From the 1927 dedication of Farrah Hall as the new home of the University of Alabama’s law school until its relocation to the Bryant Drive campus in 1978, University of Alabama law students attended classes seated on these signature benches.
Intended to inspire students to appreciate the historical foundations of American law, the benches evoke a sense of tradition one feels when imagining Sir William Blackstone teaching law at Oxford in 1753 or notions of the English Inns of Court.
The Farrah Hall Benches Exhibit can be viewed in person at the Bounds Law Library, study room 207.
The following post features an essay by 2023 UA Law graduate, Marshal Trigg, who is currently a nonprofit attorney in Washington, D.C.
Among legal historians there is a long-standing controversy over whether (or how much) of Roman law was “received” into the Common Law. Marshal Trigg’s “A Small Reception” surveys the development of Roman Law and Canon Law in the middle ages, and shows the influence of the Roman legal concepts on such innovations as Henry II’s “Assize of Novel Disseisin” and also on the works of such English jurists as Ranulf de Glanvill (d. 1190) and Henri de Bracton (1210-1268). By the 14th century, elements of Roman law had taken root in English law, notably in the development of the Court of Chancery. Chancery, in turn, was a feature of English law that was transplanted successfully to the new world. Alabama’s Chancery Courts, for instance, were active into the twentieth century (Alabama Code of 1907, §§ 3042 ff.). That alone makes the history of “reception” part of our own legal heritage.
A Small Reception in Westminster
by Marshal Trigg
Introduction
Civil law and common law jurisdictions differ in many important respects. A chief difference is the matter of inheritance: where civil law descends ultimately from the Roman legal tradition, common law is plainly derived from English tradition. Where the other nations of Europe received the Roman law, England went its own way. Still, scholars have long debated the question of a possible “reception” of Roman law in England. The question itself requires some unpacking: what constitutes “reception,” or “Roman,” or even “law”? For the purposes of this discussion, each of these terms will be considered in a broad sense. Thus, “reception” will be discussed as a matter of degree of influence, “Roman” will span the range from original Roman texts to later derivative sources such as the canon law, and “law” will encompass an expansive sweep of legal society, principles, and pedagogy. Once these definitions are applied and appropriate inquiries are conducted, it becomes clear that England underwent a reception of its own.
Goethe supposedly compared the Roman civil law to a duck: “Sometimes it is visible, swimming prominently on the surface of the water; at other times it is hidden, diving amid the depths. But always it is there.”[1] Yet if all Romans are ducks, not all ducks are Roman, and one occasionally might find a strange cryptid bobbing along the Thames. Here then, we must call on the mighty taxonomizing powers of the legal historian.
Early Antecedents
Perhaps any discussion of an English reception of Rome should take care not to elide the fact that Britain, at one point in its antique past, was quite literally subject to Roman jurisdiction as an imperial province.[2] Far from some forgotten, far-flung outpost, the island was studded with prestigious Roman courts and officials, and Roman jurists of the second and third century A.D. discussed British cases.[3] Could this early acquaintance have sown the germ of a distinctly Latin legal mode surviving the subsequent displacement via Anglo-Saxon dominion? Certainly, these Germanic settlers left no Roman institution unrazed.[4] It is possible yet that the Germanic newcomers absorbed certain Roman customs and thinking from the native British. The scant written laws from the early Saxon period would seem to discourage examination, though scholars have attempted it.[5]
However, this level of speculative inference strains the bounds of our inquiry. It is enough to say that Rome made its second contact with Britain in 597 when Pope Gregory I sent St. Augustine (“the second of that name who attained to ecclesiastical celebrity”) to reintroduce Christianity to its population.[6] Consequently, the Kentish king Æthelberht and ten thousand of his subjects adopted the Roman religion.[7] In the Venerable Bede’s telling, Æthelberht shortly after set in writing the first Kentish law code juxta exempla Romanorum (“according to the Roman mode”).[8] This may appear at first a confusing observation, as the code betrayed little direct Roman influence and in truth evinced a great deal of Frankish influence instead.[9] Rather, the very fact of providing a written legal code signified in itself a dramatic step toward Romano-Christian enlightenment.[10]
Even so, a proper Romanist would find much lacking in the brief Kentish law code. A representative example is reproduced below:
10: If someone lies with one of the king’s female slaves, he shall pay as compensation 50 shillings.
