is an invasion of privacy against the law

The privacy laws of the United States deal with several different legal concepts. One is the invasion of privacy, a tort based in common law allowing an aggrieved party to bring a lawsuit against an individual who unlawfully intrudes into his or her private affairs, discloses his or her private information, publicizes him or her in a false light, or appropriates his or her name for personal gain.[1] Public figures have less privacy, and this is an evolving area of law as it relates to the media.

Privacy laws of the United States

The essence of the law derives from a right to privacy, defined broadly as "the right to be let alone." It usually excludes personal matters or activities which may reasonably be of public interest, like those of celebrities or participants in newsworthy events. Invasion of the right to privacy can be the basis for a lawsuit for damages against the person or entity violating the right.  These include the Fourth Amendment right to be free of unwarranted search or seizure, the First Amendment right to free assembly, and the Fourteenth Amendment due process right, recognized by the Supreme Court as protecting a general right to privacy within family, marriage, motherhood, procreation, and child rearing.[2][3]

Attempts to improve consumer privacy protections in the US in the wake of the May–July 2017 Equifax data breach, which affected 145.5 million US consumers, failed to pass in Congress.[4]

The early years in the development of privacy rights began with English common law which protected "only the physical interference of life and property". The Castle doctrine analogizes a person's home to his or her castle – a site that is private and should not be accessible without permission of the owner. The development of tort remedies by the common law is "one of the most significant chapters in the history of privacy law".[5]  Those rights expanded to include a "recognition of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and his intellect." Eventually, the scope of those rights broadened even further to include a basic "right to be let alone," and the former definition of "property" would then comprise "every form of possession – intangible, as well as tangible." By the late 19th century, interest in privacy grew as a result of the growth of print media, especially newspapers.[5]

Between 1850 and 1890, U.S. newspaper circulation grew by 1,000 percentâ€”from 100 papers with 800,000 readers to 900 papers with more than 8 million readers.[5] In addition, newspaper journalism became more sensationalized, and was termed yellow journalism. The growth of industrialism led to rapid advances in technology, including the handheld camera, as opposed to earlier studio cameras, which were much heavier and larger. In 1884, Eastman Kodak company introduced their Kodak Brownie, and it became a mass market camera by 1901, cheap enough for the general public. This allowed people and journalists to take candid snapshots in public places for the first time.

Samuel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis, partners in a new law firm, feared that this new small camera technology would be used by the "sensationalistic press." Seeing this becoming a likely challenge to individual privacy rights, they wrote the "pathbreaking"[5] Harvard Law Review article in 1890, "The Right to Privacy".[6] According to legal scholar Roscoe Pound, the article did "nothing less than add a chapter to our law",[7] and in 1966 legal textbook author, Harry Kalven, hailed it as the "most influential law review article of all".[5] In the Supreme Court case of Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001), the article was cited by a majority of justices, both those concurring and those dissenting.[5]

The development of the doctrine regarding the tort of "invasion of privacy" was largely spurred by the Warren and Brandeis article, "The Right to Privacy". In it, they explain why they wrote the article in its introduction: "Political, social, and economic changes entail the recognition of new rights, and the common law, in its eternal youth, grows to meet the demands of society".[6] More specifically, they also shift their focus on newspapers:

The press is overstepping in every direction the obvious bounds of propriety and of decency. Gossip is no longer the resource of the idle and of the vicious, but has become a trade, which is pursued with industry as well as effrontery. To satisfy a prurient taste the details of sexual relations are spread broadcast in the columns of the daily papers....The intensity and complexity of life, attendant upon advancing civilization, have rendered necessary some retreat from the world, and man, under the refining influence of culture, has become more sensitive to publicity, so that solitude and privacy have become more essential to the individual; but modern enterprise and invention have, through invasions upon his privacy, subjected him to mental pain and distress, far greater than could be inflicted by mere bodily injury.[6]

They then clarify their goals: "It is our purpose to consider whether the existing law affords a principle which can properly be invoked to protect the privacy of the individual; and, if it does, what the nature and extent of such protection is".[6]

Warren and Brandeis write that privacy rights should protect both businesses and private individuals. They describe rights in trade secrets and unpublished literary materials, regardless whether those rights are invaded intentionally or unintentionally, and without regard to any value they may have. For private individuals, they try to define how to protect "thoughts, sentiments, and emotions, expressed through the medium of writing or of the arts". They describe such things as personal diaries and letters needing protection, and how that should be done: "Thus, the courts, in searching for some principle upon which the publication of private letters could be enjoined, naturally came upon the ideas of a breach of confidence, and of an implied contract". They also define this as a breach of trust, where a person has trusted that another will not publish their personal writings, photographs, or artwork, without their permission, including any "facts relating to his private life, which he has seen fit to keep private". And recognizing that technological advances will become more relevant, they write: "Now that modern devices afford abundant opportunities for the perpetration of such wrongs without any participation by the injured party, the protection granted by the law must be placed upon a broader foundation".[6]

In the United States today,[when?] "invasion of privacy" is a commonly used cause of action in legal pleadings. Modern tort law, as first categorized by William Prosser, includes four categories of invasion of privacy:[8]

Intrusion of solitude occurs where one person intrudes upon the private affairs of another. In a famous case from 1944, author Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings was sued by Zelma Cason, who was portrayed as a character in Rawlings' acclaimed memoir, Cross Creek.[9] The Florida Supreme Court held that a cause of action for invasion of privacy was supported by the facts of the case, but in a later proceeding found that there were no actual damages.

Intrusion upon seclusion occurs when a perpetrator intentionally intrudes, physically, electronically, or otherwise, upon the private space, solitude, or seclusion of a person, or the private affairs or concerns of a person, by use of the perpetrator's physical senses or by electronic device or devices to oversee or overhear the person's private affairs, or by some other form of investigation, examination, or observation intrude upon a person's private matters if the intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. Hacking into someone else's computer is a type of intrusion upon privacy,[10] as is secretly viewing or recording private information by still or video camera.[11]  In determining whether intrusion has occurred, one of three main considerations may be involved:  expectation of privacy; whether there was an intrusion, invitation, or exceedance of invitation; or deception, misrepresentation, or fraud to gain admission.  Intrusion is "an information-gathering, not a publication, tortâ€¦legal wrong occurs at the time of the intrusion. No publication is necessary".[12]

Restrictions against the invasion of privacy encompasses journalists as well:

The First Amendment has never been construed to accord newsmen immunity from torts or crimes committed during the course of newsgathering. The First Amendment is not a license to trespass, to steal, or to intrude by electronic means into the precincts of another's home or office.[12][13]

Public disclosure of private facts arises where one person reveals information which is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person.[14]
"Unlike libel or slander, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy."[10] Disclosure of private facts includes publishing or widespread dissemination of little-known, private facts that are non-newsworthy, not part of public records, public proceedings, not of public interest, and would be offensive to a reasonable person if made public.[12]

False light is a legal term that refers to a tort concerning privacy that is similar to the tort of defamation. For example, the privacy laws in the United States include a non-public person's right to privacy from publicity which puts them in a false light to the public. A non-public person's right to privacy from publicity is balanced against the First Amendment right of free speech.

False light laws are "intended primarily to protect the plaintiff's mental or emotional well-being".[15] If a publication of information is false, then a tort of defamation might have occurred. If that communication is not technically false but is still misleading, then a tort of false light might have occurred.[15]

The specific elements of the Tort of false light vary considerably even among those jurisdictions which do recognize this tort. Generally, these elements consist of the following:

Thus in general, the doctrine of false light holds:

One who gives publicity to a matter concerning another before the public in a false light is subject to liability to the other for invasion of privacy, if (a) the false light in which the other was placed would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and (b) the actor had knowledge of or acted in a reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which the other would be placed.[16]

For this wrong, money damages may be recovered from the first person by the other.

At first glance, this may appear to be similar to defamation (libel and slander), but the basis for the harm is different, and the remedy is different in two respects. First, unlike libel and slander, no showing of actual harm or damage to the plaintiff is usually required in false light cases, and the court will determine the amount of damages. Second, being a violation of a Constitutional right of privacy, there may be no applicable statute of limitations in some jurisdictions specifying a time limit within which period a claim must be filed.

Consequently, although it is infrequently invoked, in some cases false light may be a more attractive cause of action for plaintiffs than libel or slander, because the burden of proof may be less onerous.

What does "publicity" mean? A newspaper of general circulation (or comparable breadth) or as few as 3â€“5 people who know the person harmed? Neither defamation nor false light has ever required everyone in society be informed by a harmful act, but the scope of "publicity" is variable. In some jurisdictions, publicity "means that the matter is made public, by communicating it to the public at large, or to so many persons that the matter must be regarded as substantially certain to become one of public knowledge."[17]

Moreover, the standards of behavior governing employees of government institutions subject to a state or national Administrative Procedure Act (as in the United States) are often more demanding than those governing employees of private or business institutions like newspapers. A person acting in an official capacity for a government agency may find that their statements are not indemnified by the principle of agency, leaving them personally liable for any damages.

Example: If someone's reputation was portrayed in a false light during a personnel performance evaluation in a government agency or public university, one might be wronged if only a small number initially learned of it, or if adverse recommendations were made to only a few superiors (by a peer committee to department chair, dean, dean's advisory committee, provost, president, etc.). Settled cases suggest false light may not be effective in private school personnel cases,[18] but they may be distinguishable from cases arising in public institutions.

