To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Jewish Board of Guardians (United Kingdom)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Board of Guardians for the Relief of the Jewish Poor or, as it is most generally known, the Jewish Board of Guardians, was a charity established by the upper class Jewish community in the East End of London in 1859. The board sought to provide relief for Jewish immigrants and soon became the central provider of relief for the Jewish poor in London.

After an amalgamation with other charities in the 1990s, the Jewish Board of Guardians became Jewish Care, an organization that still exists today.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    916
    767
    24 530 867
    9 732
    685
  • Drawing over the colour line: Art & cosmopolitan politics in London 1919-39 (11 Oct 2012)
  • Four Visions of Daniel's Prophecies
  • ZEITGEIST: MOVING FORWARD | OFFICIAL RELEASE | 2011
  • COMMON SENSE BY THOMAS PAINE FULL VIDEO BOOK
  • America's Original Sin: Racism, White Privilege, and the Bridge to a New America

Transcription

>> Dr. Caroline Bressey: Thank you very much. So I'm going to be talking about some new research that I've been working on with my colleague, Gemma Romaine, who's here, that we started in January. It's all a bit new. So I am going to be reading my notes, but if there's things that you're not clear about or I'm talking too quickly or whatever it might be, please put up your hand, and I will try and deal with any comments, but I've planned it so there'll be time for questions at the end. So that's the plan for today. On the 12th of September 1926, Maria Davis sat down at her home at 12 [inaudible] building in Hobin, not far from here, to write a letter. Her letter is a relatively short piece of fan mail addressed to one of the most popular entertainers of the age, the African American actress and singer Florence Mills. "A Negro Anthology", edited by Nancy Cunard and published in London in 1934, carried a profile of Mills written by her husband, the comedian U.S. Thompson under the section "Negro Stars". And although no recordings of Florence Mills' performances survive, she's considered one of the leading performers of the jazz age and the Harlem Renaissance of the 1920's. So according to her husband's profile, Mills, who appears in the picture on the right, was born in Washington, D.C. on the 25th of January 1895 and was performing in theaters from the age of 4 but forced to leave the stage in order to attend school. Her family later moved to New York where they formed an act, she formed an act with her sisters, but she also performed on stage alone in theaters in and around New York. She worked hard, given this is, you know, a segregated time, she worked hard to become a performer, but her major role, her first major role came when she acted as a replacement lead in the hit musical "Shuffle Away". That was in 1921. In 1923, she came to London for the first time with a show called "Dover Street Dixie", and it had a successful run, but it was her starring role in "Blackbirds", first performed in Harlem but with long runs in Paris and London together for 11 months in 1926 that made her a massive star in Britain. Mills was a celebrity performer, but she was also an outspoken advocate of African American and black people's civil rights. Growing up in the United States, she was, not surprisingly, regularly a victim of racial prejudice and the politics of white supremacy, but these were also problems that she faced in Britain. The news that an all-black cast was going to be performing in London in 1923 outraged the entertainment unions, who complained to the London County Council and the press, and the compromise that the authorities settled on reflects the hardening racial prejudice of the color bar that was operating in Britain at the time. Mills and her colleagues did perform, but the unions successfully insisted that an all-white British cast performed in the first half with the show Mills and the rest of her African American colleagues cast in the second. When Mills returned with the "Blackbirds" in 1926, the protests continued. The unions' stance was criticized now in some parts of the press, and one reporter pointed out that it was not an issue of nationality that the unions had a problem with. There was no opposition to German or Austrian artists or American artists if they were from the United States if they were white. As the reporter observed, "The objection, therefore, must have its roots in the performers' color. What has really happened is that the VAF, which was the Variety Actors' Federation, has got black fever and got it badly. The Negro, because he is a Negro, must be banned. This certainly does not come very well from the country that was the first to abolish Negro slavery. But with the "Blackbirds" show, "Blackbirds" mania griped London. "Blackbirds" parties were held, and the performers were invited to socialize with high society. It was said that the Prince of Wales had seen the show more than 20 times. But the idea that Britain should not be a place that did not succumb to racial prejudice because of its history of abolition, although it wasn't the first to abolish slavery, that's a different story, it wasn't an argument that was won. Evelyn [Inaudible], for one, was certainly resentful of the fashionable success and popularity of the "Blackbirds". As Bill Egan has pointed out in his work on Florence Mills, the writer Antony Powell record that when issuing an invitation for guests, Warwich remind them that, "This isn't a party. There won't be a black man." So given the pressures from fellow white actors on her right to perform, it is unsurprising that Mills had a key to [inaudible] of the social problems of life in London and that she spoke out on racial issues, promoting the work of the National Association of the Advancement of Colored Peoples, better known as the NAACP during her time here. But Mills also held a deep concern about the poor and the marginalized. During her time in London, when she performed along with the "Blackbirds" cast in special performances for wounded servicemen, which is where the newspaper clipping on the left comes from, and donated her time for charity performances generating funds for the Children's Hospital in Hackney, and she was also chief attraction at a charity concert in aid of North London Jewish schools. And according to a newspaper report of that event, her rendering of the famous Jewish chant "Eli, Eli" was said by a rabbi present to be the most wonderful and expressive he had ever heard. And after her death, it became known that after her performances, once the theater was closed, Mills would be driven by her chauffeur to the East End, visiting several hospitals and giving away gifts, after which the car would head back west to the Embankment to enable her driver to distribute money to those sleeping rough by the river. Mills' stance on racial issues made her a great asset to black communities living in Britain, be they poor working people, students, or her fellow celebrity friends from the arts. In 1919, a new club, the Quotery of Friends, was started by a small group of students with the object of creating a social space where to quote serious-minded people of color could frequently meet, debate, discuss, and socialize. Although dormant for the 12 months where the program at the bottom comes from, which is an event in May 1923 because of a number of their core members had left London, they still claim to credit for having given some of the foremost functions for the Negro world in London as they saw it. The group's original members who founded the club in the spring of 1919, perhaps as a personal response to the violent race riots that were erupting around the world and across Britain that year, were all men. Edmund Thorton Jenkins, the Charleston-born musician who had studied composition at the Royal Academy of Music from 1920 to '21 but was also no stranger to jazz. Harold Piper, born in Montserrat, a member of the pharmaceutical society. Dr. Felix Herum, Harry Lekum, as he was known, a Trinidadian doctor, and then Randall H. Lockhard from