11: If she is a corn-grinding slave, he shall pay as compensation 25 shillings. If she be of the third rank 12 shillings.[11]
Thus, the much-vaunted Code of Æthelberht could fairly be described as something like a glorified penal code resting on the vast edifice of an unwritten customary law.[12] Nevertheless, it was an important beginning. In the following centuries, the study of Roman law would be nurtured in cathedral schools like that of York.[13]
Around the year 900, Alfred the Great, King of the Anglo-Saxons, assembled many old English laws and roughly synthesized them into a Mosaic framework.[14] In a prologue, Alfred asserted a continuity bridging international church canons and secular English law: “[M]any synods assembled throughout the world… Then in many synods they ordained the penalty for many human misdeeds, and in many synod-books wrote here one regulation, there another.”[15] If the legal orientation of the developing English kingdoms had been grossly Teutonic and provincial up to this point, here it was becoming Christian and, however slightly, cosmopolitan, i.e., moving toward romanitas.
III. Of Normans and Romans
The triumph of the Normans in the Battle of Hastings in 1066 represented in many respects a significant point of departure in the English realm, not the least of these being the centralizing tendencies of Norman administration. Among many reforms, William the Conqueror wrested the ecclesiastical causes from the old Saxon hundred courts and assigned jurisdiction instead to the “canones of the catholic church” to be administered by the decidedly romish ecclesiastical courts.[16] Centralized royal courts were soon established,[17] and these courts were generally staffed by men possessing a clerical background and a grasp of Latin.[18]
Near the same time, in the latter half of the eleventh century, interesting developments were brewing on the Continent. In 1054, the Christian church was beset by a schism between its Roman and Byzantine centers.[19] Subsequently, the Western church elected to substantially aggrandize the political and legal powers of the Vatican, resulting ultimately in “the first modern Western legal system”.[20] Prior to the late eleventh century, “law” did not yet exist as a distinct body of jurisprudence plainly distinguishable from prevailing customs and institutions.[21] This state of affairs was overturned rapidly in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries, significantly as a response to Pope Gregory VII’s, assertion of papal supremacy in 1075.[22] By his declaration of legal supremacy over all of Christendom, the path to a universal system of law was laid.[23] Thus the Roman Catholic Church embarked on an ambitious project to systematize its canon law as a set of ordered principles, spurring the creation of the first law schools in western Europe.[24]
Lacking much in the way of satisfactory materials, these schools drew substantially on the freshly rediscovered Digest of Justinian, the compiled laws of that sixth-century Eastern Roman emperor.[25] Knowledge of Roman law had already been available, but the Digest was set apart from other sources by virtue of being a comprehensive statement of the law.[26] Still, the bare text of the Digest did not expressly establish a general theory of law or politics.
It was the task of the glossators, those juristic assimilators of the old Roman law, to pore over the ancient laws while extracting widely applicable principles.[27] It was in this way that the new law schools set out to reconstruct the science of the Roman law. The same sort of exegesis would come to be applied to the canon law, drawing on sources ranging from Roman law, church canons, papal curia materials, biblical scripture, and contemporary theologians.[28]
Canon law came into its own with the publication of Gratian’s Decretum near 1140, an authoritative collection of canon law compiled and glossed with the intent of reconciling apparent contradictions.[29] By the middle of the twelfth century, law students and teachers were divided into two groups, canonists, who focused their studies chiefly on the canon law, and civilians, who erred more strongly on the side of the Roman civil law.[30] Roman law, not being the positive law of any institution in medieval Europe, was often referred to as “the handmaiden of canon law”.[31] The two disciplines would remain closely connected, as civil law became “theologized” and canon law became “Romanized”.[32] This developing romano-canonical jurisprudence would come to be known as the ius commune, or “common law” of Europe.[33]
It is with great sadness that we announce the death of David E. Alsobrook at the age of seventy-five. A contributor to Litera Scripta, David was a consummate Public Historian. In addition to working as a supervising archivist at the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library in Atlanta, he was the founding director, successively, of the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum and the William J. Clinton Presidential Library and Museum. Just last year, David reflected upon his long archival experience in a book titled Presidential Archivist: A Memoir (Mercer University Press, 2020). After retiring from the National Archives and Records Administration, David served as director of the Museum of Mobile from 2007 until his retirement in 2015.
