Civic wars: democracy and public life in the American city during the nineteenth century 9780520216600, 9780520204416, 9780520922082

Citation preview

CIVIC WARS

Blank Page

Democracy and Public Life in the American City during the Nineteenth Century

MARY P. RYAN

University of California Press

Berkeley Los Angeles London

University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England First Paperback Printing 1998 ©1997 by

The Regents of the University of California

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ryan, Mary P. Civic wars : democracy and public life in the American city during the nineteenth century / Mary P. Ryan.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references (p. _) and index. ISBN 0-520-21660-1 (alk. paper : pbk.) 1. Political participation—United States—History—1oth century. 2. Political culture—United States—History—1oth century. 3. Democracy—United States—History—1oth century. 4. City and town life—United States—History—1oth century. 5. United States— Politics and government—toth century. 6. New York (N.Y.)—

Politics and government—To 1898. 7. New Orleans (La.)—Politics and government. 8. San Francisco (Calif.)—Politics and government. I. Title.

Ji1764.R9 199796-25630 320.973—dc20 CIP

Printed in the United States of America

987654321

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

For Anne

|| Blank Page

List of Illustrations / ix Acknowledgments / x2 Introduction: From Public Realm to Civic Warfare / I

PART ONE

, Heterogeneous Compounds and Kaleidoscopic Varieties: Creating a Democratic Public, 1825-1849 CHAPTER 1

People’s Places / 2r CHAPTER 2

The Performance of People in Association / 58 CHAPTER 3

Public Meetings and the “Principles of Pure Democracy” / 94

PART TWO The Interregnum, 1850~—1865 CHAPTER 4

Civil Wars in the Cities / 135

viil Contents PART THREE

“The Huge Conglomerate Mass”: Democracy Contained and Continued, 1866-1880 CHAPTER 5

The “Vague and Vast Harmony” of People in Space / 183 CHAPTER 6

The People in Ceremony: Multiply, Divide, Explode, Transcend / 223 CHAPTER 7

Publicity and Democratic Practice / 259

Epilogue / 305

Notes / 317 Selected Bibliography / 341

Index / 363

ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Plan of New Orleans, Louisiana, 1815 24. 2. Map of San Francisco, California, 1853 24

3. Map of the city of New York 25

4. City Hall Park, New York 33 5. Canal Street, New Orleans, 1850 41 6. View of New York looking south from Union Square, 1849 44

7. View of New Orleans, 1852 AS

8. Chatham Square, ca. 184.7 48 9. San Francisco view, 1851 SI

10. Lafayette’s visit: engraving of Inumphal Arch 63

uw. Invitation: Erie Canal celebration 67

12. View of the Plaza, July 4, 1851, San Francisco 71

July 4, 1851 72 14. Volktest, New Orleans, 1859 86 13. New York procession passing Brougham’s Lyceum,

15. Inauguration of the Jackson statue, New Orleans 107 16. Council chamber, New York City Hall, 1830-1831 IIS

17. San Francisco election, 1850s 116

18. Astor Place riot, 184.9 137

19. Execution of James P. Casey and Charles Cora 143

20. “War Song of the Natives? ca. 1855 I47

21. Metropolitan Police storm City Hall, 1857 IS4.

22. Charge of the police at the Tribune office, 1863 WI

23. Panel from the Muybridge panorama, San Francisco, 1877 186

24. Panel from panorama of New Orleans, ca. 1870 186

2§. Panel from panorama of New York, 1876 187 1X

X Illustrations

26. Chinatown alley, ca. 1880 192

27. Stewarts mansion 194. 28. Five Points, 1875 19S 29. Canal Street, Clay statue, 1884 199 30. Shelter, Golden Gate Park, ca. 1874 208

31. Map of Golden Gate Park 210

32. Lincoln funeral procession, 1865 225 33. Attack on the Orange Societies’ parade, 1871 232

34. Mardi Gras, 1872 241 35. Mussing Links 243

36. St. Patrick’s Day, Union Square, 1870 247

37. “Comung Races,” 1880 253 38. New Orleans riot, 1866 265

39. “Rout of the Metropolitains,’ 1874 268

40. “Who Stole the People’s Money?” 1871 278 41. “The Latest Phase of American Politics? 1880 289

42. The San Francisco Illustrated Wasp, 1880 298

Violence,’ 1875 299 44. “U.S. A Plague upon All Your Goes,’ 1879 300 43. “A Republican Form of Government, and No Domestic

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

have practiced the historian’s craft too long to pretend that I am the

[ie author of the following pages. In creating this book I have

transcribed, transmitted, and lifted out of context the work of

countless chroniclers and historians, most of whom I will never meet. Because this investigation took me far from the fields of my training or expertise, I was dependent on a vast and rich secondary literature that deserves far more recognition than the simple citations in the bibliography. It would not diminish my debt to all these strangers by naming my personal and specific benefactors. My special thanks go to those very generous and tolerant colleagues who read messy early drafts of this book and tendered invaluable advice and criticism. In thanking them I also assure them that I have left abundant grounds for continuing debate and disagreement among us. I am most indebted to Thomas Ben-

der, Robin Einhorn, Philip Ethington, Eric Foner, Michael Kazin, Suzanne Lebsock, Joseph Logsdon, Timothy Gilfoyle, Terence MacDonald, Christine Stansell, and Dell Upton. Several institutions have generously supported this project with their funds, their facilities, and their staffs. My research commenced long ago at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University; it was sustained while I was a member of the faculty at the University of California at Berkeley; and it was rejuvenated for one ecstatic year when the French American Foundation sent me to the Center for North American Studies, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Science Sociales in Paris. I send special thanks to Jean Heffer, Francois Weil, and XI

xii Acknowledgments

Carolyn Kaufman at CENA. This project would never have been finished without the skillful efforts of graduate research assistants at Berkeley: Jennifer Gold, Valerie Mendoza, Jessica Weiss, and the heroic Gabrielle Tenaglia. I am deeply indebted to the librarians and staff of the Bancroft Library, Historic New Orleans Collection, Louisiana Division

of the New Orleans Public Library, the Louisiana State Museum, and the Municipal Archives of New York. The editorial staff at the University of California Press— Sheila Levine, Nola Burger, and Scott Norton—has my gratitude and affection, as does my copy editor, David Severtson.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge those who diverted me from working on this book, yet kept me right on course to creating It, as together we walked city streets and reveled in public places. My heartfelt appreciation goes to old New York friends David Gurin, Bert Hansen, Carroll Seron, Joanne Vanek, and Judy Walkowitz. I am indebted to Joe and Mary Logsdon for introducing me to New Orleans, her restaurants, her fetes, her people. ] thank Ted and Joby Margadant for the pleasures of their company on the boulevards of Paris as well as the streets of San Francisco. Thanks and a purple heart go to Judy Stacey and Carol Stack for rescuing me with walks through the neighborhood. Richard Busacca has done double duty as usual, by tending the homes fires when I escaped to distant cities and by joining me at city playgrounds near and far. I thank Anne Busacca-Ryan for constantly reminding me to cherish the cities of our world for their fun and for our future.

INTRODUCTION

From Public Realm to Civic Warfare

forawaiting the gloomy associated such an evidence ominous " ) } hose the forecasts turn of theoften millennium canwith easily find date. The approach of the year 2000 finds many observers of American civic life, including historians, in a curmudgeonly frame of mind, their pessimism fed by more than the usual references to rising crime, debased morals, and irresponsible youth. Complaints first heard in the mid-1980s about how the American citizenry was fragmenting into narrow circles of interest and identity had given way by 1995 to far more alarming and widespread signs of the disintegration of the national consensus. Those earlier squabbles about what was alternately labeled multiculturalism and political correctness paled next to the clash-

ing cultures of the r990s—urban riots, rural militia companies, and bombed-out federal buildings—while the new political identities that emerged in the 1960s might seem paper tigers compared to the insurgents of the 1994 congressional election who not only asserted themselves but also set out to dismantle the basic social programs that had, at least since the New Deal, linked Americans together in the recognition of basic public needs. Historians’ alarm about the rumored demise of a unified national narrative might seem inconsequential in a popular culture that shunned the printed word as it sated itself on talk shows, MTV,

and cyberspace. The end of the twentieth century threatened to bring not just the contest and rivalry to be expected in a democracy but a whole other order of change, a withdrawal from the civic project as we had known it. I

a Introduction Or so it might seem to an American Jeremiah at the fin de siecle. But the revelers who will gather in Times Square on New Year’s Eve 2000 will doubtless encounter some less dyspeptic citizens. The omens of crisis in American public life can also be read as signs of civic rejuvenation.

The revolt against Washington at the ballot box could also open a broader, more fundamental debate on the nature of the public trust. ‘The babel in cyberspace might give voice to the otherwise isolated and inarticulate. Those who gather at a place such as Times Square on New Year’s

Eve, furthermore, obstinately refuse to cede public space to urban anomie or disorder. Indeed, the compulsion to gather in city space seems more vigorous than ever. Witness the proliferation of cafes, street fairs, and festivals in communities across the land. Since the mid-1970s Americans have invented whole new occasions for citywide parties: Halloween processions in Manhattan, annual jazz festivals in New Orleans, foot races across San Francisco that bring as many as 100,000 giddy runners into the streets. I would bet that many Americans will greet the next century as the occasion to come joyously together, right in the heart of the city. Not all Americans have lost the will to fashion some facsimile of a civic whole.

As always, the markers of change can be read in many ways. And much depends on where we stop to read the signs of the times, be it, for example, on city streets or in front of TV screens. What strikes this observer at the end of the twentieth century is not the expected prophecies of national disorder and moral and political damnation but the fear that Americans are withdrawing from civic space as we have known it, be it in electoral campaigns, public festivals, or everyday encounters with one another. In the past Americans managed to contain their rowdy civic be-

havior within the bounds of acceptable differences and were linked to- | gether by both regular associations of town and city life and a common print culture, the very institutions that fostered the American experment in pluralistic democratic politics beginning in the eighteenth century. The differences among Americans in the late twentieth century, by contrast, rarely come together in the same public square or on the same page of newsprint. Civic life seems socially adrift. This book faces this troubling contemporary prospect in the perverse

manner of a historian: To better read the signs of change before me, I have intentionally turned backward. By examining civic life a century ago I hope to acquire some sharpened perception, even some ideas, about how to exercise citizenship in these shifting times. In so doing I have adopted a spatial strategy just as curious as my temporal move

Introduction J backward. At a time when the connecting tissue of civic life seems as insubstantial as the airwaves of mass media, I have set up my historical lab-

oratory in concrete places, in three nineteenth-century cities. In New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco I have found some solid ground

on which to confront these civic fears and hopes. In the last century these cities were arguably as full of cultural differences and as fractured by social and economic changes as any metropolis today, and they provided equally challenging conditions under which to create civic communication and identity. My years of foraging through these corners of the American past have not yielded reassuring portraits of virtuous and harmonious communities that can serve as models or admonitions for the present. What I found instead is a trail of contestation that goes back well beyond a century. What I learned, slowly and reluctantly, still incompletely, is the necessity of facing these recurrent cultural and political collisions, of embracing these civic wars as an essential feature of modern democracy. But before I report on this exercise of retrospective citizenship, a brief comment on some of the personal concerns and more abstract cogitation that informed and preceded it 1s in order. Undertaken as both a historian’s project and a citizen’s mission, my exploration began in the early 1980s amid growing unease with the fragmentation of the historical record that had accompanied the success of the new social history. The elaboration and diversification of our history that occurred in the 1970s and 1980s left a larger, infinitely improved, but more splintered picture of the past. The disarray among historians, the cracks in old syntheses, and the refuse of an untenable consensus were more than by-products of a quantitative expansion of the population included in the official historical record. A skilled and patient historian could fashion a social history from the studies of different races, classes, ethnic groups, gender cultures, sexual orientations, ages, and so forth. (My colleagues do it every day in survey courses and textbooks.) But to be a usable and living history rather than a sociological portrait, we are told that the parts of this enlarged picture need to be stitched to-

gether into a moving narrative. It needed a focal point, some major characters, a plot. In the past the focal point had been politics on the national level. The central characters had been political leaders, and the plot ended in the uniformity of a common culture or at the apex of intel-

lectual hegemony or political power.' |

These ways of giving narrative coherence to history certainly remained available to painstaking historians willing to draw the links between the social and the political, the local and the national, the social

4 Introduction | and the cultural, the everyday and the election day. Yet a rush to synthesis often traveled the same well-worn paths, sacrificing the rich record compiled by social historians, finding the easiest point of unity among the powerful and prominent, and in the end giving starring roles to the

white, male, educated, and affluent. Still searching for some way of bringing America’s diverse peoples together on one plane of analysis, but without subjecting them to the brute authority of a central government or the cultural tyranny of national character, I came upon the idea of the public, a symbol of the possibility of unification without homoge-

nization, of integration without assimilation. In my first musings it evoked a broad and visible political space where a society’s members might come together without forfeiting their multiple social identities, where they mounted debates rather than established consensus. In the first instance the public was no more than an sjnvitation to imagine a his-

torical plane of commonalty and connection that did not pulverize differences, where power was recognized without erasing the less powerful.”

From the first the word public had a second and especially seductive reference point as well. This attraction was as much personal and aesthetic as scholarly and political, and it was rooted in my own niche in American history. For someone growing up female after World War II, in a small town where my lower-class Roman Catholic parentage was still a mark of marginalization, the public gleamed as an object to covet, a kind of brass ring. As a female child of a small town in the 1950s I also saw the public as a liberation from stultifying privacy. It was a way out of the house. It summoned images of a gregarious, open, cosmopolitan, new, heterogeneous, anonymous world free of the constrictions of family and the straitjacket of gender identity. To my parents’ generation the coveted public signaled the aspirations of the “little guy” for a public voice that was heard only as recently as the New Deal. In my adolescence the public prize was the election of the first president who shared my family’s religious affiliation. My own political consciousness would take form within those social movements of the 1960s that made the dreams and protests of millions of once-silenced Americans a public matter. To this very day, when my gender remains drastically underrepresented in positions of state power and legislative deliberation, the public still glows with the aura of a brass ring. For a feminist the public remains an object of not fully requited desire. The turns in my own life and the jolts of American politics since the 1970s have not dimmed the utopian imaginings of the word; they have only made them seem more precious

Introduction ) as they receded from the political horizon. In sum the word that set the course of this book 1s bloated with social, personal, as well as political promises. In its first incarnation the subject of this book was impossibly broad, simply a study of American public life in the nineteenth century. Although my search for the “public” was singular, personal, and a mite eccentric, it was hardly solitary. The word public has one of the longest and most distinguished lineages in the Western dictionary of

keywords. From the perspective of the history of ideas my musings about the public are a dilute and base remnant of the classic vocabulary of polis, politeia, and res publica. The word public was present at the reputed origins of Western political culture, in its Renaissance, and at the moments of greatest trial. ‘The public was a conceptual life raft for politi-

cal thinkers, most notably Hannah Arendt, trying to set a humanistic political course in the wake of twentieth-century totalitarianism. Yet I have kin much closer than these in my association with the public. The public is very much in the American grain. The word had a particularly prominent place in the vocabulary of the Progressives and appeared in the titles of books by Walter Lippman, Robert Park, and John Dewey in the 1920s. And in the 1990s the chorus of concern for the public 1s full of

historians, social scientists, literary critics, and veterans of the social movements of my generation, including most especially feminists. My original fealty to the word public inspired a conversation with po-

litical theorists that became a long, rambling section of this book’s penultimate draft. The empirical historical study that followed, however, broke the bounds of this theory and became a meandering story of how Americans came together, for better and for worse, to share and shape a conjoined life. That account, which will begin with chapter 1, 1s not a paean to the public but a story I will call “civic wars.” Before that story begins, however, I offer the reader the briefest report on my foray into the body of political philosophy to which I remain indebted.

The classic formulation of the public, especially as interpreted by Hannah Arendt, offers the loftiest inspiration for the study and practice of public life. Brought down from the Acropolis, this tradition heralds the public realm, as Arendt names it, as the place where citizens surren-

der their private concerns and come together as equals to deliberate about the common good. It is in the public realm, set aside from petty material interests and devoted to mutual respect and rational discourse, that humans express their highest natures and achieve a semblance of immortality. Yet as many critics, most notably Hannah Pitkin, have pointed out, whether it be ancient Greece or the Italian Renaissance re-

6 Introduction publics, the public realm was as narrow in its membership as it was lofty

in its idealism. It was a gathering place of elite males, many of them slavemasters.°

For a more democratic social base, contemporary political philosophers turn more often to the work of Jiirgen Habermas. By locating his “public sphere” in the eighteenth-century West, Habermas opened up civic life to a much broader citizenry and wider realm of rights and freedoms. His public sphere was a “realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can be formed. Access is guaranteed to all citizens. A portion of the public sphere comes into being in every conversation in which private individuals assemble to form a public body.’ Habermas brought the public sphere not only into modern times but into a broad historical plane of analysis. By locating public life outside the state, finding it in the press and the cafes and clubs of eighteenth-

century European capitals, wherever public opinion could be formed, Habermas placed the humanistic political ideals on the grounds of social practice and in the reach of many. His public sphere has been adapted by

many historians and literary scholars and is an indispensable guide through the research for this book.* Yet Habermas himself was circumspect in his own historical mapping of the public sphere. Clinging to high standards of “rational-critical discourse,” Habermas was wary of finding a genuine public sphere outside the bourgeoisie and after the eighteenth century. To open a flank of the

public sphere in the nineteenth century, I next turned to the American tradition of political philosophy and to John Dewey’s The Public and Its Problems. Conceived as a pragmatic human creation, not as an a priori rational norm, Dewey's public was an act of human discovery and organtzation that could, or could not, be found in any historical circumstance.