Martinique, who was in London to study law. For the relaunch party, which this program is for, held on the 13th of May 1923, Florence Mills topped the list of guests of honor along with James P. Johnson and his orchestra, who would be taking charge of the music, as well as members of the West Indian cricket team. When the "Blackbirds" went on tour after playing many of the major cities in Britain, the strenuous schedule took a heavy toll on Mills. By now, she'd been performing constantly for five years, never missing a performance, and although she went to Germany to try and recuperate, she seemed to have got worse and had to return to the United States. She undertook an operation, which didn't help her get better. In fact, it proved fatal, and on the first of November 1927, aged only 31 she died. Her funeral is remembered as one of the most spectacular in Harlem. Over 5,000 people attended her funeral in the heart of black America, and it saw up to 100,000 people lined the surrounding streets. And well known for her political support for black and working-class communities, Mills' time in London became an inspiring cultural memory. When the feminist and Caribbean activist Amy Ashwood Garley and her partner, the playwright Sam Manning, he served in the British West Indies during the first World War. When the pair of them opened a club in London during the 1930's, they called it the Florence Mills Club, specializing in Caribbean food and music as Manning was a well-known Calypso and jazz musician. The club became a new coterie of friends, a gathering place for African and West Indian activists and students, although exactly where it was, we're not yet sure. So Maria Davis' letter to Mills, written in Hobin in 1926, which I will come back to, is now housed in the archives of the Schomburg Institute in Harlem, a branch of the New York Public Library vital to the research of the African Diaspora where Gemma and I visited earlier this year, and this is Gemma, who Gemma Romaine, who's my colleague on the project with me, in the archives in the Schomburg. And Florence Mills will probably be a major character in our HRC funded research project, "Drawing Over the Color Line", which examines the art world in the context of the making of cosmopolitan identities in London between the wars. And although her, Florence Mills, that is her story is clearly unique and exceptional, her time in London does illustrate a number of our project's themes. The Harlem Renaissance in New York, I'm sure many of you will have heard about. It's a time when African Americans created a revolution in music, art, and literature not only in Harlem, in New York, but across the United States, and it's a well-established subject of critical analysis for many interested in cultural politics, the evolution of music, literature of the arts, and the general history of the United States. These themes have been joined by historical examinations of the black presence in Paris, particularly in the 1920's, but also now increasingly by research across Europe such as Amsterdam, where an examination of new art movements in the city was beautifully illustrated in an exhibition held in Amsterdam in 2008 called "Black is Beautiful", and the image on the left was shown as part of that during the exhibition. But although like New York and Paris, [inaudible] London played host to the meetings of many intellectual students and workers in the realms of anti-colonial nationalists in Pan African politics. So then just a few examples. A similar interrogation of the relationships between art, political thought, literature, and identity in London has yet to be undertaken, and that's what we hope to be doing. Our project has come out of a pilot project that Gemma undertook, while uncompleted, in 2008, and she was asked to look in the UCL Slade archives, the Slade School of Fine Art here at UCL, and to see what kind of representations of black and minority ethnic people and its broadest sense or broadest understanding could be found in it, and some of you might have picked up some postcards of some of the images that came out of that research. Her work went back right to the beginning of the collection, which includes sort of very old prints, but also some of the thousands of pieces of artwork that the collection has. Although I think we'd admit that it was very much a kind of scratching of the surface, the collections that are there, and that's kind of what our project has grown upon, but although I'm going to be focusing today mostly on people of African descent, I wanted to emphasize our project is also interested in people from the Asian Diaspora, and we'll be particularly trying to [inaudible] clearly in this picture. This is a picture of Slade students here at UCL from 1938, and among them are five Indian students that we know were studying here at the time. They seem to be particularly interested in stage design and sculpture. Those are the models that particularly taking, although I doubt they were called models then. But we're trying to find out more about them, and particularly trying to locate the work they produced. So if any chance you might know who they are, do please let us know. But reflecting back on the material that Gemma had pulled out from the Slade collection, it seemed clear to us that a greater diversity of models were being used more often by the Slade during the 1920's and 1930's. Was this an influence of the Harlem Renaissance manifest in London, and if so, would we be able to use the works of art by students to recover the lives of African and Asian diasporas, people of the Diaspora living in London? We had a sense that looking at artists' models would provide us with an opportunity to examine the lives of more ordinary people, people who were working as studio live models probably to supplement their incomes in other kind of ordinary jobs. So these are two of the images from the UCL collection. Of course, UCL isn't the only art school in London. So perhaps it would be possible to replicate this across the other art schools. So in addition to examining the archives of the UCL Slade School of Fine Art, we're hoping to look at the [Inaudible] College of Arts, St. John's Wood Art School, and many of the London County Council Authority run the schools, and here are just some examples of people that we know that studied in some of those institutions. Of course, we realize that we're not going, well, we realize now that we're not going to be able to get to all these places this time, and certainly not in the depth that we would like. So I think this is probably going to be a project that gets built up. Because, of course, we're also particularly interested in people who didn't necessarily go to formal classes, people who might have been part of working class institutes, people who might have done one of courses just for their own sort of pleasure, not necessarily people who were in formal education, and quite how we're going to reach into those archives we still need to figure that out. And even something like the Slade archive, which is sort of so brilliantly put together, has its limitations. So the Slade collection of paintings, as we might call it generally, is actually a collection of prize-winning art. So people or students who did exceptionally good work, then won prizes were asked to donate their work and keep it in the college collection, which, amazingly, many of them did and still do. So there's this amazing sort of realm of art, but it's very particular, it's fine art. There's not much photography, for example. So we're trying to think about how we might access some photographic archives and places where people might have, be thinking about photography more as an art form at this time. But, of course, this being studio portraits of students working in the Slade archive remind us that aside from prize-winning students, there were lots of other people painting in a studio at the same time. So one of the things we're hoping to do is maybe find ways of uncovering other people's representations considered not as good as their prize-winning colleagues that might be in personal archives still because, of