Although privacy is often a common-law tort, most states have enacted statutes that prohibit the use of a person's name or image if used without consent for the commercial benefit of another person.[citation needed]

Appropriation of name or likeness occurs when a person uses the name or likeness of another person for personal gain or commercial advantage. Action for misappropriation of right of publicity protects a person against loss caused by appropriation of  personal likeness for commercial exploitation. A person's exclusive rights to control his or her name and likeness to prevent others from exploiting without permission is protected in similar manner to a trademark action with the person's likeness, rather than the trademark, being the subject of the protection.[10]
Appropriation is the oldest recognized form of invasion of privacy involving the use of an individual's name, likeness, or identity without consent for purposes such as ads, fictional works, or products.[12]

"The same action – appropriation —can violate either an individual's right of privacy or right of publicity. Conceptually, however, the two rights differ".[12]

Although the word "privacy" is actually never used in the text of the United States Constitution,[19] there are Constitutional limits to the government's intrusion into individuals' right to privacy. This is true even when pursuing a public purpose such as exercising police powers or passing legislation. The Constitution, however, only protects against state actors. Invasions of privacy by individuals can only be remedied under previous court decisions.

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States ensures that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized".

The First Amendment protects the right to free assembly, broadening privacy rights.  Some believe that the Ninth Amendment declares that the fact that a right is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution does not mean that the government can infringe on that right.  The Supreme Court recognized the Fourteenth Amendment as providing a substantive due process right to privacy. This was first recognized by several Supreme Court Justices in Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 decision protecting a married couple's rights to contraception. It was recognized again in 1973 Roe v. Wade, which invoked the right to privacy to protect a woman's right to an abortion, and in the 2003 with Lawrence v. Texas, which invoked the right to privacy regarding the sexual practices of same-sex couples.

On August 22, 1972 the Alaska Right of Privacy Amendment, Amendment 3, was approved with 86% of the vote in support of the legislatively referred constitutional amendment.[20] Article I, Section 22 of Alaska's constitution states, "The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed. The legislature shall implement this section."[21]

Article 1, ยง1 of the California Constitution articulates privacy as an inalienable right.

CA SB 1386 expands on privacy law and guarantees that if a company exposes a Californian's sensitive information this exposure must be reported to the citizen.  This law has inspired many states to come up with similar measures.[22]

California's "Shine the Light" law (SB 27, CA Civil Code ยง 1798.83), operative on January 1, 2005, outlines specific rules regarding how and when a business must disclose use of a customer's personal information and imposes civil damages for violation of the law.

California's Reader Privacy Act was passed into law in 2011.[23] The law prohibits a commercial provider of a book service, as defined, from disclosing, or being compelled to disclose, any personal information relating to a user of the book service, subject to certain exceptions. The bill would require a provider to disclose personal information of a user only if a court order has been issued, as specified, and certain other conditions have been satisfied. The bill would impose civil penalties on a provider of a book service for knowingly disclosing a user's personal information to a government entity in violation of these provisions.  This law is applicable to electronic books in addition to print books.[24]

Article I, ยง23 of the Florida Constitution states that "Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into the person's private life except as otherwise provided herein. This section shall not be construed to limit the public's right of access to public records and meetings as provided by law."[25]

Article 2, ยง10 of the Montana Constitution states that "The right of individual privacy is essential to the well-being of a free society and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest".[26]

The right to privacy is protected also by more than 600 laws in the states and by a dozen federal laws, like those protecting health and student information, also limiting electronic surveillance.[29]

Several of the US Federal privacy laws have substantial "opt-out" requirements, requiring that the individual specifically "opt-out" of commercial dissemination of personally identifiable information (PII).  In some cases, an entity wishing to "share" (disseminate) information is required to provide a notice, such as a GLBA notice or a HIPAA notice, requiring individuals to specifically Opt-out[30] These "opt-out" requests may be executed either by use of forms provided by the entity collecting the data, with or without separate written requests.


where is the apollo theater located in new york

The Apollo Theater at 253 West 125th Street between Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Boulevard (formerly Seventh Avenue) and Frederick Douglass Boulevard (formerly Eighth Avenue) in the Harlem neighborhood of Manhattan, New York City[3] is a music hall which is a noted venue for African-American performers. It was the home of Showtime at the Apollo, a nationally syndicated television variety show which showcased new talent, from 1987 to 2008, encompassing 1,093 episodes.

Apollo Theater

The theater, which has a capacity of 1,506, opened its doors in 1914 as Hurtig & Seamon's New Burlesque Theater, and was designed by George Keister in the neo-Classical style.[2] It became the Apollo in 1934, when it was opened to black patrons â€“ previously it had been a whites-only venue.[3] In 1983, both the interior and exterior of the building were designated as New York City Landmarks,[2] and the building was added to the National Register of Historic Places. It is estimated that 1.3 million people visit the Apollo every year.[4]

The building which later became the Apollo Theater was built in 1913-14[2] and was designed by architect George Keister,[5] who also designed the First Baptist Church in the City of New York. It was originally Hurtig and Seamon's New (Burlesque) Theater, which enforced a strict "Whites Only" policy.[6] The theatre was operated by noted burlesque producers Jules Hurtig and Harry Seamon, who obtained a 30-year lease.[5] It remained in operation until 1928, when Billy Minsky took over.[citation needed] The song "I May Be Wrong (But I Think You're Wonderful)" by Harry Sullivan and Harry Ruskin, written in 1929, became the theme song of the theater.[citation needed].

During the early 1930s, the theatre fell into disrepair and closed once more. In 1933, it was purchased by Sidney Cohen, who owned other theaters in the area,[4] and after lavish renovations it re-opened as the "Apollo Theater" on January 16, 1934,[6] catering to the black community of Harlem.[3] On February 14, 1934, the first major star to appear at the Apollo was jazz singer and Broadway star Adelaide Hall in Clarence Robinson's production Chocolate Soldiers, which featured Sam Wooding's Orchestra. The show ran for a limited engagement and was highly praised by the press, which helped establish the Apollo's reputation.[6]

Managed by Morris Sussman, Cohen's Apollo Theatre had vigorous competition from other venues, such as the Lafayette, managed by Frank Schiffman, which presented acts such as Louis Armstrong, Bill "Bojangles" Robinson and Bessie Smith and Eddie Green. Leo Brecher's Harlem Opera House was another competing venue. To improve the shows at the Apollo, Cohen hired noted talent scout John Hammond to book his shows. However, the deal fell through when Cohen died, and the end result was the merger of the Apollo with the Harlem Opera House. The Opera House became a movie theater, but the Apollo, under the ownership of Brecher and Schiffman, continued to present stage shows.[4] Schiffman hired Clarence Robinson as in-house producer,[6]

Originally, a typical show presented at the Apollo was akin to a vaudeville show, including a chorus line of beautiful girls. As the years progressed, such variety shows were presented less often.[4]

During the swing era, along with bands such as Duke Ellington, Dizzy Gillespie, Chick Webb, Count Basie, and Andy Kirk, the Apollo also presented dance acts such as Bill Robinson, the Nicholas Brothers, Carmen De Lavallade and Geoffrey Holder, the Berry Brothers, and Buck and Bubbles.[4] Comic acts also appeared on the Apollo stage, including those who performed in blackface, such as Butterbeans and Susie, much to the horror of the NAACP and the elite of Harlem.[4]

The Apollo also featured the performances of old-time vaudeville favorites like Tim Moore, Stepin Fetchit, Moms Mabley, Dewey "Pigmeat" Markham, Clinton "Dusty" Fletcher, John "Spider Bruce" Mason, and Johnny Lee, as well as younger comics like Bill Cosby, Godfrey Cambridge, LaWanda Page, Richard Pryor, Rudy Ray Moore, and Redd Foxx.

Gospel acts which played the Apollo include the Staple Singers, Mahalia Jackson, The Clark Sisters, Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Clara Ward and Sam Cooke with the Soul Stirrers.[4] Performers of soul music on the Apollo stage included Ray Charles, Otis Redding and Aretha Franklin, and jazz was represented as well, by acts such as Art Blakey and Horace Silver.[4]

Although the theatre concentrated on showcasing African American acts, it also presented white acts such as swing bandleaders Harry James, Woody Herman and Charlie Barnet during the swing era, and, later, jazz greats Dave Brubeck, Stan Getz and Buddy Rich, who was a particular favorite of the Apollo crowd. During the 1950s, several white rock and roll performers whose musical backgrounds were more country music oriented, such as Buddy Holly and Duane Eddy played the Apollo but scored with their audiences by playing blues-styled material. The theater's audience was often mixed: in the 1940s it was estimated that during the week about 40% of the audience was white, which would go up to 75 percent for weekend shows.[4] Jazz singer Anita O'Day headlined for the week of September 21, 1950, billed as "the Jezebel of Jazz".[7]

Schiffman had first introduced an amateur night at the Lafayette Theater, where it was known as "Harlem Amateur Hour", and was hosted by Ralph Cooper. At the Apollo, it was originally called "Audition Night", but later became "Amateur Night in Harlem", held every Monday evening and broadcast on the radio over WMCA and eleven affiliate stations.[4]

One unique feature of the Apollo during Amateur Nights was "the executioner", a man with a broom who would sweep performers off the stage if the highly vocal and opinionated audiences began to call for their removal.[8] Vaudeville tap dancer "Sandman" Sims played the role from the 1950s to 2000; stagehand Norman Miller, known as "Porto Rico" (later played by Bob Collins) might also chase the unfortunate performer offstage with a cap pistol, accompanied by the sound of a siren.[4]

