Vitruvius book De architectura
Source: De architectura (The Ten Books On Architecture) (~ 15BC), Book I, Chapter I, Sec. 11
Source: The Journal of John Woolman (1774), p. 292; cited in: On The Slave Trade by John Woolman http://www.qhpress.org/texts/oldqwhp/wool-496.htm on qhpress.org, 2013
Vitruvius book De architectura
Source: De architectura (The Ten Books On Architecture) (~ 15BC), Book I, Chapter I, Sec. 11
“Having departed from your house, turn not back; for the furies will be your attendants.”
Pythagoras (-585–-495 BC) ancient Greek mathematician and philosopher
Symbol 15
The Symbols
Constantinos Apostolou Doxiadis (1914–1975) Greek architect
Source: Building Entopia - 1975, Chapter 12, Metropolis, p. 171
Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778) Swedish botanist, physician, and zoologist
Fundamenta fructificationis (1742). As quoted in John S. Wilkins (2009), "Species: A History of the Idea," University of California Press. p. 72
Henry Bickersteth, 1st Baron Langdale (1783–1851) British lawyer
Symonds v. The Gas Light and Coke Co. (1848), 11 Beav. 285.
Quote
George Jessel (jurist) (1824–1883) British politician
In re Hallett's Estate (1880) 13 Ch.D. 696, 710.
Martin Sheen (1940) American actor
2000s, Progressive magazine interview (2003)
Context: I have been accused of being a traitor, and I have been accused of not supporting the military. Nothing could be further from the truth. The leaders are the ones who make the decisions. The soldiers do not have the choice. I support the soldiers as human beings. This Administration has led us into an area without vision. Bush has no clear understanding of what is being asked of the citizens, and the military is under his direction.
George Bernard Shaw book The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and Capitalism
The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, Chapter 82 http://books.google.com/books?id=ys13gZliXFAC (1928) <br class="br">1920s
Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) 16th President of the United States
1860s, Fourth of July Address to Congress (1861)
Context: It might seem at first thought to be of little difference whether the present movement at the South be called "secession" or "rebellion." The movers, however, well understand the difference. At the beginning they knew they could never raise their treason to any respectable magnitude by any name which implies violation of law. They knew their people possessed as much of moral sense, as much of devotion to law and order, and as much pride in and reverence for the history and Government of their common country as any other civilized and patriotic people. They knew they could make no advancement directly in the teeth of these strong and noble sentiments. Accordingly, they commenced by an insidious debauching of the public mind. They invented an ingenious sophism, which, if conceded, was followed by perfectly logical steps through all the incidents to the complete destruction of the Union. The sophism itself is that any State of the Union may consistently with the National Constitution, and therefore lawfully and peacefully, withdraw from the Union without the consent of the Union or of any other State. The little disguise that the supposed right is to be exercised only for just cause, themselves to be the sole judge of its justice, is too thin to merit any notice. With rebellion thus sugar coated they have been drugging the public mind of their section for more than thirty years, and until at length they have brought many good men to a willingness to take up arms against the Government the day after some assemblage of men have enacted the farcical pretense of taking their State out of the Union who could have been brought to no such thing the day before.