Pouch

Pouch (pronounced pouch)

(1) A bag, sack or similar receptacle, especially one for small articles or quantities and historically closed with a drawstring although in modern use zips and other fasteners are common.

(2) A small, purse-like container, used to carry small quantities of cash.

(3) A bag for carrying mail.

(4) In the jargon of household textiles (Manchester), as “pillow pouch”, an alternative name for a pillowslip or pillowcase (archaic).

(5) As “diplomatic pouch”, a sealed container (anything from an envelope to a shipping container) notionally containing diplomatic correspondence that is sent free of inspection between a foreign office and its diplomatic or consular posts abroad or between such posts.

(6) As “posing pouch”, a skimpy thong (G-string) worn by male strippers, bodybuilders and such (known also as the “posing strap”, in certain circles, it's now an essential accessory).

(7) In the industrial production of food, as retort pouch, a food packaging resistant to heat sterilization in a retort, often made from a laminate of flexible plastic and metal foils.

(8) In military use, a container (historically of leather) in the form of either a bag or case), used by soldiers to carry ammunition.

(9) Something shaped like or resembling a bag or pocket.

(10) In physics, as “Faraday pouch”, a container with the properties of a Faraday cage (a conductive enclosure that blocks external static and non-static EMFs (electromagnetic field) by redistributing electric charges to the outer surface, preventing them affecting the interior; it was named after the inventor, the English physicist & chemist Michael Faraday (1791–1867)).

(11) A pocket in a garment (originally in Scots English but of late widely used by garment manufacturers).

(12) In nautical design, a bulkhead in the hold of a vessel, to prevent bulk goods (grain, sand etc) from shifting (a specialized form of baffle).

(13) A baggy fold of flesh under the eye (more commonly as “bags under the eyes”).

(14) In zoological anatomy, a bag-like or pocket-like part; a sac or cyst, as the sac beneath the bill of pelicans, the saclike dilation of the cheeks of gophers, or the abdominal receptacle for the young of marsupials.

(15) In pathology, an internal structure with certain qualities (use restricted to those fulfilling some functional purpose): any sac or cyst (usually containing fluid), pocket, bag-like cavity or space in an organ or body part (the types including laryngeal pouch, Morison's pouch, Pavlov's pouch & Rathke's pouch).

(16) In botany, a bag-like cavity, a silicle, or short pod, as of the “shepherd's purse”.

(17) In slang, a protuberant belly; a paunch (archaic and probably extinct).

(18) In slang, to pout (archaic and probably extinct).

(19) In slang, to put up with (something or someone) (archaic and probably extinct).

(20) To put into or enclose in a pouch, bag, or pocket; pocket.

(21) To transport a pouch (used especially of a diplomatic pouch).

(22) To arrange in the form of a pouch.

(23) To form a pouch or a cavity resembling a pouch.

(24) In zoology, of a fish or bird, to swallow.

1350–1400: From the Middle English pouche & poche, from the Old Northern French pouche, from the Old French poche & puche (from which French gained poche (the Anglo-Norman variant was poke which spread in Old French as “poque bag”), from the Frankish poka (pouch) (similar forms including the Middle Dutch poke, the Old English pohha & pocca (bag) and the dialectal German Pfoch).  Although documented since only the fourteenth century, parish records confirm the surnames “Pouch” & “Pouche” were in use by at least the late twelfth and because both names (like Poucher (one whose trade is the “making of pouches”)) are regarded by genealogists as “occupational”, it’s at least possible small leather bags were thus describe earlier.  In the 1300s, a pouche was “a bag worn on one's person for carrying things” and late in the century it was used especially of something used to carry money (what would later come to be called a “coin purse” or “purse”).  The use to describe the sac-like cavities in animal bodies began in the domestic science of animal husbandry from circa 1400, the idea adopted unchanged when human anatomy became documented.  The verb use began in the 1560s in the sense of “put in a pouch”, extended by the 1670s to mean “to form a pouch, swell or protrude, both directly from the noun.  The Norman feminine noun pouchette (which existed also as poutchette) was from the Old French pochete (small bag).  Surprisingly, it wasn’t picked up in English (a language which is a shameless adopter of anything useful) but does endure on the Channel Island of Jersey where it means (1) a pocket (in clothing) and (2) in ornithology the Slavonian grebe, horned grebe (Podiceps auritus).  The organic pocket in which a marsupial carries its young is known also as both the marsupium & brood pouch, the latter term also used of the cavity which is some creatures is where eggs develop and hatch.  Pouch is a noun & verb, pouchful & poucher are nouns, pounching is a verb, pouchy is an adjective and pouched is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is pouches.

