of how to build a queen platform bed frame guilty' what is julbord in sweden it, and that he could not afterwards rely on it; that a general plea of not guilty, was equivalent to a refusal to accept it.
This doctrine is not meant to be contended for. It is admitted, that he may avail himself of it, at any time, by plea, before or after verdict or confession. But is insisted, that unless he pleads it, or in some way claims its benefit, thereby denoting his acceptance of the proffered grace, the court cannot notice it, nor allow it to prevent them from passing sentence. The whole current of authority establishes this principle. Pardon, E; Comyn's Dig. HainesIbid. The necessity of his pleading it, or claiming it in some other manner, grows out of the nature of the grant; he must accept it.
We must not look at a pardon, as if confined to capital cases. It exists in cases of misdemeanors also; and the same rule applies to both, and the same effect is produced in both.
A pardon may be granted on a condition precedent or subsequent, and the party remains liable to the punishment if the condition is not performed. James2 Caines 57; Radcliffe's CaseFost. Law Suppose, a pardon granted on conditions, which the prisoner does not choose to accept?
Suppose, the condition is exile, and he thinks the sentence a lighter punishment? Suppose, he thinks it his interest to undergo the punishment, in order to make his peace with the public for an offence committed in sudden temptation? A prisoner might be placed in circumstances, when he would feel it to be his interest to suffer imprisonment or pay a fine, as revenge how to get even evidence of his contrition.
Might he not, under such circumstances, refuse to accept a general and unconditional pardon? It is hardly necessary to speculate on the case of a man refusing to accept a pardon in a capital case. It is an event, not even possible, where the party was in his sound mind. If it should happen, without doubt, there is a power in the executive, to prevent the execution of the sentence. But we are now discussing judicial power, which, being governed by fixed laws and rules of proceeding, cannot exercise a discretion beyond the limits which the law has prescribed.
They cannot look to cases which may possibly arise. There is sufficient power in another branch of the government, to prevent any evil from the principle insisted on. The argument is fortified by the clause introduced into the acts of amnesty in England.
Radcliffe's CaseFost. But suppose, the prisoner is not bound to plead it. How was it before the court in any other form? The attorney for the United States did not call on the court to allow it. No evidence was offered of the identity of Wilson, or of the act pardoned. The identity had been found by a jury. How did the court obtain a knowledge of the fact? A man who has been acquitted, cannot lawfully be punished in another proceeding.
So of a former conviction. Suppose, another indictment for the same offence, and the court saw the man, and heard the evidence, and knew it to be the same, could they direct a verdict of not guilty? The defence must be pleaded with the proper averments. If the party, by an oversight, omitted it, no doubt, the court would give him an opportunity of correcting the error.
But if he refused to plead it, and the jury found him guilty, or he pleaded guilty, could the court discharge him? If they could not, how can they do it, with a pardon, when the party refuses to avail himself of the defence. Yet a former acquittal absolves him from all the consequences of crime, as perfectly as a pardon. It declares him innocent. The pardon restores him to innocence in the eye of the law. A pardon may release a part of the penalty inflicted by law and reserve the other.
A pardon may be granted on condition, as already shown. May it not, then, annex any condition? It may be on condition that he will leave the United States. Why may it not be that he will pay the fine, where the punishment is fine and imprisonment?
Why may it not be on condition that he undergoes the imprisonment? Why not, that he undergoes part of the imprisonment? LukensCoxe's Dig. Pardon, In this case, the grand jury had found an indictment against the what does the term arab spring mean for robbing the mail, to which he had pleaded not guilty. Afterwards, he withdrew this plea, and pleaded guilty. On a motion by the district-attorney, at a subsequent day, for judgment, the court suggested the propriety of inquiring as to the effect of a certain pardon, understood to have been granted by the president of the United States to the defendant, since the conviction on this indictment, alleged to relate to a conviction on another indictment, and that motion was adjourned until the next day.
On the succeeding day, the counsel for the prisoner appeared in court, and on his behalf waived and declined any advantage or protection which might be supposed to arise from the pardon referred to; and thereupon, the following points were made by the district-attorney: 1. That the pardon referred to, is expressly restricted to the sentence of death passed upon the defendant, under another conviction, and as expressly reserves from its operation the conviction now before the court. That the prisoner can, under this conviction, derive no advantage from the pardon, without bringing the same judicially before the court.