The Apollo grew to prominence during the Harlem Renaissance of the pre-World War II years. Billing itself as a place "where stars are born and legends are made," the Apollo became famous for launching the careers of artists such as Ella Fitzgerald, who made her singing debut at 17 at the Apollo, on November 21, 1934. Fitzgerald's performances pulled in a weekly audience at the Apollo and she won the opportunity to compete in one of the earliest of its "Amateur Nights". She had originally intended to go on stage and dance, but intimidated by the Edwards Sisters, a local dance duo, she opted to sing instead, in the style of Connee Boswell. She sang Hoagy Carmichael's "Judy" and "The Object of My Affection", a song recorded by the Boswell Sisters, and won the first prize of $25.00.[9]

Vocalist Thelma Carpenter won the amateur night in 1938, returning several times later as a headliner and also for the 1993 NBC-TV special "Apollo Theater Hall of Fame," an all-star tribute hosted by Bill Cosby.[10]

Jimi Hendrix won the first place prize in an amateur musician contest at the Apollo in 1964. Amateur Night had its first tie on October 27, 2010, with guitarist Nathan Foley, 16, of Rockville, Maryland, and cellist and singer Ayanna Witter-Johnson, 25, a student at the Manhattan School of Music from London, sharing the $10,000 prize.[11]

Other performers whose careers started at the Apollo include Billie Holiday, Pearl Bailey, Sammy Davis Jr., James Brown & The Famous Flames, King Curtis, Diana Ross & The Supremes, Parliament-Funkadelic, Wilson Pickett, The Miracles, Gladys Knight & the Pips, Rush Brown, Stephanie Mills, Dionne Warwick, Bobby Short, The Jackson 5, Patti Austin, Patti LaBelle, Marvin Gaye, Luther Vandross, Stevie Wonder, Aretha Franklin, Ben E. King, Mariah Carey, The Isley Brothers, Lauryn Hill, Sarah Vaughan, Jazmine Sullivan, Ne-Yo, and Machine Gun Kelly.

In 1962, James Brown, who had first played the Apollo three years earlier with his group The Famous Flames, recorded his show at the theater. The resulting album, Live at the Apollo, was a groundbreaking success, spending 66 weeks on the Billboard pop albums chart and peaking at #2. Brown went on to record three more albums and a television special, James Brown: Man to Man, at the theater, and helped popularize it as a venue for live recordings. Other performers who recorded albums at the Apollo include Patti LaBelle, Clyde McPhatter, Marva Whitney, The Mighty Clouds of Joy, Robert Palmer, and B.B. King. In 2007, gospel recording artist Byron Cage played at the Apollo for his album Live at the Apollo: The Proclamation. Guns N' Roses visited the venue on July 20 2017 for their "Not in This Lifetime" tour as part of the celebration of the 30th anniversary of the bands debut album "Appetite for Destruction". The show was recorded and was broadcast in its entirety on SiriusXM satellite radio. The concert was an invite-only event where subscribers to the satellite radio service were eligible to win tickets.

Although the 1960s was the venue's most successful decade, in the following decade, the drug problem in Harlem, with its attendant robberies and thefts, was the cause of its closing in 1976, after an 18-year-old was shot to death.[4] On April 1 and 2, 1976, Fred and Felicidad Dukes along with Rafee Kamaal produced two 90-minute television specials with Group W Productions as a way to help restore life to the theater, which re-opened in that year, featuring acts such as James Brown, George Clinton and Parliament-Funkadelic.[4] From 1975 to 1982, the theater was owned by Guy Fisher. In 1983, it was bought by Inner City Broadcasting, a firm owned by former Manhattan borough president Percy E. Sutton.[4] It obtained federal and city landmark status in that same year. In 1991, the Apollo was purchased by the State of New York, which created the non-profit Apollo Theater Foundation to run it.[4]

In 2001, the architecture firms Beyer Blinder Belle, which specializes in restorations of historic buildings, and Davis Brody Bond began a restoration of the theater's interior.[3] In 2005, restoration of the exterior, and the installation of a new light-emitting diode (LED) marquee began. In 2009-10, in celebration of the theater's 75th anniversary, the theater put together an archive of historical material, including documents and photographs and, with Columbia University, began an oral history project.[4]

The Apollo Theater draws an estimated 1.3 million visitors annually.[4]

The Apollo Theater Legends Hall of Fame has inducted such renowned performers and music-industry figures as Aretha Franklin, James Brown, Michael Jackson, The Supremes, Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye, Elton John, Mymoena Davids, Little Richard, Hall & Oates, Ella Fitzgerald, Smokey Robinson, Billy Eckstine, Gladys Knight, The Pips, The Jacksons, Quincy Jones, Chaka Khan, Patti LaBelle, D'Angelo and Prince.[12][13]


who played the black ranger in mighty morphin power rangers

Zachary "Zack" Taylor is a fictional character in the Power Rangers universe, appearing in the television series Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. He is the original Black Ranger of the first generation of Power Rangers. He was played by actor Walter Emanuel Jones.

Zack Taylor

Zack and his close friends Kimberly Hart, Jason Lee Scott, Billy Cranston and Trini Kwan were picked as the five original Power Rangers by the wise sage Zordon to defend Earth from the evil sorceress Rita Repulsa. Zack was chosen as the Black Power Ranger, gaining the Mastodon Power Coin and the Mastodon Dinozord.[1]

Quick-witted and clever, Zack relies on a combination of skill, strength, and agility to win his battles. The original Black Ranger is an energetic, charismatic, and fun-loving young man. He enjoys athletics (such as basketball, American football, and scuba diving), dancing (especially to a fresh beat bumping out his friend's boombox), parties, and girls. Whenever he didn't have an arm around Trini or Kimberly, Zack could be found pursuing his attractive, but hard-to-get classmate, Angela. Zack always loved a good joke. Though he loved all the people close to him, Zack's best friend was clearly Jason. Zack is extremely confident and positive. Only four occasions saw Zack ready to give it up: when the Green Ranger took out Zordon, Alpha 5 and the Command Center while removing the Rangers from the Megazord; when his team was placed under a spell to take away their confidence; and when their Dinozords were commandeered by Lord Zedd's first monster, Pirantishead. But the first occasion happened very early in the series when his friends pretended to have forgotten his birthday. Zack went off into a secluded area, and into a trap by Rita Repulsa. For some time, he had to fight the powerful Knasty Knight alone. Oddly enough, despite his plentiful confidence, Zack is an extreme ophidiophobe, arachnophobe, and entomophobe meaning he is terrified of snakes, spiders, and insects although, on one occasion when performing magic for a group of children seeking shelter from a monster attack, he handled two fake snakes and used them to scare off Bulk and Skull. Because of this, it can be assumed that Zack's fear of snakes deteriorated over time, especially after an encounter on Rita's Island of Illusion where his strength of will was tested against his fear of snakes.

Zack enjoyed martial arts just as much as he did dancing and, as a result, created his own fighting style, called Hip Hop kido. The customized art consisted of dance-like maneuvers flourished with fast and powerful strikes, much like Capoeira or as seen by actor Daniel O' Neill in Bangkok Adrenaline. This effective combination of power and prowess made Zack an incredibly formidable combatant.[2] However, he would sometimes tone down his style and mimic the attacks of Billy to simultaneously strike opponents. He was also very resourceful. On several occasions, it was his cunning that led his team to victory. Such occasions included his discovery of the means to overcome the Knasty Knight who was sent to isolate and destroy him on his birthday- the monster possessed the ability to redistribute the Ranger's force in order to fry the weapons they used against him. When the storm-bringing chimera monster Goatan froze the Megazord, Zack analyzed what little resources the Megazord had left and used it to regain dominance in the battle.

After Tommy Oliver joined the team, he and Zack quickly became close friends as a result of their similar interests. When Tommy was nervous about trying to engage a romantic relationship with Kimberly, it was Zack who Tommy sought for advice. Before Tommy appeared (or if Tommy is not at the Youth Center) Zack is usually Jason's sparring partner when practicing Karate. Tommy and Zack would also act as sparring partners for each other, as well. Though Jason was the Ranger Tommy selected to take on his Green Ranger powers after Rita eliminated Tommy's link to the Morphing Grid, Zack is the only other individual to don the Dragon Shield when Tommy gave it to him so that it's enhanced regenerative powers could heal Zack from the Oysterizer monster's acidic attack.

In the Season 2 episode "Green No More, Part 1", Zack's cousin Curtis was introduced, who would have a small recurring role throughout the middle of the season. Curtis was very similar to Zack due to their similar interests in dance and music, as well as their smooth-talking speech pattern. He also formed a friendship with Trini's crush Richie. The two once even managed to fight off a group of Putties while they were skating.

When Walter Jones (Zack), Austin St. John (Jason), and Thuy Trang (Trini) left the show (over contract disputes), their characters stopped making new on-screen or face-to-camera shots- simply being shown in their Ranger uniforms, using old footage, or with doubles who were never directly facing the cameras- before they were written off in the two-part "Power Transfer" episode in which their characters were chosen to attend the World Peace Conference. Zack's powers were transferred to Adam Park. Though Jason later returned in Power Rangers Zeo, Turbo: A Power Rangers Movie, and the tenth anniversary special "Forever Red," it was never stated what became of Trini or Zack after the peace conference, although Jones did return to the show in a few episodes in Power Rangers Lost Galaxy and Power Rangers Wild Force mainly doing voicework for monsters and villains.