course, not all of the people here are students here or at other colleges become famous. For all sorts of reasons, people's artwork might not be known in the public domain. So we're trying to think about how we can bring some of those images back to life. But our project is not just for the recovery of artworks or for biographical recovery. So in this case as, you know, here are these two men. Where were they from? Where did they live? What did they do when they weren't sitting in front of art students, although I have to say these two particular photographs were taken rather later than the work that we're doing. But what we want to try and examine is the space of the art studio. So spaces like this as a place of cultural exchange. So we're trying to think about how the art studio, cafes, other places of education were places where people were black and white and brown as we might want to call it, came together for perhaps as a cultural exchange but also things that may have then turned into personal relationships and particularly interesting to us political relationships. So these places include places like the Slade studios but also meeting places in Soho such as the Florence Mills Club opened by Amy Ashwood Garley and Sam Manning, and also the Shimsham Club, which was opened in Soho in 1935 on 37 Waldorf Street. And we know that the Shimsham Club, the undercover policemen watched and reported on the cosmopolitan crowds that visited there, black and white, gay and straight. They listened to black musicians who played with and learned from American and Caribbean musicians and who made friends with the Jewish radicals who visited the club. And our project is aiming to map not only the black and brown people and who were part of a political cosmopolitan movement, but, of course, the white radicals, be they Jewish radicals, anti-fascists, Communists, or ordinary working-class people who were also part of this cosmopolitan moment, if we can call it that, in London at the time. So on the 14th of May 1923, a man, somewhere in Blighty as he called it, wrote another of those thousands of fan mail letters that Florence Mills received over her career. Among the many letters that she received from fans in the United States and Europe are ones from British men and women that give us, we would argue, unique insight into individual reflections of race and performance and desire here in Britain during the 1920's. Mills received an extraordinary range of letters. Some were simple requests or letters of thanks for her participation in charity performances, such as the one in the aid of London Jewish schools or the receipt, as you saw earlier, for the Children's Hospital, but also I think interesting a number of the letters reflect a sense of ownership or imagined intimacy with celebrities that we tend to associate with current popular culture. So, for example, one gentleman who had previously lived in Africa, which where he added he had been very happy, he wrote to Mills asking in a manner which he hoped would not be considered too presumptive, if she would care to be shown some of England's pretty and historical places from the sidecar of his motorcycle. In another perhaps unlikely request came from Irene Castle, who cabled Mills at the Pavilion Theater, which is where the "Blackbirds" performance played, to ask if she could borrow the costume Mills had worn in her first time on a London stage because Castle wanted it for a fancy dress party. She was planning to impersonate Mills at a party being held by Lady Cunard, presumably Nancy Cunard, later that night. But the man who wrote to Mills on the 14th of May 1923 before the "Blackbird" mania from somewhere in Blighty did not make a request of Mills for her time or for an item of clothing. He wrote simply to express his admiration. He believed that all of London would be brought to heel with "Dover Street Dixie", which was the first show she came with. Alongside his accurate prediction of her success, he offered his own advice, warning that she must try not to let success develop her pride for pride would hide her natural charm. He implored her to be earnest and true to herself, for then he argued you will reach the hearts of the real white men. Through all keeping natural and being as good as you can, in fact, be a woman, and you will be the master of man. He did not assume that Mills would read his letter and reflected that he would probably think I'm strange in the head. I don't suppose we will ever meet, he mused, not even in Good Old Dover Street, but I will dream of you my Photo Dixie. He wished her luck when she returned a millionaire to Dixie and signed off as sincere admirer, a white poor man. And just on the side, this picture of Mills is by the Indian artist Mukul Dey. And although produced in 1923, Day exhibited the portrait in 1927 from his studio in Knightsbridge, and at the time, the "Times" argued that, "As a rule, for obvious reasons, studio exhibitions have to be ignored, but in the case of Mr. Mukul Dey, the rule can be stretched." Partly it was because of the style of engraving that he used that was rather unusual, partly because he was relatively famous. He had done some frescos for the British Museum, but they also highlighted that as an engraver with the dry point, Mr. Mukul Dey retains his interest in quote Native subjects. So this picture that he did of Florence Mills is for us a representation of the key moment of cultural exchange between two artists and political activists, and we're hoping to explore it in rather more detail as the project goes on. The date of Millicent Briggs' letter to Florence Mills is not recorded, but in it she refers to Mills as my dear bluebird. It seems likely that she sent it during Mills' second stint in London during the "Blackbird" revue. One of the songs Mills sang on stage went, "Never had no happiness, Never felt no one's cares, I'm just a lonesome bit of humanity born on a Friday I guess. If the sun forgets no one, why don't it shine on me? I'm a little blackbird looking for a bluebird, too." "I'm a Little Blackbird Looking for a Bluebird," was Mills' signature song, and the listener was picking up on this in her letter. Briggs' letter was one of thanks, for Mills had just about crowned Briggs' happiness by sending her a photograph. Now an important personal possession, Briggs had been forced to part with the photograph for a fortnight so it could be copied and colored. Briggs reveals to us later readers of the letter that she and Mills had never actually met, for she hadn't been near enough to see Mills exactly to know her flesh intimately, but she remained confident that she had got her instructions to the colorist right, but she declared, "If I don't get the coloring right, I'll let you shoot me." Briggs adored Mills and argued that it was not simply because she was famous. Sure that, "If I had seen you walking along the street and didn't know who you were, I'd have fell for you just the same." In this opportunity to discuss emotions, she had perhaps never revealed to anyone else, Briggs confessed that, "I've got it bad. I've actually fallen in love with another woman." She had to wait until Saturday before she saw Mills again, perhaps at a performance or in her return photograph reflecting that, "I wish I could be your shade, then you'd never be out of my sight." But perhaps realizing she was starting to sound slightly obsessive, Briggs brought her letter to a close in case she went off the deep end. Wishing Mills something better than fame, happiness, she remained always your slave, Millicent Briggs. The racial and class lines present in the sincere admirer's description of himself as a white poor man and the reversal of racial history contained in Briggs' declaration to remain always Mills' slave is also present in Maria Davis' letter, written to Mills from Hobin, which I mentioned at the start of this talk. Unlike her fellow poor white man, Davis had not only seen Mills in a photograph, she had seen her in the flesh, in real life, and was moved to write to Mills the day after she had seen the "Blackbirds" performance. She explained to Mills in 1926 while watching the "Blackbirds" show the night before, she felt that none among the audience never there could be a heart prouder than mine. Maria greatly admired Mills as an artist. Her "Blackbird" singing was like a nightingale. Her dancing was also divine, but the pride Maria Davis felt was the race pride of seeing a woman of color successfully performing on stage. As a black woman, or as Maria put it a color woman like yourself, she wrote to thank Mills and the entire company for being able to show the white people who think we are nobody because we are color that we can stand side by side and beat them at their own game. Before signing off, Maria evoked the evolving ideas of the African Diaspora, in praising Mills once more, this time as a daughter of the motherland. See these three letters from an unnamed poor white man, a women unpacking her first experiences of lesbian desire, and Maria Davis finding a way to challenge white racism, are all heartfelt and personal, but although short and intimate, all drew out a number of the broader themes that "Drawing Over the Color Line" intends to address. The hardening of racism or the color line in Britain between the Wars, the importance of the arts, particularly popular culture in the formation of black identities and challenges to racism, the developing formation of ideas around the African Diaspora, and the intersection of race, sexuality, and desire, and the important role of black cultural expression in the making of popular culture in its broadest sense in Britain in the 1920's and 1930's. Florence Mills directly links individuals, black and white, to the Harlem Renaissance, but there are similar stories to be recovered and reconsidered which were made much closer to home. See these are two portraits of Helen Yelen, a woman who performed in the Harlequin Cafe on Leek Street in Soho, and the picture on the left is set in that cafe. Remembered for her jazz renditions of English songs during the 1930's, she also visited Antwerp with the Austrian novelist and journalist Hilda Speel. Speel recalled her as Egyptian in her memoirs, and in William Roberts' beautiful portrait of her, which I think is at the moment still my favorite that we've found with the project so far, but in this portrait she's known as Creole. Where she is from is still unclear, and we're hoping to find out more about her. If she was born in Britain and how her life intersected with other black people in London. But by picturing her in the Harlequin Club, we see another place which, like the Shimsham, provided spaces for non-conformists' lifestyles. In visiting these places and rethinking about the relationships made and sustained within them is one of the key things we hope to do with this project. So in doing so, we clearly hope to map the biographies of men and women who experienced these cosmopolitan spaces in London, be it through photographs of celebrities, their own workers' models, their own artistic practice or political, sexual, and other convivial relationships, and many examples of the artworks that reflect these histories are the way that we hope to get into these spaces, but many of them are still to be found. So Gemma has been in touch with one of Helen's descendents, and we know that there was at least one more portrait of Helen somewhere, but we've no idea at the moment where it is. So, we're hoping that people might be able to help us find them, and on the 20th of October, we're having a project which is part of the Bloomsbury Festival to encourage people to have a look in their attics and see if they can find some of these lost items. So if you remember back earlier there was a picture of Florence Mills in a peach dress, we know that existed, but we don't know where the original is. That picture's of it from a magazine. So perhaps you have a former art student in your family, your grandmother or your great-grandmother or your mother, maybe you can ask them if they have something in their attic that might be relevant to our project. We're interested in the very ordinary, the very simple from sculpture to photography to just sketches if that's all we have, and, of course, we're very interested in arts of work created by African and Asian artists as well, and really too item is too small. If an item is very big, then I guess we can arrange to come and see it, but please do get in touch with us if you have something that you think might be relevant. If not, and if you can't come along next week, then do please keep in touch with the project via our blog and via the Equiano Center website and Twitter, where we'll be putting up updates on the project and hopefully eventually about some time next year, this time next year we'll be launching a database of all the items that we've recovered which people will be able to use in their own research. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Thank you, Caroline, for a really thought-provoking and exciting and important project for UCL. We've got a few minutes for questions. I don't know if anyone would like put a question to our speaker today. Have one at the back. Just hold. Here comes the mic. >> Hello. I just wanted to know if there was any link between the Equiano Center in UCL and the Equiano Society that's been around for quite a while. >> Dr. Caroline Bressey: Caroline: Yes. So Arthur Tarington, he runs the Equiano Society, is I guess a friend and colleague of mine. So, yes. We know each other. There's no direct link, and the reason it's called the Equiano Center here is, well, for lots of reasons. Obviously, people know Equiano really well, but there's a very, very distant connection with the UCL and that part of the UCL campus is on the site of somewhere that he used to live. The original house isn't there, but it was a link. When we were setting it up, we wanted a name that people which connect easily with the project. So [inaudible]. [ Pause ] >> I just wanted to double check the tragic information that I think you said that there's no recordings of any kind of - >> Dr. Caroline Bressey: Caroline: No. Not that we know of at the moment. I guess partly it's quite early, and partly I guess those things aren't recorded. I mean, she's becoming more popular, and I think people, obviously people are very interested in jazz, and, you know, the interaction of jazz and people have done a lot of work on that, and I think people are always looking out for things. Certainly there's nothing of her performances in the U.K., sound recordings that we know of, and as, yeah, I still don't think we've found anything in the States, but that's not to say there isn't anything to be found. Maybe someone in their attic somewhere has something. That would be great. [ Pause ] >> OK. Any other questions? If I can maybe squeeze one in of my own. I mean, the Slade archive is quite an extraordinary thing to that amount of material going back through department in the Bartlett. You know, it's something that we talk about all the time. We're very envious of it. Is this project going to branch out into other bits of UCL, or in the Soho? >> Dr. Caroline Bressey: Well, kind of hopefully, Ann Welch and I are also work on a very small scoping project called the World of UCL before 1948 where we're trying to look at the diversity of students here at UCL, and at the moment, that's particularly looking at law and medicine. So we're working on trying to do that, and I think there's certainly stuff, though, we certainly we know about African and particularly Indian students were here studying law and medicine in the 19th century. So hopefully if we can illustrate that there's stuff there, that would be something, a sort of way to think about UCL. We always talk about this, you know, that UCL was the first university to admit people, you know, without regard to race and class and so on, but actually the history of that isn't particularly well known within college. So it would be great to be able to do some more work on that across the board. >> Well, that sounds, that's really wonderful. I wish you all the best of luck with that, and just before we go, if we could just one more round of applause for our speaker. Thank you very much for coming.