The prisoner being asked by the court, whether he had anything to say, why sentence should not be pronounced for the crime whereof he stood convicted in this particular case, and whether he wished in any manner to avail himself of the pardon referred to, answered, that he had nothing to say, and that he did not wish in any manner to avail himself, in order to avoid the sentence in this particular case, of the pardon referred to. The judges were, thereupon, divided in opinion, on both points made by the district-attorney, and ordered them to be certified to this court.
A certiorari was afterwards awarded, to bring up the record of the case in which judgment of death had been pronounced against the prisoner. The indictment charges a robbery of the mail, and putting the life of the driver in jeopardy.
The robbery charged in each indictment, is on the same day, at the same place, and on the same carrier. We do not think that this record is admissible, since no direct reference is made to it in the points adjourned by the circuit court; and without its aid, we can readily comprehend the questions submitted to us. If this difficulty be removed, another is presented by the terms in which the first point is stated on the record.
The attorney argued, first, that the pardon referred to is expressly restricted to the sentence of death passed upon the defendant, under another conviction, and as expressly reserves from its operation the conviction now before the court.
Upon this point, the judges were opposed in opinion. Whether they were opposed on the fact, or on the inference drawn from it by the attorney, and what that inference was, the record does not explicitly inform us. If the question on which the judges doubted was, whether such a pardon ought to restrain the court from pronouncing judgment in the case before them, which was expressly excluded from it; the first inquiry is, whether the robbery charged in the one indictment is the same with that charged in the other?
This is neither expressly affirmed nor denied. If the convictions be for different robberies, no question of law can arise on the effect which the pardon of the one may have on the proceedings for the others. If the statement on the record be sufficient to inform this what is a fat cell, judicially, that the robberies are the same, we are not told, on what point of law the judges were divided.
The only inference we can draw from the statement is, that it was doubted, whether the terms what font does verizon use the pardon could restrain the court from pronouncing the judgment of law on the conviction before them. The prisoner was convicted of robbing the mail, and putting the life of the carrier in jeopardy, for which the punishment is death.
He had also been convicted on an indictment for the same robbery, as we now suppose, without putting life in jeopardy, for which the punishment is fine and imprisonment; and the question supposed to be submitted is, whether a pardon of the greater offence, excluding the less, necessarily comprehends the less, against its own express terms.
We should not feel how to restore your ipod touch difficulty on this statement of the question, but it is unnecessary to discuss or decide it. Whether the pardon reached the less offence or not, the first indictment comprehended both the robbery and the putting life in jeopardy, and the conviction and judgment pronounced upon it extended to both.
Who Are the Palestinians?
2. At the April sessions , of that court, six indictments were presented to, and found by, the grand jury against James Porter and George Wilson; one for obstructing the mail of the United States from Philadelphia to Kimberton, on the 26th day of November ; one for obstructing the mail from Philadelphia to Reading, on the 6th day of December ; one for the robbery of the Kimberton. Aug 07, †Ј The Arabs of British Mandatory Palestine (), then, had been exposed to competing narratives by which they could construct their political identity. 9 Haj Amin al-Husseini, for example, was an Ottoman officer, but he joined the Hashemite army as a recruiter. 10 Another figure from those days was Aref al-Aref, a supporter of the.
Yet again, Palestinian leaders are claiming that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanite people who lived in the land of Canaan before the Israelite tribes settled in it. No less than the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, made that claim in Germany; no one was taken aback by his remarks or questioned him.
Ironically, a strong dissenting view to this thesis that the Palestinians can be traced back to the Canaanites comes from Hamas. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian!
We are Egyptians; we are Arabs. We are Muslims. We are part of you. Personally, half my family is Egyptian Ч and the other half are Saudis. Yasser Arafat claimed that the Palestinians are descendants of the Jebusites, whom he describes as a Canaanite tribe. The hub of Jund Filastin was the town of Ramle, not Jerusalem; the intention was apparently to protect the trade routes leading from Egypt to Syria and Iraq. The first generation of the Palestinian Muslim leadership took part in the Great Arab Revolt of the Hashemites in According to Palestinian historian Muhammad Y.
The Arabs of British Mandatory Palestine , then, had been exposed to competing narratives by which they could construct their political identity. The goal was reunification not Palestinian independence.
As long as Palestinians saw themselves as part of Syria, they were not aware of their Palestinian identity. Adnan Abu Odeh, a senior Jordanian statesman of Palestinian extraction, wrote about Palestinian-Jordanian relations and made a distinction between the two peoples. In his view, the difference between Jordanians and Palestinians does not necessarily lie in how they define their identity but in how others define them.