David was a prominent Alabama historian. His finished his doctorate in history at Auburn in 1983. His dissertation “Alabama’s Port City: Mobile in the Progressive Era, 1896-1917” remains a fine example of urban history. His study Southside: Eufaula’s Cotton Mill Village and Its People, 1890-1945 (Mercer University Press, 2017) chronicled the difficult lives of millworkers while giving a human face to life and labor in a company town.
Such scholarship did not go unnoticed. David’s 2004 Alabama Review article on Mobile’s 1902 street car boycott won the Alabama Historical Association’s Milo B. Howard Award. His book Southside won the Association’s Clinton Jackson Coley book award in 2018. That year (2017-2018) he served as president of the Alabama Historical Association.
In addition to all of the above, David Alsobrook was the embodiment of what it means to be an Auburn person. As the first graduate of Auburn’s storied Archival Training Program, he sought to live up to Dr. George Petrie’s “Auburn Creed,” which begins: “I believe that this is a practical world and that I can count only on what I earn. Therefore, I believe in work, hard work.” On the other hand, several people who have commented on David’s passing remarked upon his affability and kindness.
See below for his Litera Scripta post titled “Jessie Gillis Parish: A Woman Voter of Barbour County, Alabama.”
The following is an obituary of David Robb (1937-2021), a scholar who made use of our Frank M. Johnson materials and visited the John C. Payne Special Collections facility on more than one occasion.
David Metheny Robb, Jr. was born on April 12, 1937 in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and died on March 5th at Huntsville Hospital due to complications from COVID-19. David Robb and his wife Frances Osborn Robb are well-known in Alabama for their work in museums and for their efforts in historic preservation. Their joint projects included a finely executed display on Judge Frank M. Johnson, Jr. in the Middle District of Alabama Federal Courthouse in Montgomery, and the conversion of Congressman Carl A. Elliott, Sr.’s house in Jasper into a museum.
David Robb graduated from Episcopal Academy in 1955, and from Princeton University in 1959, where he majored in art history and developed a lifelong love of the graphic arts, printing, and travel. He served as a Naval Air Intelligence Officer on the aircraft carrier USS Oriskany for three-and-a-half years. On leaving the Navy, he worked as curator for noted collector and philanthropist Paul Mellon. After he married Frances Osborn Robb of Birmingham, they attended Yale University where they received Master of Arts degrees in art history.
Robb then received a Ford Foundation Fellowship at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis. In 1969, he was appointed founding curator at the new Kimbell Museum in Fort Worth, Texas and moved up the ranks to Acting Director in 1979. In 1983 Robb was appointed director of Telfair Academy in Savannah, Georgia, where he also oversaw two historic buildings, Telfair Academy and Owens-Thomas House. In 1985 he was appointed director of the Huntsville Museum of Art. While there he organized several initiatives, including the planning of a new stand-alone building for the museum. He retired in 1995, taking on special projects, many with Frances, and traveling in England and France.
Since then, Robb presented papers at professional meetings, published in Alabama Heritage magazine, and served on state boards, including the Alabama Historical Association and the Friends of the State Archives. David Robb will be buried at Maple Hill Cemetery in Huntsville, Alabama. Donations in his memory may be made to the Alabama Historical Association and the Alabama Department of Archives and History.
The editors of Litera Scripta offer their sincere condolences to Frances Robb and salute the memory of David Robb, gentleman and scholar.
From time to time we like to post historical essays written by recent Law School graduates. Today’s post is a work of intellectual history by Christopher Collins, a 2019 graduate of the University of Alabama School of Law who is currently a graduate student in the UA College of Communication and Information Sciences. Chris is working on his MLIS. The title of his essay is “Alfred’s Doombook: The Anglo-Saxon Foundations of Magna Carta.”
