DOCSLIB.ORG

National Register of Historic Places Registration Form

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: _Union Iron Works Historic District_______________________________ Other names/site number: Potrero Works, Union Yard, Bethlehem Steel Yard, Potrero Yard, San Francisco Yard _____________________________________ Name of related multiple property listing: _N/A__________________________________________________________ (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing.) ____________________________________________________________________________ 2. Location Street & number: East of Illinois Street between 18th and 22nd Streets City or town: San Francisco State: California County: San Francisco _ Not For Publication: Vicinity: ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property _X_ meets ___ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: _X_national ___statewide _X_local Applicable National Register Criteria: _X_A ___B _X_C ___D Jenan Saunders, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Date California State Office of Historic Preservation_________________________________ State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting official: Date Title : State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Union Iron Works Historic District San Francisco, California Name of Property County and State _____________________________________________________________________________ 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: entered in the National Register determined eligible for the National Register determined not eligible for the National Register removed from the National Register other (explain:) _____________________ ______________________________________________________________________ Signature of the Keeper Date of Action ____________________________________________________________________________ 5. Classification Ownership of Property (Check as many boxes as apply.) Private: X Public – Local X Public – State Public – Federal Category of Property (Check only one box.) Building(s) X District Site Structure Object Sections 1-6 page 2 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Union Iron Works Historic District San Francisco, California Name of Property County and State Number of Resources within Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing _____38________ ______4_______ buildings ______2_______ ______0_______ sites ______4_______ ______6_______ structures ______0_______ ______0_______ objects _____44______ _____10_______ Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register ____0_____ ____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) _INDUSTRY/manufacturing facility – shipyard/ship repair__________ _DEFENSE/naval facility – shipyard/ship repair __________________ _GOVERNMENT/office – Naval office ___________ _______ _COMMERCE/professional – shipyard office ___________ _______ _INDUSTRY/industrial storage –warehouse ____________ ______ ___________________ Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) _INDUSTRY/manufacturing facility – ship repair ___________ _GOVERNMENT/storage – warehouse _________________ _ _COMMERCIAL/storage – warehouse ________________ __ _COMMERCIAL/professional – artist studio ____________ __ _VACANT/NOT IN USE ________________ _ ___________________ Sections 1-6 page 3 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Union Iron Works Historic District San Francisco, California Name of Property County and State _____________________________________________________________________________ 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions.) _ OTHER - Industrial ______________ ____ _ MODERN MOVEMENT – Moderne ________________ __ _ LATE 19TH and 20TH CENTURY REVIVALS – Beaux Arts _ LATE 19TH and 20TH CENTURY REVIVALS – Classical _ _ LATE VICTORIAN – Renaissance Revival _______ ____ ___________________ Materials: (enter categories from instructions.) Principal exterior materials of the property: foundations concrete; brick; wood roofs metal – iron/steel; tar and gravel; wood walls metal – iron/steel; brick; concrete; wood walls plastic sheeting other terra cotta Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.) ______________________________________________________________________________ Summary Paragraph The Union Iron Works (UIW) shipyard, located at Potrero Point in San Francisco, California, comprises 66 acres.1 Bordered by the San Francisco Bay, it lies at the foot of Potrero Hill in San Francisco’s Central Waterfront District (Figures 1 and 2). The area is primarily industrial, with a power plant and the historic American Can Company building nearby, and is rapidly being transformed to a mixed-use district including commercial, light industrial, and residential uses. The Dogpatch Local Historic District — a primarily residential neighborhood interspersed with commercial establishments — lies several blocks to the west. Third Street, one block west of the district, is the main thoroughfare connecting to the rest of the city, with a light rail line extending public transportation to the area. The district itself features 54 contributing and 1 Union Iron Works moved to Potrero Point in 1884, and the shipyard has taken on many names over the years. For consistency in the following pages, the name Union Iron Works (UIW) is used to indicate all incarnations of the shipyard associated