Thus, the national definition of the Palestinians stemmed from the borders that the Western powers carved out, whereas, after the First World War, they defined themselves as part of the short-lived Hashemite regime in Syria. A remnant of those early days is the flag of Palestine, which is actually the flag of the Great Arab Revolt of the Hashemites. This latter flag represents the Syrian aspiration for an empire. Similarly, the first generations of Palestinian nationalists joined the Hashemite administration out of hope that pan-Arabism would liberate Palestine.
To this day, the PLO regards itself as pan-Arab. Britain destroyed Palestine and cleared the path for the colonialist settlers instead of the real owners of the country. Associating Palestinian history with the Canaanites is, then, part of the total denial of Jewish history.
Some time ago, in one of the West Bank cities, I talked with a retired Palestinian teacher about the Canaanites. He claimed that they were a Yemenite Arab tribe that settled in Palestine and that the Israelites when they conquered the country, did not build a single new city or village; all the cities are Canaanite cities. He also said that the Israeli Shekel bears a Canaanite name; the evidence is that it was a Canaanite currency that Abraham paid to the Canaanites for the Cave of Machpelah.
One theory associates the Canaanites with the tribe of Amalek, 18 hated by the Israelites. Thus, linking the Palestinians with Canaan reflects an uncompromising attitude of all-out war. King Faisal, she wrote, opposed severing Palestine from Syria, and in doing so set the stage for the ongoing opposition of all Syrian governments to creating a separate Palestinian state that is detached from Greater Syria.
Thus, Arafat gave the Canaanite narrative Islamic roots. Such is the ethos. Most of the families find their origins in Arab tribes, some of them with Kurdish or Egyptian background, and there are even Ч by word of mouth Ч widespread stories of Jewish or Samaritan ancestry. Although one might have expected some effort to adduce a Philistine ancestry, there is almost no such phenomenon.
In Nablus, there is a family named Kanaan Ч that is, Canaan. We asked members of the family about its lineage, and they affirmed that they had been Canaanites for 3, years. From Aleppo, the family branched out to Damascus, Cyprus, and other places, including Nablus.
Although the name may indicate Canaanite ancestry, the Canaanite forebears were in Syria, not in the land of Canaan. According to another source within the family, the clan originated in Homs, 23 Syria and became widely dispersed in the Middle East, apparently including Nablus, about years ago.
Thus, apart from the Kanaan family with its possible Canaanite ancestry coming from Syria, not Palestine, and its possible Arab origins, there is no direct or indirect evidence of the Palestinians having descended from the Canaanite people as they claim. My ageЧ10, years. I am a proud son of the Canaanites, and I was [here] 5, years ago, and years before the coming of Joshua bin Nun, who burned my city, Jericho, and I will not trade in my history [because of a demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state].
It turns out that the Erekat family originates in the large Huweitat tribe, and they belong to the Ashraf families that trace their lineage to the family of the Prophet. They are related to the descendants of Hussein, grandson of the Prophet, who migrated from Medina to the Syrian Desert and settled in the Aqaba area. Kamal Erekat himself was wounded in the war and later became the first speaker of the Jordanian parliament.
In general, the list of heads of the Erekat family includes many Jordanian cabinet ministers. Why is the family so prominent in Jordan? Because the Huweitat tribe was among the main tribes that backed the Great Arab Revolt of the Hashemites in Mecca, and it moved north along with Laurence of Arabia Чthat is, at the same time as the Zionists were establishing themselves in Palestine.
The Hejaz-based Huweitat tribe linked up with the branch of the tribe that had already settled in Jordan, and together they conquered Aqaba. How did the Arab tribes of the Levant and Arab tribes, in general, come to be so dispersed? The Ottoman Empire was a gigantic open space, and internal migration and free movement of individuals and nomadic tribes were a common and characteristic feature. Hence, Arab tribes that settled in the Land of Israel were also varied and of different lineages, and during the Ottoman Empire, the Arabs in the country did not identify themselves as Palestinians.
The term Palestine was Western and was regularly used by Jews who immigrated to the country; the Zionists called themselves Palestinians while the Arabs simply identified themselves as Arabs.
