document_title: Citizenship Clause

question_text: who has the power to make naturalization laws for the united states

root

text: Citizenship Clause

text: Text[edit]

text: Section 1, Clause 1, of the Fourteenth Amendment, reads:

tag: p

text: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

text: Naturalization[edit]

text: The reference to naturalization in the Citizenship Clause is to the process by which immigrants are granted United States citizenship. Congress has power in relation to naturalization under the Naturalization Clause in Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution.[4][5][6][7][8]

text: Senate debate[edit]

text: The text of the Citizenship Clause was first offered in the Senate as an amendment to Section 1 of the joint resolution as passed by the House.

text: There are varying interpretations of the original intent of Congress, based on statements made during the congressional debate over the amendment.[9] While the Citizenship Clause was intended to define as citizens exactly those so defined in the Civil Rights Act,[3][10] which had been debated and passed in the same session of Congress only several months earlier, the clause's author, Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan, phrased it a little differently. In particular, the two exceptions to citizenship by birth for everyone born in the United States mentioned in the Act, namely, that they had to be "not subject to any foreign power" and not "Indians not taxed", were combined into a single qualification, that they be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, and while Howard and others, such as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, the author of the Civil Rights Act, believed that the formulations were equivalent, others, such as Senator James R. Doolittle from Wisconsin, disagreed, and pushed for an alternative wording.[11]

text: There was no recorded debate over who was encompassed by the expression "not subject to any foreign power" or whether these same people were excluded by the wording of the Citizenship Clause. Howard, when introducing the addition to the Amendment, stated that it was "the law of the land already" and that it excluded only "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers".[12] Others also agreed that the children of ambassadors and foreign ministers were to be excluded.[13][14] However, concerning the children born in the United States to parents who are not U.S. citizens (and not foreign diplomats), three senators, including Trumbull, as well as President Andrew Johnson, asserted that both the Civil Rights Act and the Citizenship Clause would confer citizenship on them at birth,[15][16][17] and no senator offered a contrary opinion. