United States or American Samoa ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !


In Boston, William Veazie was set in the pillory in the market-place for ploughing on the Thanksgiving Day of June 18, 1696. He said his king had granted liberty of conscience, and that the reigning king, William, was not his ruler; that King James was his royal prince, and since he did not believe in setting apart days for thanksgiving he should not observe them.

Carroll would say, and the others would acquiesce simply, with no thought of the possibility of anything else. "There's that young man who goes on the train every morning with papa," said Charlotte. "His name is Veazie Francis Veazie. He has called here. They live on Elm Street. His father is that nice-looking old gentleman who walks past here every day, on his way to the mail, a little lame."

Curiosities of Literature. By ISAAC DISRAELI. 4 vols. Boston: William Veazie. 1858. Possessing this book, Robinson Crusoe might have enjoyed all the pleasures of what Dr. Johnson called "browsing in a library," and that a large and choice one. It contains in itself all the elements of a liberal education in out-of-the-way-ness.

It would be venturesome to attempt to predict what the Supreme Court will do about it. Many constitutional lawyers seem to think that Congress has succeeded in its attempt and that the act will be sustained. Certainly there are strong precedents pointing that way. Three in particular will be relied upon the Veazie Bank case, the Oleomargarine case and the Narcotic Drug Act case.

On the contrary, the act expressly applied to "every person, firm, corporation, or company carrying on or doing the business of refining sugar...." The case, therefore, has no bearing on the point we are discussing. Had the act applied only to corporations, a different question would have been involved. The case of Veazie Bank vs.

In the Veazie Bank case the Supreme Court upheld the validity of a so-called tax law whose purpose and effect were to suppress the circulation of notes of the state banks. In the Oleomargarine case the Court upheld a tax whose purpose and effect were to suppress the manufacture and sale of oleomargarine artificially colored to look like butter.