Diplomatic pencil pouch.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (UNVCDR; United Nations (UN) Treaty Series, volume 500, p 95) was executed in Vienna on 18 April 1961, entering into force on 24 April 1964.  Although the terminology and rules governing diplomatic relations between sovereign states had evolved over thousands of years, there had been no systematic attempt at codification until the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815), held to formalize the political and dynastic arrangements for post-Napoleonic Europe.  There were also later, ad-hoc meetings which dealt with administrative detail (some necessitated by improvements in communication technology) but it was the 1961 convention that built the framework that continues to underpin the diplomatic element of international relations; little changed from its original form, it's perhaps the UN’s most successful legal instrument.  With two exceptions, all UN member states have ratified the UNVCDR; the two non-signatories are the republics of Palau and South Sudan.  It’s believed the micro-state of Palau remains outside the framework because it has been independent only since 1994 and constitutionally has an unusual “Compact of Free Association” arrangement with the US which results in it maintaining a limited international diplomatic presence.  The troubled West African state of South Sudan gained independence only in 2011 and has yet to achieve a stable state infrastructure, remaining beset by internal conflict; its immediate priorities therefore remain elsewhere. The two entities with “observer status” at the UN (the State of Palestine and the Holy See) are not parties to the UNVCDR but the Holy See gained in Vienna a diplomatic protocol which functionally is substantially the same as that of a ratification state.  Indeed, the Vatican’s diplomats are actually granted a particular distinction in that states may (at their own election), grant the papal nuncio (a rank equivalent to ambassador or high commissioner) seniority of precedence, thus making him (there’s never been a female nuncio), ex officio, Doyen du Corps Diplomatique (Dean of the Diplomatic Corps).

Lindsay Lohan in SCRAM bracelet (left), the SCRAM (centre) and Chanel's response from their Spring 2007 collection (right).

A very twenty-first century pouch: Before Lindsay Lohan began her “descent into respectability” (a quote from the equally admirable Mandy Rice-Davies (1944-2004) of MRDA fame), Lindsay Lohan inadvertently became of the internet’s early influencers when she for a time wore a court-ordered ankle monitor (often called “bracelets” which by convention of use is dubious but rarely has English been noted for its purity).  At the time, many subject to such orders concealed them under clothing but Ms Lohan made her SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor) a fashion statement, something that compelled the paparazzi to adjust their focal length to ensure her ankle of interest appeared in shots.  The industry responded with its usual alacrity and “ankle monitor” pouches were soon being strutted down the catwalks.

Chanel's boot-mounted ankle pouch in matching quilted black leather.

In one of several examples of this instance of Lohanic influence on design, in their Spring 2007 collection, Chanel included a range of ankle pouches.  Functional to the extent of affording the wearing a hands-free experience and storage for perhaps a lipstick, gloss and credit card (other than a phone the modern young spinster should seldom need to carry more), the range was said quickly to "sell-out" although the concept hasn't been seen in subsequent collections so analysts of such things should make of that what they will.  Chanel offered the same idea in a boot, a design borrowed from the use by military although they tended to be more commodious and, being often used by aircrew, easily accessible while in a seated position, the sealable flap on the outer calf, close to the knee.   

The origin of the special status of diplomats dates from Antiquity when such envoys were the only conduit of communication between emperors, kings, princes, dukes and such.  They thus needed their emissaries to be granted safe passage in what could be hostile territory, negotiations (including threats & ultimata) often conducted between warring tribes & states: the preamble to the UNVCDR captures the spirit of these traditions:

THE STATES PARTIES TO THE PRESENT CONVENTION,

RECALLING that peoples of all nations from ancient times have recognized the status of diplomatic agents,

HAVING IN MIND the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations concerning the sovereign equality of States, the maintenance of international peace and security, and the promotion of friendly relations among nations,

BELIEVING that an international convention on diplomatic intercourse, privileges and immunities would contribute to the development of friendly relations among nations, irrespective of their differing constitutional and social systems,

REALIZING that the purpose of such privileges and immunities is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient performance of the functions of diplomatic missions as representing States,

AFFIRMING that the rules of customary international law should continue to govern questions not expressly regulated by the provisions of the present Convention have agreed as follows…

US Department of State diplomatic pouch tag.

The diplomatic pouch (known also, less attractively, as the “diplomatic bag”) is granted essentially the same protection as the diplomat.  Historically, the diplomatic pouch was exactly that: a leather pouch containing an emissary’s documents, carried usually on horseback and in the modern age it may be anything from an envelope to a shipping container.  What distinguishes it from other containers is (1) clear markings asserting status and (2) usually some sort of locking mechanism (the origin of which was an envelope’s wax seal and if appropriately marked, a diplomatic pouch should be exempt from any sort of inspection by the receiving country.  Strictly speaking, the pouch should contain only official documents but there have been many cases of other stuff being “smuggled in” including gold, weapons subsequently used in murders, foreign currency, narcotics, bottles of alcohol and various illicit items including components of this and that subject to UN (or other) sanctions.  For that reason, there are limited circumstances in which a state may intersect or inspect the contents of a diplomatic pouch.  The protocols relating to the diplomatic pouch are listed in Article 27 of the UNVCDR:

(1) The receiving State shall permit and protect free communication on the part of the mission for all official purposes. In communicating with the Government and the other missions and consulates of the sending State, wherever situated, the mission may employ all appropriate means, including diplomatic couriers and messages in code or cipher. However, the mission may install and use a wireless transmitter only with the consent of the receiving State.

(2) The official correspondence of the mission shall be inviolable. Official correspondence means all correspondence relating to the mission and its functions.

(3) The diplomatic bag shall not be opened or detained.

(4) The packages constituting the diplomatic bag must bear visible external marks of their character and may contain only diplomatic documents or articles intended for official use.

(5) The diplomatic courier, who shall be provided with an official document indicating his status and the number of packages constituting the diplomatic bag, shall be protected by the receiving State in the performance of his functions. He shall enjoy person inviolability and shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention.

(6) The sending State or the mission may designate diplomatic couriers ad hoc. In such cases the provisions of paragraph 5 of this article shall also apply, except that the immunities therein mentioned shall cease to apply when such a courier has delivered to the consignee the diplomatic bag in his charge.