Kimberly is the main character in this comic book mini series published by Boom! Studios. The series is a modern remake but also serves as a continuation from Kimberly's exit in the third season of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers.[3] Kimberly needs to rescue a French town under siege from Goldar. She seeks help from Zordon who uses the Sword of Light to activate the latent pink energy within her. Kimberly then teleports to Zack and Trini in South America for their help. Zordon uses the Sword of Light to share Kimberly's power with them. Zack once again becomes the black ranger.[4] It is also revealed that Zack and Trini are in a relationship.[5]

During the final minutes of the episode "Legendary Battle", the Black Mighty Morphin Power Ranger appears and takes part in the battle against the Armada's final assault. It is assumed that it is Zack while his replacement, Adam, participates as the Green Zeo Ranger.

Zack appears in the 2017 film reboot, played by Chinese-Canadian actor Ludi Lin.[6] He is initially introduced as a school truant with an apparent need for adrenaline, willing to attempt the team's more extreme stunts, such as jumping over a chasm. In the course of the film, it is revealed that he lives in a mobile home park with his ill mother, and Zack is her only caretaker. He is the first Ranger to try and pilot his zord, despite being told that it is only controllable once they have morphed, taking the Mastodon on a run through the hills. He rallies in time to assist the team in facing Rita in the final battle.

The choice of color for the Black Ranger (Zack Taylor) and Yellow Ranger (Trini Kwan) have been a source of criticism, due to the belief these colors are representations of their racial backgrounds.[7][8] There are many parodies illustrating the perceived inherent racism of the show. According to the producers, this was not noticed until the tenth episode of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers.[9][10][11]


when did the court of claims change its name to the court of federal claims quizlet

The Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982 created the modern court.[7] While the appellate division of the Court of Claims was combined with the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals to comprise the new United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the trial division of the Court of Claims became the United States Claims Court (and in 1992, the name was changed to the United States Court of Federal Claims).[8] Appeals from the Court of Federal Claims are taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and a judgment there is conclusive unless reviewed by the Supreme Court on writ of certiorari. Decisions of the Court of Claims are binding precedent on both its appellate and trial court successors.

United States Court of Federal Claims

The United States Court of Federal Claims (in case citations, Fed. Cl. or C.F.C.) is a United States federal court that hears monetary claims against the U.S. government. It is the direct successor to the United States Court of Claims, which was founded in 1855, and is therefore a revised version of one of the oldest federal courts in the country.

The jurisdiction of the United States Court of Federal Claims is currently codified in 28 U.S.C. § 1491. The court is established pursuant to Congress's authority under Article One of the United States Constitution. Unlike judges of courts established under Article Three of the United States Constitution, judges on the Court of Federal Claims do not have life tenure (see Article I and Article III tribunals). Instead they serve for 15-year terms[1] and are eligible for reappointment. The President appoints the judges of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims with the Senate's advice and consent.[2] The judges are removable by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for "incompetency, misconduct, neglect of duty, engaging in the practice of law, or physical or mental disability." [3]

The courthouse of the Court of Federal Claims is situated in the Howard T. Markey National Courts Building (on Madison Place across from the White House) in Washington, D.C.

The court traces its origins directly back to 1855, when Congress established the United States Court of Claims to provide for the determination of private claims against the United States government. The legislation was signed into law on February 24, 1855, by President Franklin Pierce. Throughout its 160-year history, although it has undergone notable changes in name, size, scope of jurisdiction, and procedures, its purpose has remained the same: in this court the federal government stands as the defendant and may be sued by citizens seeking monetary redress. For this reason, the court has been referred to as the "keeper of the nation's conscience" and "the People's Court."

As originally in 1855, the court lacked the essential judicial power to render final judgments. This oversight was resolved by legislation passed in 1866, in response to President Abraham Lincoln's insistence in his Annual Message to Congress in 1861 that, "It is as much the duty of Government to render prompt justice against itself, in favor of citizens, as it is to administer the same, between private individuals."

In 1887, Congress passed the Tucker Act, which significantly expanded the court's jurisdiction to include all claims against the government except tort, equitable, and admiralty claims. The court thus today has nationwide jurisdiction over most suits for monetary claims against the government and sits, without a jury, to determine issues of law and fact. The general jurisdiction of the court, described in 28 U.S.C. ยง 1491,[4] is over claims for just compensation for the taking of private property, refund of federal taxes, military and civilian pay and allowances, and damages for breaches of contracts with the government. The court also possesses jurisdiction over claims for patent and copyright infringement against the United States, as well as over certain suits by Indian tribes.

Additionally, the court has jurisdiction to hear both pre-award and post-award bid protest suits by unsuccessful bidders on government contracts.

A unique aspect of the court's jurisdiction throughout its history has been the authority to act on congressional references of legislative proposals for compensation of individual claims. As eventually codified in 28 U.S.C. ยง 1492,[5] either House of Congress may refer a bill to the Chief Judge of the court for an investigation and a report to Congress. A judge of the court is assigned to act as the hearing officer and preside over the judicial proceedings. Then a three-judge review panel submits a report to Congress for its consideration and disposition of such claims for compensation.

Befitting its unique role, the court has been located throughout its history in Washington, DC, in the vicinity of the White House or in the U.S. Capitol Building. It first met in May 1855 at Willard's Hotel. In July of that year, it moved into the Capitol. After briefly using the Supreme Court's chamber in the basement of the Capitol, it then acquired its own rooms there. In 1879, the court obtained space on the ground floor of the Freedman's Bank Building, which stood at the place now occupied by the Treasury Annex, adjacent to the southeast corner of Lafayette Park. Two decades later, in 1899, the court moved to the building formerly occupied by William Corcoran's art collection across Lafayette Park at the intersection of 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue.

It remained there for 65 years. This building was designed by, and is presently named for, the architect James Renwick, who also designed the Smithsonian Institution's Castle on the National Mall and St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City. When the facilities there were deemed inadequate by the mid- 1950s, the court asked Congress for a new location. Eventually, the site at 717 Madison Place, NW, was chosen and the court moved to its present home on August 1, 1967.

The court's original composition of three judges was expanded to five in 1863. They would consider evidence proffered by claimants and weigh testimony taken by permanent or special commissioners employed by the court, who were dispersed across the United States. One of the first commissioners was Benjamin Harrison of Indiana, who would later become President.[6] If oral argument was requested, the five judges would hear the case en banc. Appeal to the Supreme Court was by right if the amount in dispute was over $3,000. The growth in government caused by and coinciding with World War I made the system unworkable, as the number of filed cases increased considerably. In 1925, legislation enacted by Congress at the request of the court created a separate trial division of seven commissioners and elevated the five judges to an appellate role. Initially, the trial commissioners would function as special masters in chancery and conduct formal proceedings either at the court's home in Washington, DC, or elsewhere in the United States in a court facility amenable to the parties. The trial procedures evolved to resemble a non-jury civil trial in district court.

In 1948, the commissioners were authorized to make recommendations for conclusions of law. The number of commissioners was increased in 1953 to 15. In 1966, Congress provided that there would be seven appellate judges to be appointed by the President with life tenure. In 1973, the title of the commissioners was changed to trial judge and by 1977, the Court of Claims had 16 trial judges who conducted trials of cases in the first instance. Judgments, which are required to be paid out of appropriations by Congress, were originally paid by individual appropriations passed separately or as part of other appropriations bills. In 1955, Congress provided for a standing appropriation for judgments of $100,000 or less. Finally, in 1977, Congress created a permanent, indefinite appropriation for all judgments awarded by the court.

The court as now constituted consists of 16 judges, appointed by the President and subject to confirmation by the U.S. Senate for terms of 15 years. In addition, judges who have completed their statutory terms of office are authorized to continue to take cases as senior judges of the court. This ongoing tenure serves as a mechanism to ensure judicial impartiality and independence.

In recent years, the court's docket has been increasingly characterized by complex, high-dollar demands, and high-profile cases in such areas as, for example, the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s, the World War II internment of Japanese-Americans, and the federal repository of civilian spent nuclear fuel.

Nevertheless, despite the nature of the claim, the notability of the claimant, or the amount in dispute, the Court of Federal Claims acts as a clearing house when the government must settle up with those it has legally wronged. As observed by former Chief Judge Loren A. Smith, the court is the institutional scale that weighs the government's actions against the standard measure of the law and helps make concrete the spirit of the First Amendment's guarantee of the right "to petition the Government for redress of grievances."[9]

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 gave the court the authority to create an Office of Special Masters to receive and hear certain vaccine injury cases, and the jurisdiction to review those cases.[10] This vaccine injury jurisdiction has been enlarged in recent years to encompass claims stemming from a number of additional vaccines, including, for example, varicella, hepatitis B, and influenza.

Though a provision of the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 gave the Court of Federal Claims and U.S. districts courts concurrent jurisdiction over post-award protests, subsequent legislation provided that, as of January 2001, that the United States Court of Federal Claims would be the exclusive judicial forum for post-award bid protest litigation.

In 2006, the court rendered judgments in more than 900 cases and awarded $1.8 billion in damages.