As Adnan Abu Odeh observed, the definition of the Arabs as Palestinians stemmed from how the British identified the land Ч that is, from how foreigners, not necessarily Arabs, referred to the area. Those migrations were not typical of Palestine, which had not yet emerged, but rather of the Middle East as a whole, and in this regard, the Palestinian tribes were no different from the region in general. Up to the present, almost every Palestinian family describes its origins by identifying either with the Qays northern Arabian tribes or with Yaman Yemen.
In , the historian Ihsan Nimri published in Damascus a book about the history of Nablus and the Balka. Nimri was a resident of Nablus. Balka, a region in central Jordan in which the town of Salt is located, was connected to Nablus and was not referred to in terms of southern or northern, but rather, regarding the eastern direction Ч where Jordan is today.
As Nimri wrote in the introduction: The Israelites conquered it easily, and after that, the Assyrians deported them to Iraq, and Iraqis settled in it. In the days of Rome, the city rebelled, and the Romans destroyed it and rebuilt it and called it Neapolis, the new cityЕ. Thus, according to this book on the history of Nablus, the references to the Canaanites are chronological rather than actual, and the Canaanites have left no trace in the current demography of the city.
Among the prominent tribes is that of the Barghoutis, from whose ranks have come Marwan Barghouti and other well-known figures. In a conversation with a member of the family many years ago, he told me that the Barghouti family symbolizes sumud Ч remaining steadfastly on the land.
The family originally was Jewish, he said, and they converted to Christianity during the Byzantine Empire, and then, when Islam arrived, to Islam. There are, however, signs of its Christian origins. The family comes from the village of Deir Ghasana in the Ramallah district. Although the Barghoutis ignore this Christian origin, other sites refer to it.
For Muslim families, a Christian origin could indicate a Jewish origin, though not necessarily. The Christian families of Ramallah are an example. According to their tradition, the Christians of Ramallah are descended from the Christian Bedouin tribe of southern Jordan. Yes, there were Christian Bedouins in the past. They were the Haddadin tribe of the Karak area, kilometers south of Amman, who were forced to leave years ago by pressure from the Muslim tribes who sought to marry their daughters.
Originally, the Haddadin tribe was Yemenite, and it was forced to leave pre-Muslim Yemen at the time of the Jewish king, Dhu Nuwas CE , to avoid converting to Judaism and to maintain their Christianity. The Jewish origin of the fellahin [villagers, laborer] is a fascinating subject.
Nonetheless, in conversations, many Palestinians confirm ancient traditions of Jewish origins that are common in their families. For example, a female clerk in the office of Ahmed Qurei Abu Ala once told me that her origins lay in the two biblical towns of Tzora and Eshtaol mentioned in the Samson story Judges Interestingly, the pairing of Tzora and Eshtaol is also preserved in spoken Arabic. The most notable examples are the village of Yatta Ч the Biblical Juttah Ч and particularly among the Makhamra family.
In he described the lighting of Hanukah candles and observance of Jewish customs. The tradition that the Makhamra clan has Jewish ancestry is common to this family, noted Ben Zvi. When Arab families investigate their origins, they tend to associate themselves with a glorious chapter of Islam. The Huweitat family claims to be descended from the Imam Ali. However, when it comes to the ascriptions of the Arab tribes of Hebron, there are independent testimonies that the Tamim, a major Arab tribe, indeed has honorable origins connected with the dawn of Islam before the seventh-century conquest of the country.
The family received Hebron and its neighboring villages from Muhammed as a patrimony. Whereas the Tamimi tribe consolidated the Arab origins of Hebron, there are testimonies by Hebronites themselves that half of the city is of Kurdish origins. Numerous Hebron families, such as the Hashlamun, Kafisha, and other families, are of Kurdish origin. The Kurds also settled in other parts of the country and Transjordan. By now, the Kurds have completely Arabized, and they retain no connection with their origins.
In Amman, however, a Salah ad-Din al-Ayyubi Society has been established that seeks to preserve the Kurdish background. A study published by the American Journal of Human Genetics on July 27, , reports that descendants of the Canaanites have indeed been found in the Middle East. Of late, the Palestinian leadership has been repeating the theme that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites.
Because it keeps reiterating this narrative, there is a concern that some in the West will fall for it. Why the Canaanites? Because they were in the country before the Israelite tribes were and thus have precedence.
Hence, it is important to clarify how the Palestinians themselves view their own ancestry. Even the Kanaan family of Nablus locates its origins in Syria.