Early history and foundation

The Jewish Board of Guardians was a charity established in the East End of London by members of the Jewish community in 1859.[1] The situation of the Jewish poor in London was increasingly problematic by the late 19th century. Christian missionaries and conversionists targeted the Jewish poor, which became a concern for their co-religionists. Members of the Jewish community deemed existing methods of relief for the Jewish poor in London as insufficient.[2] The Board of Guardians was established to consolidate and effectively provide relief where other charities had failed. The Board of Guardians was established because of the introduction of the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 amendments by secular authorities.[3] These laws applied a workhouse test to qualify for poor relief; the workhouse was unsuitable for the Jewish community because of their special religious constraints and requirements.[3] The three main Ashkenazi synagogues of London thus established the Board of Guardians. These were the Great Synagogue, the Hambro' Synagogue, and the New Synagogue. These establishments voted in 1858 to establish a conjoint committee to tackle the issue of the Jewish poor. The first meeting of the Jewish Board of Guardians was held at the Great Synagogue chambers on March 16, 1859. The board was initially led by Ephraim Alex, overseer of the poor for the Great Synagogue, who secured a grant of less than £500 from the three synagogues to assess the Jewish poor in London.[4] The seventeen members who founded the Board were delegates of the Ashkenazi synagogues. They included financiers, businessmen and professionals. Lionel Louis Cohen was the honorary secretary of the board until he succeeded Alex and became president of the Board in 1869.[5] Baron Ferdinand de Rothschild began terms as Treasurer in 1868 and 1875.[6] The headquarters were initially an extension on the Jewish Soup Kitchen, but later moved to Middlesex Street.[7] On its foundation the board stated that,

the teachings of religion, the impulses of humanity and the doctrines of social sciences alike concur in recommending and consecrating an enlarged and expansive charity, and in distinguishing it from mere alms-giving".[8]

The board later became concerned with the poor from the Netherlands, Germany, and increasingly Eastern Europe.

In their 29th annual report, the board stated that

"Organization such as possessed by the board is necessary from an economic point of view, so as to practically eradicate the great problem of relief in a manner which will do the largest amount of good with the means at disposal; and the fact must not be ignored that a larger expenditure is not a sure indication of an increase in pauperperism and nursing but may reflect a removal of poverty by a prompt wrestling with discovered suffering through the bestowal of an adequate and measured assistance."[9]

Work

Initial aims

The Board of Guardians was established to help the poor Jewish community in London. The board aimed to create a system that would help this community without creating a class dependent on it for survival. As Eugene C. Black states,"the board strove to avoid any form of aid that might pauperise the recipient or crease passive dependency".[10]

Unlike other Victorian charities the Board could not rely on the workhouse and had to create useful and novel practices to help their own community. The Board aimed to provide relief that would help others in the long term. "From the outset the Board found it hard to meet the needs of the ever-increasing poor Jewish community".[11] The board relied on donations from eminent Jewish families to fund their charitable work. However, the needs of the community soon expanded far past the resources available.[12] As Laurie Magnus states in the volume to commemorate the first fifty years of the board, "from the very onset of its work the board found it difficult to maintain this equilibrium. They community required its services. And this fact, proved somewhat embarrassing when the fresh duties were thrust upon the board without the corresponding resources".[12]

Eligibility for relief

The board was particular about to whom charitable relief was provided. There was no relief without inquiry. Visiting officers made the appropriate checks to ensure that the Board's limited resources were not wasted. This meant they visited every applicant.[13] Black similarly states that "Home visits went hand in hand with relief and the Board reinvestigated any case lasting over six months".[11]

The relief provided by the board was also not available to new immigrants until after a six-month initial period.[14] This allowed the Board to advertise in continental papers against migration to England in hope of receiving aid. In using this method, the Board of Guardians hoped to stem the tide of foreign migration.[15] By 1896 the investigation of cases was assigned to an official committee, who brought legal action against those they deemed to be unworthy or misusing the Board's charity.

Applicants for relief

The application of relief from the Jewish Board of Guardians was from those, especially within the Jewish community who were in great need. The scope of people who applied for relief from the board was expansive but included groups such as: widows, children, orphans, asylum seekers and people seeking medical or financial aid.

The 1905 Annual Report of the board shows that the highest group of people receiving temporary relief was those with illnesses and the lowest being those with husbands in prison.[16] Deserted wives received little help. The board tried to help those they considered to be most in need, more so than deserted wives. However, because of a lack of alternative systems of relief the board decided they had to help them.

The Board not only attempted to identify those who should be helped by categorisation such as orphans and widows, they also attempted to do it through government categorisation of the deserving and undeserving poor. "The deserving were those in need who are unable to work because they are too old, disabled, or too sick." [17] Hqwever, ‘the undeserving were people who didn’t want to work but could, these were the people the Board tried to avoid helping.'[17] Furthermore, the number of applicants fluctuated, with "the number of poor immigrants including wives and children ranging annually from about 250–1,000 varying on the condition in other countries."[18] "The Board focused on the welfare of the children as they were the future and would also prevent further generations of Jewish poor".[19] As seen above, the main group of applicants were immigrants, said to be escaping persecution. Lipman emphasises this majority by stating that, "native born applicants, from 1800-1900 were only 10% of all applicants."[20]

Although, this is not the figures of applicants that have recently arrived in the country, as "earlier immigrants had become absorbed in the resident population and had become reliant on the Board for relief."[20] From 1889 to 1914, the Jewish Board of Guardians was the primary organization that dealt with the foreign poor in a narrow area of the East End which suffered from a great deal of overcrowding.

Controlling the Immigration of the Jewish Poor

Although the Board had been providing relief to the Jewish poor since 1859, it was not used to dealing with the vast numbers of Jews that began to settle in London, resulting in a number of issues. These issues included problems of overcrowding which caused increases in rent and poor living conditions. Bad living conditions and appalling sanitation resulted in the spread of illness and disease, meaning medical relief was limited. There was also higher competition for jobs and widespread unemployment. The Board were concerned with the number of Jews potentially arriving to seek relief temporarily instead of aiming for long-term self-improvement.