The court has special jurisdiction, spelled out in  28 U.S.C. § 1491: it hears claims for monetary damages[11] that arise from the United States Constitution, federal statutes, executive regulations, or an express or implied in fact contract with the United States Government, most notably under the Tucker Act. The court has concurrent jurisdiction with U.S. district courts, when the claim is for less than $10,000, by the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1346. Claims have a statute of limitations of six years from the time the claim first accrues.[12] This limitation is strictly construed by the court.

The court has concurrent jurisdiction involving contracts with the federal government, where a contractor has the option of choosing between filing suit with the court or with the agency Board of Contract Appeals. The general rule is that a contractor may either 1) file suit within 90 days with the agency Board of Contract Appeals or 2) file suit within one year with the court.  A contractor, however, must choose which forum in which to file; a contractor cannot file suit with both the agency Board and with the court. (However, in a case where a contractor has filed with the Board, and the Government challenges the timeliness of the filing — the 90-day limit is statutory and cannot be extended — the contractor can file with the court within the one-year period to protect its claims.)

Unlike district courts, which generally only have jurisdiction over disputes in their geographic district, the CFC has jurisdiction over disputes wherever they occur in the country. To accommodate litigants, judges on the court may hold trials at local courthouses near where the disputes arise.[13]

All trials at the court are bench trials, without juries.  Because the court only hears cases against the Government, the United States is always the defendant in cases before the CFC.

The court receives a variety of claims against the government, including breach of contract claims, illegal exaction claims, takings claims under the 5th Amendment, claims involving military pay, claims for patent and copyright infringement against the government, federal tax refund claims, and protests regarding contract bidding procedures. According to the Court, tax refund suits make up a quarter of the claims brought before it, although the court exercises concurrent jurisdiction with United States district courts in this area.

Orders and judgments from the court are appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which resides in the same building as the CFC.

The court also may hear congressional reference cases, which are cases referred to the court by either house of Congress. The judge serving as hearing officer renders a report as to the case's merits, which is reviewed by a panel of judges formed for that purpose. The report is forwarded back to the chamber of Congress requesting it.[14]


who is credited with inventing the first microscope

Over the years there have been claims Zacharias Janssen invented the telescope and/or the microscope in Middelburg between 1590 and 1618. Zacharias worked for some period of his life as spectacle-maker (a very competitive and secretive trade) and at one time lived next door to Middelburg spectacle maker Hans Lippershey, also claimed to have invented the telescope. Janssen's attribution to these discoveries is debatable since there is no concrete evidence as to the actual inventor, and there are a whole series of confusing and conflicting claims from the testimony of his son and fellow countrymen.[9][10]

Zacharias Janssen

Zacharias Janssen (also Zacharias Jansen or Sacharias Jansen) (1585 â€“ pre-1632[1]) was a Dutch spectacle-maker from Middelburg associated with the invention of the first optical telescope. Janssen is sometimes also credited for inventing the first truly compound microscope. However, the origin of the microscope, just like the origin of the telescope, is a matter of debate.

Zacharias Janssen was born in The Hague. Local records seem to indicate he was born in 1585[2] although a date of birth as early as 1580[3] or as late a 1588 are also given.[4] His parents were Hans Martens[5] (who may have had the occupation of a peddler)[6] and Maeyken Meertens, both probably from Antwerp, Belgium. He grew up with his sister Sara in Middelburg, at the time the second most important city of the Netherlands. He was known as a "street seller" who was constantly in trouble with the local authorities.[6]

He stated he was born in The Hague on the marriage file of his first marriage, with Catharina de Haene, on October 23, 1610. When this file was refound by Cornelis de Waard in 1906, De Waard found the following excerpt: Sacharias Jansen, j.g. uut Den Haag, "Zacharias Jansen, bachelor from The Hague"[5] Before, it was often thought that Janssen was a native of Middelburg. In 1612, Zacharias and Catharina had a son they named Johannes Zachariassen.

In 1615 Zacharias was appointed guardian of two children of Lowys Lowyssen "geseyt Henricxen brilmakers" (called Henry the spectacle maker). It is surmised that Zacharias also took possession of Lowys Lowyssen's spectacle-making tools because the first record of Zacharias Janssen being a spectacle maker appears in 1616.[7] The family had to move to Arnemuiden in 1618 after Zacharias's counterfeiting activities were exposed. There Zacharias was again accused of counterfeiting in 1619 causing him to be on the move again, ending up back in Middleburg in 1621.[8]

A year after the death of Janssen's first wife in 1624, he married Anna Couget from Antwerp, who was the widow of a Willem Jansen (probably a relative of Janssen). He moved to Amsterdam in November 1626 with a profession of a spectacle maker, but was bankrupt by 1628. Janssen has been given a death date as late as 1638[3] although his sister said he was dead in 1632 testimony[8] and his son Johannes declared his parents had died by the time of his marriage in April 1632.[5]

The claim that Zacharias Janssen invented the telescope and the microscope dates back to the year 1655. During that time Dutch diplomat Willem Boreel conducted an investigation trying to figure out who invented the telescope.[11][9] He had a local magistrate in Middelburg follow up on a 45 year old recollection of a spectacle maker named "Hans" who told a young Boreel in 1610 about inventing the telescope. In his investigation the magistrate was contacted by a then unknown claimant, Middelburg spectacle maker Johannes Zachariassen, the son of Zacharias Janssen, who testified under oath that his father invented the telescope and the microscope as early as 1590 and that Hans Lippershey had stolen his father's invention of the telescope.[9] This testimony seemed to convincing to Boreel, who modified his recollections, concluding that Zacharias must have been who he remembered.[12] Boreel's conclusion that Zacharias Janssen invented the telescope a little ahead of spectacle maker Hans Lippershey was adopted by Pierre Borel in his 1656 book on the subject.[13]

In Boreel's investigation Johannes also claimed his father, Zacharias Jansen, invented the compound microscope in 1590. This pushes the date so early it is sometimes assumed, for the claim to be true (Zacharias most likely dates of birth would have made him 2-5 years old at the time)[14][15] grandfather Hans Martens must have invented it.[16][17]

Other claims have come forward over the years. Physicist Jean Henri van Swinden's 1822-23 investigation reached the conclusion supporting Janssen and in 1841 a collector named Zacharias Snijder came forward with 4 iron tubes with lenses in them purported to be Janssen original telescopes.[18] In historian Cornelis de Waard's 1906 book on the history of the telescope he recounted his discovery of note written in 1634 by the Dutch philosopher Isaac Beeckman in which Beeckman mentioned that Johannes Zachariassen claimed his father created his first telescope in 1604 (and that it was a copy of an Italian device from 1590).[19] The German astronomer Simon Marius account to his patron Johan Philip Fuchs von Bimbach about meeting an unnamed Dutchman at the 1608 Autumn Frankfurt Fair who tried to sell him a device that sounded like a broken telescope has led to later speculation this unnamed Dutchman could have been Zacharias Janssen.[20]

The confusion surrounding the claim to invention of the telescope and the microscope arises in part from the (sometimes conflicting) testimony of Zacharias Janssen's son, Johannes Zachariassen. Johannes claims include that his father invented the telescope in 1590, that his father invented the telescope in 1604, that he and his father invented the telescope in 1618, and that Jacob Metius and Cornelis Drebbel bought a telescope from him and his father in 1620 and copied it.[clarification needed][22] Johannes also seems to have lied about his own date of birth, maybe so he could stake his own claim as inventor of the telescope along with his father.[22]

The 1655 investigation by William Boreel (who may have been a childhood friend of Zacharias Zachariassen) added to the confusion over invention. The people he had the local magistrate interview were trying to recount details 50 or 60 years after the fact and Boreel may have confused the names of spectacle makers from his childhood. He may have also been confused about a microscope built by another optician for Drebbel, claiming it was built by Zacharias Janssen.[9]

An investigation begun in 1816 in preparation for a memorial to commemorate Janssen as the inventor of the telescope and microscope turned up further problems with the claim including the Lippershey and Metius patent applications, Janssen late 1585 date of birth, and no record of him being a spectacle maker before 1615.[23]

Albert Van Helden, Sven DuprÃ©, Rob Van Gent, and Huib Zuidervaart in their book "Origins of the Telescope" came to the conclusion that Janssen may not have become an optician until 1616 and that the claims surrounding him as the inventor of the telescope and the microscope were the fabrications of his own son, Johannes Zachariassen, who claimed it as a matter of fame and for possible financial gain.[9]

In the years 1613â€“1619, Janssen was tried several times for counterfeiting coins. Janssen grew up right next to the Middleburg mint where his brother-in-law worked. These circumstances made it very easy for Janssen to mimic the process of manufacturing money. He fled to the neighbouring village of Arnemuiden to avoid the high penalties for counterfeiting coins.[5]

However, he continued counterfeiting coins in Arnemuiden. In 1619 he was apprehended for owning several devices he counterfeited coins with. Normally, one would have been sentenced to death for this crime. However, since the father of the Arnemuiden bailiff was found to be an accessory, he was pardoned from this punishment. Thanks to this, the process was delayed to such an extent that Janssen was able to flee again. Eventually, the case was dismissed. Janssen returned to Middleburg in 1621.[5]

Janssen's life was documented by the many investigations on the subject before the Second World War. Many of the Middelburg archives were destroyed by a bombing of Middelburg on May 17, 1940, during the Nazi invasion of the Netherlands. Without these earlier studies, very little would be known of Janssen's life at all, since all original files were lost in the fires following the bombardment.


who was blamed for misgovernment for annexation of avadh

His kingdom, long protected by the British under treaty, was eventually annexed  bloodlessly on 11 February 1856, two days before the ninth anniversary of his coronation. The Nawab was exiled to Garden Reach in Metiabruz, then a suburb of Kolkata, where he lived out the rest of his life on a generous pension. He was a poet, playwright, dancer and great patron of the arts. He is widely credited with the revival of Kathak as a major form of classical Indian dance. He is survived by his great great grand daughter Manzilat Fatima in Kolkata who is a chef and is cooking with the same passion with which her ancestors ate.