(7) A diplomatic bag may be entrusted to the captain of a commercial aircraft scheduled to land at an authorized port of entry. He shall be provided with an official document indicating the number of packages constituting the bag but he shall not be considered to be a diplomatic courier. The mission may send one of its members to take possession of the diplomatic bag directly and freely from the captain of the aircraft.

Former US Ambassador to Pretoria, Lana Marks (b 1953).

Some ambassadors have been more prepared than most for handing the diplomatic bag, notably Ms Lana Marks, the South African-born US business executive who founded her eponymous company specializing in designer handbags.  In 2018, Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2021) nominated Ms Marks as US ambassador to South Africa, a role in which she served between January 2020 and January 2021 when, under the convention observed by political appointees, she resigned her office.  Although Ms Marks had no background in international relations, such appointments are not unusual and certainly not exclusive to US presidents.  Indeed, although professional diplomats may undergo decades of preparation for ambassadorial roles, there are many cases where the host nation greatly has valued a political appointee because of the not unreasonable assumption they’re more likely to have the “ear of the president” than a Foggy Bottom (a metronym for the State Department, the reference to the department's headquarters in the Harry S Truman Building which sits in the Foggy Bottom neighborhood of Washington DC) apparatchik who typically would be restricted to dealing with the secretary of state.  That was apparently the case when Robert Nesen (1918–2005, a Californian Cadillac dealer), was appointed US ambassador to Australia (1981-1985), by Ronald Reagan (1911-2004; US president 1981-1989), a reward (if that’s how being sent to live in Canberra can be described) for long service to the Republican Party fundraising rather than a reflection of Mr Reagan’s fondness for Cadillacs (Mr Nesen’s dealership also held other franchises) although it was Mr Reagan who "arranged" for Cadillac to replace Lincoln as supplier of the White House limousine fleet.

The Princess Diana by Lana Marks is sold out in emerald green but remains available in gold, black and chocolate brown.

Uniquely, South Africa has three cities designated as capitals: Pretoria (administrative/executive), Cape Town (legislative, parliament), and Bloemfontein (judicial, Supreme Court of Appeal).  In diplomatic protocol, ambassadors are accredited to the Republic of South Africa and present their credentials to the president and in practice this is done in Pretoria (Tshwane).  Ms Marks’ connection to the Trump administration’s conduct of foreign policy came through her membership of Mr Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club (annual membership fee US$200,000, the "world-renowned Trump International Golf Club, West Palm Beach" a five minute drive), an institution which also produced the country’s ambassador to the Dominican Republic.  Ms Marks seems to have fitted in well at Mar-a-Lago, telling South Africa's Business Live: “It's the most exclusive part of the US, a small enclave, an island north of Miami.  One-third of the world's wealth passes through Palm Beach in season. The crème de la crème of the world lives there.”  One trusts the people of South Africa were impressed and perhaps even grateful.

Jail

Jail (pronounced jeyl)

(1) A prison (in some places used generally of institutions of incarceration, in others tending to be applied to structures used for the detention of those awaiting trial or convicted of minor offenses).

(2) To take into or hold in lawful custody; to imprison; to incarcerate.

(3) In horse racing, the condition created by the requirement that a horse claimed in a claiming race not be run at another track for some period of time (usually 30 days).

(4) In dodgeball (and related games), the area where players who have been struck by the ball are confined.

(5) In computing, as used by certain variants of Linux, an implementation of a sandbox in which can be run an instance of another OS (operating system).

1225–1275: From the Middle English gayole, gaylle, gaille, gayle, gaile, gaiole, jaiole & jaile, from the Old North French gaiole, gayolle & gaole and the Old French jaiole (cage), from the Medieval Latin gabiola, from the Vulgar Latin gaviola, a variant of the Late Latin caveola (small cage, cell), diminutive of the Classical Latin cavea (cavity, coop, cage).  Regionalism in language was one more common (especially in eras when population movement (particularly in rural areas)) was more limited and the two spellings in the Old French variants reflect the independent linguistic evolutions, the spelling “gaole” indicative of a pronunciation in use until the seventeenth century.  It fully displaced the native Middle English quartern (prison, jail, cell), from the Old English cweartern (jail, prison) and partially displaced the native Middle English lok, from the Old English loc (enclosure, pen; jail, prison) (from which English gained “lock”) and the Middle English carcern, from the Old English carcern, from the Latin carcer (prison, jail).  In the Old English, there were many words meaning jail (regionalism also a factor here) including heaþor & heolstorloca (the latter meaning also “jail cell”), clūstorloc, dung (the latter meaning also also “dungeon”), hlinræced, nirwþ, nīedcleofa, hearmloca and nearu.  Jail & jailing are nouns & verbs; enjail, rejail, jailor (or jailer) & jailoress (or jaileress) are nouns, jailed & enjailed are verbs, jailless, jailish, jailable, nonjailable & jaillike are adjectives; the noun plural is jails.

In English, there are seeming anomalies which must baffle those learning the tongue and make them wonder how such a messy and sometimes inconsistent language became something of the world’s lingua franca.  Were it possible to have a committee edit the lexicon and eliminate the pointlessly troublesome, not only might something be done about homophones like “razed” (demolished) and “raised” (built) but the “gaol” (still used in parts of the English-speaking world to mean “jail”) would be retired and “jail” would become universal.  Jail as a noun dates from the thirteenth century and the persistence of “gaol” as the preferred form in the UK is attributed to the continued use in statutes and other official documents although there may also have been some reluctance to adopt “jail” because this had come to be regarded as an Americanism.