with Pier 70 from 1884 to 1945. The Ownership Map (Figure 3) shows the rough boundary of the Union Iron Works Shipyard in 1884 along with the various owners of the southeastern portion of the district prior to the U.S. Navy purchase of the area in 1940 and the construction of the extant Building 12 Complex. Previous owners included Pacific Rolling Mills (1868-1900), Risdon Iron and Locomotive Works (1900-1912), and U.S. Steel Products Company (1912-1940) who owned the land when the U.S. Destroyer yard was built and operated by the Union Iron Works Company. Section 7 page 4 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Union Iron Works Historic District San Francisco, California Name of Property County and State noncontributing resources, including buildings, piers, slips, cranes, segments of a railroad network, and landscape elements. Most buildings are industrial, constructed of unreinforced brick masonry, concrete, and steel framing with corrugated iron or steel cladding. There are also several architect designed buildings from prominent San Francisco late nineteenth and early twentieth century architectural firms. Also present are modified waterfront structures inherent to shipbuilding and ship repair, including slipways, wharves, and floating drydocks, remnants of the district’s historical function. The property maintains exceptional integrity in terms of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. ____________________________________________________________________________ Narrative Description Site Overview Union Iron Works stands on what was once a small promontory surrounded by deep waters, called Point San Quentin in the 1850s and later renamed Potrero Point. By the late 1870s, Potrero Point was developed with industrial and residential buildings. No filling of the bay or grading of the point occurred prior to the construction of Union Iron Works during the early 1880s.2 In 1884, Union Iron Works
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Miles Poindexter Papers, 1897-1940
    Miles Poindexter papers, 1897-1940 Overview of the Collection Creator Poindexter, Miles, 1868-1946 Title Miles Poindexter papers Dates 1897-1940 (inclusive) 1897 1940 Quantity 189.79 cubic feet (442 boxes ) Collection Number 3828 (Accession No. 3828-001) Summary Papers of a Superior Court Judge in Washington State, a Congressman, a United States Senator, and a United States Ambassador to Peru Repository University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections. Special Collections University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 Telephone: 206-543-1929 Fax: 206-543-1931 [email protected] Access Restrictions Open to all users. Languages English. Sponsor Funding for encoding this finding aid was partially provided through a grant awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities Biographical Note Miles Poindexter, attorney, member of Congress from Washington State, and diplomat, was born in 1868 in Tennessee and grew up in Virginia. He attended Washington and Lee University (undergraduate and law school), receiving his law degree in 1891. He moved to Walla Walla, Washington, was admitted to the bar and began his law practice. He entered politics soon after his arrival and ran successfully for County Prosecutor as a Democrat in 1892. Poindexter moved to Spokane in 1897 where he continued the practice of law. He switched to the Republican Party in Spokane, where he received an appointment as deputy prosecuting attorney (1898-1904). In 1904 he was elected Superior Court Judge. Poindexter became identified with progressive causes and it was as a progressive Republican and a supporter of Theodore Roosevelt that he was elected to the House of Representatives in 1908 and to the Senate in 1910.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.S. Oregon City (CA-122) by James V
    U.S.S. Oregon City (CA-122) By James V. Hillegas-Elting The U.S.S. Oregon City (CA-122) was the namesake of its class of heavy cruisers. Designed, ordered, and built during World War II, it was an advanced warship; but the war emergency was over when the ship entered full service in early 1946. About two-and-a-half years after Secretary Frank Knox announced the navy's plan to build a ship to honor Oregon City, Bethlehem Steel Company in Quincy, Massachusetts, launched the ship on June 9, 1945. The wife of Oregon City Commissioner Raymond P. Caufield was present to sponsor the ship, and singer Bing Crosby attended as part of a war bond drive. The Oregon City class weighed 13,000 tons, was 673’5” long, and had a beam of 70’10”, draft of 26’4”, and speed of 32.6 knots. The class carried a crew of 1,142, and its main armament was nine 8” guns in three turrets (two fore and one aft). For air defense, it had twelve 5” guns, forty-eight 40mm guns, and twenty 20mm guns. The navy planned to build ten ships of the class, but only two others were built as heavy cruisers: the Albany (CA-123), launched on June 30, 1945, and the Rochester (CA-124), launched on August 28, 1945. Once commissioned in February 1946, the Oregon City completed its “shakedown” cruise between Boston and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with Oregon City Mayor J.B. Caldwell among the guests. Based in Boston, the Oregon City served as the flagship of the 4th Fleet from July 1946 until its reassignment to the 2nd Fleet in January 1947.
    [Show full text]
  • City of San Pablo Affordable Housing Strategy
    CITY OF SAN PABLO AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY Prepared for: City of San Pablo November 9, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 5 Effects of COVID-19 on Housing Affordability ..................................................................................... 5 Process for Developing the AHS .......................................................................................................... 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................................... 8 Housing Supply ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Existing Housing Affordability Needs ............................................................................................... 15 Existing Resources, Policies, and Programs .................................................................................... 21 RESIDENTIAL MARKET CONDITIONS IN SAN PABLO ...................................................................... 27 Residential Market Supply and Trends ............................................................................................ 27 Opportunities and Constraints for Development ............................................................................ 34 OVERVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Ship Names: Background for Congress
    Navy Ship Names: Background for Congress (name redacted) Specialist in Naval Affairs December 13, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RS22478 Navy Ship Names: Background for Congress Summary Names for Navy ships traditionally have been chosen and announced by the Secretary of the Navy, under the direction of the President and in accordance with rules prescribed by Congress. Rules for giving certain types of names to certain types of Navy ships have evolved over time. There have been exceptions to the Navy’s ship-naming rules, particularly for the purpose of naming a ship for a person when the rule for that type of ship would have called for it to be named for something else. Some observers have perceived a breakdown in, or corruption of, the rules for naming Navy ships. On July 13, 2012, the Navy submitted to Congress a 73-page report on the Navy’s policies and practices for naming ships. For ship types now being procured for the Navy, or recently procured for the Navy, naming rules can be summarized as follows: The first Ohio replacement ballistic missile submarine (SBNX) has been named Columbia in honor of the District of Columbia, but the Navy has not stated what the naming rule for these ships will be. Virginia (SSN-774) class attack submarines are being named for states. Aircraft carriers are generally named for past U.S. Presidents. Of the past 14, 10 were named for past U.S. Presidents, and 2 for Members of Congress. Destroyers are being named for deceased members of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard, including Secretaries of the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • The USS Arizona Memorial
    National Park Service Teaching with Historic Places U.S. Department of the Interior Remembering Pearl Harbor: The USS Arizona Memorial Remembering Pearl Harbor: The USS Arizona Memorial (National Park Service Photo by Jayme Pastoric) Today the battle-scarred, submerged remains of the battleship USS Arizona rest on the silt of Pearl Harbor, just as they settled on December 7, 1941. The ship was one of many casualties from the deadly attack by the Japanese on a quiet Sunday that President Franklin Roosevelt called "a date which will live in infamy." The Arizona's burning bridge and listing mast and superstructure were photographed in the aftermath of the Japanese attack, and news of her sinking was emblazoned on the front page of newspapers across the land. The photograph symbolized the destruction of the United States Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor and the start of a war that was to take many thousands of American lives. Indelibly impressed into the national memory, the image could be recalled by most Americans when they heard the battle cry, "Remember Pearl Harbor." More than a million people visit the USS Arizona Memorial each year. They file quietly through the building and toss flower wreaths and leis into the water. They watch the iridescent slick of oil that still leaks, a drop at a time, from ruptured bunkers after more than 50 years at the bottom of the sea, and they read the names of the dead carved in marble on the Memorial's walls. National Park Service Teaching with Historic Places U.S. Department of the Interior Remembering Pearl Harbor: The USS Arizona Memorial Document Contents National Curriculum Standards About This Lesson Getting Started: Inquiry Question Setting the Stage: Historical Context Locating the Site: Map 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 16 Lc 39 1378S
    16 LC 39 1378S The Senate Committee on Transportation offered the following substitute to HR 1052: A RESOLUTION 1 Dedicating certain portions of the state highway system; and for other purposes. 2 PART I 3 WHEREAS, our nation's security continues to rely on patriotic men and women who put 4 their personal lives on hold in order to place themselves in harm's way to protect the 5 freedoms that all United States citizens cherish; and 6 WHEREAS, Corporal Matthew Britten Phillips played a vital role in leadership and 7 demonstrated a deep personal commitment to the welfare of the citizens of Georgia; and 8 WHEREAS, Corporal Phillips was born on April 13, 1981, the beloved son of Michael and 9 Freida Phillips, and attended West Hall High School in Gainesville, Georgia; and 10 WHEREAS, he served as a guardian of this nation's freedom and liberty with the United 11 States Armed Forces, valiantly and courageously protecting his fellow Americans with the 12 173rd Airborne Brigade; and 13 WHEREAS, Corporal Phillips made the ultimate sacrifice during the Battle of Wannat when 14 his unit was ambushed by the Taliban; and 15 WHEREAS, Corporal Phillips embodied the spirit of service, willing to find meaning in 16 something greater than himself, and it is abundantly fitting and proper that this remarkable 17 and distinguished American be recognized appropriately by dedicating an intersection in his 18 memory. 19 PART II 20 WHEREAS, the State of Georgia lost one of its finest citizens and most dedicated law 21 enforcement officers with the tragic passing
    [Show full text]
  • A History of 119 Infantry Brigade in the Great War with Special Reference To
    The History of 119 Infantry Brigade in the Great War with Special Reference to the Command of Brigadier-General Frank Percy Crozier by Michael Anthony Taylor A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of History School of History and Cultures College of Arts and Law University of Birmingham September 2016 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. Abstract 119 Brigade, 40th Division, had an unusual origin as a ‘left-over’ brigade of the Welsh Army Corps and was the only completely bantam formation outside 35th Division. This study investigates the formation’s national identity and demonstrates that it was indeed strongly ‘Welsh’ in more than name until 1918. New data on the social background of men and officers is added to that generated by earlier studies. The examination of the brigade’s actions on the Western Front challenges the widely held belief that there was an inherent problem with this and other bantam formations. The original make-up of the brigade is compared with its later forms when new and less efficient units were introduced.
    [Show full text]
  • Additional Historic Information the Doolittle Raid (Hornet CV-8) Compiled and Written by Museum Historian Bob Fish
    USS Hornet Sea, Air & Space Museum Additional Historic Information The Doolittle Raid (Hornet CV-8) Compiled and Written by Museum Historian Bob Fish AMERICA STRIKES BACK The Doolittle Raid of April 18, 1942 was the first U.S. air raid to strike the Japanese home islands during WWII. The mission is notable in that it was the only operation in which U.S. Army Air Forces bombers were launched from an aircraft carrier into combat. The raid demonstrated how vulnerable the Japanese home islands were to air attack just four months after their surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. While the damage inflicted was slight, the raid significantly boosted American morale while setting in motion a chain of Japanese military events that were disastrous for their long-term war effort. Planning & Preparation Immediately after the Pearl Harbor attack, President Roosevelt tasked senior U.S. military commanders with finding a suitable response to assuage the public outrage. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a difficult assignment. The Army Air Forces had no bases in Asia close enough to allow their bombers to attack Japan. At the same time, the Navy had no airplanes with the range and munitions capacity to do meaningful damage without risking the few ships left in the Pacific Fleet. In early January of 1942, Captain Francis Low1, a submariner on CNO Admiral Ernest King’s staff, visited Norfolk, VA to review the Navy’s newest aircraft carrier, USS Hornet CV-8. During this visit, he realized that Army medium-range bombers might be successfully launched from an aircraft carrier.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Judy Baca
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Judy Baca, SPARC and A Chicana Mural Movement: Reconstructing U.S. History Through Public Art A dissertation in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in History by Juan Pablo Mercado 2018 ã Copyright by Juan Pablo Mercado 2018 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Judy Baca, SPARC and A Chicana Mural Movement: Reconstructing U.S. History Through Public Art by Juan Pablo Mercado Doctor of Philosophy in History University of California, Los Angeles, 2018 Professor Juan Gómez-Quiñones, Chair This dissertation is about the uses and function of public art and makes the argument that public art should be viewed as an historical project. When developed within the framework of a collaborative community project with a thoughtful consideration to the experiences, values, and aspirations of community members, these projects challenge neocolonial tenets of exploitative labor conditions, racism, homophobia and sexism. By imagining public art as an innovative process that crosses the boundaries of social justice, history, and collective memory, Judith F. Baca established, and the Social and Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) employed a form of remembering that served as an essential component to understanding how communities envisioned themselves, their struggles, and their ability to transform history. Reimaging certain flashpoints in U.S. history through the historical projects of public murals urges a more nuanced consideration of the past that dislodges narratives of de jure and de facto discrimination and ii racial violence. What results from this reconsideration is a construction of multiple histories that challenge universally venerated, yet often distorted legacies of this nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Oral History Office University of California the Bancroft Library Berkeley, California
    Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California Joyce Rutherford Rosie the Riveter World War II Home Front Oral History Project This interview series was funded in part by a contract with the National Park Service, and with the support of individual donors. Interview conducted by Sam Redman in 2011 Copyright © 2016 by The Regents of the University of California Since 1954 the Regional Oral History Office has been interviewing leading participants in or well-placed witnesses to major events in the development of Northern California, the West, and the nation. Oral History is a method of collecting historical information through tape-recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. The tape recording is transcribed, lightly edited for continuity and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewee. The corrected manuscript is bound with photographs and illustrative materials and placed in The Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley, and in other research collections for scholarly use. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account, offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is reflective, partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ********************************* All uses of this manuscript are covered by a legal agreement between The Regents of the University of California and Joyce Rutherford, dated December 7, 2011. The manuscript is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California, Berkeley.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the William A. Baker Collection
    Guide to The William A. Baker Collection His Designs and Research Files 1925-1991 The Francis Russell Hart Nautical Collections of MIT Museum Kurt Hasselbalch and Kara Schneiderman © 1991 Massachusetts Institute of Technology T H E W I L L I A M A . B A K E R C O L L E C T I O N Papers, 1925-1991 First Donation Size: 36 document boxes Processed: October 1991 583 plans By: Kara Schneiderman 9 three-ring binders 3 photograph books 4 small boxes 3 oversized boxes 6 slide trays 1 3x5 card filing box Second Donation Size: 2 Paige boxes (99 folders) Processed: August 1992 20 scrapbooks By: Kara Schneiderman 1 box of memorabilia 1 portfolio 12 oversize photographs 2 slide trays Access The collection is unrestricted. Acquisition The materials from the first donation were given to the Hart Nautical Collections by Mrs. Ruth S. Baker. The materials from the second donation were given to the Hart Nautical Collections by the estate of Mrs. Ruth S. Baker. Copyright Requests for permission to publish material or use plans from this collection should be discussed with the Curator of the Hart Nautical Collections. Processing Processing of this collection was made possible through a grant from Mrs. Ruth S. Baker. 2 Guide to The William A. Baker Collection T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Biographical Sketch ..............................................................................................................4 Scope and Content Note .......................................................................................................5 Series Listing
    [Show full text]
  • The 60 Year Saga of Miller/Knox Regional Shoreline
    www.PointRichmondHistory.org Vol. XXXII No. 1 June/July/August, 2013 $3.00 In this issue: The 60 Year Saga of Miller/Knox Regional Shoreline The above map shows the areas that the East Bay Regional Parks folks plan to “re-vision” Miller/Knox Park Point Richmond History Association Contents of this Issue From the From the President 1 President Members 2 By Mid Dornan Editor’s Notes 3 Seeing members and guests and putting A-Mid Trivia 4 faces to their names at our Annual Point Church News 6 Richmond History Meeting in May makes the Womens Westside Improvement 10 event personal. Those attending from out-of- town are especially appreciated. At the Masquers Playhouse 13 The Board of Directors for 2013 - 2014 History of Miller/Knox Park 14 elected at the meeting are: President, Mid Dornan; 1st Vice A Day in the Park 16 President, Pat Pearson; 2nd Vice President, George Coles Brooks Island II 19 Heinz Lankford; Joint Secretaries, Tom Frank Spenger, Sr. 22 Piazza/Mary Cosby; Treasurer, Kathe Keihn. Membership; Pam Wilson and Archives, 90’s Club 24 Museum Manager and Staff Coordinator, Cards and Emails 24 Bonnie Jo Cullison. After our Editor Gary Birthdays 25 has a chance to experience and enjoy his new retirement from his business ALKO office Deaths 27 supply in Berkeley, we expect even more in Calendar 28 our great newsletter. Our knowledgeable Kaiser historian speaker, Steve Gilford, entertained us with his stories about the Richmond shipyards and ships, focusing on the S.S. Stephen Hopkins. Guests chatted with him over refreshments which included a special recipe for ‘History Bars‘ which is to be found elsewhere in this issue.
    [Show full text]