Wajid Ali Shah

Wajid Ali Shah (Urdu: واجد علی شاہ) (30 July 1822 – 1 September 1887) was the tenth and last Nawab of Awadh, holding the position for 9 years, from 13 February 1847 to 11 February 1856.[1][2]

Nawab Wajid Ali Shah's first wife was Begum Hazrat Mahal, a woman who has gone down in history for her valour and courage in standing up to the might of the British forces during India's first struggle of freedom against British in 1857[3]

Wajid Ali Shah succeeded to the throne of Awadh when the kingdom was well past its heyday. The British had annexed much of the kingdom under the treaty of 1801, and had impoverished Awadh by imposing a hugely expensive, British-run army and repeated demands for loans. The independence of Awadh in name was tolerated by the British only because they still needed a buffer state between their presence in the East and South, and the remnants of the Mughal Empire to the North.

Wajid Ali Shah was most unfortunate to have ascended the throne of Oudh at a time when the British East India Company was determined to grab the coveted throne of prosperous Awadh, which was "the garden, granary, and queen-province of India"- the royal predecessors and successors of Awadh were one of the major threats to the Mughal Empire before Britain's attempt at usurping full political control in India.

In different circumstances perhaps, he might have succeeded as a ruler because he had many qualities that make a good administrator. He was generous, kind and compassionate towards his subjects, besides being one of the most magnanimous and passionate patrons of fine arts in the Indian tradition. When he ascended the throne, he took keen interest in the administration of justice, introduced reforms, and reorganised the military. Wajid Ali Shah was widely regarded as a debauched and detached ruler, but some of his notoriety seems to have been misplaced. The main case for condemnation comes from the British Resident of Lucknow, General William Sleeman, who submitted a report highlighting "maladministration" and " "lawlessness" he described as prevailing there, although Sleeman himself was strictly opposed to aggressive annexation for reasons political, financial and ethical.[4]. This provided the British with the facade of "benevolence" they were looking for, and formed the official basis for their annexation. Recent studies have, however, suggested that Oudh was neither as bankrupt nor as lawless as the British had claimed. In fact, Oudh was for all practical purposes under British rule well before the annexation, with the Nawab playing little more than a titular role. The army was composed mostly of British officers, while the purse strings were firmly under the control of the East India Company. In his book "Awadh Under Wajid Ali Shah", Dr. G.D. Bhatnagar[5] gives the following assessment of this ill-starred prince:

Dr. G.D. Bhatnagar, Awadh Under Wajid Ali Shah

A large number of composers who thrived under the lavish patronage of the Nawab rulers of Lucknow enriched the light classical form of thumri; most prominent among these was Wajid Ali Shah. He was not only a munificent patron of music, dance, drama, and poetry, but was himself a gifted composer. He had received vocal training under great Ustads like Basit Khan, Pyar Khan and Jafar Khan. Pyar Khan, Jafar Khan and Basit Khan were the direct descendants of Mian Tansen and were the sons of the famous tanseni Chajju Khan. Bahadur Hussain Khan/Zia-ud-Daulah was the favourite musician of Wajid Ali Shah. Bahadur Hussain Khan was the son of the famous Sufi saint Jeevan Shah of Jhansi and descendant of Tansen's son-in-law Naubat Khan. Although Wajid Ali Shah's pen-name was "Qaisar", he used the pseudonym "Akhtarpiya" for his numerous compositions. Under this pen name, he wrote over forty works – poems, prose and thumris. Diwan-i-Akhtar, Husn-i-Akhtar contain his ghazals. He is said to have composed many new ragas and named them Jogi, Juhi, Shah-Pasand, etc.

The source for much information on music in Nawabi Lucknow comes from the text Ma’danul Moosiqui (‘The Mine of Music’) of Hakim Mohammed Karam Imam, courtier of Wajid Ali Shah.[6] During his time, complicated ragas like hori and dhrupad were ignored and easier raginis like tilak, pilu, sendura, khammach, bhairvi and jhanjhauti were encouraged. As these were liked by the king and easily understood by all sections of society, they came to be well-loved by commoners. Wajid Ali Shah has been accused of cheapening the classical tradition and promoting lighter forms of music such as ghazals and thumris. But then, as argued by scholars like Ravi Bhatt, this is how popular music has always been criticised.[7] Popular belief has it that the light classical form, thumri was created by Wajid Ali Shah. However, James Kippen argued that evidence suggests thumri had almost certainly already become an independent vocal form somewhat influenced by khayal by 1800, becoming extremely popular and pervasive in the time of Wajid Ali Shah. Wajid Ali wrote and performed ghazals, and the modern day style of ghazals were certainly evolved by his innovative ideas and experimentations in ghazals, some of which were noted for their inclusion of obscenities and sexually explicit references to his own private life.[8]

Together with music, dance in Lucknow developed strongly and became a pre-eminent art under the patronage of Wajid Ali Shah. In the ancient times Kathak being the part of the temple ritual, was performed at temples. With the change of time the Kathak performers in search of better prospects and rich patronage left the temple and entered into royal courts. Transformation was inevitable. The dance started adapting itself to the demands of the court, but it was under the artistic guidance and patronage of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah, that Kathak achieved greater dimensions. He gave a definite form, made it more artistic, and gave to it an aesthetic touch, he enriched it with rasa and bhava, and he added literature to it, lent it sensuality, and furnished it with grandeur and splendor to its presentation, argued Abdul Halim Sharar.[9] During this period, Kathak was also extensively performed by tawaifs, who themselves developed the art in parallel to its refinement in court. They frequently performed on lighter classical music of such as dadra, kajri and tappa as well as thumri. Given the tawaifs' environment, their performance style of Kathak also differed from the court style, involving more of what in Kathak is termed nakhra (mischievous playfulness).[10]

Wajid Ali Shah started two distinct forms one is Rahas and the other one is called Raas. He himself choreographed a dance based on the moves of Kathak called, Rahas, that he danced himself with the ladies of his court. For him Rahas was a dramatic form of theatre including acting, dancing, and music and with different scenes the whole setting and locale changes. On the other hand Raas was purely a religious form. Primarily Dhrupad was sung in Raas and the performance began with its singing. Raas was a circular form of dance where many gopis danced with one Krishna. Radhakamal Mukerjee in his book, The Lord of the Autumn Moons, says that the Raspancadhyayi or the five chapters pertaining to the circular group dance of Krishna with the Gopis, distill the embody the fully maturity of the mystical emotions.[11]

Kathak dance attained new heights of popularity and glory under his expert guidance and lavish patronage. Thakur Prasadji was his Kathak guru, and the unforgettable Kalka-Binda brothers performed in his court. What with the grand pageantry of the Rahas, Jogiya Jashan, Dance dramas, and Kathak performances, Lucknow became the magnetic cultural centre where the most reputed musicians, dancers and poets of the time flourished. The greatest musicians, dancers and instrumentalists of the time enjoyed his munificent patronage and hospitality. It was at his reign that Lucknow Gharana came into existence. It was in this period that the Lucknow Gharana of Kathak attained maturity, through the efforts of the stalwarts like Thakur Prasadji and others. The Lucknow style of Kathak dance is characterized by graceful movements, elegance and natural poise with dance. Abhinaya, concern for movement shape and creative improvisations are the hallmarks of this style. He not only made Kathak as the official court dance, but using it in performances of rahas made it popular among the people.

When Wajid Ali Shah was a young boy, some astrologers warned his parents that he would become a Yogi, and advised them that the boy should be dressed up as a Yogi on each birthday of his so as to counteract the effect of the evil stars. He established his famous Parikhaana (abode of fairies) in which hundreds of beautiful and talented girls were taught music and dancing by expert-teachers engaged by the royal patron. These girls were known as Paris (fairies) with names such as Sultan pari, Mahrukh pari and so on. On each birthday, the Nawab would dress up as a Yogi with saffron robes, ash of pearls smeared on his face and body, necklaces of pearls around his neck, and a rosary in his hand, and walk pompously into the court with two of his 'paris dressed up as Jogans. Gradually he made it into a spectacular pageant or Mela known as Jogia Jashan, in which all citizens of Lucknow could participate, dressed as Yogis, irrespective of caste and creed. Later, when his favourite venue, the Qaisarbagh Baradari was built, he began to stage his magnificent Rahas (obviously a Persianised name for Rasleela) full of sensuous poetry, his own lyrical compositions and glamorous Kathak dances.