His formula for creating a public specified only this: “We take as our point of departure from the objective fact that human acts have consequences upon others, that some of these consequences are perceived, and that their perception leads to subsequent effort to control action so as tO secure some consequences and avoid others.” Dewey then construes a public that, theoretically, could exist anywhere, even in the most unseemly civic spaces of America in the 1990s.° Writing in 1927, Dewey rarely gave specific social or political content

to the public. His major historical reference was to the New England community of face-to-face public assembly. Reconvening a town mecting is not a strategy likely to revive the public in the late twentieth century. An update to Dewey's public can be found, however, in a number

Introduction | of contemporary writers, including postmodernists and neopragmatists, many of them veterans of the social movements of the 1960s. ‘They argue for a public created through the piecemeal identification of new political constituencies. Social movements not only make new public claims for isolated groups but expand the rights of all. The feminist movement is a prime example of this pluralistic expansion of the public; 1t not only enrolled the second sex in the public realm but formulated whole new sets of human rights, naming them such things as privacy, reproductive freedom, family entitlement. These contemporary theorists dispute the singularity of the classic notion of the public but reclaim the term in the plural or prefix it with adjectives such as heterogeneous or democratic.° At this point in the search for a civic lodestar I came to wonder if the public should be the exclusive focus of my attention. A qualifying term used by everyone from Dewey on began to assume a central place in my thinking. That term was democratic. Turning directly to recent demo-

cratic theorists, most notably Claude Lefort and Chantal Mouffe, I found classic and Renaissance notions of the public demoted to secondary importance, behind the political practices of representative gov-

ernment dating from the nineteenth century. Lefort focuses not on a preconceived public realm but on the process of representation, the ways in which the “people” become sovereign. To democratic theorists such

as Lefort the participation of the people is the measure of civic wellbeing, and yet who the people are is never established in any finite, stable, or absolute way. Democratic politics and decisions about the conjoined life of a polity are worked out in an unremitting practice whereby citizens name, assert, and give meaning to themselves and one another. “The identity of the people remains latent. . . . Representation is depen-

dent upon a political discourse and upon a sociological and historical elaboration always bound up with ideological debate.” Convinced that the democratic public I valued requires this unremitting representative practice, I retitled my project The Public and the People and vowed to place the two concepts in constant, fluid relationship to one another.’ Once the search for civic ideals shifts from the Olympian plane of the polis to the pragmatic practices of democracy, the public sphere or realm splinters, inevitably and unregrettably, into more mundane and multiple political spaces. Democratic theorists are particularly intent on locating

politics in actual physical spaces, historical sites that are public in the more pedestrian, colloquial, but critical way—1in their openness and accessibility to the people. The writings of Lefort and Dewey no less than

those of Habermas refer at critical points to mundane public places

8 Introduction called, variously, civil society, New England communities, face-to-face ties—that is, multiple, finite, often small and decentered publics where people formulate their democratic aspirations and mobilize for political action. Conversely, one cannot imagine Dewey’s pragmatic method of locating the public or Lefort’s model of popular democracy operating in private space—the intimacy of the home, the recesses of the individual soul, and what Habermas calls the “rooms and anterooms of bureaucracies.” By decentering politics and underplaying the role of the state, democratic theorists invest the social space between the government and the private home with more significance, by default if not intention. Even

Hannah Arendt was enticed into this earthbound social dimension of the public as a “space” where “men act together in concert?’® Theories of democracy seem especially to gravitate toward this social and spatial public. ‘The germination of democratic institutions may even require open, accessible, shared space, sites where the people can actually see each other in all their diversity and can mobilize, debate, form identities, and forge coalitions. Contemporary theory also adumbrates an aesthetic dimension to public democracy that is nurtured by the diverse and unpredictable encounters possible in open social space. Lefort repeatedly and approvingly quotes Tocqueville’s observation that the “ceaseless agi-

tation which democratic government has introduced into the political world influences all social intercourse. I am not sure that on the whole, this is not the greatest advantage of democracy-’?

As the course of this search for the public shifted from the classic public to modern democracy it was inevitable that it should come back to Alexis de Tocqueville. First, Tocqueville’s own search for a political system and culture to succeed the ancien regime \ed not just to democracy but to a social rendering of the public: It was founded not in the su-

perior virtue of Americans but in their inveterate habit of forming groups to obtain common social goals. “Wherever, at the head of some new undertaking you see the government in France, or a man of rank in England, in the United States you will be sure to find an association. ... Thus, the most democratic country on the face of the earth is that in which men have, in our time, carried to the highest perfection the art of pursuing in common the object of their common desires, and have applied this new science to the greatest number of purposes.” Tocqueville’s democracy was composed of associated peoples, of voluntary organizations, or of local governments; his is a politics of public sociality. It is Tocqueville who located civic life in a place that is most congenial to this investigator. Its coordinates are not the goodness and virtue of the clas-

Introduction 3 sic public sphere, nor the austerity of pure pragmatic practice, but the democratic associations of people.

Tocqueville guides the story that follows in a second, fundamental way: He identified the empirical center of the history of democracy peculiar to the United States. He discovered democracy not just in association but in a critical place and time. Touring America in 1831 and 1832, he was struck by sights such as these: “The people of one quarter of a town are met to decide the building of a church; there, the election of a representative is going on; a little further, the delegates of a district are posting to the town in order to consult some local improvements; the labor-

ers of the village quit their ploughs to deliberate upon the project of a road or a public school” Tocqueville located democracy, in other words, in relatively dense human settlements, towns, villages, or cities. Tocqueville’s America is distinguished not just from the classic or Enlighten-

ment public sphere but also from another great theory of American democracy, Turner’s frontier thesis, which traced the distinctive politics of the United States not to public associations but to the individual freedoms practiced in the supposedly open territories of the American West. The human settlements that so sparked Tocqueville’s political imagination point to an ideal time and place in which to examine the democratic public practices of an associated people. Tocqueville’s visit, occurring in the second quarter of the nineteenth century, intersected with the moment when the term democracy became the best designation of the new nation’s political ideology and institutions. By 1825, despite some contrary and curmudgeonly opinions, American politicians operated on the assumption that the people had to be consulted in public matters. A stance of superiority to the mass of men and deference to the opinions of the better sort, once proudly espoused by the likes of John Adams and James Madison, was now taboo. In the second quarter of the nineteenth century the term democracy was rarely qualified by allusions to those as-

pects of republican theory that constrained the voice of the people within the confines of a mixed constitution, with its aristocratic and monarchical elements. The frank exhaltation of democracy had become

the presumption of national politics with Jackson’s bank message in 1832. Ever since, politicians have courted the common man and bowed to the people in their homeliest aspects and humbler statuses. After ac-

knowledging the accomplishments of a generation of historians who traced survivals of a republican ethic in nineteenth-century America, it is time to give this explicitly democratic strand of American political history a central place as of the 1830s. ‘Thereafter neither politicians nor his-

10 Introduction , torians could sanction restrictions on popular participation in government, no matter how rational and critical were the discussions that transpired within the public sphere.'° The trrumph of democratic rhetoric was no mere chimera but the product of a slow yet revolutionary change in the methods of representative government. The chief element 1n this transformation was the expansion of the elected sector of the government, which under republican theory and early American practice was kept in balance by constitutional restraints and restrictions on suffrage. By the date that begins this study, and exemplified by the New York State Constitution of 1821, legislative bodies were elected more directly, and property restriction on both voting and office holding had been abolished for white males. Democratic life was breathed into these representative procedures by political parties, mobilizations in civil society that the “founding fathers” had once bitterly excoriated. Still suspect as late as 1820, partisan loyalty was the focal point of politics by the raucous presidential election of 1840. With it came the assumption of permanent opposition, contest, and debate 1n

public affairs and the removal of inhibitions about partisan loyalty. It was in the process of partisan elections that a public constituted itself in a participatory and expressive way. Only after several decades of practicing democratic politics in heated electoral contests for relatively low political stakes did Americans begin to invest public institutions with the extensive administrative power and responsibilities associated with the

modern state—things (such as income taxes and standing armies) that were established during the Civil War. Although this democratic public life was acted out on the national stage and orchestrated with particular virtuosity during presidential elections, its origins and constitution can be discerned best at the local level by eavesdropping, like Tocqueville, on the political practices of associated Americans. Those ubiquitous meetings that dotted his itinerary, while less remote and more down to earth than those in the Acropolis, seem far too bucolic to offer models for democratic practice in late twentieth-century America. Tocqueville painted Americans as a relatively settled, homogeneous people who traced a cultural and political ancestry to Anglo-Saxon England. While he pointed out, perhaps correctly, that

democracy flourished under such homogeneous social conditions, the village setting did not subject the democratic public to a severe test, certainly not by contemporary standards of diversity and disorder. My strategy in selecting exact sites for this study was to place the representative institutions established by 1825 in direct confrontation with a particularly

Introduction I] heterogeneous and fractious people. Therefore, I mounted my historians’ canvas squarely in the middle of rapidly growing, soon industrialized, garishly diversified cities. To maximize the pressures on public life, I chose three sites that also reflected regional differences and antagonisms; one north and one south

of the great rent in the nineteenth-century national order and a third located in the contested territory of the West. These three particular cities, New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco, meet my criteria for being ungainly, urban mongrels. Each is the antithesis of the other putative cradles of democracy, the New England town or the sparsely settled frontier where a sense of the common good or the unanimous public interest could be read off the surface of social relations within a relatively homogeneous community. The diversity of the citizenries of New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco precluded any assumption of an organic, automatic public consensus. Each was a port city tied to a transoceanic hinterland and open to waves of immigration. Already by the Revolution, New York boasted a cosmopolitan history. Having passed from Dutch to English colonial control, it hosted a mix of Western European immigrants along with significant numbers of African-born slaves and toler-

ated a range of religious sects as well as the usual number of urban infidels. The roots of city people were even more tangled in New Orleans. French, Spanish, English, African, Afro-Caribbean, and Ameri-

can Indian accents mingled in one of the most polyphonic cultures on this planet. The transient population that hastily staked a claim beside the Bay of San Francisco in 1849 was fed by especially strong demographic currents from the South. Migrants from Australia, Chile, Mexico, and elsewhere in Latin America pitched their tents beside refugees from back East. Soon the ocean traffic came from Asia, bringing thousands of Chinese. In none of these cities 1s there much evidence that the simmering social diversity ever boiled away. During the Civil War and after each city experienced vicious interracial conflict at the time that it ad-

mitted enough immigrants to make one third to one half the population foreign born. The heterogeneity of the city was not as easily corralled into a single political jurisdiction as historians often assume. Even the national affiliation of each of these cities was a recent, fragile, and reversible creation. New York was invaded by the British as late as 1812. The teleology that affixes a basic stable national identity on the ports of North America is

especially inappropriate to the other cities in this triad. In just one month, November 1804, New Orleans officially passed from Spanish to

12 Introduction French to U.S. authority. Well into the 1840s, city business was still con-

ducted in French. The national identity of the settlement beside San Francisco Bay was also unstable. In just a few decades the hunting and fishing grounds of native Ohlone Indians passed through the hegemony of the Spanish crown, to the Republic of Mexico, and on to some fortune hunters calling themselves the Bear Flag Republic before it became a U.S. territory and finally a sovereign state in the Union. ‘Then, 1n 1861, the Union itself was violently torn in two, causing particularly bitter internal political divisions in these three cities. The instability of nationality during the nineteenth century ts just one indication that democratic civic life 1s not a simple transcription from a singular national culture, nor is it centered in a singular political institution such as the state. Accordingly, this search for the public will focus not on centers of government but on the far more dispersed and elusive habitats of the people. The people of course do not present themselves to historians directly, transparently, as pure essences. A major objective of this investigation is to discover how people actually defined themselves as political actors and recognized one another. At best, some citizens left fleeting, partial, and ambiguous traces of themselves on selec-

tive sets of documents, few of which bear those exquisite signs of authenticity characteristic of the elite citizens who transcribed their lives and thoughts for posterity. Of necessity the search for the democratic public will be conducted in that second-class stock of historical documents called the published sources. It 1s there, in published proceedings of municipal governments, printed guides to city life, public commentaries of literate citizens, and above all the daily newspapers that the public discloses itself to citizens and historians. The impurities of these raw materials do not require an apology, for

in this instance they have their virtues as well as their limitations. Michael Warner, among others, has demonstrated how the emergence of the democratic public in the modern West was inextricably bound up with publication. Until the mid-eighteenth century the idea of calling upon officials to publish, much less explain or justify, their actions was considered libelous. Soon thereafter, the first halting attempts to question colonial authority took the form of demands for the publication of colonial procedures and mushroomed into a printing industry premised on the radical assumption of open debate, public discussion, and governmental accountability to citizens. The political literature of the early national period was more than a printed transcript of public debate. ‘The process of publishing government actions created an imaginary but con-

Introduction 13 sequential republic of letters. Print linked author to reader and readers to one another in an ongoing, widespread, deeply thought if unspoken conversation. A political culture of print made government a public rather than a private matter; it was critical to the democratization of civic life.14

By 1825 the republic of letters was on its way to becoming a democ-

racy of print. With steady growth of the penny press the majority of adult males became parties to the public discussions on a whole range of political issues. Early in the century the expenstve newspapers not only were few, of narrow distribution, and small in size but scarcely mentioned local or national events. It was through the fiercely partisan campaigns of the press in the 1830s and 1840s that readers were introduced to a daily diet of public discussion of local and national politics. By 1850, when the press began to assume a nonpartisan but nonetheless politically engaged stance, the whole electorate was mobilized by newsprint. Circulation figures in individual cities reached to six digits, newspaper offices became gathering spots for obtaining political information, and even the illiterate congregated on street corners and in grogshops for a public reading of the dailies. After midcentury the press became more

ageressive in courting and organizing public opinion by sending reporters onto the streets to survey and report on grassroots political discussions. Through it all newspaper editors were major public actors, candidates for public office, sponsors of major public projects, targets of violent crowd action and even assassination. By the late nineteenth century the big city newspapers had come to dominate civic space itself: the office towers of the New York Herald, San Francisco Chronicle, and New Orleans Picayune provided a spatial as well as an ideological focal point of public life. By scanning pages of newsprint, the chief informant for this account of the people and the public, the historian becomes witness to the oral, the imagined, the distorted, the living public.!? As the printed nexus of an extended, multivoiced conversation the newspaper may be as close as historians can get to the voice of the public. This is not to say that these published records speak of the people any more accurately and authentically than does any other species of historical document. At the same time newspapers and published records supply an admirably complete empirical record of local events and public actions. Nearly every political body, from Sunday school societies to the city council, reported to the local newspapers, while very few deposited their private papers in historical archives. Repeatedly, the fullest, most intricate and extended accounts of public events are to be found in

14 Introduction neither the minutes of the city council nor the private papers of mayors but in the newspapers. Once again it was Tocqueville who spied the practical as well as the theoretical significance of the press for democracy.

He noted that an independent press was not only the “chief, and so to speak, the constitutive element of liberty” but the most efficient channel of communication and most audible call to the association so necessary to democracy. In Tocqueville’s pithy but overly modest image the city presses “drop the same thought into a thousand minds at the same moment.’ This newspaper democracy has the final advantage that it extends across time as well as across the space of the city, making the historian just another citizen reader. 4

The following chapters report one citizen’s reading of this public record. My selective itinerary through this boundless universe has been plotted around a few signposts, or what Dewey called markers, of the public. My route will begin among the people and circle slowly in on the more formal institutions of the public. The first marker of the public is within the domain of everyday sociability, of face-to-face or shoulder-

to-shoulder encounters between city residents, most of whom were strangers to one another if not representatives of alien cultures. This public life transpired in streets, squares, and parks, places of informal, casual, largely unplanned social interaction. The search for the public be-

gins here, because such actual social interactions may nurture, undermine, or otherwise fundamentally condition the discovery of a more formal and organized public. Dewey, among others, maintained that sustained face-to-face associations (like those of the New England town of his birth) were the necessary precondition for discovering a public. Portraits of urban sociability such as those drawn by Lyn Lofland or Richard Sennett point to city streets as schools of public spirit more appropriate to complex modern cultures. City sidewalks were spaces where citizens could learn the cosmopolitan skills of discerning and accepting

differences. The most exquisite evocation of such urban civility came from the pen of Jane Jacobs, who described the makings of the public on the sidewalks of New York some thirty years ago. “The sum of such casual, public contact at a local level—most of it fortuitous, most of it associated with errands, all of it metered by the person concerned and not thrust upon him by any one—is a feeling for the public identity of people, a web of public respect and trust and a resource in time of personal

or neighborhood need” I have been alert to any evidence that city people found the first dim recognition of a public identity in encounters like these. The civilities of

Introduction ft) the streets may be the most basic training exercises of democratic citizenship. The possibility of nurturing such public civility, as Jacobs clearly demonstrated, depends on the sidewalks themselves, on the actual phys-

ical organization of city space. Accordingly, charting the roots of the public in everyday sociability has required attention to the changing organization of urban space—such things as the layout of streets, creation of parks, maintenance of squares, and construction of public buildings. These spaces are also the sites of a second flank of my research in which I examine how public culture was organized through civic ceremonies. The performances and festivities that were enacted in public spaces on civic holidays served as both staging grounds and exercises of public life. Fourth of July parades, to give the obvious example, brought city residents together in a short-term commitment to some larger civic identity. In the process the celebrants might acquire a cultural cohesion that would gird them to undertake more costly and difficult public projects. At the very least public ceremonies allowed vast numbers of citizens

to learn, invent, and practice a common language that could be converted to other civic or political uses. This public record is subject, like any other, to different readings. It can, in the manner of some symbolic anthropologists, be seen as the reservoir of a complex but seamless com-

munity identity, a pool reflecting an unproblematic common culture. But in the three bustling towns under study here, public ceremony is just as likely to present fractured images, outlines of the distinctive publics that formed in each city: ethnic contingents who skirmished on the sidelines of parades, racial minorities who were banished to the back of the line of marches, women who could be found only back stage or on the balconies, whole classes who strategically retreated from public icstival. This second part of the investigation 1s an especially sensitive measure of the degree of public consciousness among the people. It may speak either of unity or diversity, harmony or conflict, exclusion or openness, but it always puts a large and vivid representation of the people on or near a public stage. The luxurious ceremonial life of the last century will at least reveal some of the many possibilities of the urban civic imagination. !°

The ceremonial civic lessons were carried onto the next plane of my analysis, to a space of more formal and directly political public action.

Perhaps the most intense focus of public attention in a nineteenthcentury city was not a promenade or parade, neither casual socializing nor festive solidarity, but a knock-down-drag-out political contest called an election campaign. The operating principles of urban politics in 1825

16 Introduction and after was not an allegiance to some Olympian public good but a radically democratic procedure, an agreement to disagree. Conventional wisdom downplays the level of permissible disagreement and tells us

that American electoral procedures compressed the diversity of the people into two parties with narrow ideological differences. In these three cities between 1825 and 1880, however, the voting public was far more distended than dualistic. Even the most rigid schemes of classifying partisan politics recognize three party systems in less than fifty years— Federalists and Democratic Republicans, Jacksonians and Whigs, Demo-

crats and Republicans. At the local level the major parties regularly splintered into contending factions that were joined by an array of serious and sometimes successful contenders for local power, chief among them working men, abolitionists, nativists, and municipal reformers. An investigation of these partisan formations of the public, their ceremonies and symbols, as well as their platforms and speeches will be a critical test of the democratic public. Because neither elections nor city council mectings ever enrolled all the people or expressed all public needs, it is also necessary to be attentive to the many occasions when politics spilled into the streets, 1n less than civil ways. Vociferous, often violent crowds took regularly to the streets of New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco to articulate interests, opinions, and demands that had not been heard in the more formal arenas of political discourse and decision making. Although the rioting public included relatively large cross sections of the urban population, it was more likely than a civic ceremony or a political party to enroll the

more disorganized populations—the poor, unenfranchised, women, racial minorities, underrepresented peoples. In addition to functioning as an active part of the public, these urban crowds broke the silence of the formal public about certain issues and certain citizens: They are essential reminders that the democratic procedures of the nineteenth century consulted and enacted the will of only some people. Much of the heterogeneity of the democratic public was washed out when established governments took action in the name of the whole polity. In the end only a few of the infinite matters of public relevance (or, in Dewey’s terms, indirect consequences) reached city hall. Groups such as racial minorities and women seldom were able to place issues of ereatest concern to them on the public agenda, much less translate them into public policy. Accordingly, any attempt to retrace the steps whereby people discovered the public must move beyond the space of discourse, demonstration, and contention to consider public decisions and public

LULTORUCTION Li

policies. At this final plane of analysis tlie discrepancy between the public and the people will appear once again and in boldest relief, inscribed in

the limited nuimber of issues, interests, and public goods that culmunated in government actions. Tn fact the range of municipal actions in the nineteenth century was relatively small, and extremely hesitant: from partial responsibility for street improvements, to private contracting of major services such as the waicr supply, and occasionally a major investment 1n civic Improvement such as a municipal hall or grand park. Although a number of historians have shown how antebellum cities were busy staging grounds of different public interests, they had a very small set of public programs and ser-

vices to show for themselves. There is still little reason to expect that these three cities managed to disprove Sam Bass Warner’s interpretation of nineteenth-century urban history as the domain of the private city. Too often the machinations of the capitalist market, rather than democratic deliberations, were left to determine the public good. During and after the Civil War, furthermore, military force, governmental bureaucracy, and corporate franchises became larger forces in municipal life, posing a potential threat to democratic freedoms, without necessarily promising to distribute the beneficence of government to all the people. One should not expect a simple story of triumphant public democracy in the pages ahead. The meaning of civic life in these three cities almost 170 years ago, as today, was confusing and contradictory. Was it possible for so diverse a

people, with such different beliefs and competing interests, to mold themselves into one public, even a harmonious circle of publics? Would the decentralized practices of democratic associations create pandemo-

nium or a working coalition? Can a public composed of men and women separated by their different resources and flagrant inequities opcrate in a truly democratic manner? Can (must) democracy attempt to

moderate inequality? Could democratic politics meet the needs of so many people living so closely together aad yet often so culturally and politically apart? Can government administer to public needs without jeopardizing individual freedoms? To address these basic questions [ adopted a mundane empirical strategy that can be quickly recapitulated. After parting with the lofty aspirations of political philosophers who sought an Apollonian public realm, I

come down to earth to explore the associated democratic practices of specific places. My research plan then takes on a tidy trinitarian shape. To explore a full range of civic possibilities, I set my story in three differ-

18 Introduction | ent cities, each chosen to test the fiber of democracy under the most riotously heterogeneous social conditions. Convinced that the quality of civic life could not be measured or explained within the narrow compartments of historical specializations, I proceed on three planes of investigation—the social, the cultural, and the political. I have plotted the history of the democratic public in an old-fashioned, linear narrative, told from a single but hardly omniscient vantage point. Eschewing a more fashionable posture, such as telling multiple or open-ended sto-

ries, I have indulged an irrepressible urge to make my own sense of things and thereby give the reader a firm and fallible position to contest against. (Such straightforward contention can be a useful mode of discourse in a democracy.) The narrative is divided just as predictably into three parts. Part one describes the creation of a robust democratic political culture between the approximate dates of 1825 and 1850: It builds up from the first chapter on city space, to a second describing civic ceremonies, to a third addressing politics in the conventional sense but as conducted both inside and outside the electoral and legislative arenas.

Part two is but one chapter that recounts how, around the time of the Civil War, the municipal public exploded into quite uncivil warfare. Part three also contains three uneasy chapters that detail a sequence of critical alterations in the organization of city space, culture, and politics. By tts termination, in the year 1880, civic life had quieted down significantly

and had been reshaped in some fundamental (not always democratic) ways.

But in New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco the tidy plan ran amuck and created some major disorder. Writing urban history, much like touching down in a busy city street, can be a delightfully disorienting experience. Early in the story the civic center splinters into a kaleidoscope of urban associations. Soon thereafter, and even before the outbreak of the Civil War, segments of the public went to war with one another. By the end of part three, which reaches the year 1880, this account of municipal life will have earned and maintained its new title, “Civic Wars.” Running through the whole story of democracy in the city is a spirit of public contention, which I will first report and then, in the conclusion, attempt to come to terms with, if not explain. For now I will only say that I have come to believe that the often uncivil history that I am about to describe betokens something of a civic accomplishment. An indelicate balance between civility and belligerence may, in the last analysis, be a precious contribution of the nineteenth-century city to American democracy.

PART ONE

Heterogeneous Compounds and Kaleidoscopic Varieties

CD Creating a Democratic Public, 1825-1849

Blank Page

CHAPTER 1

People’s Places

‘ J isiting New York City in 1849, Lady Emmeline Stuart Wortley

fumbled for words to capture a place “unlike every city ever beheld before.’ That a tourist was bewildered by “the cosmopolitanism” of Gotham and “the extraordinary stir and bustle and tumult of

business going on perpetually” will surprise no one familiar with the place and its people. But Lady Stuart Wortley did provide one more original observation about civic life in the second quarter of the nineteenth century: In antebellum New York she saw “heterogeneous compounds and kaleidescopical varieties presented at every turn?’ With these two awkward pairs of words Lady Stuart Wortley compressed the life of the city into an image of variety and cohesion—a “heterogeneous compound”—and drew an unstable alliance between diversity and symmetry —those “kaleidescopical varieties: ! Part one of this book will describe how, in the second quarter of the nineteenth century, American cities indeed held the complexity and constant movement of urban populations together 1n an intricate but comprehensible and even pleasing whole. Before 1850 those who walked the busy streets of New York, as well as the lively promenades of New Orleans or the rugged pathways of San Francisco, were less likely to express

anxious disorientation, so common in latter-day urban chronicles. Surely the antebellum city had its detractors, and historians properly point to growing apprehension of urban danger, especially as midcentury approached.” But the antiurban bias that has pervaded American thought for the last century has cast a teleological shadow over a time of al

22 Heterogeneous Compounds and Kaleidoscopic Varieties

relative urban contentment. My reading of the historical record will, for the sake of balance, lean in the direction of a more sanguine interpretation. The people of these three cities managed to construct a mechanism that brought differences together into a colorful whole, something that resembled an urban kaleidoscope. This complex social creation was constructed from the ground up, on the concrete spaces of the city. These elemental building blocks of civic consciousness are the subject of this chapter, which will describe the particular arrangements of people and space that supported American democracy during a critical period be-

tween approximately 1825 and 1850. | No one could dispute that by the midpoint of the last century the cities of New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco were well supplied with the raw materials from which to construct a kaleidoscope or blend

a compound. The human fragments numbered over half a million in New York and 110,000 1n New Orleans. In each city, including the upstart settlement of San Francisco, the pieces of the kaleidoscope were

very much in motion. The 35,000 residents whom the census takers found just within the Golden Gate in 1850 were almost to a man (and a very rare Woman) newcomers to a village only recently claimed from the Mexicans (and the Spanish and Native Americans just before them). The city had acquired its name and corporate status only three years before.

Meanwhile, in the relatively ancient cities of New York and New Orleans the population had grown fivefold in the two preceding decades. These two ports were, respectively, the first and second major points of entry into the United States. New Orleans saw an estimated 188,000 1mmigrants (one and one-half times its official population) pass through its port in the preceding decade. The diverse origins of these mobile thou-

sands meant that unusually disparate languages, cultures, and peoples came together in these port cities. Over 40 percent of the residents of both New York and New Orleans had been born abroad, with the Irish and Germans constituting the largest immigrant groups. A full majority of San Franciscans were foreign born as of 1852. The population flowing

into San Francisco and New Orleans was replenished from Asia, the Caribbean, and South America as well as Europe. Already in 1850 hundreds of immigrants from China were arriving in San Francisco. In New Orleans the balance between those of European and African descent was slowly stabilizing after an erratic half-century. In 1820 African Americans, free people of color as well as slaves, were a majority in the Cres-

cent City. Thereafter steady migration from the Northern states and immigration from Europe gave Caucasians the demographic edge, accounting for almost three fourths of the population by 1850. From the

People’s Places 23 perspective of New Orleans natives, the migrants from the Northern United States were as disruptive a presence as any: Just a few years after the French-speaking majority of New Orleans voted against enrolling Louisiana among the United States of America, they found that English had become the predominant tongue spoken in the city.* The “American” majority had shallow roots in all antebellum cities. As of 1850 over 55 percent of New Yorkers and New Orleanians had been born out of state if not out of the country. These newcomers swept into the city at a time of frenetic economic expansion that splintered the polity along yet another axis. Social historians have demonstrated that the decades before 1850 saw the demolition of the bonds of interdependency that once linked master and servant,

journeymen and apprentice, shopkeepers and clerks into joint households and under a web of deference and stewardship. It 1s equally clear that differences in wealth became more dramatic over the course of the antebellum period. Yet the shifts in occupational structure did not sort themselves into clear class divisions. The period between 1825 and 1850 saw both the expansion of independent wage labor and the continuing

predominance of small-shop production. The militant producer consciousness of Anglo-Saxon Protestant artisans waxed its strongest just as

unskilled foreign-born, often Catholic laborers came to dominate the manual work force. Finally, the whole motley marketplace was turned topsy-turvy by the prolonged depression that followed the financial panic of 1837. In sum the diverse and growing urban economies of these commercial cities tended to fracture the occupational structure, giving another bewildering turn to the urban kaleidoscope.* The populations of these three cities were diverse in national origins, place of birth, lines of descent, and economic status and were composed of people who had resided together for only a short time. Such a population is unlikely to manifest the coherence of a folk, or common, culture or a singular and seamless community. Still, this does not mean that the coresidents of American cities were merely stray atoms strewn across the urban landscape. At the most basic level they were drawn into rela-

| tions with one another by the necessity of sharing densely settled urban turf. During the second quarter of the century the physical arrangement of this common ground fostered public sociability and democratic association. Although the antebellum urban plan was a haphazard creation, to say the least, 1t was, to use Kevin Lynch’s phrase, a readable city: Its basic spatial organization was clear enough that residents could comprehend where they were 1n relation to the whole urban polity (figs. 1-3). The social life of antebellum cities flowed along three spatial coordinates,

a ee ee ee ee

rrr a ee a oe i SO ae CO Oy CO Oe ee ee au a aoeTEM Se a. an ps oe ee Es ae nN Nk Ee CCR, al eg I a eo ee ee LO EN eae OE Tae RU eg I eee ee CO ae Ee ee OSD NY aS i a iia re aSee Coe ee NA Ae Tees oe Ee a le ene ee CC et oe Ee eae a a oe | a ee eeDc) i xJeesCmeeLeoenasoo. ae GRE sei oe 8: aOy ee Ts SOee ai Oe C—O i cam RB Nea Ai aiseeeeASsu ieallo ino aecanennauay uucwaune ys wesanai ; SRE eee aN (Ril ee ee itiel OOaSO ee aa eilea 1aR RG UN Hae NAIC SAO

OO es | os [ee ae 2,,,r,D,r”rt:tC«wSti‘CéiCsésésé‘(‘CSéCOéCO™;S:CSCS LOO OT ON a ica mr rrsC—*s*=“‘ (SR

SU iMMR teeSe 8.POS Ia a PES MS eeia ee eG ae Fee eT yeOS Ses.eee hae eenTeRE ON SARIN SOI od IB GCN ae DO ey eCasin UtZcOS hs eo a*aNO ene aes SR ie Oa ne Me ees tla iMUG enna MS OC ai ann Coe eS taek eT iG Co SNe TIS SeOM 0Me ES is Soh MaMa aaneee ela SUD es. ;San aed CSE Se cae 1AEG eR ete ee SR Hah Scan a as PUR Pe a ae os Fe any aes aeeieUke eine oe eeSe SOME NS AVN SMe ich aro NO oaaun a eaSe aiean Ce ae Bog 'e Se occa crue oe oeeh OU ead ee ee CS Oe ae Cae Sea ShMORE SCM IeMec er SE alee LONE Nae eee) |eye, a aseysig SOee aRtCE Otaioe aM ICOng: PR OE ORB GU Gea aOSB Ces aUNOE ianMean: nN ilngon eeeRe enMn Meee aceon Mic caviae Mogae, UU, seemecmmneag Beaman NN RAAT CCN GM Ort OT iG a GAG ME gS SMUG rat RAS, ci eer oO ah eam ee ne Conan ‘ nih ley Oo eas ye OAL SL OI

ae) sc . ae 3 Br ee eet MMS HUA R Re SGI ARON AAO MES Hui OT cll ee OUEST CO eS GCA Grete Bag ae AOS es EC On mA CN SO OO Nea Se we bye be aye _aORNS 2EN,,rrtr:t—t~s—i‘COS .AoeBai Se aeae Lee Fo eeaCIM oe C2 sori BayeMMM ea GISante SS EN SSeeu iy CF NSS Mah OIC SoS OMA INOS SHARE ES Soemae Ca Se MOREE Seay BPae. eprmeeoe il ies Calera puDae OSSSo ROT ONE GN con a Seay ee SRE ONGC ee - 1Reaswee ¥ ON Uyyre aeDUoe ws |DO—— Lmhmrrmr,r”—”TF oeeltcetaBO oo. oeaNDe ee ae ona sol

ee a ne iis | corn Ee OE ee ee en ae

Hehe A Se Na. Bie Ble Lp Ce oN ee a an al tein en VRE Sarai) AGT MSU MMe SSE ROR Sai Oa OAR ae 2. Cie uC e T ES USL RE AR a eee wel cea er. Se ae tenses, SBD op _ “4 Fees ee MAC URAC Nein) i re GCA ON RIAU RI ONS Cs ROC ARMING NUE Ne LEAN ines NCE NCI ay Dun HUE FEO a

CMB NS WI ear OM ES eeA)ceNT eesais EOoa Seago ee IO a iain NC No data CUSGe SOAs 1 |+ailaASS I aap la aa: a et a EE eeNIG aeo. eSga) EC ee EN ORONO RAG ON insae eee a |DIN. alee GEES AOS MM ences deisiAIRS agi ye ee ce Pe Bee os Ges ES Me as aiin aeMal we MES) ee ee te cen cc UPR MMRMMIg ch, ee Oeee SEROE ecccscak cert ee SalAU MM} GSMest eTae A MG Ta ee SSST ceiSs fh Gh Pe ee CELE CIN dsuoSReae NE ile oe A CNB e TU RSs MD ante MMat eae;or ccaOER aan ON eens ON I INING TOMER. |Se AEE UIE asian NR Ua Ie OR Ree a Pega tee a ete ||) 0 ae a ena fe alae. "REMI OEC sonnets Sul cra Ciah BE Le cite ene tl pambeanead tte TAGISH BES ce at te Di SMO Cy RS UNSUNG MIRA SUA Vaio Me” yeh See

Sa i a | ee ae ee ee BOE Ra Su TA STS RTD SASS Sc) a ee PC Uh ie

et Ge a SC Naat MiiaMIAN OMAN ae: PARE ik FANS TOD SakNG GU aR i eeNE eei eT eeeHOHE CNNSibi a Set eS Cee ASG TINCT allcree UND iia FE MN SG ALA MR a OE ral Sno EU pease ee oe see TINGE sgAINE IANSArn ie PhLS Seg Sea, eeaea abee CN TE CN sco cada os LoS AE VATED GME SUNY IG0SE iii cyCTT NCSe SI Le Rea cePas get JEG ROSS St Des ire elacc atic FOr ele Oe EC etreeR Ce ee Sue EO NN, iN aeDee AIM NS Occ eS ae alte en Pec: oniee mM UAmine ESL NS SFonic DEAS cay Ane aA Cent ats See aHie enSAN? EeSak a ialDARE OER US I RS RMS AEA es MN hea ty OS Sone ol Pate yah eeCoo ata ae Seeee ee ee Hee i oa) SON AOr SMa SIRES CSE Gna ayRt eeieFT se) eC We de Le Oe SU ah EN aliNRO NE BS OOO URIS Se OCS PO ke GI SO Se eee liga fe eer cea se eee ONCE Se ISTE CS A MAO Ce So EEE SRE Nee BleMRE ec nee RN eenPe Tals SCOT TS SS Se UNE ssnTne vec eA ay aeFe Sere SIRE! OAS ONES RO MO ee i 6MUA co UNM es2GeBee LS ean ae Sa TRAD Re Merceemeegae | Gara NRE SAO SU Ee Si NE: Sea EB eae Le RN SCION NG So ar One aaa ee eee ogee aes Ce eee ey ee OO ONG a Gee aE aMG eee NO AMM CMU fal, So ae M's SANUS Wd bes. es De AMMA Soo Ss crtr Secs Rn COS eco ceri nOT| ROR PI AGE LOST RC ES ee OR SG UNCC EEOC TTY ill i a a ee eee ao ea

Fo hao a uaeog elon as RMR EMD 2 0 eaten Sai © NI sak snug ania ee ANTE DG ROMS i eea eeeeeeEAeC eer ce CANCE ANE or has iimae saan ee NDE ee ee

aaieNsee eee ee Pieces trees ear cere ||og|)iecranny |a|TE econ ecerenerine ee Te ig. NG cee co enn aa ee aeoes ree SG Ae a dea ee eeSOM ARTE eCA Ia ea ee bas ea)me ea Minti NN GPE N SHE a One aCUS ee ee | ae a ||iG ea PR SU Fe Fe ET ceSa iO Ra MG Ua TS CER. SH cou ee eeHEAR Bee i ia ee oe BIE Aaroy ea RAE UCC STWaki! a LeNO Sere aE: Was eR laNe IR eeSy ti MU Lee sicikc reyNE

ee OePee aieeiesionals i ga orse Tea | SE i NS | ee aee la -ie oe aOIagg Gio icgs Sy ae es Hee ee es neeee oe : iNy ae ee Me ee

oo ee i we oes eean ee aDaae - UN FFi CNkehe eea a| es | tee OT Tales Wiel aaa SAG ll ec I Oa UC eS Ts gos ee aigcll EE OO CURel a sO Ae a Me oe iee sO 1 a eatCe Noma aeeFtai Sawer egi aeeeeee Ea SSS ee ee oe or aan Te ckMONT taannwcon’ | idee aeeM ooNe oF ee eecCO ye Oe ae oF io CE es | fk Fee LP Bee ee er ee AV EL OCG RG ISN cra Cate uC GEM Oe ea Oe. MOR 6 a ke Se CM ea RM gh dN os CE UG ET enn nT ii ee a ae ee ees: Ce we Oe Eh CO Oe ee a a Fe i eC EO a MN Ie MA OU ce OURO Mae In Ct i. ae AMG ee ueeeEe ee ee Rae a: ae ia ieee MEI be ME ae eeTE a aeQa ee aye OeIeeSsNeCt Maia Gass OkeEN Ce eee ee Gere Eee EO acy CURMUIN AINE Ne aU Sees cates Caren eecacear ts online amma s nt aa dehagrr 7 ET i OU li SOO A as ANI 4 CA Oe aa

SR COMME Ce CC mmm GE Ei TT DIE SOMES 6 ves cued a anil Se Bhi RM Ra = amRNna i aninaE isa ee os A EO HU Rs a Ae Oe a ih iE MCU cai ee ZN a

oe ee nioo ae Re ohST ina TS Resican Ca Pe errr) UD Ree ey eae verre dee stcorhin batt das acc) eRiy a MO Ne aabl One eeee Beeeeee iim ts iLO heseC Ne Rees HON ee eae lie en ee ae MN ToC aeNie SEG EsWe 20) Some CoitesMa Hii ee aa fe ali oe Se ee OS On Ct Gam pl elROUT eeMD CL OCR NGI Ke ANE ion an wai ACE eee EE ae ST UO CO eS aE A Wn RR LE eraAN at CSR ‘ean recone aynEy Nee enya OS CLEC ey eeGy onnneones Sane eeREI le Eein a Ca ee aNe Oo Ce a iiMMR ae ve CNA osMUIR aSSGN we cn ee [ea arama iegcesotenacsinred ed none one ea TE ON CF AA Pe ee Se he leucine asia 1A Ane spelen | eh ee) eet ante UO RL Ra MUI oe ee eau ok hs a

ee oe ee ea te ek Ce

Oe SE en EH Te ame ne We See ANG oe MEU &: Aaa y Rete a ean SI RH A Fo ASA SAIS TaNEE ASUS HA USES NS MASSON ONG AC IG. BAC aN alt TORRE OO SRT ISSR MC Sere et cl Ct ener eed

RNS NG MIR Ad Cn 8: yn Since A RE SEY Me Mesa ibaa = aol Re acl Nae art oe SA aepane Ceo eatUREA ee eeBet ce mee eae) Ge ee iRoe ees ee ees eee Beer eee Sek eo Lees i ee eae ee rome Peon iat ee Spek CE 8 oa, See ee ee ee eee pokes Eat oe teas ee ce eee ae eer eg Abe a OPA UIRURSS ERR SoS iene alas gos 6 IE a eee are Bos ern aor AS oo ee ee oe Q Ley yh ee eg os fee oe ie ee eer eee ee nee ei cee eee eae Oe cee eee Ber ecee os Sonepee iene ey ae ai, ee a ae ROP SE GME ote Gort aati | pecs ESGi8 “Leah Woke SROiih Neha Gor RS hia Gosek been Boers 6MIRC) re Oe es ee Fo epee ee Bet eee CON PS aioS prea cy Retna esegeneveel eeRYaeweet oe eerie Cera Sees SMES Ce ite aN go ae”Ea’, AN GS aeCaebay Biprane Se eer aeee oem ees fe cea tepee aeaaaeenpoe a Gere Os Oe ao iter MB IES EN aS BP | pone Caer: © trae [oe ae ee Bae a ct 4 ieee a weet Ears Foe Cea eee eee Boe

Eee Deiat ener mh : : oe erie vee fe eine oe anaes a Ree Rey St Goan ig fe Getawane Oe eae Oh amie Se tec ie eee eh he ea ope Beh oose heures eee eh een ees os hare a aeee oo Ger niet) cere. a Caen BEEN ip SSS cis EEE ee [IELES ent DNS eee oes FeBOG es ost 4ones ee asa wees ei aeeaoSSSok Be eeBap eeogen ae Bee i Le seeeeleBae foea eee Zoe EP ares SPOS PES ARO CER Ag MORES ele RE a aioe PEEL Pere ne COO are ere De eisereek Last Sak:aoe Boogie J etn Sete roe ee ace ener eine ree

A tes brah eee oe a: ee Be Be ie Rein Es) ee ae cee Le ie eer eee JS ES | Lee piesa ee ees

8 BoAShe 0 00Sie See Ru eR ecaee tee BL eaeeee ee) eae ereoa ee eee eae)cere Mee cs eo ae eee eeSB Eeca OES: OR ROR oe eR Bnpac Mista OR Sip Ah. Seraih Sere Sahn Mea neces sarei ast LESht ee ee eM rshy ee ee eet ccencane, S oe pneainine Hneee ROSIE NSF MUN ES VsBg Wallces 2g SS Ste eeas Oreed eeeeees eee eeeeebeso oes ere rs cio ober ee eadeeeee oePIN oeees ee ee REcena ag PSS 5caeeAEE LE ateeee SLeeirirae rege page eeee eee ne ec rs et ees ene er ee eed eae ce eeeeetocoemere oor eee eg)PRN ee eeDen, ee ae ee MEIINE Tye ON

SEAL UU go oeWenig oecngeee eed Pegpscciaig IeeeeoN eee Pee ce eeeeeee ee ee Be oe BS Nes aorARON penned: ea es ge ' eeeee ee eee ee oe Ceeee ieee eeeek ee ee ee ping pec n co jemumnig EOIee pcsotaag SSRee SG ee: ee eee Bh Reece cet te ie ee Kes OS Boe? ee eee ere Ve Le Ce ae Ee ee ee Q a ee ae ee coe cee Ree 1 a ee Paes te eee By Reba ee ene REggBgctAR SETS ct SE bn erBees ae rae ee syeebee ee Ae Bea poner Bee OrsSeer Soreeee eeoan, ee eeones ee Cee ee aES RAR ge Eo TPSoe ageink) geet ag Sr Sai EN ek ROseA RN A agtaeer SEAN Severe Ceec: Leca Bey erieOy eesdeca eee ae ee Sree eesPee eeehe EASE ayeno Ee geisha ieee © Gere EAMG aig Ee Be eS fee ee ee as Sa ghee er ee hy area As eee LON Wa hatee Sak cee va be ee ae Gbraa eo the tek it oe eee pies pa pacer nag ieee phieenia among pinting eh, wrxa gM MALOU a oh 2 Be gee oh

Bt A ae BOoscee OPeeON CEIREera i NS NE co neee ee en pe aca ee feee oeattiPe ee ee eeseaaire atoatdand: sasee Bae a eee re Loe Be ie ee peeenOk| eae eeeOhoe Cee eget wee Pe SL Oe Ieee ee heaeceae Pers Se ee : aes oe eeae STE Pa a gee eR Ne oa Olga“eS PE ee SB os a Ici aera a Geno OG OE SOs noeey lage Soest See e eee eee tice ieee Rog eee eiacl Sanwsitee teas ao konail weveoe meena Ee Sewae gon ee rie arene ES ReeeFS NS i,ae Nee ess BEE aise: gee Kes, pe acen eee Bes ee easieeee ee aaa oecesssic uci scfm enaues ee ey oe ee ee, a ee Pieeh kal Peed

Re Ce ee gon ee Poe : ae Cee yo (we OU aires gh

pg ME NE ae AGRI Tag ee Se Sage NC OA RN Eade eB ON CCL MTS ae ee ee ee ee ae ee ene . Ce ee s a ee ee ge 2

Bor ae MSCS DONS Se eeENS eeRU eee Ee PARC icone a «He eecas ee ee eeUe ee iGucci Oecee ES Sa eee ee eeLA eeWee ee eens Ee OPM anyBOSH CACORE SatsaERGs PHOS POO SES Oy EMER NEBag Neene UsPE ESmeena ERIE SS] BePe a iaeieee ee ieees ISD NOES Bey cus ek Coates ae : d| RON oterents ee ee ce) Reeder Ne en Baeeeeh Bee Bete BENT Wee tai(amen ee earia,“aon eee teres ee Rnd Bence Medpeed gioeaNg ered) eeeeee eee Bere ee:ae ereee ckeee ve | SE aa Be Oeeneerisee Se SE aGS aeTSaRRR CRCMOU TE: Rai mite amu BOLE SPYyer Eoo ee Caeeee aeee e eeeeae Pes Los Fg ee Pee a. oo ee eeegTea ce a1 ae :BOE o aNe ee eee a |oe PONS a: : DORON Sereect gosee et MES NON ey OOS. aiE ETts ag LES MEGS ORONO oeeee Oa eeA A Can oh CN cnn ne on AG aday TO RO RS Ne Pg8See ices ee 2 a Bt ReaeaGO= trESae eeneS aearsNS ee oeAM enh UE ei Rr RNesca SMI ees ia Be SU OL cdanne ee ee eee)

;eePOS ee ha oe oN ONeeeReS: hep ee ESO A coe a oo ee ee SesPaoeeeee Bg tot Be aeee eae Loe © oea Se poe ai one es _ Cae oi oeon i ea weea a] veene ees |

I gt one SN sileae leSe EEN RG OSS, Sa alee ONG ONweer, NENE eg SPN ERS WORSE SEE ge! RIESE ENMU eaeee Seene Ws rrr i Gh SatieWE Nighi CREO oesyaa Rar rae ossere eiFeseeecan Oger hee re ere A TS ae Mea goatAONE HE aadikBe eeRE eeCoe eeANeeRRO: teeNIRS Bein Bein aeEG Gd eeSANE eaeteRIDE Genie Be Ue OIE Gee ed en eeee gee reI ae IS ge EIEN ES SE INVESIG gg UA OMT Re ee os Berea Ne RISE BCE: SLSep, SSE ee Be wdUe? eeSie Oo os eyIPI aBseeen ae ee |

Dee MON NO INN Pee OLE NOME UNCP Bam’ ee EO ews: poe aoe GNM: Daren emnaay SUR ec eae Pe ee ee eee wy ee eeeke oNPEee oe EO ae. Se OS I SReo Leakey a eyoe aei aea Bee 1eae Spee Bee aoeee eae ae Po ae Bo eee eee eeNalBO ea eee eeEN DR ae gee ee cS es eae) cd eee aeoSebiee Paige oF ake erate oo eo Se Ge ee ;ian Se 3SR cee wnt as ioe aoeOE. em ty ee eesSE ssTONES clOe fieioeS ek ed 2 Pe NE ea NEN rieee GAOT Ger oko BSS Nea BN ORS i eeOe ED eae ee a Ance eePe Oeoo oe Se GSE RSGINLE UO GSE Eos MORSE

oe eeos ie Ree eSee ee POS CeO oSDAEaeOGRE: & Deak ee legcae Ceer aeee ae Teka ee ee OE Ge ag Ce ISAOR i A ea, ae ee oa ee ee eer oe Pere Les ar Ce Oe 1 ee te wl ooo 5 Coe eeSSSR CN es ae Cae esee LIES Blane Oo nsae aC aay egA URIs nae ees 8AN ete Be eee ceene ae a ee ee oe eS aUe Son eea!a BONEN eae ee aCe Lo es Se NI WE See a Cg Ne5Eg NONE SURES ONEgi: SAA GS, eeee eeee eseee Ds oe PN teCee ceOs 2.EU Cr ee ee ee Be on ae oS eeSR eo eee ee ee eaeeeeee aa iaee os aN ee UM ee es ooo. So. i oe aM ae ee OG IE NON es Os ee So So oe no ra a a ek ae a a ey Bh ie ee ire ne a i a a Oe ru ran Aer A EN Fee ae Oe oe Se ee eee ee eas ee ee rece eeGAS eeaooeekeeOS ee eee ee Oe Se NPS ee a5aRaiLy oO eee teere of Me? Oo aNOE Noe. oeeeLS ee— as i De 2eg Be ee ae — asReeeec eS iaee Sane ‘0ieee ee ene ee erefre (ee oe eseeeae Se — NO asoe Ce 0 2gtMean et es Seah Re 0oo eeeoS cone ee ieee eeeee ON LON fr ey SS eeaoe 1Bo Sit Whos HG oe Cr Pa ane Coe Rigi eM o® eegs ee OE ee eeach ee ogENN Ay teenOe eeeCee ata Eeee pileee ii NORE SSSR: NOIUO CEsROE an eae Ga IEEUae SNA ESE REO ee ES Ce meng hS ES Be eee eee SSE SEAIS, ee SI a ey Gl oe eeOME: oer Pena ben OC BeAny PeCITC ee eee shiesSeSa ae RO

Ro ON GNSS ate oe MAIN EN oe aeBOE ge RNBEEN keISG A oeSony Wea (0 aptBLOG eoatey a EM of iE eeMAUCAN atin aman POR GM ON Pk aleern a cet ac BOOS we ee : Bc eee Oe ee MES a SEE as MING CR gas BS IBON OD Nh EIN EON SGct CON NOR Magpies ytdoR Reng MEER NON egos Rnd Veeeens ee ee ee be Cecen eeeeepra a ee eee aeTORi PN EI, eae eaEES iOUE ACO lea IG a KG RIES Seiunedts REcee ST a eek ona e ene Bee, MM ree PSS SR UR 3Sortan RO ISN a ie Ay ee eeNT eeeeek. oe EE OSU vn ASE MO Bo OIEEUS ENeas ei)pce ekpiek oe TNE ees oeOE ee bie a&eae Bip MokMIM oe re cata, POM ok i ge DN EO er IPp OaPRN RimiUO RNNLU SiacORG HSU On cee ESegy | BT Atlee See i Am Wagest EVere GS SON ootre aE aROS ahao 2BPC CeRS ear Roo eon aeCe een aeeGCN EY OC 1OA ISpeo Blagg Geaeeeeee ENG RSCG Wine A ca a) eeMES neBeh OOS Oe, cata aneg oeeeRS Or

| eed eeeevyeee LOO Coe OS EO NS a FO ee yy Ce EP NO a ON oe a SS re ee er Hom pean ee mene ee Sot gn Pe Sere OR Ge MM Se ee a a DI a as ee Brea it ae| :

ee a ieeSE ee EGS Ses Naeger IRN YE DR SASS AURALoe Moai cceyML SERN Ay EO Ue ese MU LeaE ne arNC ge BISON INNES SCAN gS ha aseaneaenC So cs cree ae ae ee ete CEs PNEhVON ee Cae ae aie SeWOR S NA a UDR Iesole shals0UPOS WORM PSGONG CEGNLCRS PN RGA ANGSOa n RSLS USeeeR @ee er

ee ee SE NING ie th BS A ai SOC RM ALS Bp BEE pI CNN Gi SCH OLAA iat ma OR Eee ua Rr ast BERR 2 (SST) aay ea ee ii ise WSN M AVIA sad aoeR pains oe NRCS Loe:

ee eeMe eee er baoeerie) am ie aOn a Ye en ee ee ae IRee OUNE a PEON SG STURGIS MeON EY Ba ceree Ge SUPE EEtoe ASESe ES SER is SRE ge Olivas eet, gee een NGS HORAN Neoga© kea HS Teen aapita Gia Le a CEO eee BO a ee | Gs eee erg ee a fos a ee SSR RRE VaR i ence aeCa cp ANGE ES Narn aCSN UU ie SM aE paar ee ibs Gear ae Gonna tata Os EIN SCC CRON Sia te ae ye cwaoney: wekanuas A Be eeeg ae ee ere eeBe ae aee re enens ee eekMEAs NS StON RCS LO es RON EA Bean ayySoaae Manca ihIepong eee eyaae ee RR ee aaa SRT eT SOIN ETT | SRN, ean ea RL spiteSoa OPENraOPE OREN IG Bea SIE RE A URE MIA Mi: eG oe SANS Ns, Me Eos Brayleat” eo ansasia en eeetie heernn OOpte CA casing Re cas catia pe ier or AN

SeUES eyANPe ee es eea AEN ee eeSeeON ee ee RO CRMIR ee ea4 ee aEaAME ee e HOU ACI BN oc EASE GSie aMS engl ad eesGON EEN ge aeSSIS a WON EeOOR On SeSear. Bee caMn: LeSAGAN eeeSNE aera AOeagEEer SeUS EN oP Age ee ane Oe eeoe re ree ea SINCae Rasta yao ONSene BETOERE ME teRt ASR eeerR ee

OEE OE OO a|08 AES N Ooh CON te We ee Be Dae ete ee oe ee ee Oepe ee eetg, ReBe Ge |cee ae ea | ee ANOE ee oe. eee ee oc ON ee Ce aOUTS a Ga CO eee ee eee RCN ce aNE ae ne Bake ees ee De oe Pe EE SS ee e ee a ON ENE ee ps pO oe SUS ee Se eeoo ere pW ae Se st ae er Ae eo eee eee | ee Ce GE ea eeRONG Sane PIS TEE EEE GEoe OP UN eeceuey Pema yan been ee cee een AO me ue Oa POOR Oe MeN Ree a i Be errr | ie eee) ee aa, ee| :OSedIaeeeee SSE ee MO : ao ea on ee oe ee ae CS De Eg ee eee ees ee Bie ee Ol ee ee RS oe Soe a Rae tore Ee ae ark Hie ee ears SPO IR eS Me EES SSE ee ee Oe oe IS ws oe a oe ee Le De as 5 SSS a re cneneon | i ee Tr ee ee ea eee Denis sect oe

ee es CO ee ee ee te ee ee ee a OU ESN RE i, ee ee ee E ol I OI oS NE ee Ge Oe a Pe ee a aN ee so, eee Ne Og CS ee gare PIO au IPee ee is) 1 ee eS AN LN iee Eeeeee Eoeee eeGee See eR ee es er Pees ie OeCF a alee, 5 ee asLe ne ne oe ee po SACS S NESS I OSE oS ee I pana EE y NS See ee ee en aS phan rote rr eae OO Ba RS NGI RIN oc pe erence Secrecy MMe niece oe MPMIMRD Co oe gre ee ‘i i Boe NSCS cae a ae oe ea BEY PG Ml RRR oe

ee PAGE Te OMG He OOS Gar aie MICs cee ha Me AAO ag Lae aWUE Ee Ga ioe each Walaa ORI oe LS TESE Oly SSS ee re . aeeOe POG SNoN Mei lel EN a a, Haereee SA SS ese a ye eeEsSA Sg

Soa Rn nna SG eneGo eT Re CaN eeeCO 7 MOUSSE ENON BONO UGIINS NSCS Woes: oes ee eeaceeer sc SE a eeae eeenrans eeSSUES et ae eee ee eeee ee eeeee ee ec aah Rane Ce Ree eeGh MD, eects AERIS PUES 7 UE ON OL pcr OM aOE as SOE EE ee Pe eeaGcAaOt ee neapieeeee ae EECMS eee is tk eeeTEU a eee ees see AEE RECS Be ee eeaenI AS RON Oe: ot ee NS IGE he: eeiG OU Grea Se eewe ee eee ee 28 ee a o HOU ce ca ines Oe Oe oe Coe OS ee ee oe ee os Pe ee ee ee ea ee ee Pe SR Se EO Ss NID Se tae an Se neaan Eee ON MIRC G RRR SOT SS OSasey OS eB NM Go ES UMM carat cots ee Pie 28 RE WA OR oe See ee Co Bee ea te we ae SMC NC ped PE EOS SUE SEES ee ee Renae

ee ee ee ee ae ee ea ee ce ao * HES OS MBI OS ETE A Ses OST Bienes Se CN Di RG Ee NOUS ESE Gia Sk Saher cee re coer rem RE CO BR NaI RDU OS Me AM SES a TONED Reese RE a Ane eRe 2 PN GN ee Fa ge tog ele gs enti a ea Sat aamag ened cosh fuigie doco gatos icc teeeee

Seen 2. : ERS Eg UA ae Re eh OG ee RNC ee oe ee ee So Ba nor hes te Rene eae ee eee cet So a 1 et E b eceeeceaerercaseeeseas tet | 0), ie eae ian nett an Reine ete aes Wy, desiree at ase RR en Ce ee ON Ree ees aon ee PG: ES 2 NOISE aaa re PO Se A SERIE ERE TESA SS SAS Ee Egg SSE ea I A Pee : eR eS a TAIGSEES SUES CES CAPONE RUN Re A SerSReaRNceSOUS a ee NS ee OS eeeCIR eePT FFeager ee OV anaeaseeCae ereRRR eaeresRare Breeeeee eeaeeeINU ueeste er ose adeGtBE Ges RS ASE: EIS EEee SSR Ge ER ggSi reaIIS a a auan Sa ees ea PRRES OepaSR, US pata cee het etAUC at ee ARTA roars VicSie eersea sena eg Beacesmmnctecess: OU tees aOIG See SRE SEE Reet ea pen strate ey epee ERE SIMS ee ae PO eashea OE BINS EN os Ss yogiRegen oeneo, SNee EES NGS MISS SO PES Oene aR meee RS oe bicnene ee| oe ee ee Os i To Me ee eS Cece PE — sen ee ee ee I ae oe . Soe ee |.eeAreD: :eeaSO oe iiyOe-oe EN se Oe Oa fe ii aeeeheCs _ SEE . -per ee ey ES LeaES Oe a aLo, ae ee oN Ls Oe YBa aia ites MO ene foe Or ooSeSg {Ee nee eee ee Ae,ee A oe eas poe ee NN Lp Rn aan iNSeeee 2ae aicPBs Sete 2) Dp eeee 8.i oe ee ie accaeee ee EE as ee een EO ia Be IN ti eo. ee i eee > es et vena ee aOe a ora DRGae ee Bi Figs Niey oF eee sSeecanen Ce eo, ge ae ie Ss ~< asy_aeC7 pare ee 8 aoo a ence anol ceed B ee e: Fe.Be EO ean bole ec oe ee co eo oe a Rea els~— ee foreoe i Arete a.OE oe oo . a Cee ee yy oe. 8 — ye oe. — — ee BOs i si ee ee ong 8 oo, Ce ee ae Po Co, y SE : Ine ee > neva) BeEES aiee sy euia Loo 6s SAN a Die Oe) Se, Boo oo oe 8 ee _ eeeOe er at oe NG oe Re eeaa ee ee er eeu oe es Ue oe eo aaia6ne Strontrentaca tins a:. pices =.2. Wisse yoaeeS ee ioe anes ee yeLo ae Ome eeco NOSES eee Es et fisesneceuly oeCe aFe nape onepah Nes ee aoe Ree rE eS: ee aes 2s Seei ys es ogee SGN ea Nees eeeees Ns aSeofces-Baa ag FS Hobane oe a ome 8 ee Po a SENSES CEs ne Bee pee a tg: Lene .4aie: aslee a a) haa OX eeSealy we NG oPN, i xesaeiOeeSeeOs‘ eeee eseeoe Coen nes, SOvs ok ys eeOsee PS oc ae Ce ee ee ee Bea igee ee a. Cee ee aus 7oo aa

ifaaee i.Se : 7 | ee -aa .. .USES ae Ne ee a aes > oe ee oo ee we, og GS i | a ao be ee oe ee mer OS: Se mete See ee, cee Ae No) toe Mon Ce vo ee ees a he Re See Oe ea ee hes Se ee aae: ee oe aReOs Ec Wah yoo eOU ee Bs aoeoe -SSNS eee ie ee7 ease oeEe Weee LeSs a Re RE aA nee Genter ee TM a eacen Bete caeMa Pe SCG eee SUR liCO ee aBae bo MW sie SE Re hen eek =ata iene Lee Le. oe ne ee as, ee eo ee ee eae peabeatiore LE ee Sedaka hae Ta oe Reef tybias ee Aiteo ii SSoe oeaca oo— oS ea — 2 i7 - oe 7 _2.oo - oo =e oeparen 8 es Oe Ls ie ae ON: Bs eeMyce tiok. eo Ra oeFi aeSian Ce .Remi ea hs Te cay eee esteoe ee VeRES ieinee ieaks agon etOnce ce Bee Ceoe) etre ete AS SR Seeeay eae cae OEM: ee ie ee, aeheee eeoe ae heSea ok CSG oe Dieu ae ee aetine oeee anae aSolna —ENS .>— -a ee See — ac ee ae oe 2 eS oy Se i. os ol, Se . x \ oo ae Belch eaeriee eet eee a Looe an” a va pe oe et ee a oe ue ee ae Oe Ne Soc ok eS cages Oe Dna g OS a, oe a is rae: ee: | .Herne eTene oe Ce aul es eS GE ie | Ba oon ee, is pee he Reba. PotMer a eae F ieee ig ees anaes ici ana aSee eeeNe oe aeoe ESeereen oe AOS) BareSE Cm AEN! ONG ae Oe Sage Se ek as EN Ratio pa ae a:es4. ee_ aeSEB ee oeoye Ate eed. aig HORS es leitUe i” Sag ee ete ees i Fee oe I ge a en aSlings os >Saheoeae-as . AGC —PO= CRE eon eens ta ponePoses ee ee aeSees ee ee ee Oe, ae pecans Be Maat, 2eee ee i ay ee aeoe ences ES Ms gg eee Bt Scere fg gate aa eas ihgTas eel Seer Cone EEE eaon Neea.SRR: teaiteategal oeoes LEeaeeeyeees LOGS ere ae ZSees Wp anakMaye oo oe? er Bien ect ee ?

Seees eeassee eteee ceigs Eelee ess. eer aec aOy Sy ee aBe PRO? eka? eeRe ee Dos Feieiee as eReBe8 amee Cs2ae ESE Be BOCES EE OSS ee es os oo ot Pe eM ee Sane ese hae Ge hoe ee ee OEE SsSoS eeae ee HOS So ee eC Ny se BRes a pe Oe Sait gee oe hae ea htEE Oa ee greas Pinan ia.a—ee Re Se eS ee ee oeaesoros wc ieeCONES OG lil ea on ee es ee Reread oe ee aE Sg: he Wc Pee aa ae ns PEE eeaeeeates ee na Pee ES Sen RS taiEE Gsae ANON i ig oeee|Bo Pei: a pee eee Socal GED Se sees Ree reg gg Ng gee paeeae tes tte penne eee eee EE sei ay pecs Ube re Ree inc rage Be oeeee Oeeeeeee eames es es oe eeee 7 since . ye > Sy gpoo. ‘f: SERN Reece ES ee oS igs hs Cte Gea pLa: Plgee i,Ne He gsaan en etre ce ee eeOe Gat oan years: IAN porn re)Crees Been aoe MOE OeSC STeui ee pe roan eee SESE ee EE eae Lee aoea. eaNN ole et aSraA eo eee Se eee eo ee Py , cees BERS BEES EE eres ee Rea ee Bae SRN ALO ne Bye ee areal ae ee eee oe Oe Ess Se Sea gs ee Nair PMs Bs Beg a Bee ots es ee ee fe COE a. o —

OEE Eo ee Gage. pnaacetees SESE es, ae Neue eee gee ae oe sehr ey Ce es nil a Bie Senn Us sere a Yee ac cae, See Mees ee Se noe See al SN) USES: ry oo SAGs ESS SPEC SURES SNS Res te ee Ball veant aN ph 7 MN a voce meg Gs ia oe mot Mi, ig Bae Sees) oS Ree ee ee sis eo ee oo Pigs Le ee ate es CO Scares I SCRESas Sit pea retas SEER EES Serene a ea seen Rigo Sa eRe Mag isan Po ISS irs, a ot Rea ie ak sie ae ae, A eee ie fenuenas Wie oe Onan _ site ae — o a : L So :

Bears peorniccsieans HEUER eeeesoeSE MT Se Se aes oe ni aNeeSel eae Siaig, se NS aeaR Coigs esNe oe Bee Bio ag Ae Ae MeeePena coSe pee SOS Oo. Rew SESEASS Se eereaee LER SES nie Seeone enue il ee ee a ee GisRes ey ci sa) oe | ee enn Miiaoh Soe aoen saas: eae fe, Es eee Ea eee oe til Gee ees TEESSee: Seger CUS SES ee eee Ee eepee aTS Recaps eeeeROERAT &mien or POA ss a eit RLS eee ee Reigns aM icnige Seunis ey GN =nN, o ee - iHO = ee

OUT a Bae eas NESE ee SOR ae aa aE NE AE: een nee oan cts ae i aoc MO ee foe é ee a ae ee oo i, nae elias Fehon aig oes ah ee ae Cg eo aes Seopa ees ed ae See TO Same pee aC Mae ee DN ac ag A Nae 8 2 SS Be ke oN Hi ae ee ta ig EN Ce ae Ss le inc are ane ee iene Sa ete aie SSS: SERRE: eras See eects ESSE Se Or ae ie UN es il Be ee a SO ONE AE a EO ea SN ec sill’ ee icons oan le Se oe es, Lo — ie he ~ y SS - : ee . : 3 eespea:ae VT esoe Aga gkpila a MO A aaeeeae Titian Voce poe ae ie eae ee eshoe isePagat Tee le Ce ee NS Re eae ciais eats a one ee, a __" me |oe| ofSh foal -aaall Ee :Baoe ta ieSs ay eePoe a oe poy aie: neiosilyoa egNag eee hn eeGran Beene ] is a =ke-a flee oe Misa oe-" :Oe eas BR fee ae re, mlee page ise renee SEE i: ys ee cee. Uae Gurren Sesae AeeOMe sane

om oe a. boSe ole eeCs ae il oo : .- 5oe a=ey Se AaeOe ioeaeeeueee eses ee aCeese i —a-oo es ee ees:egEe as leLee oeCe 7CeOR o ASK Se —iea:

aFS oo ee ee ae ea& ee a MM Vigeeoe areege gs Fi as~~ LON) i ieee ceBesa ae pete Ce ee:: I. :CNIS | i. -en a| 7ieeaoe lor ee ak ~~aoe 9 3Me |nae res oe ia ae eae ee a“a==ees ee aRt eta Ca ee: ST UAW ses aoD Oh aeka: te, Pe.Dee Ee Sees 5 eae eeaC Boas | onan i aeata celonal Pies ay eae Gs ee —. f Pe aeBr eo oe ee Ssfae sta Toba on my ea =Re s oy, >ey SJ) 7:.eo 2utes pe ee eeBs StaSeh isSle ee % be os ee Aine HS ea) ig Bias Ce go eeeAg oeaeeae Baa es _SEER_eeoD oF 2 oo ok i Pi ee 2 8 Ihe Ge ee Cee ee pee oo. 7 5 Looe Po ee pee aie, aireeeeeenCree CoSPes DERE eer SUD aR TOE SyMaleate 1 FecesPepin MN Sar ateVig POST RNnan ODTo Seta eager Iver awe OReat eeePe ashee oe ae aN a ae vee Recey ae.shy BAe aa SO eT eeoO oreSR ey ae eaeON gareBois! vote NOI al Wiis Se hive: Sutin Ee eee aut eed Shs Scenes aes BEES. eee ee Se ae aval Foe | ten Gale eae peur inte ee He ee e ie eee pe een ec! Si ee ta iGO as oe oe ae Ce eee gs, oa ee 1 Velen oe i ae eaeet ee ee Ora ae ae eat ay ine Ohiae Cehes eee ey a ee Se Ree ae rsfig ce SW sis pes | ibis oeMi ee oe , ee a— ee SERRE eee 2 ee ees toes cide (a kstyRJ) eSBi es Renee cree ES Vea eer, ee oeOe ea eee csae ote ines ne OREN enee hee SeLey re es e eeoe eeoe eeey gl ithe oe eteoes see el) aaa faaoo Nesis eetl eeeeee eos Csee (iis ee eeee ee ooSo SOE 5Coe eee ae OE ae oe eae oe ese LOO ee oo. oe Bare EeSes FetN hiaeae he ae ca Setant 3Cee esee baton ae auPet en ae yf Ce tas ee Pie eyok i—yo. Ea ene ee ESN Sees A SAG Ce eaters eo oe Re ay ane Taaas ee ee rd — coer: a Sn gee Tees, et) ae one al Prat lean si Pg oe! aa ee Sten a Des utente: IA ear ook a a

eee oe Pe | oe eis ae ae ay Oy ff rl fe o os i Le Se Le a ~ ee eeteCli. 2opetra oS ,easeoa Be Oo ee So OeoeMaver | ae moe oo aoe ody) eeSee5So So . aeaseee ee Cos i oo oe. eeGeooe ey

OSS as ae ee nears eee ke ARR ‘ Spies igsae oS 1 E

ac a pees apt Es 1k EE po Sa eneec ISRE Se SO Be hoae SEER OES, ee ERS Ste 3 ae geen a BSE pee: oer EEE Dee SSPE eee in ote ee ee reine Rise gS ee Bene tie YS a eS

ne . rs ie ana adEEE. se«2EE aa m*FSS es . a gia eee oS ng i ooSeams, REPRE 0 OOee aN neDae Seren ahons. earenters FO ero eee fe Sree: Lidice 77 ROS ORO RRae Reteoe SS ES e: eee SSeS Rca BE Fe gaa as pee ee: Bre OO Bc Pee ee.lo ae Ro FS Se Su.aSAR Fegts RErd 8. RR AG SeGo aangee eaten SSSLS ea eS on — aae oo Beer aEN > eee 76 Spee OESoaieareennaeeoe” ao aot cae BP seSeeger ag iwee ae a-:— Resco ticcon edtace en ses eens See 7,ee RERY FAB SeeERE ee Faeee: ee Rent Sseee OS ew o= aPeers te *Sieh: es sign alesse WR Sige big Peers spe ek ae oo a Sea eae caer CEA 1. TIS a BASE De Sa al igeccoencne EE ETAL BERS Se Serna Sea Sanaa: Res OO). ER conn ees fe ee eee aeSo eeee caoe do ee eeRE a “os tie Ues iRue ee ae ae BySacer Re aS A Bin Res ON scat aeEe RS oeIe yt LER Bass neersGeers ceaGoce SeeBee PateeS acre ans “SEISES F Ret ERE RgOT res + SHonnts eyES Sikes 82Scie SEES ei—ps ie. 2S 1. - a itea 2 aee eet SSSR aBae .2: a% Pe go “RT yee OS ee wi titoonasr wt .SESS Tits ast os Re eg OTE ST 2! ope See ty Ee ::SS se See eese LAE TEs Ea Fe, otTEES TEESVEeissos Nee See ohn pause a;EE 2Ob Spi eesae? Re fePo oe .seri_Seth SE R&S ati = ee 2Gens oe Se Sa sk: tities ls ic Gyathe. ES 2 Eaae ~.ese oe SEE: REESE Ss

ieee < O93) ‘Cal oma

23 2 .Sr NOT ie Sie an oS ? anel from F e Muybridge F 5 . Cour Bancry. ft Li b S ) 77tes ofytherar SET RBA REE Longa RR 2 SS SSS

wes .

= ——r—“a——sS— eee

=0—r—e__ ad goes oo ce eeoo a eS . eea Cc a eehroeAe Ses 8 es See ES eee Sethe ome eee Same SESS SE RRENEE SS SE RSI EUS TE eee JONES ERD Sele ct tee TPE TR Gad =.

SO eee ae ee eee ee ee sg eee ees Cas Se eee SAE SR seen Se > a - COR ee SE SOR nate eee ee TE it Ee ES Soe"

ee pe eea rae: OEE eee :SErss SEReee So keeeee oeSee Seca ee si Sg RESES See or gE Sere enene 2 2eee 2 =e — eee. SE EE eens ICES Sees eeeSve ate Pe es INSISES SEES LE IhYasin ears : yeh 20 aMe eseas Taggeet . ..... phby Ghee ee TERE aeeee BESTS Tas Pe BARE s we AEE

Pe ea: So ee eee .....rti—i‘i‘COC eles UE ian alert tt cae deve cian SEPFE peeeseeSeES RSet ae eeeRSee poe — —rr—“_—O———C FTC mes oeees OR a eee eeeaCe BERa eeRagurmnee SO aoe Ooargh ee oo NG Be SeeCa aR Sean Seon Renae er: Seca FS ka SS be Sait cee pgae tg SE Hie eee ae SeSa eR saeiene en ne Ret oe aoe ae Bee BR So ar aS NC oe RSee Rete ie eeees Ree SeennSa Mgabeagie 2 Seb Tees EOS Baa Sg FSP 4 gee aeaone aaa RetSE eR tes seanaMeapetaee =SRR Fon ee RS ER Sak a Spee ee ER EOSNT SS pe ttoanpeoe oeSescapes oat So ee ee Fate Sees Reg NO RSS eas pe fs: re NRE A EE See RUE eeeREN EESe eee aSaeIER eeROA a oe ao nee egnee antesae ee Saye ae OE SAS Be apeSEE eee SEER Oeok RaeROE so SURaSeis aaaRS abanSah Be Seah ERS as

Le ete ee Ge 8 ais geen oe ee oe — _ .

ae ae “s + EGOS AESee Se Ae SSRER os QORSO ee eae eePERGrte Poe Bo een eee SoS. Bs Sachee aes ea ieeee OeBeene coxa : . apRESes BSBATES SSeS=Os aes osERS Sa a3See PtsSAS RCRON ROTTS wee SSESgah

.eae = itn gener EES oygray Lewesaa. week ME Soros SE Cae ee Sr SeSe Sey eeseth SS eBE aaeee ORaseOS FS SES ERE Teens essgeases coi * esoe ess r et ROREO RRene eadROS is RC mastitis: “SS ae Sea SP . oS pee bat, wg Sionsnhti See2 oe RRS SATE co i *eee se Soe Po es er eee agg ed tg Pee eae SeyeeRe ans eRRET SSSee esSe§eee CoM SEE OSFe Be Be Se seas Pree ss6ee4G “Se Sead RBS eeeBS SEEBr Shed, SeeOO ees ees cad oe ne Ses ee a eeSE aa aaR aa 8ee

on, phe itgSe eatenSR SG, Pe anton, SRE anGE” PRR ee SERS PORES aggeiht beSee SPeengt we Se Ey«|Se eeSe aeRESer eeeRa a ———actaah Se Oa et thenat RRRE ssSees Se . ee Se Seesat . ccognggQt oe SGN OLE ee RSE

cd , _.* EE ei ee SS Sea : ees ae oe

SE fee Se Be to etsGe as Mee oS: See BFos cope RR eR Re Bh. 5S oF Se eoSESRSEAEL Sos HERSgiee ree:=«eae 0daeERR RE Sop enonl coaad peer oe——

ee ee See Fe ER7OP ee ee: Creer eeeStRe Bren eee=.Ce PY RE Sa re BSRSBe-erGORE, RO Po a.ttcell Se aSsant Eee See cnt Pacman aope . RRS Sees SOS MMM sientee NaeeS 5ee oeGS RE 3 Ri Seemann cag RRR ga : : ehaan eR __ er2BOER ae Fe chet Re SSL ERR ‘. Sse 5NE Re Re aeeee Soe oSge? Ae Seah SRR Ee weet a. FBR a SS cca oe Be eS = EES Seen ee ee dete Re: ES PR we hae HRS Eee oe eee 7 ae a et ean 2. oo cee detec ieeeRegs CES toa esooBS SSPans Soe es :ag” is ES “Re| Eien. ie es eae ES Raga . PEE. . SOsaeSoe Bs ss: Z SRORRET So geesFRY SE Reape eee Bs ont. eS es Sete, oo : BRS eee gS” pes. 33 +: see ana eS oa ERE pee ena nae “ee Saf Gag CR (ee ee Se ea sg Oe SORE Oe Ba SESSE gE Mattie hEod: 3.RE eR oS SENS shy St an, oxceaS Setiredt ence+4 eee aee Rees here EEE se Lan - eo pee ean org Be oS SE Oe ac a pe ane wt ee aad Picea, ge SS RRS «ORS Soe Seu see seoSe.SR ae Seeye S. BE Ss SRE aacRES SOI ais Re ee TI SOT ERR ee SOR Serena pean SSSCo eae grtCS uw .ees ne SSeS = pak ORE eeSoe? BeeRSear Ge SEI Saree Kaa tangs eee EEE ee ay eT hawee Re . at Seen wo eSch be eee = agose OS. Rpeeeeeoane pe ee ee ae2a ee | aes Se Fix heK He. 3 an SRR aRS F owed poe BOERS OE Caer aresnanes ha ae pe 84. SOR eS SeeesESS eee Fe tesLeer Pears ao : _See

wens 207 i. ES Fee Pile ARES ESSE icy seers Raise peepee BS Ae ae ee Lee eee2en _ = Boas or BEES EP SE RE NY 3S Bee Peete Eeeaty Seen 3Aygl on“ae aeete =oieee aan “ae # ws

3 ee aan sO Ee Se ETE SEES EET So eon en nL ee . nr, pot, SE SESE SRE Re eeTe: ' eee 7 oS LEER SE can ee Rees eeeRen ooeeihe oem ee iROO as ee ai a,eee eee Eee tee. SEM Eee Beeoccse SRR R..Be._SaeRER ide eecnog RR RRR RR SRR SS akiosRO RR¢. hate SS RA aa Bee ee*BBRReNES seers Oe oe BRC ee Soe ie ee aeNe SRR RN Re ee eo oo J USRPS ISELIN SSES ni Sa 2 ey 0 Sa UE meae2 Bees SE soe : eee: eee 5 SORE ae paises oe a eee Bes ee Bike SON RR RC acme ee ey . ) ESSE DEE BeOS URE LO Pregee - RIES. A ea ee manera ee a Be i RR ce eReeePee aera aecel Eee ee Pareeee ee ey?) TRSELEEP AO ESia Bec cs | SH«ers ee, een See ow Eee ss CASTES CS Sic, Sse pecs. Sk. eee EE OSE RE irsoii On Be ee a: Rh SONOS cm WSEAS AI,TRL a)PE J5y TLS Soc. SS ITia aM Oa Reg RR Re Cc er _SUE2)NEES OSES Sheed A Serre rs. sees: ee 2 RTECS TRae SR ae. ees SR Ci eee ya ER nheeeet no Se chan Seas EEE > _eepaemaraeer1 cS 3 2 ee RRSR ST ae ae aetia See eenena Saba Sin 2iSy Seieaeenuee etna SEEgg RSSUR eeon, es cet SR TREE Ih a ae ae, eee RO alia ae Se eee eae SE ee . Seem GRO = ROE, a apne Se ees MS SRR ORE.,.. tc.” UR RRR ER ERR Sania, cro Ra. OS ae iia emer aoe Ree is RSE SE ae peeSad ; gees EER Se cacao 4 SRR a ot eee Sg eee eRe sdoc.aeRRR AeORR caeESR SRcnnra|eRage | SESE SE aa SSE 27 2 eee: - | +RR HARES thu sianoc amin ee aS cane PenceSenet, ihe. ARRANGE se ae SRS oR aD WORSE ee a eee Bn eee ee eee Oi cpp Re eee Re eee ac at De Pe eee 20 ee eee _SERRERSOO neo Sec STaR RII coSIS RR RD ARR ORRGR ett aenninn ee),ROO 1,eeceeeea emer ences ner nS” ORS 2h Se peers? see Bs RI CS Rs RR NZ RED RR MR ers cs oR 4, EL Bao SESE ae Rear See See bas epee aes Bie ree ysegtien eames isu gee Be a ee PN naa a roce nid cnc oR Beene SSsco eee Ba SEES” Seat OE ERIS CR ROO Do |EE oo ees eRe SRE te Re eae Nn eOo ee cn SSeS SRR MSSR SSRIS a SEER NyEA ce SS Ec DODO Suen aR RasRRLor. TERR SEi .ae e Se aS RASS Rano: SE eeSEoe apeROY onSoESTO AROS a OR Same OaReSESE rn,22eS Se ee nae See ge a ~ S38 "aoe eens ReneeSeem = SUE .PRO SOO AR ROR Pas SRR Gog * 2 TNR Oe eS wees U1 75 SSE Seeaa Pace ee

eat He Se : eR See REESE Ree RN ARN Sa RRR SER EON Stas cn RONACT IN EMR SES RRC ONIN. “OORT. 5 BR NRRL COCR SD SILLS I SSS SDs RRO FECTS ES US ye Fa ae

oe ee ee ee ee ee ee

oeesaenese EEE eae aanBR tc eS ineee aRRU tg a7, eaER me ee Se RO SR RRR EE Po ee oe ee re ee eeESR eee erin aRE SR) NS ee PERN «2 ReSeren Re se ikee roase aa ead iis ee SE I NR NR Oo SL RRSaDESE. REN RO SSre SOR aon. Reee pmo Re URN RRR Aae hs RRR SpE +eee aaees RE Se ee Serr ae en So Teas ene, aGSE atest a oe ai SRC Re eeaoe RR RR RMI SiO Re CSS ia ee eta eaten nee pe cee -RE ee eae ee oS Eee ears ne BS 322 2, ea ES Big Re Cees 5, ROR SRO ROD a So ete oti, RE RR ies onto earn a ad Pape NGS 3. wi Bg ee ee SSO EET ODS NORA RMR i,

ope oo aa eect a Rr ce ee a eos SO GIRS Be OORT BORE EER ei ER ER RRR ae Rag a ene a SSS er a EERE RY BSR : Rr aeeOE aen aeae a FOE IRIE oneeROSES a.ici” SERofRe Reeee se aha TaeaR eeRRC RR Re ee eee oe Reamer aS” °EU See a CORE 5 SE SSR soon nn oeNy eee Sete cee SR SR eeoo Rar mR eR a cn aaa eearahi ee eae Ree eeNr ea ne Beamer coy... “2”. hacer omemnee BRR i SR aaOm Norns hen nN a eign RRR RENE oheR orca erence meaner IE Fetay? eeeeseee EE eee "SER eee3g riaERR acne onan nc On acres oen oie eece eesaSee eri SEI ea pein eee Tea RO remem aC OE

Semen See pee Oe ERR epee a SO Ro Re a ocean Bere Re orALa2opeEe ge aeTE SS RRS RSCTA ER Peveee i RRSir. SRR iSaaagS eR Nc RR as ONNR aROE RE Moerseae sagt SE)ae Scr >Ea ecgPe LS naeSoe Rn RORcee So eare eee aBe aii anne sarees ee nate aeSR a Ne a a oe aR Ree gio eeROR ne oun oar AT Sa eee cae NCA Co cece SS . *gine ee. reee aeREREE Sea SR aFE OOS SR ON ORR ues Seteer an eae eee PF,:SEY ee geIRCIR SRR Ss Sse ie Se San econ ca eee enero oni aimranianecaencan sania nag aaa oneSE eR coe Boise Cua recaee enn peer ee“ek EE E POT BERET SRR RRR Seer RRO Regen Soa oeBea ER Ramee tS Scene Sager EE>" SPS iT 5SEES iasuMereanennemntnteiae ee Soe SyBEL gS OBE oe |Ae eR ae oe00rE eaES neee ee ake NR ee aReae RR ORES ees: EES wo a Secs SRI UR Rece2Seo RReeeee Se SR coe os sRRR SR

Bl d ll Ca. 88 Idd0. C tesour ofythe Figure , wunatown a ll cy.M . alSdeCll

Bancroft

Library. ibrar y

‘

People in Space 193 also vague and mottled: the association of the poor, workers, and Irish in the region south of Market, for instance, as well as the huddling of some native-born citizens in a middle-class development on Rincon Hill.'? Signs of class or economic differences were becoming clearer than the ethnic borders of city space. In New York the “Americans” of Greenwich Village were middle class, and the “Nigger Hill” dwellers were poor squatters whose hovels would be bulldozed away to create Central Park. Perhaps the most dramatic signal of social differences to appear on the city skyline after the Civil War was the erection of ostentatious mansions for the rich. Nob Hill in San Francisco was the most garish example, unmistakably home to the zenith of San Francisco wealth and society, the railroad tycoons of Huntington, Stanford, Crocker, Hopkins. The Big Four competed with one another to build the largest, best-fortified mansion atop the city and then fenced their properties in granite, brownstone, or brass. James Flood, whose fortune was made in mines rather than rails, won the height contest, erecting a tower of thirty-four feet alongside his palace. In New York as well the map of wealth that would endure a century appeared as the rich began to build their mansions on Fifth Avenue and line their facades with marble, which eclipsed brownstone as the insignia of an affluent neighborhood. The opulent Fifth Avenue mansion of dry goods merchant A.’T. Stewart covered a space sufficient for the tenements that housed hundreds of the poor downtown. The chiaroscuro of class grew more dramatic in the late nineteenth century, be it measured in figures on the distribution of wealth or in contrasts between Fifth Avenue and Nigger Hill. But symbols of class differences were not the same as spatial barriers between the rich and poor: Few city people could erect granite fences between themselves and the masses. Pockets of wealth and poverty dwelt side by side in every city. The dispersion of zones of impoverishment throughout the city was reflected in increasing use of now-famuliar terms slums or tenement district. This urban argot indicated a simultaneous concentration of poverty and its dispersal beyond any single fixed and centralized place such as Five Points a generation earlier (figs. 27—-28).!°

As late as the 1870s the polyglot population of America’s great cities could not be sorted out into tidy niches. Kenneth Scherzer, an assiduous historical geographer of New York City, has concluded that although the class and ethnic patterning of city space became perceptibly more segmented after the Civil War, residents were seldom afforded either homogeneous neighborhoods or a cushion of distance from people different

194 “The Huge Conglomerate Mass”

ee 8 TL eee

oe , J Ce E

a ez Ce aa? ee i Ze leo © Le -. .

BR ee

a oa i Giaa oes 2 i 6 6etC;.lUlUCULClUU eee a G Pen a _ =: = ae =.

S..—rhr—— “ee =X =, esl

ee, yell Figure 27. Stewart’s mansion. From Frederick Lightfoot, ed.,

Nineteenth-Century New York in Rare Photographic Views.

from themselves. The native born, for example, never found a perfect refuge in Greenwich Village, and the Irish immigrants never barricaded themselves inside an urban village all their own. The people of late

obstinate differences. |

nineteenth-century American cities still lived close together in a world of

Building toward Modernity

Yet the turf on which they encountered one another was changing in undeniable ways. The transformation of the built environment took off in the real estate boom after the war, stagnated in the prolonged depression of the 1870s, and sped up dramatically at decade’s end. In New York and

San Francisco builders and businessmen found a wayy to expand the boundaries of urban settlement. Slowly the shape of Gotham began to

swell in a vertical as well as a horizontal direction. By 1864 half the city’s

population resided north of Fourteenth Street and pressed up the island

on both the east and west side. Driven by the power of steam to move ,

the granite that covered much of the island and propelled by the ambi-

ee See *e.*e; — _-, Se lll lciccirc rc Lc Cr ys — si _C—CisSCSCS ee be ee i a ree ee pe ae ee DOS Porr ER fg re ee 2. fC

People in Space 195

—e—“ _OOOOOOOOOOOCOCOCOCOC~*~swsOw—O~wOCOCOsiswsCS:s—i‘CSOSONSCNCisisésé=C=iza;§

i—Lrrrrr—s—“‘“‘CC(‘(“(‘“‘SRRNNONONOCOCOOCssa i — — —— ri rr r— rr — —“€§&®————C “§’ ee es le:Ci‘C ‘CRS

ee i se Bo ee er

ee —h—“— — rr rr Ll rl re rLh—c cr = “rrrL——TysF|« sFFF_,-—F rs TF, -F§=§éFF=E i

——— — ——————— ———— rrr Lr, TG ER go ee ee ae ee ee ee ee | REN Sa ee r— r—

eee r—“—_™s—s—s—SCsw@sOCSC“‘(CRCO*C”*;C™™....l. CC

aoe | 2. Ce, lc rr

eS Ee OE Mag ee ee re ci ee ea ee ey ep ge a ee SF oe, Boe ane jek 2 Pee S| a re EES EE Gf ee as Ee ee fF Prneee

pee Mg ss ee ee See ees oo oe

tee ite Poe ct eo wi Be ik 27 ete S407. 7. PO GI. cana oo 2 cor Sa es oa eae Ne ae ees eee ec Ra ere

Bee oO) oe SRR enc ee eet eg UR Rie: eee

eg BE ES UP a Oe le ius sees “ae = fe Bog 8 Al ment at el eee ee rey ee ie ee See ey 7 OP UMBRBA Cp Ts Cy $n Ae AE ASSL Ei ea ade a ee SR a ER co

ee cy < ee as ee ‘| Re oe CUR ee fe erm sou eee

Bic nL) on ~ iB=eee SSSi, ghRRR 2 3 SR eeOPPS a ee a aeae eae as. Or gee CO Big Oe At ens Ree AN a eee eee es oySa BseeAe Bsa .

Pe Boe SS eR oe ee ee ey es igeiBs ee ee re ee ee rn reee SSA BOE oR ee Se teee 2 eroo ees (ae ere eee Oeae hye SEES Bot erCee a PeeOOS (2 oeSe sine ee Ee ae- ee BE, . 8 BN2 |Cee PeesoeoeRRO ee. ae Po| ONG re Bg

ae eee ee s°e..*

*¢e

ee ae Bg: oie DER BRON EBs oP — -. ic eed

Cee fo ee lc ,rrrs——COC—COwS.S aC a$eeCisitsis

Sapien ee eo a cen ee es ee ae ee

eS ———_,—-__—_—_=™|--=-E==_———rs—=—i‘i‘éeésésCwéwC™z_C—~—sé—:on- hible veWaica ae"‘.| Wwe ave yoth :

248 “The Huge Conglomerate Mass”

ways practiced that spirit of toleration and fraternity which these emblems indicate, I feel no hesitation in entrusting them to your care. Take them now and proceed to the pious mission which has called you out today.... Act your part like true sons of liberty and the women of your race will cheer you to victory.’ Responding for the Mitchell’s Rifles, Captain McCooney gallantly replied: “Your words have sunk deep into our heart....In future camp grounds we will see them and know that the true and beautiful daughters of our race are cheering us on?” In San Francisco in 1873 a Mrs. O’Brien called Irish men to the same nationalist duty, and in a less pacific but equally gendered style. She asked that the members of the nationalist corps “never be forgetful of your manhood or the claims of your far off brothers.”*°

The physical and audible appearance of women in ceremony conformed to a sharply binary division between the sexes. The ceremonial woman was not only feminine in demeanor but also supportive of a militantly masculine political position, be it a warrior for Irish nationalism or fighter for white supremacy. The feminine side of gender antinomy was a convenient support for ethnic identity, evoking as it did the ties of

blood, marriage, kinship, and reproduction, which gave definition to different descent groups. An orator on St. Patrick’s Day in 1854 invoked this symbolism when he spoke of “the hope that this good brotherhood

may often mect together on this day to do honor to the mother from , whose wearied womb they came-?*! Frail femininity was also readily adaptable to the enactment of the lost cause. New Orleans ladies organized Memorial Day as a flourish of demure femininity: “there were no noisy demonstrations, no parades, no gatherings, just a quiet laying of flowers and whispering of prayers for the dead. Even the male orator that year dealt out images of victimization, of “weary, sick wounded” men coming home in defeat. Wreaths bore the words “to some dear dead one to a lost cause.” (It should be noted that all this docile prose was issued “by order of Mrs. C. M. Pritchard, Pres.”) The ladies of the North also found new roles to play and opportunities to exploit in modern ceremonies. Their forte was not the Civil War memorial but the charity benefit. By the 1870s the image of the benevolent woman was emblazoned all across the winter holidays and installed

in the rites of noblesse oblige performed at the public institutions. In San Francisco the presentations of the “little Sisters” objectified the recipients of female charity. In 1869 the Roman Catholic Sisters of Mercy

conducted the usually Protestant rite of feeding turkey to the needy. Their objects were the inmates of the Magdalen Society, numbering

The People in Ceremony 249 seventy-eight, who were treated to “lectures on religion” as they feasted. On New Years 1868 the Ladies of the Larkin Street Presbyterian Church

and Sunday school staged exercises for children whose behavior was “commendably orderly” Elsewhere, charity women decorated the “Orphan Christmas ‘Tree” and escorted Santa Claus to the poor and deserving. This editorial homage to the San Francisco Orphan Society sums up the philosophy of public welfare in a laissez-faire political economy: “This associated maternity that stands before us to-day with open arms, offering a shelter and a home to the orphaned life of this city, it 1s a fond maternity, gentle in winning, skilled in nursing, tender in cherishing, patient, affectionate, faithful and pious. ... This corporation has not only a

soul of intelligence, but a warm woman’s heart a most motherly charity?’ #?

The impersonators of benevolence presented themselves in especially ingenious ways and elegant costumes in New York. A Miss Huntington

made a winter ritual out of her method of instructing poor girls in housekeeping. Holiday season at the public institutions was an opportunity to display her “kitchen garden method” of domestic education, set

to music and performed by poor girls. Other women organized balls and soirees to benefit their favorite charity. During the depression years of the 1870s the custom of conspicuous display of dress, dance, and dining as a way of collecting alms for the poor offended many New Yorkers and prompted even the New York Tribune to rebuke the lady organizers of these ceremonies. The charitable rites at a girls’ industrial school in 1879 were considered 1n better taste. They featured 260 girls being fed 200 pounds of turkey. “The girls pick ciders and wood in the streets in the morning and attend school later in the day. They always have a substantial dinner and are given warm clothes to wear if they earn a certain number of credit marks. On Wednesday their parents and many of the other deserving poor persons in the neighborhood called at the school with baskets, which were filed with turkey, potatoes, pies, etc?’*? In such rituals as these women of the middle and upper classes spelled out an elaborate social and political theory: They honored free enterprise, self-help, class harmony, and female altruism all at once. Such extended metaphors of class and gender wove in and out of the neighborhoods of New York in the late 1870s. The Tribune's coverage of ceremonies of public and private charity for the winter of 1880 consumed two columns of small print and included rites such as these: Miss Huntington demonstrating her housekeeping method at the Wilson Mission for girls; a ritualized feeding of an orderly file of poor children at the

250 “The Huge Conglomerate Mass”

Howard Mission and Home for Little Wanderers; the provision of 6,535 pounds of turkey to children housed in state institutions; and a dinner at the Girls Lodging House No. 27 in St. Mark’s Place presided over by Mrs. John Jacob Astor. Clearly maternal charity could not mask an 1n-

creasingly condescending and cavernous gulf between the classes in modern America.**

These female rites of class were only one of the myriad projections of gender difference on the public calendar of industrial American cities. During the winter holidays images of nurturing femininity— mothers around the Christmas tree and the charitable matrons at the public inst1tutions— monitored the more private boundaries of urban culture and class privilege. When women approached closer to the public stage, it was usually in a gendered phalanx and trailing allusions of prtvacy—voluntary benevolence on Thanksgiving, domesticity on Christmas, abyectly mourning for a lost cause on Confederate Memorial Day. ‘This feminine construction of social welfare as somehow marginal to the public sphere was illustrated vividly by the Ladies Evangelical and Philanthropic Soctety of the First Congregational Church of San Francisco. On September

14, 1877, they appointed a “Flower committee? “The object being to | carry flowers to homes where they are seldom, if ever, seen.” After visiting families and assaying their needs, however, these ladies reconstituted themselves into an “Employment Committee,’ a mode of recruiting domestic servants. Completing this recessive, privatized picture of women’s place in the civic ceremonies of the late nineteenth century 1s the figure of the female allegory. The Goddess of Liberty or Maid of Erin did offer

some women a central place in a genuinely public ritual. But masked as a symbol of nationality or ethnicity, these living icons represented some transcendent femininity or served as the objects of voyeuristic desire. They did not represent themselves as active citizens.*°

Maids of Erin, Goddesses of Liberty, and the whole repertoire of feminine imagery served at least two symbolic functions. The first was to

transmit meaning beyond and above the field of social difference and political conflicts to a plane of spectacle and abstract civic unity. Second, and somewhat paradoxically, female symbols unified the separate ethnic groups by weaving cultural bonds around common national origins, b1ological descent, or class position. In neither case did women represent themselves. By appearing in public as transcendent symbol and a species of spectacle herself the female icon was a synecdoche of the innovations

| in cultural performance after the Civil War. She served to evade and obscure the fissures in the urban population—class interests, demands for

The People in Ceremony 251

Justice, the claims of participation for excluded minorities—even as she

gave symbolic shape to other identities such as Irish nationalism or whiteness. Female gender symbols represented civic order, not warfare, but order at a price. The ceremonial performance of gender operated by a dialectic all its own and peculiar to its time. Within the context of Victorian gender categorics, Women were admitted to civic ceremony carrying intimations of privacy and passivity that tended to disguise the interests specific to their gender position. Thus, the ceremonial apparition of femininity in public ironically turned in upon the women who impersonated it. The female historical actors behind the scenes of these ceremonies, the likes of Miss Donnelley, Mrs. Huntington, or even Mrs. Astor did not lead a female

assault on the public sphere. They may, in fact, have even diverted women from demanding full citizenship in their own right. The apparttion of femininity in public was not, for the moment, the beachhead for a mobilization of women’s rights or feminism. It would take more than another generation for women to assemble in significant numbers and

on their own behalf in city streets. Even the boldest advocates of women’s rights were still rather shy of public spaces. When Susan B. An-

thony scorned the gender exclusions of the centennial celebration of American Independence she called her sex to a rather secluded demonstration of their disapproval: “in meetings, in parlors, in kitchens wher-

ever they may be, unite with us in this declaration and protest?*° Women had hardly begun to imagine the suffrage parades of the next century, and not until the 1960s would they appear alongside and equal to men in a few Mardi Gras clubs. As long as women represented some transcendent other and projected ideals of domestic seclusion onto public ceremony their civic actions had the dialectical effect of affirming exclusion from the sphere of democratic participation.*’

The Articulation of Race and Class

Another construction of difference that came into sharper focus after the Civil War, the division connoted by the term vace, operated according to a different and equally complicated dialectic. First of all, racial differences resembled gender dimorphism in that they were readily adaptable to spectacular display. In fact the quintessential spectacle of Mardi Gras was one of the first and most elaborate public stages for the ractal theories that were becoming prominent at midcentury. Tableau 3 in Rex’s

procession was captioned “Delicate satire on the disposition of the

252 “The Huge Conglomerate Mass”

Aryan race.” The entry of His Majesty Rex into the city a few days before had in fact been advertised as “a compendium of the ‘Aryan Race?” ‘The oldest and most prestigious Carnival club, the Mystic Krewe of Comus, presented a vernacular enactment of a new language of race as the theme of its tableau in 1877. This eclectic text rattled on about the descent lines of Noah, “Aryan Anthropology,” and the etymology of the word Caucastan and prefigured the carnival representation of Radical Republicans as the missing link in evolution. New Orleans was neither alone nor particularly precocious in employing the new language of racial difference. The iconography of the Orange riots in New York had featured apelike depictions of the rioters, epitomized by Thomas Nast’s drawings of the

hairy visages and protruding jaws of Catholic rioters. Some Irish Catholic sympathizers took up the same symbolic weapon. A cartoon in the Ivish World pictured the parade of July 12, 1871, carrying banners like

“Orange-outans” and “APA-pes, Darwin’s missing link? *® | This racial scheme of classification led to a second parallel with the ceremonial attention to gender distinctions: It grounded social differences in biology. To shore up the biological bonds of human communities required attention to matters of marriage, bloodlines, and descent. Tellingly, carnival tableaux, from enactments of Spencer’s Faire Queen to an exegesis of Darwin, focused on parables of mating. One text that accompanied a parade entry told how “some of the Aryans became fossilized by isolation and corrupted their blood by constant intermingling of close relatives.” Another bemoaned, with tongue 1n cheek, “the Aryan tendency to seek alliances and admixtures which elevate, and hence an earnest and marked progression is visible in their morals and intelligence.’ In the spirit of carnival inversion the revelers from Rex’s club added some gender ideology into the spoof on Aryan anthropology in 1877 by posing the comic King of Carnival as a champion of women’s rights as well as the Aryan Race.*? A cartoonist for a California periodical even found materials for punning in the emerging language of race.

He pictured the progeny of an Irish man and Chinese woman in the same frame within equestrian competition and labeled his creation “Coming Races” (fig. 37).

Under the masks and disguises of Mardi Gras, New Orleanians played with serious, politically charged questions about human descent. In attempting to chart clear lines of what we now call “racial” differences

within the multiple and intermingled bloodlines of the New Orleans population, Mardi Gras pageants stumbled upon perplexing gender issues. Rex may not have been an Aryan feminist, but he did point out

CO ee

The People in C

Eee # ee # es=. |eeoe ee ee Be ee gS Sa SRSatie Se Se se : ee SSS ae ee Aag bee ee as oe Ee “Eee Ee ES cramer teea sere EL Cen ee ag eee SEER SSRIS agin hy SP | Ce aE : th ESSER, SESSRS Sint ilBEES SSE LsEELS aE BEAT ee ee SEEhee Ee TE dheee Wp SESen URELeeDEES haste RARER Eeeeote SES eeBE eeeGaee {SO eeSRE. ESTE SEEESAS SUBSER wae SUP ATSUS siaAR? Sk SSE SSeS SESS SS CE NS ie »eee ce Se aSR re Sag Se Pe ELEC SEES sckge Po) TEE peatecoreeand eeee eeeee eee : Peles tua TO EEE NE SE RUSS UE OSSUSS ER nD Se wee EES hahsingh) DevhSE gesee UPS SHES ESS eeeSerta RESRR Ee eee, a aes as a Ee pi BS as ao ie Be oe 8 ey eS oy BOOS as Sea eens ee os oO BG oe SEES 20 Res. ene pie errr: af ren reenter ERE SARS SEAS nets SRSPoe Ra cae tsaeSOS RAED Shon ean RSENS EROSsO Sty Be ranran PEAS SERS 25 =FOE ON EOE Barta Re ce te ageeioe oe ISR TEEs RE See USSG: parSates aesETERS RteSeee Rese tatERTS engTeh hacy RRSSos ieeentPepe ESRpees AR red IEReee SESS SSE eR RES PER Scere BECO: BoreSOR 6 Sesh Bae pees SEAGER soleuae a EREA Sars SK Ses Ag Aetc ReteWere BE EeeFees SAR PR TAenim hha CPR ER RN cane SES FAY emeonnee ot SSS cccenn cane See

SESS eeeee esaera Reet esSeBS Ler socheREN 3333 ERpeaoa SaLR ae SSeS Peon gee SERV SA SSS PRS eee y i RCA Vk oS Se een SEER SESE eg eSEE E SRR ERESRR COERICER NRE ESSE Eee opCIS seaecreg hwseeeae PRBc AY OR SORE RRNe ROS SS J NOIRE ne RNR PNR Dg SDS TRONS ERE: ERee BrodSaree ee Brees) ae pe BSG RES i So InkOe: Meee BR SS Boe SoaES aesigeyRar RE Sc “xe SEA eae BNR Oe RR BEE RES SSROt am asanaan

ees A pea Beoateae EE ateS55OR SUES Cee IRON eaepeer BE ENS ees | Wi Sed See ESS eenSeeSpence ae Se eaeEs ak Soatves hos Sess Bae a Btw toeeRRC xen hee Ses FRAY Sega ntelSEES oes at RE Pee Sa cee cae PRESOS ery SN ESC eyeeye ae eeSN NESECee RSREE CRSA” be ceies Sareea Ss REESE an pa Eee cetFea aeSent rteNE pee S Tes ieansae ea AAR AL eae SRE TRE aSccs rgSES as AF SESS RS SS53ERS Seay a Specie ReSaias Cienmae TE 3 jee Heads EEE Se aASE OOK Rie ha SSR Shr" Sie bene ogres a eee SEGUE aeSR ¥SB me BS PRIS! STR ERR ox C6: peePONS fatesen ag EES aDee.) eoigo Seca b>Sees GREE EAS cee SE ae RG PER eT Mk tat eyBee SERFao BS SES tsRia EESESE RRS Bue: | Sap ae ceeeehis, eee lkSO) LASELE 1Tee ats 2EeeS ea et

aoS See SeSee e ES egeg Sa Nee EE SoESeee SE eNO | SSR poten aepore: PRONEaSopa CRS See. 5 SoeJR a eeRSE nt TES,EES) + GEERRR NS CN |« oR Os aeBaer I AREeee ee 4) ee ee kes ae Sa Bsneioons = >a oS Sey ES aaa«IR Sen oe EEE cae Se £RR, 5Sepoe aRSS ER SS arep alaesaa JO ee IE BES > Saeeeee Se“eg Re ET ee Se eS eeeS, SNSY eas ig Seote ES, aLEROY. BOS es SS gee eerEIU aeS RC Oe ont So- Seaast eee— BRS eee SCE ee 2 aEPP REF Ree OO aaeoo fo Po ae 2k2Reece Ses See ee SS See SE Paeee ee SA ‘eR, SE Fly * on Se Siesievee

Pe oes Ff fs 2 eee eee rs

Ree eeeROR eeeNee 2 eget Bellsae SSees os Soe es A —rstsi‘—C™s__ Re ed eC eco : S58 Rota Sees S Rae TOR Re ibaa ae Soh beBe pein: Bene oeresgees epee - ed SEEeee et ee 2Bibs oe aa RS cas Nigga eBee ret Ree SERGE NN aoe ERO ASS 5g 2a rn Re SRSee UA 2 re SESE rere aneR ee aa ORRTeed ORES So ic Genie eae CRS SSE2Geen UR eee SRR eR Seiaeon ae ies Fs“By SS MERE VET ES ey oo ee NN: Sareea er eet Don RES Sag RH, SUE SS- SES *Sees : SE eas SEs Se, EE Th NR aoeREE 20. = RRR Se Reesto conorenroc ec SS CE vs Ets, 2 RES SeeRRR eae 2 Lee ake atin eRSSE ee Ee Re ee eet Seen JBERS RRR RES RES SSR FR SR RN See es SoaPe SRE SS ea Se Seco: Suomen OE REScte"E osc~Us: es SEES SSF SERS ENERE ro SSS BRR aeDae oe BEN eeaR oeREN ee Soe BE SONCOSTS GUS SEER ea ESE SeaySica

te -S 5 oe Pa ae eee : BO RESON, SOR SE eB cS — s — Ss gore es SERS a SRE tans Be? SES et SSS PSS cen ena ERR SO ae Se ae Baers 3 wee REEOR .BROS rnSoSie een E EE Bo RS aSOsonRees ee Bee SSa reeRe ere#ee gePEGS pee CC BRO Ree eeSe os PIER ERE 3Ree Een BSR SOSSCS RRS, TARRAe GEO Sd Soe obae Re oeee 3 es PRIS oe | Nes, x SRS SE cea Be eee Be | SEER ST Bang oe Ri Nope as + Son SSE SRS SSE

- A ye po Bo ee Seco See es EET OS eee nee.

ey 2ARES eeeorSRS Re Reese TeSEQ Tt SRS Mice Ra Reem GyeOU ts OUP peSRE Spe Seaee ESeSPee Pa Pg gee,RUSE Ej Se SNAE wien eeSESS Bees eee Tce Sec teers are CE eee Rie rtER

Barren Bites SNPS eeeOe ae ee ee SRB cP RON E RO ERseeSEAS CEASE SES0SRP Soe asOE Bee ees Sor ee mn SLR clei 2)eke RR SSE Se, oe ee ee BERNESE Ty SR— Be teoe Sow Se ys RREt Fo SEES ESSE ee ~ BES _—. fee ae DoeSR “a ee 7 3a‘eisws coepcre = Soe Bes PN TE ae SSeS See WEST TeeBUS JESSRe ea SEES aman teae acaen SET

ie ef a i ey BRE Rar Soa Sak Peco ncoun eee pH g 0 EE ee SESEE

erlheae og eee oe ESS arate eee fae ee Mae cs; ee aeaa tere SERENE | Seg SS eee eer Ree eRe RetaEee SIN EES ee [DETERS DEoe aR IRoe ar. eesESS EE ee) eRe RRS. RoR RSS ae JERSE area cee re eee ee anae = Rae ELOY See Seeremie poco BN «LE BE ete URS Serene Nea ae 2 ae ae SER Ciewe See ee ee ES ee a aSE ct

Ra.SoS eR35S fA See ST ee oeSoha SeeneyBe BRR eeeeShh tees,eee REE: ee epee ee Ce RENCE ee RSS eeBe Seni ceed RRR 2aeSERS OR eeSo esPRE SSCaeser Be peemneeLS .a eae eeSSE ene”. geo emt BEN SER See* Bee aepeen cie eoa ee heEe ETE ERE BEES aes. GR Se ooSees geeseBP eee oo eeSO er: Se 5} ee eS2Raa ia ae Rae se Ree Soe i aaNae Sa aeagater SORE or 5etOne: oe ee en eee SoSSEES REESE eeBeas eee ree SeSoe Seeoceenante as aEE OR Be OeSEL ORR ER BaeeURN aneSas UrNEE Se 0aseaR ogSPF an RS Ce Se ae,FSSeReco Sa ee NR ee See ag. ORB Se eeRea RE NaaeCN pe

it CeeeS ee nE ee eeeBae ee ene ae Ae es PAP SO eck eeeta ee as ee eSiRee re iaee a Oe Re OS BOSS pia SR Sir ee See Be E Sade e eee Sete Te ee Sree, So eee OeTe Ce es PORN FORD BRON NGS ere eee ee (Gee = eeAa gts Ria aee SNS Eee eeNee, eeONE iN SEEN ee Greer ie i Rom he mee ne BiSe hy 5eeSOE RG eatee Ren ee Saee See Re te Oe Rs amet ae ee ee Remini eet er eae st SOUS Se Ee ee Se Bees RSs Beiee Nees eR a ee ee at a Mae SO RAEAED StS 5 Hee OE ae Santthercieete a tg heh, Soe ee Ses cot Seek: em Mee Bat ett inn A MR REE BSE 2 Sec a SRS Ra Ra Ne RRR SOR ES Ka RRO

PS On SeBeesPOEs eesence DaeeeCORR Ok See ies eros AB eacOea csrton cee Rene oheee ets oe otis ee pi i Ve NeSacRs ERE SeaSSE eaOSS Rearean ane Meena yp Ses “vee ete RE EGCR RES ORBS Ee SRR SS ROR NOOR SERRE Sopa Ch So SS Xo SOB OEES 8 2Fok RON Se ERRBS aeons cotSES nea ee Be AS Mee te, S) eG Begone Ss eons Stee oa SE Seren Bh jo rNpage of bey be

Se Se Se oeEe aSSeS eS enSSESs ee OeoeneRees OePe Poe, 8ee ear See Bi areee: ee eo oe BORE CER ISORRIN SORRO oO RCE BEI PO ee eree ae ne OSE GS NISC ee “OS UR CEs BO SEO, eeRRR Es ORRRERRN UE SSTA: SS teERNE REO, Sse eaesoste tar Ste Sin Bos oe ReEy ae asSO SEES SS OS eSeer EES Ea secace RES SS UNGAR. KkeR Re RRRBS NBR. ROAR ENNS. NCEE FERC Sa Oar RO ROR renoORES RETR A LIBRE panyheer aagnrn Meennemtes oe ae ESO ee2Shia ee Eee reARI Sk ee eeSUR Cok eae Ne aes SCS ne eeee ee ee UeRenee eee

OR aR eSSEE (Pe eeeOe ter RE nn Sh Kauai Eons oe oe ee ageee Pn aeae Rae aaa ; ee » ee oesa eeeies memati. SO eee a Rg ANE eR eaea Se ns SER Ae Sr ee aa eae SER Re ae ee a eR Sear Airs:a oppenreneas Go aS ee 3d Ree re er Bes es eg CSOs PE Mei Ben SERRE ISS ee ee 3 pore as a Sete SR IBe Brees tee games © eee ee . UO a Ree Boe Sh Peer oe RRA SE ed Soe fas See ee. geek. ey ee ee aPenoes ee eeWAY ae eathsneeeeRos saeEEIAS eee aes ReesOREO ss y Rte eReSESE ee gen SoeBeoers Se Segaa eeNe BaiPOOR CS aSONI sist San oeee BF:OO eeOR Es MR ere aante East.— = Guia eee Biensien a EEE 2S Se DORR BURRS BPKS a a See Ri aoe: PIRRS OPT SO ee BSRaeSSR CR Connie RO RR

(CREE SS Sh RRS SC oa ee Re ee SE Se SS ae GARRY oy Smmnea Pi SRR ie SOR ge OER Nein, RRR. Boe ee Be Re aaa Ss SR > ee OnE SAO RS SERIES © RERAN Sn ene es S eee Pga aeeRR Bee SOraeos | Paemeeeen a ee TN eens Se BR SES ec cine aR RR aIR Rae BER Mh. es nan, Re Re Ee Ss saa RR steaaonnenonnns te OER Seth aRteak a 2Sa DRNY | et ROS eeeSSR SeteeeSE Sona Sk RRS LORIN SASSER BROT SOS STa S CORON erePoe er BE eeeRS ti ORi Serene Ne aangOOS aEsBESS ee # ee eee BSOM eeCaan re SE eens SeeS GRRE oe SeeACo SERIE SeeTR RON ae oes ee SNe Ree Sy as Bae oes SoSeeemer Soe eee aos Ras45Sees SeisSesean Se

Ps m i ee er ee aah me ae ee ee ese eRe Rage ee RE Be ORL ee ee po

SER Ae SOD OR a So ASS So a sereheee Rint meatreee tere CSE oe SE 2 EERE SRR es ee Pia as aaa Be oe tacnsan 7 ite Stn sey aC Spartina. aes a Mana Bare ON Sa ot Boe SRORROR RES AIRE SOE Bn SRC “NE SO ERR RR Sa ee eee ee

Panetta pte a RCA RA ean SRS aoPe ge XZ. Re ON rx NG any ARETE OTR canter Saee ERROR SOS SOR Renter nasi OC NOS ry CRI REAR EAs oeSEDER ere cockatiotcenang eecmegtotes maven eee UR taeae earning SASS Phra $spes Aes ARR Be haaacces. OR gS Bee ek ee eSaie aa SE ee Sets Seg ere Soe anna enaRLeet eee ere ion oeRYN 5SORE ere Lee S GSP oeESOC eeaehiSene ee ageScee PCA Pe ce See NERDS «et BSE Ee eae Se ATcan TREE BIOS IE CNL tO OSen: SSI eens SSae SED eeeCase REESE NOR SNC EN (SEES RRR 2.05 NaaS eee SNS ER 5 SO8 RR RSNA. CORR BR BS GS CLAN pePh eeeSe a i cae: Seog RRR sae eos oS Fee ees SN | Bi aeee eeoses aa RO eeR ee en ree enNe ais Ree eh aRRRCRE Re SRON RRS SIN 0 BS EON ERE 2 Pc Se SBE SRG ORGS © See RRCSS RRR

eee ee eee |eeSe sae OOS OES i RRR URES ORs REPS pepe ae ae © Ces PES ETSeay aySgC2 eeeaeee ee tt eeSREERIN EU Roars See ee me aeen Se Bae ERG NR Ss: SRE EOS RR Pgs RRR IeR Does e SBS Be Seana aR ERNST oa 4ERE oS pee os Skee Ss oe tsRNa aaa eee ee eeNe Reco RE, Soe eeASIEN EE Na eaPROS EES Beeae eres ener 3° SRN. “ER EAE Se Re aR Le SSS CLL eae eee BRR ReRC SRPBoe NY ARS RSE Se eee Boe ESSERE eR ee he ge nag nenYO are Re rR Sar ES Bg OE sea eeeheae ‘pepeieanpeacs ons sea) NSEaoe RR SBOE oe Booch Sonn onanaeeRe Sa See EE CUR SER ee etESeee 2ST SS SRann RSS come aac erectcoemenabaames BB eee Sy SECS Cae ORE TE SES

aeee eei Rae ise SEAS oe RIGOR St rr aSiti ee rt ereane eeeKeBee eee cs ee Rese raeee eS RR SetSRS oe ec. ee Pues ee | 8a Sea oes aEEE beneES us ASSES 2 ee ee eee ee PRG SaneSesto eas Eoa oe ceeen ee ey

: eT le a eC - lllmrmrr—~—~sr—”—“—SC Se ee ee eo ae a OER ARIE eT NE “SORO as, Bae ON EDDIE SSN Ce 1 NS, RRSEER a SR ERE Socrecaiinhnccneta ae Saeia ne dan coe eee nnian eaeERE: ae et SS ReSOCORRO eS ISTE Spies RieRRR ee he, eee Seer por ees SnSoh ae ees esr RD ane ACIS Bea oF SRREM S Rtn SS RO Ma RRRREK SR ay PUES A SR NS AERO RTSSRR ALES ER: SE SOS SERRA ERNE See te a eatin etaeaenntecteuane tenn ernanuratae SReen ARS SSO Sraega tees OR See Slash ROR ee Be ee

Beneie 23, S.. Seana a Ne ao on Dre FSS RTO SS SRK: Bas BA SMOKE Bone fae DAL ASE oe toes, SN SEC SERRE. SON ine eR ae SS See ee SEER SORES SES RRS RAO RR ice EERE NS Re BS eee = ae ee pe TE SRR oi RS eon Fe Byte Ee Uae er ae St PR NERS SRD PER RSENS HHate ORESate RRRRR PERSLE SSRIeee ote RTO SNSay te SR ease Some teen RO eR SERRE SEE EE gee ees ey: ROS Sear ae==Saget Eee. ¥ orOO EROS eS“SOa RDA SB [EEE SR COA Soper oeSDSeERIER eo SEL arose e sae ei SER RESaOR EE Be Bar ceeehSO ra PM RRR

Boos ee Ee i Sed ee BS ns gee oa ees ee oo i | 2 RE eee “Ee get sea pak eco PEE A RR ES bxcts iene SSIS See RI RO LS RSE SER SERS ER Sgr ses SS Siac ery Roatg es nnentatnnn meunagasnemeanenn tne SASS ae SRR See Deer Se ee BO ee R cites imme Sener a rs oa emaeenereaS a

ROSALES oiei, Bates a Pe eCBees ee a SEVike SRR oartES Aarts PRP Bee Bore. SSEENEEEESEESE Se on Bee Se Sisara Ronen oeSRE SeerBo EES Sa Re Sarangi omens gkhnineunnrmanecaaesen nee SereneCs oto! Se Be 2gett eesTESS pee ee 4 BOC Bes ae eats este eS BELTS UD RSIS £2 WENO Mier25a REN RROta Sn TE nea ee ecON riuyuy cepa Shyer SANT: Sg ORE eeSe BORE Fepciiuegcope RAR keeee Cee SOIR BERN SNeRS Sak 2-i AeBay ca reSRE eee Se a oe eee Se SUSE PAE SS eae nano SSbeseescsoenL Coe Ataee>OE Ra REE CRECR Sacre Sa ROR I eeiene uaaae SEean icenese aR ERE RRR en NE CURE RR Se Ses PA SEE Sets AS Spe aceROS Se IG ROR SRS Seca een cS

Pee OMey GaTey Seen Pages een ea, ot PEE ie EGPai ES OTTER ROTTS Ree Re SS RR Ber oe 2. a aany RR See ee IR RR ih gar eRNCE ERE eaGRACE Bo ROS Se8eeRT LEGER ENEmae RS a See nee oss SRC cereeeeol RR eae eee NS Les eeeeeeagianeanaron ee Ra Seana 8S SR peSim 3 aNR es RS REE EL ge eee

aPeay OO aCOpeda aLSSeee ey a SES eeSEa ESE EhLSoR PLS ee SRC ee rg BRP SOP 5BSNER 02 SU” ORES I oeSTE eeeeeadS eos ea ey: es Sette Seco AOL SAEs Sohn ea noo Hc. a ieAon Maar aeOR Mast pe IeRRR ER eaoes ROBE ie RRR De Ry Be SRE RS PRP Oe Seeman Nett Se eos cata SES ASS eee vc aeaI Saino ato ea et eeSee a LOSI. IN Eee Fe FSO sna ot eens BSR: SeSe a eae eG Seen BS at Rag RIK NO Pod ResTO [OES Bak ata RD a eG ER A RCo Ratt atin Suieee cass Reon eee:eat See ees ORS Ne a BE ROSE BR hoes Fe iUE vceSERRE PRRs Te: SSES OBES BSR OSH EES Seesene ee esosSESE Ee Mar Ber rane ae aach EOE SU eeTEESE Ressaenen Sainte Sittin 2s Set > ORES SRNR AC kn Ean ea RRR aSRR tea RN eaScRR EN ERS eS SIE somes LAER AS DBRe ATES ae Re eS ese SISTINE UES aeEUS aa PR EE LESac. 2 EES Rae OS ONE Sian RO TeOe Ra el aR RIO SeOE Rte: 3 ORS Sr srtian BaeEERE Rees Se & HN ERR BSAC S SRLS aR OY CS: SeSSS SengSOR EE Se PRES EGS. ek oo apie RSE eRe TeY OR StanaR SERB oA oN RRCRED AAS SRR Rriha Sk FeaD 20,Og CORO Eee eee a Kr eS SC oHS SRR Ge a R ee B 2. SRS RRO OS RRR: BOE is os nos Co Bae Reet

eabeater ARAL RES Sirota es Sapcients eke connects Skee EE Se Re ae a RB LE ae SESSS NeA osRRS a Se RS RS SR aesRR eee Sees ee at ESee eeA ee Be ae SIND o scannenneis BIR oe SSIS a aeECR a 2RE Soha ee an aeer Spite RgBR on te eS SE Padre onsen ee ae aPe uk Bree 2BePGR OR BH SS S PR BROS es i eee SiR aORO Been es oir ran eee RO ee ee PSE Re ERE EAPRR OA cos caeCam aatiesan ie Ree Cee onpesmi SE SS eeeEIN DROESS ieee Sere BE EE IR eee SS RENE ESRNea aie Ss age igs Soc Ri cena Super statin Se ocr a Sear RCEeS ReTE ae Fe ce eS oe

ee ee ee SS Bg Se a Cy Barts tes So OSS f 22 oe oe a Pe » es se oe ee ne pe: SON on a ce ee Se pe re Re seer oN ESS eee ee Bee ee ee Pk Saas coe PORE ee ee eS DEB Bes SOLER SOR DER RELag Byta Snr apetacncee EN GchBRIS SDR SSSIRS RRR ESSE a SSeS OS CNBe" RR Ne Pa RRR ag ithe tte, Roget PEREGS econ ed SD aR Se Es ee sc ae SES es oe oes. RieSame Sa PicsiGinea s Sak Pe eet SRRce ee ie SESRy Spee. YESSTOR: oes ceed Be oS Nabe sees ge cnoea Lie ES3GEES a tonearetEStE Som Seeprerease. 6 EOSon Gare SEE Sag eee SeeRR a SSSR EEAas Poe s a Rie eas

Geer # BS RNPSS ORS ACR TLS Sen ap REESE Fcc 5BES a Sag cnase BRNoCR BatsRRO ee Ba Sg Fe as he SERRE Se SS RATER a So RERUNS ea TRSOS: a gins aS an toePe as a Beery RenAS TES ers aS eehetcenenenest Beaten pat: Ge . Rea ion ee RNRaa 5 ekeeCOL LAO ae hes cee SoSPs ReNE 3 eSRR tentaN eeeSSS MSSSeSCOPE Sieaaeo ESSURGES SES ee eeSaat eg eSche SEER Se SS SEER AE RE ROK SE SONS” SORE RTOS oF SEEN Sates Shokan 22 SO SNS SH oP ORS ERR fi eae yew ot SOR SO Se Se i eens: On Sse ae ER SEES va ae CE aeons NaC oy bs Sy Se Se Se, ORS ROS Re Ke tai oR § Sait tors SS ee

hs ROR CON RCRD: RE Ce Rane RSS Sr Stes SOA erent SO OSS, BS: pe SEE Nana St SEs Pees Cet SRO Te ONES ae N CREAN Oe oe Raa Roe R Sane artaas eepeoeesmennns Sateen Noone nto ee hy ee eae ee ee ee

Ree CSREES PRB eee eR Re Sain ae AALS: Sesi ee SRR Bee eke peeLC RO NSS SN en Oe SS Rpcaiasatn Sn RaPee I CASSIS Eg Reena Serna Bs Bee Ries as ConesaeSance ee a . aSeiCo aCea3 ee aeBa TIS -aSF POY eos F oeSinwpeene ae eS a yoo SeEER SR oerege SER Sn SOS ee aM See "3 RS ee eR Sa SsRY sear Cara et Le. ee Powers eagle eg RR ota go saSesNS pe ASS aNSSSCRE Ne. 9ReeRe een Sem,gprsaed fo co a ee ee See Ee CaS Gee eer Aten es 5 epee ees SEE Na Sea NSE SR nae aC a eines er Ps ee SEE I 5 CORSE SO Re eae Basi

Pe eeoeOO a ie eeee eeSS ee ee ee Od Se Se Cee eee eee a te ee ER Rs Re ON eee ee ES eee ee ee Pe Ee te eee Sonne oo ees : as RS SRESDRSEE Seateacre ns Rae ReseaxSorts oy Sock an eee mK ASE Pee hee Ree ROT a ooov SER nt 5 eg CES ene LS} OarENG a ae oat ee oe eeSeif ee pasoeoe SERRE Se RR NS SeenS aah Sages Seen, tat Semaine OG ci FRESE DS3 5SNS SO ERT BS aRRS REN aS nana atacatecgeten iacieeae eeenies ape ee eCSe Cvnag Soefone. eaR Sita eney Oe5RRR 2 Be

Saosbee $i Bey EPS Se eee Be Cees ea SECS oe eR ERE MRE eS Se Shoes IE Sea Se AROS SN SO eo SRS ODM aS B RON BO. gece ae peeticectiganh tee R a ce fee ngs See RoR nT: San OE Sees BREET eee aes Ce ee es eee ee Beene 0 Be teREESE ee Ds SAS ESR SEEN OsneDEE SeSET SeES eens RE ope | RE Oe eeaR,aN ee. eesee CREA is sae oaee Re aPRN RRS LHe Saga Pts etnSah SNR geRO RES RAR ADEN ARRAN Satie RS uae geeEIS eee : Se das een eas SReRER ESSE OR RRSP SEAR Be SIR Le SEEPS EES NE A ROI Seco eee ean Se Re :pecee RN seracp a ae Be eet Gon OeREO eeeeSeECE RUAN OSROR Sy SR BS Ce Ree aeSarSennen eg Sa Ses OTT SSORNS ee ents aie Seri g oe aera Sa cee ee Sohne SARS eeED SO rer stro Gee rene Ne fare EU RSECCSEE ODeee Soa Baie Ne ceeeseiRe eee: pie ae eeshs er SSeS SR ee GERD PRES OSBEE CgRS PR OE EY SoS Sani aSUES ee ae FeASNT BeesaSea {EL Re eee| PESOS ee ae SoegiShe es A ee Pe Ra OG Se a Be eee acento Sec eee | ee Se ee eee ce ee Oe eames ee ee ae Se Tie ae ee cat Eg Baap on aes PES Rites Sg SS eg nie Se giarnngy cio geee ean gees Se EE RR ag OR i Fe SRS So SR ec ee ee Pag , yo SEE Ap meeteg Rin tees ERROR RSE RS CES eae meg RR Pe cianrate oe ae cones Ke Saar Oe ya ERR eR RE ee CES SIDS. 8: aaa tea Pe ee siemens RCSA E ROY 32 AM SOR. OY BRON PR Si cin SESE onto Sak. Sent eC Saat. Se eS Sn SU ar esc on Gi eee Se a EE ER ES ORE Oe tk Nn Sgn SR ieee aera Se Se eC ESR EES SOPs RO RR

oe a I

EE ke PERE, See eee tee en Same ar Re Oy at ES SN SR NOR 2S es PES RSS organ enemas Be SI errr te OR Be oe GD A DRE a nha NOR SAGE Ete NG Bee SES senna anna neues pean

Eee wey Ree RON Rates ree a A a ee ey eR BoA NES SRE SRO AES CC PRES PhS Se SSUES RE EE ge eg Dee EASE TOS cepa ee ree ae ee a ee ee — RSE ct ARR PRO) BOLE. he SRR RARE RS BE” Stans Sots SIRS U Rea. Re Re RE A OAD BER CSR Rassias Bo RRR: X Ste SSR Re RICRRONSSS fe SERINE Soa SENN OR ERRORS SACD CGN Soran the MURR CEREEERS SORES SORRY oc Oo SR NC Bp P marae set pate SOR Sx SRR Bie aa Ne garsutnwnncaaaesees SRS

Ee Bi icc nt SOE OS ee te 5, ee eas CR ge ee pet ees fy ERDGES ae aR ne es Cea Se Se ee EN Se RO oes el LENS OOS ST Sree en nanan RRRRE RE oi Bos RO RERE NS gn nee PROT ROT SR aN CK EES ie eats eeacaraannns s.r rea Reine wate mrera nS SS eoede ghana hates RCA 2 eae ES Se SS eee See ge os a Se yas eSOss eee SB SEES EISote Seatyee atic sae BON SATS gas geeRS eeRR ne RE EUAn ea eS CEEISEST WR eae Regaap Ray saiataosinteger penee 8Sie ne Pee a gee S : fe a Rear sees SER aSoS Peat SactSRB OR oe aaaeS aia Sekern ert a ea SOTERA Bay ior anes SEE ee Sa Se NSE aaa eee coche pteosc Sete SEESNR Bree eeehacen ee eS se ee Fee :nee OT¥RR ce AR SPORE Romie rN ERtc a ROR RRs Seat ged Googie taninne Sepment SESSA Bien DR oe SEEEDNS SeePSSareaOn 2G RT CR BaaeSNe Sanat ene eeeSeneca CEeeEe Be ee Soetecere nee ORR. ASS Oe SOR AEE Se a Sather a aesON RaeA hemp Cranes air catcu eyCA eterBae TA by gage Re th Bane, Bik ES: gf ee toe BEES CE Rae ES NT RRSSO SSNSane ae RR SR SS caNiko ee a ieae = ‘ca eeHs es See eee: OS ee SRRace VS E¥S aoeNa SORES ath ee EEGET ee Chee ksNg ROG ORS eeSes SSSSE ge cares cee SERRE SEOs RRSes AUSSEESEEETS deesy ©aeSaat eee aes oesPik SPERORR Pep Na ERASR ENSSR 8 CECE are Sees A inhe REE TS re Ne aE BR 2” RRR SeRETR eR SR EOS oe ENees Meee RNS Seamer Rome AES Ae Mcoes Beeeee Seen eeas

oF BES eeeRE SaasOR 3, OR Se ee es a, ks, OESee 2 em pide ae Se ee RRce geeTa Se Gees geen ee eseeeeae 82 ee . Be. eeBS ONG eeokeeMeee ee eee Spee eeee: Gees es, Ce So 7s eaenceSee POSS ERS RR IS ee SSeS RE IS ERE ODN te aR CRORE REN