Alfred’s Doombook: The Anglo-Saxon Foundations of Magna Carta
Magna Carta might often be misunderstood, but far worse is that King Alfred’s Doombook[1] is so neglected. A.E. Dick Howard wrote that Magna Carta “became and remains today one of the great birthrights of men who love liberty.”[2] But on June 15, 1215, it had nowhere near the significance it has assumed in recent years––its force of law actually declined over the next several centuries.[3] J.C. Holt even opened his magnum opus on the Charter with the statement that “Magna Carta was a failure.”[4] And yet we know it as Magna Carta––the Great Charter; but it was less an act of greatness than a preservation of the status quo[5] and perhaps even a bad-faith baronial power grab.[6]
Much of Magna Carta’s influence derives from the fact that it was thought for many centuries to be the oldest extant consolidated written statement of English law.[7] Even after the rediscovery of the old Anglo-Saxon laws, Magna Carta continued to be worshipped as “a sacred text, the nearest approach to an irrepealable ‘fundamental statute’ that England has ever had.”[8] King Alfred’s Doombook, however, is the oldest extant consolidated written statement of English law, and it is time to rediscover it as the true founding document of Anglo-American legal heritage.[9]
This paper aims to show that while Magna Carta is rightfully revered as “a foundation stone of English and American legal rights,”[10] it is not the origin of our liberty-loving rights. Magna Carta is rather a later stone placed upon an Anglo-Saxon legal foundation started by Alfred’s compilation of laws, the Doombook. King Alfred compiled these laws toward the end of the ninth century.[11] He consolidated longstanding customs and practices from the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms and added Biblical authority.[12] Alfred’s goal in promulgating his Doombook aimed at uniting the English amid existential threats posed by large-scale Viking invasions. And the English kings seemed to base their authority partly on continuity with their predecessors––the legitimate king preserved the traditions of his predecessors, and this is the topic of Part I of this paper.
Kings Alfred and John actually had a great deal in common, as will be discussed in Part II, though history has been kind to the former and critical of the latter. Both were unlikely kings, favored by their fathers and dutiful to their brothers. But Alfred inherited a kingdom on the verge of annihilation whereas John would be crowned king of an efficient and almost automated governing apparatus.[13] This apparatus owed much to the reforms of John’s father, Henry II, but the system itself was built on the works of Alfred and the laws of his Doombook.
Parts III and IV will discuss Magna Carta and the Doombook. Part III will mention two fields that show no Anglo-Saxon precedent: the Charter’s “immediate use” provisions and the introduction of environmental law into the realm of English legislation. Part IV will discuss four common threads that show a continuum between Magna Carta and Alfred’s Doombook. These threads involve the regulation of customs and immigration; the rights of widows and the freedom of marriage; the idea that the king is not above the law and his need to seek counsel from his subjects; and the idea of due process and the equal application of the law of the land.
Every influence English law encountered, including Norman influence, has left an imprint on its character, but the Conquest merely wove itself into the established Anglo-Saxon fabric.[14] England did not begin anew when William and his Normans conquered the island.[15] The Anglo-Saxon system persisted and continued to provide the matrix within which English law would grow.[16] Magna Carta, like many famous tapestries from the Norman and Angevin era, is made of intricate stitching. But the first stitches to Magna Carta were not Norman or Angevin––they were Alfred’s.[17]
We regret to report the passing, on June 22, of Donald Richard Bounds, aged 89 years. Born November 13, 1928 in Illinois, Mr. Bounds graduated from UMS High School in Mobile and was a 1951 graduate of the University of Alabama. After receiving his undergraduate degree, he served in a medical unit of the U.S. Army during the Korean War. Mr. Bounds graduated from the University of Alabama School of Law in 1956; in law school he was a member of the Alabama Law Review.
In 1958 Donald Richard Bounds and Robert T. Cunningham, Sr. founded the law firm of Cunningham Bounds, LLC, which would become one of the most prominent and successful plaintiff’s law firms in the nation. Subsequently Mr. Bounds would serve as president of the Mobile Bar Association, president of the Alabama Trial Lawyers’ Association, and member of the Board of Governors of the Association of Trial lawyers of America. In addition he was a fellow of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers and a member of the International Society of Barristers, the American College of Trial Lawyers, and the American Bar Foundation. In the midst of this exemplary service to the legal profession, Mr. Bounds found time for many charitable activities. The School of Law benefitted from his generosity, including the endowment of a student scholarship in memory of his son Donald Richard Bounds, Jr. In 1998 the Bounds Law Library was named in memory of Donald Richard Bounds, Jr. and Russell Hampton Bounds.