Ranbir Singh gives details of Wajid Ali Shah's book entitled Bani in which the author mentions 36 types of Rahas all set in Kathak style (with colourful names like Mor-Chchatr, Ghunghat, Salami, Mor Pankhi and Mujra), and gives exhaustive notes about the costumes, jewellery, and stage- craft. Rahas, prepared at a fabulous cost of several lakhs (hundred thousands) of rupees, became very popular, and was performed at the Kaisarbagh-Rahas Manzil, (most probably the first Hindustani Theatre Hall). Many have regarded Wajid Ali Shah as "the first playwright of the Hindustani theatre", because his "Radha Kanhaiyya Ka Qissa" staged in the Rahas Manzil was the first play of its kind. It featured the Goddess Radha, Lord Krishna, several sakhis, and a Vidushaka-like character named "Ramchera". Songs, dances, mime, and drama were all delightfully synthesised in these Rahas performances. He dramatised many other poems such as Darya-i-Tashsq, Afsane-i-Isbaq, and Bhahar-i-Ulfat. It is said that Amanat's Inder Sabha was inspired by these dance-dramas, written, produced and staged by Nawab Wajid Ali Shah.

Like the Performing Arts Wajid Ali Shah also patronised literature and several poets and writers in his court. Notable among them were ‘Barq’, ‘Ahmad Mirza Sabir’, ‘Mufti Munshi’, and ‘Aamir Ahmad Amir’, who wrote books at the orders of Wajid Ali Shah, Irshad-us-Sultan and Hidayat-us-Sultan, Amanat the famous author of Indra Sabha and Bekhud wrote Jalwa-Akhatar, Hajjo Sharaf and Afsana-i-Lucknow have presented a picture of the times and life of Wajid Ali Shah. The famous poet Ghalib also received the gracious patronage of Wajid Ali Shah, who granted him a pension of Rupees five hundred per year in 1854.[12] Wajid Ali Shah used to write himself and was a poet of a considerable merit. He used to write under the nom-de-plume of ‘Akhtar’. He had equal command over Persian and Urdu and wrote several books in both languages. According to his court chronicler Masih-ud-Din he received a liberal western education and was well versed in ancient and modern history and literature. Garcin de Tassy, while travelling in the sub-continent during the mid-nineteenth century wrote in his journal about Wajid Ali Shah and noted, "I do not have to appreciate here this very political resolution, neither do I have to appreciate the qualities or defects of Wajid Ali Shah, as a sovereign, but I am interested in him as a distinguished scholar and as eminent poet in Hindustani".[13]

Wajid Ali Shah wrote extensively and adopted a simple language which easily conveyed meaning to all, it showed sprinkling of Awadhi, the local dialect. He was a prolific writer. His work Sawat-ul-Qalub runs into 1061 pages and comprises a collection of 44,562 couplets, and was completed in a short span of three years. Abdul Lais Siddiqi in Lucknow Ka Dabistan-i-Shairi noted that it was common for kings to employ poets to write on their behalf but this was not true of Wajid Ali Shah, and every single word has been written by himself and no one else.[14] One of his most important works is the autobiographical Huzn-i-Akhtar, which is in verse and contains nearly 1276 couplets. It is faithful records of the hazardous journey that he undertook from Lucknow to Calcutta, after having relinquished his crown. It speaks of the unkind and unceremonious treatment metted to him by the British authorities. Vivid details of the people and the places he encountered on his journey. It also evokes his desperation at his arrest and subsequent deportment to Calcuttaâ€™s Matiya Burj. Another important work of his is Bani which runs into 400 pages. It is a treatise on Music and Dance, which offers details of the mushairas held at Matiya Burj, of the buildings raised there at his command. There are also descriptions of the animals at his personal zoo, besides vignettes of the life and the time at Matiya Burj. Although it is estimated that he wrote over 60 books but most of his works are not available and hence no critical assessment of his writing has been made till date.[15]

After losing the kingdom, the Nawab first went to Kanpur and then progressed to Calcutta in a steamer accompanied by his close relatives and large entourage comprising musicians, nautch girls, cooks and animals from his menagerie and came ashore at Bichali Ghat near Metiabruz, Calcutta on 13 May 1856.[16] He had made up his mind to go and plead his case to Queen Victoria because of his firm belief in the British sense of justice. However, his physicians did not think his health would permit such a long voyage and it was his mother, brother and heir apparent who left for England. A year later when the First War of Independence spread to Lucknow and the sepoys installed one of his sons to the throne of Awadh, Wajid Ali Shah was imprisoned in Fort William by the British along with his Prime Minister, due to apprehensions that he would become a rallying figure for the sepoys. HEA Cotton wrote that on Panic Sunday (14 June 1857), there was wide spread apprehension among the white inhabitants of Kolkata because he had "one, two, three thousand" (no one knew) armed men under him. The First War of Independence dashed all his hopes of returning to Lucknow.[17] After his release from Fort William, he was "allotted" a building called BNR House in Garden Reach near the headquarter of South Eastern Railway, Kolkata. In those days, it is said, it was called Parikhana.[18]  However, heartbroken after leaving Lucknow, he had carried his dear city in his heart and proceeded to carve out a miniature of Lucknow in Metiabruz. In his exile in Metiabruz, he tried to keep the sweet memories of his Lucknow era alive by recreating the musical environments of his Kaisarbagh Baradari. The banished king had been "given" a number of fine houses with vast grounds stretching along the banks of the river Hooghly three to four miles south of Kolkata. Because of the presence there of an earthen dome (or raised platform), people would refer to it as Matiya Burj. The king spent lavishly out of his income of 12 lakhs (or, 1.2 million) rupees per annum and before long a "second Lucknow" arose in this area.[17]

His bhairavi thumri Babul Mora Naihar Chhooto Jaay has been sung by several prominent singers, but a particularly popular rendition remembered today was performed by Kundan Lal Saigal for the 1930s movie Street Singer.

In a strange manner, this sad song epitomises the pain and agony of the poet king himself when he was exiled from his beloved Lucknow.

बाबुल मोरा, नैहर छूटो ही जाए
बाबुल मोरा, नैहर छूटो ही जाए

चार कहार मिल, मोरी डोलिया सजावें
मोरा अपना बेग़ाना छूटो जाए | बाबुल मोरा...

अंगना तो पर्बत भयाssss और देहरी भयी बिदेस
जाए बाबुल घर आपनो मैं चली पिया के देस | बाबुल मोरा...

بابُل مورا، نیہر چھُوٹو ہی جائے
 بابُل مورا، نیہر چھُوٹو ہی جائے

چار کہار مِل، موری ڈولِیا سجاویں (اُٹھایّں)
مورا اَپنا بیگانا چھُوٹو جائے ، بابُل مورا۔۔۔

آںگنا تو پربت بھیو اؤر دیہری بھیی بِدیش
 جائے بابُل گھر آپنو میں چلی پیّا کے دیش ، بابُل مورا ۔۔۔


where is chechnya and why is it important to russia

The North Caucasus, a mountainous region that includes Chechnya, spans or lies close to important trade and communication routes between Russia and the Middle East, control of which have been fought over by various powers for millennia.[3] Russia's entry into the region followed Tsar Ivan the Terrible's conquest of the Golden Horde's Khanates of Kazan and Astrakhan in 1556, initiating a long struggle for control of the North Caucasus routes with other contemporary powers including Persia, the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean Khanate.[4] Internal divisions prevented Russia from effectively projecting its power into the region until the 18th century; however, Russian-allied Cossacks began settling the North Caucasus lowlands following Ivan's conquests, sparking tensions and occasional clashes with Chechens, who at this time were themselves increasingly settling the lowlands due to adverse climatic changes[a] in their traditional mountain strongholds.[5][6]

Chechen–Russian conflict

Incorporation of Chechnya into Russia

Soviet Union era

Russian Federation era

The Chechen–Russian conflict (Russian: Чеченский конфликт, Chechenskiy konflikt) is the centuries-long conflict, often armed, between the Russian (formerly Soviet) government and various Chechen nationalist and Islamist forces. Formal hostilities date back to 1785, though elements of the conflict can be traced back considerably further.[1][2] Even at this official date, the conflict is the longest active war in the world.

The Russian Empire initially had little interest in the North Caucasus itself other than as a communication route to its ally Georgia and its enemies, the Persian and Ottoman Empires, but growing tensions triggered by Russian activities in the region resulted in an uprising of Chechens against the Russian presence in 1785, followed by further clashes and the outbreak of the Caucasian War in 1817. Russia only succeeded in suppressing the Chechen rebels in 1864.

During the Russian Civil War, Chechens and other Caucasian nations lived in independence for a few years before being Sovietized in 1921. During the Second World War, the Chechens saw the German invasion as an opportunity to revolt against the Soviet regime. In response, they were deported en masse to Central Asia where they were forced to stay until 1957.

The most recent conflict between Chechen and the Russian government took place in the 1990s. As the Soviet Union disintegrated, the Chechen separatists declared independence in 1991. By late 1994 the First Chechen War broke out and after two years of fighting the Russian forces withdrew from the region. In 1999, the fighting restarted and concluded the next year with the Russian security forces establishing control over Chechnya.