Some idiomatic and slang uses

Things to find on the web.

A “jailbreak” literally is “an escape from jail” but it was adopted in the ecosystem created by the computer industry to refer to modification to the hardware or firmware of an electronic device (mobile phones, tablets, gaming consoles etc) to allow the installation and use of software not officially supported or explicitly excluded by the manufacturer.  With the coming of AI (artificial intelligence) LLMs (large language models), jailbreak also became the term for a prompt which in some way bypasses any ethical restrictions imposed by the vendor.  In ice hockey, the jailbreak is a rule applied in some leagues under which a penalty is ended if the short-handed team scores; the goal scored in such circumstances is a jailbreak.  Any prisoner who emerges from jail (whether by a jailbreak or by more regular means) is said to be a “jailbird” and there are more than a dozen formal & informal terms for “jail” including slammer, hoosegow, jailhouse, big house, Uncle Sam’s hotel etc.

2022 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat Redeye Widebody Jailbreak in Go Mango with satin black accents over black Laguna leather and Alcantara upholstery.  Because of the design of the front splitter, this model was supplied ex-factory with the one-piece yellow "underwire". 

Unexpectedly, during the 2010s, "underwire" entered the lexicon of automotive slang when it was used to describe a plastic part fitted temporarily as a protective piece.  The yellow plastic fitting (pictured above on the leading edge of the Challenger's splitter) was called a "splitter guard" which was unimaginative but the factory didn't envisage them as consumer items and the term was merely explanatory for the information of those preparing cars for sale.  Installed to prevent damage during shipping, it was part of dealer preparation instructions to remove the pieces but leaving them attached became a cult and some cars were even retro-fitted.  An element in that was the "end of an era" vibe and large number of the vehicles in Dodge's "Last Call" runs (of which there were many) were purchased as investments to be stored away for the day when V8s are no longer produced and collectors will be anxious to pay much for the way things used to be done.  How well that will work out remains to be seen but with the "Last Call" runs typically in batches of more than 3000, most of them weren't, in collectable terms, especially rare.  

2023 Dodge Challenger SRT Demon 170 Jailbreak in Panther Pink with satin black accents over black Alcantara and Laguna leather.

In the Demon 170 Jailbreak program, there were 40 exclusive paint colors and this is the sole example in Panther Pink.  The model was rated at 1025 HP and, with a different design of front splitter, was fitted with a two-piece underwire.  The first Supermarine Spitfires and Hawker Hurricanes which in 1940 fought the Messerschmitt Bf 109s & Bf 110s in English skies during the Battle of Britain were rated at 1030 HP and while the power characteristics of car and aeroplane were very different, the numbers are indicative of 80-odd years of progress.  

The text: "TO BE REMOVED BY DEALER" was molded into some of the splitter guards but after the things picked up their cult following, dealers began checking first with customers.

Dealers cautioned against the trend, noting the pieces weren't specifically molded to ensure a perfect fit so dirt and moisture were prone to being trapped in the gaps and this could scuff the paint.  They were known also as "damage guards" and "scuff guards" but more imaginative souls dubbed them the "underwire" while serious students of such things suggested a better simile might have been "pastie", while acknowledging Chrysler followed the lead of the underwear manufacturers in having available both single and two-piece "underwires" although this was coincidental and deterministic, dictated by the splitter design.  Women have been known to remove from bras especially intrusive underwires (a "comfort thing") but whether on splitters they were kept or discarded might have seemed an improbable subject for dispute but with cars, men always find a reason to argue about something.  Although probably it would have preferred to discuss horsepower, superchargers and such, Chrysler noted the cultural phenomenon and, while obviously reluctant to upset either faction, did issue a statement to a magazine which had requested comment:

"The splitter guards on Dodge Charger and Challenger have taken on a life of their own. They originally made their debut in the 2015 model year to protect the performance fascias on SRT models during shipment from the manufacturing facility to the dealer, and, yes, they are designed to be removed before delivery.  But today, they have their own Facebook page, and many of our performance enthusiasts have active debates on whether to keep or remove them. Some owners say they are even selling them in the aftermarket.  Obviously, they weren't part of the original design, so we started with yellow guards and shifted to pink, but they are still so popular that we may shift them yet again to black. Wherever we land, this is another example of how our customers are passionate about every part of their Dodge muscle cars."

1970 Dodge Challenger hardtop 440 Six Pack in Panther Pink High Impact (code FM3) over black vinyl (code X9) with houndstooth cloth inserts (code 5).  On the Challenger, Panther Pink (FM3) was offered only in the spring of 1970.

By the twenty-first century, long done were the days in the early 1950s when Chrysler Corporation was run by men with an ethos that cars should be designed so “a gentleman can drive one while wearing his hat” and if that dictated stodgy looking vehicles, so be it.  That changed with the release of the 1955 range and from then on, for better or worse it was all about style but by the early 2000s, the company reached the same conclusion as GM (General Motors) and Ford: automotive aesthetics attained their peak in the late 1960s and what’s been done since hasn’t been as good.  Accordingly, for the release of the third generation (although many don’t count the second because it was a badge-engineered Japanese import) Challenger (2008-2023), Dodge produced a most accomplished re-imagining of the first (1970-1974), a vehicle which was a costly commercial failure although that was due more to external conditions than the thing’s dynamic qualities.  Between 2008-2023 the Challenger was produced in a bewildering number of variants, many with some of the longer multi-part model names and it’s doubtful if any but the most devoted fan-boys could either recall or deconstruct the configuration of them all.

Designer colors and more: Publicity shot for the Porsche Sonderwunsch programme; note the rubber laid down on the concrete.

On intriguing piece of nomenclature was “Jailbreak” which Chrysler’s marketing types picked up from the use in various sub-cultures to circumvent manufacturers’ restrictions on devices like smartphones although this was a case of Dodge “hacking itself” (using “hack” loosely) because the Jailbreak “customization program” was explained as a way in which buyers could bypass the previous limitations on what could be ordered with which, enabling them to “mix ’n’ match”.  The concept is of course familiar in the fiscally rarefied air breathed in placed like the Porsche Sonderwunsch (special request) office but it wasn’t new to Detroit, Cadillac in the happy days of the 1960s, despite in a typical year offering literally over a hundred combinations of interior & exterior combinations also offered buyers the chance to make “special requests”.  There's no record of Cadillac attempting to act as the "good taste police" and presumably if some buyer did ask for an aesthetically dubious combination, duly it was built although the factory did refuse to use light colors on dashboard pads or package shelves because of the risk of reflections in the glass.  The deviations from the production line rationalization which was designed for optimal efficiency of course came at a cost and took additional time but everything was priced at a level to ensure the profitability to which Cadillac had become accustomed.

The jailbreak programme was also available on the Charger.

For Dodge the Jailbreak programme was run on similar lines and while not quite an “anything goes” approach, it was more permissive and for the Challenger’s final two seasons (2022-2023), buyers of SRT Hellcat or SRT Hellcat Redeye models could “fine-tune” things like paint, interior trim, wheels, stripes, badges and other items in a way the factory had not previously permitted.  As icing on the jailbreak cake, the SRT Hellcat Redeye Jailbreak cars received a more potent engine, rated at 807 horsepower, a number which would have seemed a fantasy in the era of the second generation Challenger when the most powerful engine offered probably generated (in comparable terms) around 435-445 HP.

The Royal Navy's Battle Cruisers opening fire in the opening stages of the Battle of Jutland, 31 May 1916, (1919), oil on canvas by Lionel Wyllie (1851–1931).

Fought in 1916 between the UK’s Royal Navy and the Navy of the German Empire (the so-called “Second Reich”), the battle of Jutland in 1916 was the closest the world got to the clash on the high seas of fleets of dreadnoughts, an event the navalists and theorists had for a generation be expecting or hankering.  For a variety of reasons it proved anti-climatic (though at a cost of over 8,000 lives) but while a tactical victory for the Germans (in terms of ships sunk or damaged and causalities), strategically the British succeeded in ensuring for the rest of of World War I (1914-1918) their opponents were confined to a pocket of the Baltic, denied access to the North Sea and thus the Atlantic; this enabled the Royal Navy’s blockade of Germany to be maintained.  Summing up, the New York Times concluded: “The prisoner gave his jailor a bloody nose but at the end of the day was back behind bars in his jail cell.”  Barely noticed except in the halls of the admiralties (where it made a great impression) was the vulnerability of the battlecruiser, a class of ship of which much had been expected although at Jutland they were used in a way the theorists who suggested the configuration had neither intended nor recommended.

The concept of a “black jail” is ancient; it’s a jail where people can, for whatever reason, be imprisoned by some agency of state, often in secret and with no recourse to legal remedies or other procedures.  It can be thought of as a particular example of “being disappeared” and the use of such institutions was the origin of the judicial writ of habeas corpus (from the Latin habeas corpus ad subjiciendum (“You (shall) have the body to be subjected to (examination)”) which in the common law tradition can be translated as “bring them before the court so the lawfulness of their detention may be assessed”.  First seen in England in the twelfth century, the writ to this day remains (in Western nations) one of the core protections afforded to citizens.  In 2002, shortly after it invaded the place as an administrative convenience, the US established such a jail in Afghanistan and apparently it was controlled by the Department of Defence’s (now again the Department of War) intelligence office and staff from Army Special Operations although other agencies were known to have provided “specialized services”.  Existing always on a “neither confirm nor deny” basis, the US Black Jail was an example of the way things get done when it’s required to process irregular combatants in extreme conditions.

It illustrated too the use of language: Among nations party to the relevant conventions, whereas prisoners of war (ie those combatants who meet the definition) are held in “PoW (prisoner of war) Camps” and never lose their military status; others can end up in “jails”.  Of course, it can’t be certain organs of the state in some Western countries aren’t still in secret maintaining “black jails”, possibly without the knowledge of elected governments.  The system of concentration camps created during the Third Reich (1933-1945) began as a way for the state to regularize what had unexpectedly “sprung-up” as a number of “black jails” created informally by party members to imprison their many opponents and enemies.  It was a classic example of the essentially criminal, gangster nature of the Nazi state and while the authorities didn’t object to most of those in the black jails being incarcerated, they wanted it done on an organized, professional basis.  Structurally, the operation of the concentration camps was also a microcosm of the whole Nazi project: Those who could send victims to the camps or have them released had no say of what happened within the camps while those running the places could order neither an individual’s jailing nor their release.

Jail juice comes pre-packaged.

In 2011, the Salt Lake Tribune reported a case of botulism in jail juice fermented in a cell in the Utah State Prison, the source traced to a “bad” potato.  The prisoner responsible for the brew (containing powdered juice mix and several types of fresh and canned fruit) told medical staff he added the “two-week old baked potato” because he thought it would “accelerate fermentation”.

Jail juice is prison slang (originally a US form but now widely used, even beyond the English-speaking world) for the various forms of improvised alcoholic beverages (typically fermented) brewed in correctional facilities.  There are other slang forms of the concoctions including “prison hooch”, “swish”, “prison wine”, “toilet wine” & “loaf brew” (some forms of white bread said to be a good additive in the process once crumbed) but most descriptive was “pruno”.  Dating from the late 1930s, the name was derived from the use of prunes, then in ample supply in many US prison kitchens.  The term pruno became generic, later applied regardless of the fruit used in the fermentation.  A “phone jail” is a place (usually in schools) in which the mobile phones of students are locked away for certain durations (which can be short or the whole school day).  “Jailbait” describes someone (almost always female) who is (1) obviously sexually mature yet (2) was (or appeared to be) under the legal age of consent and was (3) considered attractive or seductive.  The term references the legal concept of statutory rape under which an adult engaging in consensual sexual relations with someone under whatever is the relevant age in that jurisdiction can convicted and jailed.

Lindsay Lohan “Mug Shots” coffee mugs.

In November, 2011, in a hearing held at Los Angeles Superior Court Airport branch, Lindsay Lohan was sentenced to 30 days in jail at Lynwood's Century Regional Detention Facility.  The penalty was imposed after she admitted violating the terms of her probation from a 2007 DUI (driving under the influence) case; she had failed to attend community service appointments at a Los Angeles women's shelter.  However, just 4½ hours into the 30-day sentence, she was handed a “get out of jail free card”, released because of chronic over-crowding in California's jail system.  Sometimes, you get lucky.

At least one “Get out of jail free” card has been included in every version of the Monopoly board game since first it was released in 1935 although most editions have featured two, one from the “Chance” stack, the other from “Community Chest”.  What possession of the card confers is the ability (as the name implies) for a player to move on from the jail square without having to throw three doubles (of the dice) in a role or pay a fine although, in certain circumstances, it can be adventitious for a player not to use the card and “remain in jail”, something which sometimes happens IRL (in real life).  From the board game comes the idiomatic use of “a get-out-of-jail-free card” to refer to “a certain privilege or advantage providing relief from an undesirable situation or immunity from punishment or consequences”.  Historically, states have sometimes offered similar devices although they’ve never been available for those accused of serious offences.

Macy’s department store, Herald Square, Manhattan, New York City.

In George Orwell’s (1903-1950) novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), the Ministry of Love was responsible for the dispensation of fear and suffering and its most dreaded institution was Room 101, located in the basement of their headquarters.  Room 101 was a torture chamber in which the ruling party subjected prisoners to their individual worst nightmares and greatest fears, the purpose being finally to destroy any residual resistance.  Less threatening though equally specific is Room 140 at Macy’s department store Herald Square flagship store in Manhattan, New York City.  One of a few private “jails” in New York, those accused of shoplifting are escorted by security guards to Room 140’s cells where they can be held for hours, the stories told suggesting the detained are asked to sign an admission of guilt and pay sometimes hundreds of dollars in “fines”, sometimes without any conclusive proof of an offence.  That may sound medieval but a majority of US states do have on the books legislation which offer retailers often a wide latitude forcefully to hold and subsequently fine suspects, even if, technically, nothing has been stolen or criminal charges have been dropped.  The US industry’s problem is real because as much as US$15 billion is each year lost to shoplifting and the purpose of the laws is both a tacit admission the state would prefer not to be involved in “low dollar value” matters and a way to enable stores to recoup some losses.  Under New York's long-standing law, retailers may collect a penalty of five times the cost of the stolen merchandise (up to US$500 per item), plus as much as US$1,500 if the “recovered” merchandise isn't in a condition to be sold.  A conviction is not a pre-condition to bring a civil claim.

If ever Macy's comes under new management, hopefully the new operators will have a better sense of the sardonic and rename "Room 140" to "Room 101".

In operation, application has been controversial with claims retailers abuse the law by engaging in “racial profiling”, targeting minorities and holding customers for hours as a form of duress; Macy’s has in the past paid a settlement to the state to settle a number of claims.  Macy’s maintain their corporate policies prohibit coercion when recovering fines, recently issuing a statement: “Our policy of exercising our right to pursue a civil recovery payment is consistent with common practice in the retail industry and within the parameters of the law.”  Many retailers detain suspected shoplifters although few have their own jail cells and Macy’s is unusual in requesting the on-the-spot payment of fines.

Vis-a-vis

Vis-a-vis (pronounced vee-zuh-vee or vee-za-vee (French))

(1) A French phrase, literally, “face to face” constructed with the prepositional use of the adjective.

(2) In numismatics (of a coin) having two portraits facing each other.

(3) As a preposition (some pedants disapprove of some of the extensions of meaning), in relation to; compared with; as opposed to.

(4) A type of horse-drawn carriage commonly made by Amish coachbuilders, mostly in the mid-western US; also produced for the tourist trade in various places.  In the horse-drawn era, vis-à-vis carriages were usually described as barouches, berlines or landaus depending on their configuration.

(5) A sofa in the shape of the letter “S” with seats for two, so arranged that the occupants can be face to face while sitting on opposite sides; sometimes called the tête-à-tête (literally head to head).

(6) One’s date or escort at a social event (obsolete).

(7) In limousines, a coach-builder’s term for a rear compartment configured with two rows of seats, facing each other.

1755: From the French prepositional use of the adjective vis-à-vis (face to face) from the Old French vis (face).  Vis is from the Old French viz, from the Latin vītis (vine) from the primitive Indo-European wéhitis (that which twines or bends, branch, switch), from wehiy- (to turn, wind, bend) which influenced also the Latin vieō and the English withe.  The à is from the Old French a, from the Latin ad, from the primitive Indo-European ád (near; at).  The French vis was an obsolete word for “face”, replaced in contemporary French by visage.  The literal meaning has long run in parallel with the modern meanings (“in comparison with; in relation to; as opposed to” although pedants disapprove because of the imprecision).  In French, the original sense is preserved also as real estate jargon meaning the windows of one house are within sighting distance of those of the neighboring house (literally that the occupants can see into each-other’s homes).  In English, the un-accented spelling vis-a-vis is now more common. 

Prostoria Vis-a-vis Sofa Segment.

The companion term tête-à-tête (from the French and literally “head-to-head”) means “a private conversation between two people, usually in an intimate setting”) and thus, strictly speaking, refers to a process rather than a seating arrangement and, since advances in communication technology, one can have a tête-à-tête over a phone call whereas to be vis-a-vis with them, physical closeness is demanded.  However, the two terms are often used interchangeably and the use of vis-a-vis is also sometimes the victim of linguistic promiscuity, suggesting sometimes just about any juxtaposition.  Furniture makers also variously describe the “S” shaped sofas using either term.  Occasionally, those who use vis-a-vis in its classic sense will baffle others as Horace Greeley Hjalmar Schacht (1877–1970) managed while being cross-examined during his trial before the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg (1945-1946):

Prosecutor: The position you took, as I understand it, was that the Wehrmacht was important not so much as an aggressive weapon against strong countries, Austria & Czechoslovakia, as against, or vis-a-vis, if you will, the larger powers, the concert of nations in Europe… in other words, the army stood there… as a weapon… vis-a-vis the Austrians.

Schacht: Not vis-à-vis the Austrians but vis-a-vis the Allies.

Prosecutor: I am a little naïve about these things, I must say.  You say… not vis-a-vis Austria but against the powers?

Schacht: Not against the powers but vis-a-vis the powers.

The rarely convivial Hjalmar Schacht, standing right behind Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945).  Dr Schacht was a confessed Freemason.

Although that exchange was not critical in Schacht securing one of the three acquittals the bench handed down, the judges doubtlessly enjoyed it more than the prosecution.  At various times during the Third Reich, Dr Schacht had served as Minister of Economics, Plenipotentiary General for War Economy and President of the Reichsbank (the German central bank) and he’d been indicted on counts one (conspiracy to commit crimes against peace) & two (crimes against peace).  His acquittal on both disappointed many but there were many technical difficulties in the case (especially the first count which was essentially one of "conspiracy", something with which only the Americans and British were familiar as a legal concept) and the prosecution lacked the expertise in matters of public finance and international banking needed to understand the details, let alone pursue them to the standard needed to convince the judges (except for the Russians, comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) convinced of the guilt of all) to convict.  To be fair, the matters were complex and the financial wizardry with which Schacht concocted the money to allow the Nazi’s rearmament programme to be funded was hardly orthodox monetary policy.  In particular his invention of the Metallurgische Forschungsgesellschaft (thankfully abbreviated to Mefo) which essentially meant the Reichsbank loaned money to the government (which under any other circumstances would have been unlawful) without raising loans or increasing the money supply seemed mysterious to the lawyers.  It was quite a trick and indicative of the intricacies which littered the case.  While awaiting trial at Nuremberg, the defendants had been interviewed by a number of specialists including a psychologist who, among a battery of tests, included relatively simple mental arithmetic.  The tester had been "amazed at Schacht’s inability to do mental arithmetic; he had expected great things from a financial wizard."  This Schacht explained as a virtue rather than an inadequacy, claiming: "Any financial wizard who is good at arithmetic is probably a swindler."  One can see how Schacht convinced the judges to grant him an acquittal.

The vis-a-vis limousines

1967 Lincoln Continental limousine in Black Satin over black leather (front) & light tan cloth (rear), by Lehmann-Peterson of Chicago, built originally for August "Gussie" Busch II (1899–1989; chairman of Anheuser-Busch 1946-1975).  Most of the Lehmann-Peterson “stretched” Continentals were badged “Executive Limousine” which may seem tautological but internally the company distinguished between “executive”, “government” and “funeral” limousines which all differed in the details of their interior fittings although the mechanical structure was shared.

Although the original company was in 1972 absorbed by another corporation, the Lehmann-Peterson brand is a rare survivor in the once well-populated world of coach-builders.  The company was founded in Chicago in 1963 by George Lehmann (1938-1972) & Robert "Pete" Peterson (1924-1995) with the conversion of a single Lincoln Continental sedan into a limousine, subsequently displayed to the Ford Motor Company.  Ford was impressed with the execution and taken especially by the layout of the rear compartment which was a most accomplished execution of the vis-à-vis seating, then rare in US limousines.  Because of the elongation, Ford’s concern was the limousine’s rigidity but their extensive testing at the company’s proving ground (covering a reputed 40,000 miles (64,300 km)) revealed the modified platform was a little stiffer than the donor vehicle, something they chose not to publicize.  That the structural integrity was able to be maintained (indeed, enhanced) was related to the platform of the 1961-1969 Lincolns being designed to accommodate the four-door convertible body available between 1961-1967 and was a development of the huge Lincolns of 1958-1960, then the largest cars ever produced with unitary construction.  Lehmann-Peterson during the 1960s enjoyed great success with their Continental limousines, building almost a thousand for government and private use.  One of the most notable was the popemobile (though that term was not then in use) used by Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) for his one-day visit to New York City on 4 October 1965 to address the United Nations General Assembly, calling for peace and disarmament, a recurring theme in papal pronouncements which seems little more effective now than then.  It was a packed itinerary for the pontiff who as well as celebrating Mass at Yankee Stadium, visited St. Patrick's Cathedral and enjoyed the pleasure of an audience with Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969).

The ex-comrade Marshal Tito 1968 Mercedes-Benz 600 Pullman Landaulet (six-door, long-roof) with jump seats. 

The optional vis-a-vis seating configuration in the rear compartment of the Mercedes-Benz 600 (W100;1963-1981) Pullman was something of a novelty, the competitor limousines from the UK or US built usually with an opulent rear bench for two or three with a pair of utilitarian fold-away (jump or occasional) seats for staff or other temporary occupants (even the infamous X-100, the Lincoln Continental in which John Kennedy (JFK, 1917–1963; US president 1961-1963) was assassinated used jump seats).  There had been the odd exception.  While the limousines or horse-drawn carriages of kings and emperors had side-by-side seats for two to accommodate a consort, the Roman Catholic popes were granted a single, raised, throne-like chair for, unlike less spiritual heads of state, the bachelor Bishop of Rome never (officially) had a consort to accommodate (there were a few concubines but (as far as is known) they predated the automobile.

1957 Imperial Limousine by Ghia (left), 1964 Crown Imperial Limousine by Ghia (centre) and 1967 Imperial Limousine by Theodorou with the unusual folding vis-a-vis seats (right).  

The 600’s much-admired vis-a-vis option arrangement did seem to affect the US coachbuilders, the configuration seating seen more frequently in the years that followed its debut.  Prior to that, the elongated editions of Cadillacs, Packards, Lincolns and Imperials usually had rear compartments (often trimmed in leather unlike the cars from the UK which traditionally used leather only in front (for the chauffeur) with “West of England cloth” for the passengers) equipped with jump seats.  Even the Imperial Limousine built for Chrysler with exquisite care and precision in Italy by Ghia (1957-1965) used them but when production was outsourced to US operators, coach-builders such as Chicago-based Andrew Theodorou included what they called “conversation seats” which, cleverly, were arranged vis-a-vis but folded in such a way that most of the additional space afforded by the conventional jump seats was retained.  During the stretch limousine era in the US, vis-a-vis seating was often used.

Mercedes-Benz 600 Pullman Landaulet (four-door, short-roof) with vis-a-vis seats.  Almost all the 600s delivered to North America, Australia and the UK were trimmed in leather but in Europe and some export markets, mohair wasn't unusual and the factory even made available its famously durable MB-Tex (a high quality vinyl rumored to verge on indestructible) but none were ever so equipped. 

Seated vis-a-vis, Lindsay Lohan (b 1986, right) and her sister Aliana (b 1993, left), enjoying a tête-à-tête (literally, head to head"), La Conversation bakery "& café, West Hollywood, California, April 2012.  Sadly, La Conversation is now closed.

Mercedes-Benz offered the vis-a-vis configuration, in a choice of leather or mohair, in both the 600 Pullman’s closed form and the rare landaulets with their fold-back roof.  The landaulets however were often parade vehicles, used to percolate along crowd-lined boulevards with a prince, president, pope or potentate standing and waving and for this purpose, the vis-a-vis seats intruded too much and the fold-away jump seats, which afforded more standing room, were preferred.  That’s why illustrious 600 Landaulet owners such as comrade Marshall Tito, North Korea’s Great Leader, Dear Leader & Supreme Leader, the Shah of Iran, Robert Mugabe, Saddam Hussein, Mobutu Sese Seko, Idi Amin, Nicolae Ceaușescu, P W Botha and a dozen-odd others of varying degrees of virtue, all eschewed the vis-a-vis arrangement because it made it harder to stand and wave.  Only ever produced in small numbers (although such was the factory’s misplaced optimism they hoped they might make a thousand a year) the 600 was introduced at the Internationale Automobil-Ausstellung (IAA, the  Frankfurt Motor Show, September 1963) and in a run of eighteen-odd years (1964-1981), only 2,677 were made, 2,190 of the standard-length sedan (referred to often as the short-wheelbase (SWB), a relative term given it was over eighteen feet (5.5 m) long), 487 of the twenty and a half foot long Pullmans of which 59 were landaulets.  Of the rare landaulets, most had a convertible top which exposed only rear-most of the back seats, twelve being built with a longer fabric roof which rendered open the entire rear compartment, this dozen often called the “presidential landaulets” although this was never an official name.  Although the specification sometimes varied, the Pullmans with the jump-seats usually were configured with six doors while the vis-a-vis models used four.

Vis-à-vis: Matra 530: The LX (left) and the SX (right).  The SX was France's most notable contribution to the small community of "bug-eyed" cars.