Mr. Bounds is survived by his wife Anita Chamberlain Bounds, his sister Dorothea Bounds Long, and several nieces, nephews, grand-nieces and grand-nephews. A service in his memory will be held at 1:00 p.m. at St. James Episcopal Church in Fairhope, Alabama.
In response to our recent posting of D. Pierson’s 1902 “Lifetime” voter registration certificate, our friend David E. Alsobrook sent us an image of his great grandmother’s 1929 certificate. As you can see, it was issued to Jessie Gillis Parish of Barbour County, Alabama, on January 3, 1929. Jessie Parish is one of the individuals discussed in Alsobrook’s forthcoming book Southside: Eufaula’s Cotton Mill Village and Its People, 1890-1945 (Mercer University Press). Following a path blazed by Dr. Wayne Flynt and others, this work will provide “an in-depth-examination of life, loss, and work in a self-contained Southern cotton mill village.” Such studies are necessary if we are to understand the legacies—cultural, political, and religious—left to us by “ordinary” Alabamians. We asked David to give us some background on Jessie Parish, who after all was a member of Alabama’s first generation of women voters. Here is what he said:
Although Jessie Parish’s voter registration certificate indicates that she was born on August 18, 1872, this date probably is incorrect. Her tombstone in Eufaula’s Fairview Cemetery records her date of birth as 1871. However, U.S. Census records for Barbour County reveal that she was born in 1869, in Glennville, Alabama, a few miles north of Eufaula. Her parents were Malcolm D. Gillis and Queen Ann Stephenson, who had three other children born between 1873 and 1881. Malcolm Gillis was a Confederate veteran and a cotton overseer in Glennville. Jessie married Thomas Mallie Parish in Eufaula in 1898. They had a daughter, Oma Parish Alsobrook (1899-1969), my grandmother. Jessie, Mallie, and Oma all worked at Donald Comer’s Cowikee Mills in Eufaula. The accompanying photo of the Parishes was taken around 1909. The Parishes were typical of the families who eked out a subsistence living in the cotton mills and lived in the village known as “Southside.” Jessie Parish probably was the first woman in her family to cast a ballot in Alabama.
Jessie Parish died in Eufaula on October 19, 1939. I only knew her from my grandmother’s occasional comments. However, her mother, Queen Anne Gillis, lived for many years afterward, and my grandmother remembers her well. I suspect that Jessie probably met her future husband, Thomas Mallie Parish, on the job in old Eufaula Cotton Mill, owned by Capt. John Tullis.
Jessie was a straight-laced Baptist her entire life, and her husband Mallie was a Methodist. At her funeral, the ministers from the two Southside “mission” churches officiated–Washington Street Methodist and Second Baptist. After Donald Comer acquired the “busted” Eufaula Cotton Mill in 1909 and changed its name to Cowikee Mill, Jessie and Mallie continued to work together there or possibly later at Cowikee Mill No. 3 in Eufaula. These are the only basic details I know involving Jessie Gillis Parish. She and Mallie were typical mill operatives–they worked hard all of their lives, and the debilitating nature of the work took a toll on their bodies, and their daughter Oma eventually joined them in the mill.
Like so many other mill families in Eufaula, the Parishes are rather invisible and anonymous in historical annals. As you’ll see in the pages of Southside, my grandmother Oma told me a lot about her father Mallie and the other Parishes, but for whatever reason, she seldom talked about her mother.
Over the past year the Litera Scripta editors and research assistants have worked with their counterparts at the University of Virginia Law Library to create a website presenting the correspondence of Daniel J. Meador (1926-2013) and his pupil Ronald Sokol. A native Alabamian and a 1951 graduate of the University of Alabama School of Law, Meador was a distinguished law professor whose service at the University of Virginia began in 1957 and continued until 1994, interrupted by a year in England as a Fulbright fellow (1965), four years as Dean of the University of Alabama School of Law (1966-1970), and two years as Assistant Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice (1977-1979). During most of this period Meador corresponded with his former pupil Ronald Sokol (UVA Law, class of 1962). Like Meador, an habitual student and a prolific author, Sokol has traveled the world studying languages, laws, and cultures; but most of his time since 1970 has been spent in Aix-en-Provence, where he has built up a substantial practice in French and international law. Sokol’s correspondence with Meador features discussions of politics, approaches to law (French, American, and Cambodian), and the nature and flaws of institutions, as well as insights into regional cultures, writing, and travel, and reflections upon the passage of time. Please see below for the link to the website, which is titled “The Letters of Daniel Meador and Ronald Sokol.”
We announce with much sadness the death of University of Alabama School of Law graduate and former Special Collections Research Assistant Brad E. LeMarr. Brad died on January 20, 2015, at the age of forty. Possessed of a truly versatile mind, Brad earned advanced degrees in History and Classics in addition to the JD (class of 2008) and MLS that he received from the University of Alabama. He was admitted to the state bars of Alabama and Oklahoma, but his true love was classical history, especially that of the late Roman Republic. Kind and attentive to his colleagues at the Bounds Law Library, Brad applied intellect and intuition to the processing of collections. He also participated with enthusiasm in the production of our seventh Occasional Publication, titled A Goodly Heritage: Judges and Historically Significant Decisions of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, 1804-1955 (2010). Requiescat in pace!
Welcome to Litera Scripta, the Bounds Law Library Special Collections blog! We hope to share with you our many books, manuscripts, and artifacts. We’re not particular about form or format. At Bounds, we preserve and catalog a diverse collection of documents and objects, all with an eye to the evolution of common law. Our primary focus is on legal history in Alabama; but we’re also interested in law and society in the south and the nation, in the English roots of constitutionalism and the rule of law, and in the history of the civil law.
Thus we’ll be blogging about our collections of early Alabama lawbooks; our Tudor-Stuart treatises, abridgements, and reporters; our first edition Blackstone; our collections of lawyers’ notebooks and Alabama judges’ scrapbooks. That’s just a start! Soon, for instance, we’ll unveil an assemblage of books and ephemera associated with the Knights Templar. And much, much more. Most of our holdings are by definition hard-to-find. Some are large and impressive, such as Justice Hugo L. Black’s reconstructed study; others are small and unique, such as Justice Black’s ouija board. We’ll speak for all of them—with the possible exception of the ouija board, which has been known to speak for itself.
A word about our title, translated freely as “the written word.” These words are plucked from a Latin proverb sometimes quoted by lawyers: “Vox emissa volat; litera scripta manet.” Or, “Spoken words fly away; the written letter remains.” As to the printed letter, the decorative initial letter in our title was borrowed from Renaissance printer Richard Tottel’s 1562 work, Regis Edwardi Tertii a primo ad decimum….
Finally, our editors Paul M. Pruitt, Jr. and David I. Durham would like to introduce themselves and their colleague and fellow contributor Ellie Campbell.
Paul M. Pruitt, Jr. is Special Collections Librarian at the Bounds Law Library—a position he has occupied since the crust of the earth began to cool— and Adjunct Instructor at the UA School of Law. He is co-editor, with David I. Durham, of the Occasional Publications of the Bounds Law Library. The latest in this series (Number 8) is titled Traveling the Beaten Trail: Charles Tait’s Charges to Federal Grand Juries, 1822-1825 (2013). Pruitt has authored a number of journal articles; in addition he is author of the book Taming Alabama: Lawyers and Reformers, 1804-1929 (UA Press, 2010).
David I. Durham is the Curator of Archival Collections at the Bounds Law Library and teaches in the university’s Department of History. In addition to serving as co-editor of the Occasional Publication series with Paul Pruitt, Durham’s research interests include legislative, legal, and diplomatic topics in the United States and Latin America. His book,A Southern Moderate in Radical Times: Henry Washington Hilliard, 1808-1892, explores the role of a political and social moderate in a polarized society and was published by LSU Press in 2008 as part of their Southern Biography Series.
Ellie Campbell is the Archival Assistant at the Bounds Law Library and is a recent graduate of both the University of Alabama’s School of Law and School of Library and Information Studies. Additionally, she holds a Master’s degree in Southern Studies from the University of Mississippi and a Master’s in American Studies from King’s College London. She is the author of “Breakthrough Verdict: Strange v. State,” a chapter in the forthcoming book New Corn, New Fields: Essays in Alabama Legal History. She will occasionally contribute book notes on key texts addressing Southern and Alabama legal history.
This website uses cookies to collect information to improve your browsing experience. Please review our Privacy Statement for more information.