In 1774, Russia gained control of Ossetia, and with it the strategically important Darial Pass, from the Ottomans. A few years later, in 1783, Russia signed the Treaty of Georgievsk with Georgia, making Georgia—a Christian enclave surrounded by hostile Muslim states—a Russian protectorate. To fulfill her obligations under the treaty, Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia, began construction of the Georgian Military Road through the Darial Pass, along with a series of military forts to protect the route.[7] These activities, however, antagonized the Chechens, who saw the forts both as an encroachment on the traditional territories of the mountaineers and as a potential threat.[8]

Around this time, Sheikh Mansur, a Chechen imam, began preaching a purified version of Islam and encouraging the various mountain peoples of the North Caucasus to unite under the banner of Islam in order to protect themselves from further foreign encroachments. His activities were seen by the Russians as a threat to their own interests in the region, and in 1785, a force was sent to capture him. Failing to do so, it burned his unoccupied home village instead, but the force was ambushed by Mansur's followers on its return journey and annihilated, beginning the first Chechenâ€“Russian war. The war lasted several years, with Mansur employing mostly guerilla tactics and the Russians conducting further punitive raids on Chechen villages, until Mansur's capture in 1791. Mansur died in captivity in 1794.[9][10]

In 1801, Russia formally annexed Georgia, deepening Russia's commitment to the region.[11][verification needed] In subsequent years, a growing number of small-scale raids and ambushes by Chechen fighters on Russian forces moving through the Caucasus prompted the Russians to mount two substantial military expeditions into Chechen territory, both of which were defeated, and Russian leaders began considering more drastic measures. These were postponed however by Napoleon's 1812 invasion of Russia.[12]

After Russia's defeat of French Napoleonic forces in the 1812 war, Tsar Alexander I turned his attentions once more to the North Caucasus, assigning one of his most celebrated generals, Aleksey Petrovich Yermolov, to the pacification of the region. In 1817, Russian forces under Yermolov's command embarked upon the conquest of the Caucasus.[13] Yermolov's brutal tactics, which included economic warfare, collective punishment and forcible deportations, were initially successful, but have been described as counterproductive since they effectively ended Russian influence on Chechen society and culture and ensured the Chechens' enduring enmity. Yermolov was not relieved of command until 1827.[14][15]

A turning point in the conflict was marked in 1828 when the Muridism movement emerged. It was led by Imam Shamil. In 1834 he united the North Caucasus nations under Islam and declared "holy war" on Russia.[16] In 1845 Shamil's forces surrounded and killed thousands of Russian soldiers and several generals in Dargo, forcing them to retreat.[16]

During the Crimean War of 1853â€“6, the Chechens supported the Ottoman Empire against Russia.[16] However, internal tribal conflicts weakened Shamil and he was captured in 1859.[17] The war formally ended in 1862 when Russia promised autonomy for Chechnya and other Caucasian ethnic groups.[17] However, Chechnya and the surrounding region, including northern Dagestan, were incorporated into Russia as the Terek Oblast.

After the Russian Revolution, the mountain people of the North Caucasus came to establish the Mountainous Republic of the Northern Caucasus. It existed until 1921, when they were forced to accept Soviet rule. Joseph Stalin personally held negotiations with the Caucasian leaders in 1921 and promised a wide autonomy inside the Soviet state. The Mountain Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was created that year, but only lasted until 1924 when it was abolished and six republics were created.[18] The Chechen–Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was established in 1934. Confrontations between the Chechens and the Soviet government arose in the late 1920s during collectivization. It declined by the mid-1930s after local leaders were arrested or killed.[19]

Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941. According to Soviet sources, Chechens joined the Wehrmacht, although this claim is disputed as little evidence exists.[19] By January 1943, the German retreat started, while the Soviet government began discussing the deportation of Chechen and Ingush people far from the North Caucasus. In February 1944, under the direct command of Lavrentiy Beria, almost half million Chechens and Ingush were removed from their homes and forcibly settled in Central Asia. They were put in forced labor camps in Kazakhstan and Kirgiziya.[20] After Stalin's death in 1953, Nikita Khrushchev came to power and soon denounced his predecessor. In 1957, Chechens were allowed to return to their homes. The Chechenâ€“Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was reestablished.[21]

In 1957, Chechens were allowed to return to their homes. The Chechenâ€“Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was reestablished.[21] The violence began in 1958, upon a conflict between a Russian sailor and an Ingush youngster over a girl, in which the Russian was fatally injured. The incident quickly deteriorated into mass ethnic riots, as Slavic mobs attacked Chechens and Ingushes and looted property throughout the region for 4 days.[22] Ethnic clashes continued through 1960s, and in 1965 some 16 clashes were reported, taking tall of 185 severe injuries, 19 of them fatal.[22] By late 1960, the region calmed down and the Chechen-Russian conflict came to its lowest point until the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the eruption of Chechen Wars in 1990.

In 1991, Chechnya declared independence and was named the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria. According to some sources, from 1991 to 1994, tens of thousands of people of non-Chechen ethnicity (mostly Russians, Ukrainians and Armenians) left the republic amidst reports of violence and discrimination against the non-Chechen population.[23][24][25] Other sources do not identify displacement as a significant factor in the events of the period, instead focussing on the deteriorating domestic situation within Chechnya, the aggressive politics of the Chechyen President, Dzhokhar Dudayev, and the domestic political ambitions of Russian President Boris Yeltsin.[26][27] Russian army forces invaded Grozny in 1994[28] but, after two years of intense fighting, the Russian troops eventually withdrew from Chechnya under the Khasavyurt Accord.[29] Chechnya preserved its de facto independence until the second war broke out in 1999.[30]

In 1999, the Russian government forces again invaded Chechnya, in response to the invasion of Dagestan by Chechen-based Islamic forces.[30] By early 2000 Russia almost completely destroyed the city of Grozny and succeeded in putting Chechnya under direct control of Moscow.[30] According to Norman Naimark, "serious evidence indicates that Russian government developed plans to deport the Chechens once again in the mid-1990s if they had lost the war."[31]

Since the end of the Second Chechen War in May 2000, low-level insurgency has continued, particularly in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan. Russian security forces have succeeded in eliminating some of their leaders, such as Shamil Basayev, who was killed on July 10, 2006.[32] After Basayev's death, Dokka Umarov took the leadership of the rebel forces in North Caucasus until his death owing to poisoning in 2013.[33]

Radical Islamists from Chechnya and other North Caucasian republics have been held responsible for a number of terrorist attacks throughout Russia,[34] most notably the Russian apartment bombings in 1999,[35] the Moscow theater hostage crisis in 2002,[36] the Beslan school hostage crisis in 2004, the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings[37] and the Domodedovo International Airport bombing in 2011.[38][39]

The exact casualties of this conflict are difficult to ascertain due to lack of records and the long time period of the clashes. One source indicates that at least 60,000 Chechens were killed in the First and Second Chechen War in the 1990s and 2000s alone. [40] High estimates of these two wars range of up to 150,000 or 160,000 killed, as put by Taus Djabrailov, the head of Chechnya's interim parliament.[41]


what happens to the boy in the little boy found

One of the major themes in The Little Boy Found is the presence of God in people's lives. This is explicitly said in line 4. God is a common topic in Blake's poetry, especially in Songs of Innocence and Songs of Experience. In The Little Boy Found being 'lost' does not always refer to literally being lost. It can also refer to being lost in life, such as drug addiction or just being out of touch. Although Blake was a religious man, God does not always refer to the deity that most people associate with the name. It could also mean the loving connections and relationships that people have with other people.[2] According to the article 'Pictorial and Poetic Design in Two Songs of Innocence' by Thomas Connolly "some individuals are maimed because they are exposed to destructive experience without the shielding protection of a guardian."[3] In The Little Boy Found the boy has been lost, and wandering. He is then led by the light of God. God appears as his father in white; this portraying God's innocence. He is then led by God to his mother. The fact that the boy was lost signifies that he might have strayed from his original innocence. However, through the guidance of God he is led back to his mother, this exemplifies the pureness and innocence of children.

The Little Boy Found

"The Little Boy Found" is a poem by William Blake first published in the collection Songs of Innocence in 1789. Songs of Innocence was printed using illuminated printing, a style Blake created. By integrating the images with the poems the reader was better able to understand the meaning behind each of Blake's poems.[1]

"The Little Boy Found" is a sequel to "The Little Boy Lost". The two poems are written as simple songs, similar to nursery rhymes.[2]

The little boy lost in the lonely fen,
Led by the wand'ring light,
Began to cry, but God ever nigh,
Appeared like his father in white.

He kissed the child and by the hand led
And to his mother brought,
Who in sorrow pale, thro' the lonely dale
Her little weeping boy sought.

The poem's rhyme scheme isÂ : ABCB DEFE, with internal rhymes (CC and FF) on the third and seventh lines (The third line of each stanza). Blake uses a form of alliteration in the first two lines, repeating the letter l in "little...lost...lonely...led...light". The repetition of sound creates a rhythmic flow, setting the tone for the rest of the poem. The poem consists of two stanzas. In the first stanza the little boy is lost in a bog, and afraid when God comes to him. In the second stanza God leads him back to his mother, who had been looking for him.

The Little Boy Found presents a pastoral setting.

Scholars agree that "The Little Boy Found" is the 14th object in the order of the original printings of the Songs of Innocence and of Experience. The following, represents a comparison of several of the extant copies of the poem, their print date, their order in that particular binding of the book of poems, and their holding institution:[4]

Songs of Innocence, copy B, 1789 (Library of Congress) object 23

Songs of Innocence, copy G, 1789 (Yale Center for British Art) object 21

Songs of Innocence, copy U, 1789 (Houghton Library) object 15 The Little Boy Found

Songs of Innocence and of Experience, copy A, 1795 (British Museum) object 22

Songs of Innocence and of Experience, copy L, 1795 (Yale Center for British Art) object 22

Songs of Innocence and of Experience, copy Y, 1825 (Metropolitan Museum of Art), object 14

Songs of Innocence and of Experience, copy Z, 1826 (Library of Congress) object 14

Songs of Innocence and of Experience, copy AA, 1826 (The Fitzwilliam Museum) object 14