Therefore, a six-month rule was devised, which was primarily a probation period for the Jewish immigrants. Relief was not given unless Jews had been in the country for at least six months. This rule was proposed by Ephraim Alex, the first president of the Board (1859–69), in, A Scheme for a Board of Guardians, to be formed for the relief of the necessitious foreign poor.[21] However, relief was distributed to the new immigrants in cases of emergency. In the 1880s it became apparent that the elite would be faced with an influx on immigration as immigrants left Eastern Europe either to start a new life in England, or to use England as a temporary stopping point as they aspired to reach America. The board initiated several methods to control immigration, as it became transparently impossible to limit it, such as transmigration, dispersion and repatriation. Jews were either emigrated on to countries such as America, Canada and Australia or repatriated back. From 1881 to 1914, the board helped 17,087 people to settle in London, however, it managed to reduce overcrowding by emigrating 8,152 and repatriating 7,574 people. Nathan S. Joseph, chairman of the Executive of the Conjoint Committee of the Russo-Jewish Committee and Board of Guardians 1893–1909, to differentiate the ‘industrial fitness’ of the Jewish immigrants. The classification was as follows: "firstly, skilled artisans, who were vigorous, robust and healthy, secondly, those fit to transmigrate and thirdly, the poor and weak, the adventurer and mendicant."[22] Generally, those who were put into the first category, mainly being young, fit and healthy were offered help to transmigrate. More immigrants, however were repatriated as it was the most cost efficient option. Historian Vivian D. Lipman, argued that it is Jewish tradition "to give applicants enough to get them on to the next town and the next overseer."

Systems of Relief

Loans

The board provided relief through the use of loans. "Money was almost never used and the Board considered cash relief an ultimate last resort." [10] The board established a loans committee that oversaw the distributions by the charity. "In its first 17 years the Board provided 1767 loans totaling £226322".[10] Despite their wish to keep them low, loans given by the Board did increase. One of the initial reliefs given by the board was the loaning of sewing machines. "These machines were lent to deserving borrowers, who paid for them in installments." [23] The Board used the money gained from this to buy more machines and repeat the process. "By 1864 they had managed to by 26 machines."[23] This system of relief was later taken over by Messrs Singer themselves.

"In 1866 the loans committee became a department in itself, under the supervisions of David Benjamin, a benefactor of the committee."[24] Under this new system the loans could be organized and controlled more closely. It also allowed the more respectable classes to apply for relief in private separately to the wider public. The security of the loans committee created a confidence, which encouraged donations. The provisions attached to the loans also meant they were not misused. "In 1887 the capital of the loans committee was increased and donations such as the 3,000,000 francs by Baronesse de Hirsch allowed the committee to expand."[25] By 1907 it had an annual turnover of £13,000.

Education, Apprenticeships and Employment

The Jewish Board of Guardians main aim was to create a self-supporting class. They focused on education and apprenticing the future generations to stop them becoming impoverished. "The work committee acted in conjunction with the loans committee and became the industrial committee in 1872."[26] The board aimed to provide apprenticeships for boys and girls.

Laurie Magnus states that, "Following the loans of sewing machines the industrial committee used this money to accomplish 2 main purposes:

  1. Loan of tools and implements to carpenters, cabinet makers, show-makers, printers, book-binders and other mechanics on the same basis as the on which the loans of sewing-machines to tailors and umbrella makers had hitherto conducted.
  2. Giving security for tailors and mechanics to enable them to obtain work from warehouses and workshops."[26]

In 1896 Helen Lucas became the president of the JBG workrooms where girls would be taught how to embroider and other types of needlework so that they would become employable.[27]

"In 1903 a ladies sub-committee was enacted which focused on the apprenticeship of girls".[28] The board considered education one of its main aims, to create an educated class and to keep skilled workers in long-term employment.

Jewish Board of Guardians apprenticeships [29]

Year No. of applicants Programme cost (£)
1863 1 10
1873 85 1,319
1888 103 1,461
1893 131 2,107
1898 230 3,001
1903 236 2,945
1908 371 3,239

Emigration, Transmigration and Repatriation

The board experienced the issues surrounding an increase Jewish immigrants and refugees coming to London. The board vowed to help this class of the strange poor which mainly came from Europe. "In 1881 the problem of immigration was increased by the influx of immigrants seeking refuge from the pogroms of Russia...The Board of Guardians created a joint committee with the Mansion House Fund to tackle this issue."[15] "By 1885 the problem had further increased and the Board set up temporary shelters."[30]

The Board of Guardians also encouraged repatriation and transmigration. They sent many migrants back to their countries of origin, as well as on to other countries, especially the United States. "The Board denied welfare to those who had been in the country less than six months".[14] The Jewish Board of Guardians did not want the new immigrants to become burdens on the preexisting community. Eugene C Black states,"those who could not adapt and were poor prospects for emigration, Board leaders argued, should not remain burdens on the community".[31] Those who came to England could not necessarily be transmigrated by the Board on to countries such as the United States. "In 1886 authorities in New York denied entry to those who could not show they had the means of supporting themselves nor a benefactor to rely on."[32] They faced similar problems in Hamburg and the board could not support these migrants. The Board paid for immigrates travel to Hamburg and on to other countries if they failed to find employment in England. In September 1886, the Hamburg authorities stopped this policy.[33] This thus increased the number staying in England and increased the Board's work.

Impact of aliens on Jewish Board of Guardians relief funds [34]

Year Cases No. of individuals % of Russian aliens who are residents in the UK for 7+ years % of Russian aliens who are residents in the Uk 7 years Total
1894 5,157 32,510 40.8 35.7 76.5
1895 4,794 34,418 41.2 36.5 77.7
1896 4,366 35,063 27.9 47.4 75.3
1897 4,286 33,380 30.0 49.3 79.3

Jewish Board of Guardians repatriation and emigration, 1894-7[34]

1894 1895 1896 1897
REPATRIATION
Men 490 335 460 533
Women 108 80 61 74
Children 261 111 131 158
EMIGRATION
Men 79 88 87 109
Dependent Wives 13 35 29 36
Children 36 72 34 64
Widows 3 6 1 6
Children of Widows 5 4 2 13
Single Women 10 8 7 9
Deserted Women 61 79 93 98
Children of Deserted Women 113 172 207 194
Orphans of Deserted Women 0 0 6 6
DESTINATION OF EMIGRANTS
United States 127 145 149 176
South Africa 16 27 38 21
Australia 12 9 3 17

Health, Sanitation and Social Care

The living conditions of the Jewish community were of paramount importance for the Board. Laurie Magnus states that,"The Board believed that the central problem of relief lay in the homes of the poor". The dwelling of the East End population was considered to be inadequate and central to the problem of poverty. Magnus continued..."The Board established Medical and Sanitary committees to tackle this problem. The medical Board was given medical officers and £293 and 18s to solve this issue...The issues faced by the Board included insufficient food and clothing, a neglect of proper standards of cleanliness, bad ventilation, overcrowded dwellings and deficient light...The visiting committee, which was established in 1862, dealt with housing".[35] Furthermore, they looked at the conditions of the Jewish quarters and reported their findings to The Jewish Board of Guardians. "The medical Board provided nursing until 1906."[36]

"The prescriptions distributed by the Board were fulfilled by the Metropolitan Free Hospital...By 1871 visits and applications for medical relief reached 41,000...By 1873 the medical committee was completely reorganized to stop a misuse of funds...The Board later disbanded the medical committee in favour of state organized relief. To ensure sanitary efficiency, as well as clean homes and water supplies, the Board established a sanitary committee. The Sanitary Committee visited 2,317 cases and visited 132 workshops"[37] This committee was remodelled and became the Health Committee.

Partnerships

The Russo-Jewish Committee was established in 1882 to oversee all matters of Jewish immigrants. The Conjoint Committee an amalgamation of the Russo-Jewish Committee and the Jewish Board of Guardians, aimed to tackle all matters of immigration. This committee collaborated with the Board (between 1893 and 1909) and became the primary source of aid to the Jewish poor. "The Conjoint Committee was the lineal descendent of the Mansion House Committee "[38] Despite the fact that the two organizations were a partnership, the Board of Guardians continued to dominate the majority of decisions. Sir Julian Goldsmid, chairman of the Russo-Jewish Committee, cooperated with Benjamin Cohen, who was the president of the Jewish Board of Guardians at this time. Any disagreements between the two leaders were settled by the interests of the elite as a whole. As a result of the six month rule, other charities developed in order to aid the immigrants."In the process of adjustment those immigrants were helped by relatives, kinsmen, landsleit, and alternative smaller and more flexible institutions, such as Hevras" [39] Hevras, a charity also established in the East End, offered help for immigrants to overcome the distress’ caused by the immigration process. This charity was less hierarchical and more democratic than the Board. For many, Hevras represented traditional Jewish morals within the charities policies. Many immigrants turned to Hevras because of the Board of Guardians restrictive policies, such as the six-month rule.

Public Opinion and the Aliens Act

Public opinion of the Jewish Poor in London is hugely significant in understanding why the Board was created, and in part, what the Board sought to achieve. Bad public opinion regarding foreign poor was due to the massive influx of immigration effecting London’s resources and the commonly held myth of "the Dirty Jew being reinforced by the foreign poor."[40] Even Alfred Cohen a brother of Leonard Cohen, who was a Board member, regarded alien Jews as "dirty squalid and unpleasant."[5] "The foreign poor were accused of causing overcrowding, increases in rents and demands for premiums."[41]

The Aliens Act of 1905 can be seen as responding to this negative public opinion of immigrants, non-specifically Jewish. However, the act "is generally believed to have been chiefly a response to heavy East European Jewish immigration into Britain after 1880."[42] This therefore shows correlation with Jewish immigration. The act was also created in part because of negative public view of the migrant Jewish community; with "agitation to restrict Jewish immigration beginning in the 1880s and becoming more outspoken through the actions of a number of right-wing groups and activists."[43] The Aliens act was the "first piece of immigration legislation in 20th century Britain" and the first "to define some groups of migrants as undesirable."[44]

It is said that, "The Act ensured that leave to land could be withheld if the immigrant was judged to be undesirable by falling into one of four categories: a) if he cannot show that he has in his possession ... the means of decently supporting himself and his dependents ...; 'b) if he is a lunatic or an idiot or owing to any disease of infirmity liable to become a charge upon the public rates ...; c) 'if he has been sentenced in a foreign country for a crime, not being an offence of a political character ...; or d) if an expulsion order under this act has (already) been made."[45]

The above statement can be seen to relate to the Board's own category of defining applicants as deserving or undeserving but also represents the stereotypes immigrants may receive from the outburst of negative public opinion. "The Board members were of a higher social stance than the Jewish immigrants and poor they were helping."[46] They used their upper-class status to gain funds from friends and colleagues which allowed the Board to function as well as it did. Rozin supported this by stating that the "Cohens were supported morally and financially by the wealthy class as a whole."[47] Furthermore, the work of the Board, therefore, may have been more for preservation of the existing Jewish community and identity in as far as it sought to help the poor altruistically.

The Board in the 20th century

The work of the Board of Guardians diminished in the 20th century. The medical committee had been disbanded in favour of relief provided by the official state authorities, and later more committees reduced their work in favour of state funded welfare. The Board had been at the forefront of innovation, but a lack of change meant it began less prevalent. Eugene C Black argues that, "for its first thirty years the Board had been in the forefront of innovation in social work, for the next thirty, it fell further and further behind."[48]

"The Board slowly adapted its administrative attitudes, arrangements and commitments."[48]

"The liberal government increased social welfare legislation in 1905, and further increased it after the December 1910 election".[49] The introduction of old age pensions in 1908, national insurance in 1911 affected the Board's work. The 1905 Aliens Act similarly worked in the Board's favour by decreasing the number of immigrants allowed to enter Britain. "However, some of these reforms were not fully applicable, especially of many of the Board's recipients were not British citizens and therefore could not qualify."[49]

By 1920 a broader scope of unemployment laws meant that they began to help the Jewish community. "Much of the Board's work shifted to the public sphere, with most relief being provided by the state apparatus."[50]

In the 1990s the Jewish Board of Guardians merged with other Jewish charities to become Jewish Care, an organization that still exists today.

Criticisms of the Board

Despite the Board being a charity, they did receive criticisms from ex-members and the general public. Some of the main criticisms of the Jewish Board of Guardians come from those within the Jewish community itself. The general organization of the Board was criticized, with some claiming "the private donor was uninformed and misdirected, so often gave to the wrong people, the wrong amount and in the wrong way."[51] Lipman went as far as to state that, "there was no attempt at budgetary control."[52]

However, despite the need to be critical of how the Board could have improved efficiency, it cannot be ignored that the reasons for these mistakes were the Board trying to deal with an increasing number of cases. This meant that "the time staff could spend on one case and money they had to give was decreased."[53]

The process of checking if an applicant was worthy for relief was also analyzed. People "criticized the Board for a lack of sympathy in the administration of relief, claiming the applicants were interviewed standing up behind a brass rail."[53] The Board was also accused of losing sight of the applicant’s real needs and failing to provide constructive help in the early 20th century.

However, the main criticism the Board faced was regarding emigration and repatriation. Many felt that the Board’s great work encouraged people who were not suffering persecution to come to England purely for a better standard of living, giving the impression that the Board were encouraging immigration. However, the Board’s way of dealing with this has also been highly criticized. They created the six-month rule to refuse relief to those that had been in the country less than six months. But this rule "meant the new immigrants in the greatest distress were denied relief...However this was counteracted by the fact that discretionary power relieved those in need despite the amount of time they were in the country for... Repatriation as a whole was criticized. As many believed it was "endangering the lives of the repatriates as took them back into discrimination and awful conditions."[46] However, in 1905 after the Pogrom the Board stopped repatriation completely but was persuaded to bring it back due to a mass of requests from applicants. "The Board was also generally under scrutiny from other organizations. The "American-Jewish establishment suggested that the Board were not making as much effort as they could."[54]

Additionally, old Board members such as Asher I Myers published "sustained criticism in the Jewish Chronicle."[19] Nevertheless, this was an organization experiencing increasing pressure on their resources and relying almost entirely on donations. The Board was also "always hampered by the fact that if they developed their services too far they might be encouraging immigrants."[55]

Notes

  1. ^ Magnus, p. 9
  2. ^ Magnus, p. 10
  3. ^ a b Black, p. 71
  4. ^ Magnus, p. 24
  5. ^ a b Rozin
  6. ^ Thornton, Dora (2001), "From Waddesdon to the British Museum: Baron Ferdinand Rothschild and his cabinet collection", p. 57, Journal of the History of Collections, 2001, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp. 191–213, doi: 10.1093/jhc/13.2.191
  7. ^ Black, p. 73
  8. ^ Magnus, p.26
  9. ^ The Jewish Board of Guardians 29th annual report, p. 10
  10. ^ a b c Black, p. 93
  11. ^ a b Black, p. 78
  12. ^ a b Magnus, p. 40
  13. ^ Magnus, p. 46
  14. ^ a b Magnus, p. 92
  15. ^ a b Magnus, p. 91
  16. ^ Jewish Board of Guardians' Annual Report 1905
  17. ^ a b Hernist.org
  18. ^ Lipman, p. 32
  19. ^ a b Lipman, p. 111
  20. ^ a b Lipman, p. 83
  21. ^ Rozin, p.134
  22. ^ Jewish Chronicle, 12 March 1893, quoted by Rozin, p.140
  23. ^ a b Magnus, p.27
  24. ^ Magnus, p.29
  25. ^ Magnus, p.35
  26. ^ a b Magnus, p.31
  27. ^ "Lucas [née Goldsmid], Helen (1835–1918), philanthropist and social worker". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. 2004. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/55195. ISBN 978-0-19-861412-8. Retrieved 17 December 2020. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
  28. ^ Magnus, p.37
  29. ^ Black, p.82 Jewish Board of Guardians Annual Reports
  30. ^ Magnus, p.98
  31. ^ Black, p.96
  32. ^ Magnus, p.99
  33. ^ Magnus, p.100
  34. ^ a b Jewish Board of Guardians Annual Reports, 1897
  35. ^ Magnus, p. 110/112
  36. ^ Magnus, p.124
  37. ^ Magnus, p.116
  38. ^ Magnus p.94
  39. ^ Rozin, p.137-138
  40. ^ Jbooks.com
  41. ^ Lipman, p.89
  42. ^ Jewishvirtallibrary.org
  43. ^ Jewishviruallibrary.org
  44. ^ 20tcenturylondon.org.uk
  45. ^ 20thcenturylondon.org.uk
  46. ^ a b Rozin, Pp. 123-146
  47. ^ Rozin, Pp.123-146
  48. ^ a b Black, p.99
  49. ^ a b Black, p.100
  50. ^ Black, p.102
  51. ^ Lipman, p.29
  52. ^ Lipman, p. 46
  53. ^ a b Lipman, p.109
  54. ^ Black, p.264
  55. ^ Lipman, p. 109

References

  • Black, Eugene. C The Social Politics Of Anglo-Jewry, 1880-1920 (Oxford, UK: B. Blackwell, 1988)
  • Jbooks.com, 'Jbooks.Com - Interviews And Profiles: A Literary History Of The Dirty Jew', 2015, accessed 6 May 2015.
  • Jewishvirtuallibrary.org, 'Aliens Act | Jewish Virtual Library', 2015, Jewish virtual Library [accessed 6 May 2015].
  • Englander, David, A Documentary History of Jewish Immigrants in Britain, 1840-1920, Leicester: Leicester University Press (1994)
  • Herinst.org, 'Business-Managed Culture - Work And Welfare - Deserving Vs Undeserving Poor', 2015, accessed 6 May 2015.
  • Hartley Library, University of Southampton, MS 173/3/11/2 Archives of Jewish Care, 1894-1901, 39th Annual Report of the Board of Guardians for the Relief of the Jewish Poor 1890-1901
  • Lipman, Vivian D., A Century of Social Service, 1859-1959: The Jewish Board of Guardians, Routledge and K. Paul, 1959, p. 54
  • Magnus, Laurie,The Jewish Board of Guardians and the Men who Made it, 1859-1909, London: The Jewish Board of Guardians (1909)
  • Rozin, Mordechai, The Rich and the Poor, Jewish Philanthropy and Social Control in Nineteenth-Century London, Brighton: Sussex Academic Press, 1999
  • 20thcenturylondon.org.uk, 'Aliens Acts 1905 And 1919, Explore 20Th Century London', 2015, 20th-century London Archived 14 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine [accessed 6 May 2015].
  • Hartley Library, University of Southampton, MS 173/2/12/4 Archives of Jewish Care, 1757-1889, 29th Annual Report of the Board of Guardians for the Relief of the Jewish Poor 1887-1893
This page was last edited on 30 January 2024, at 19:35
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.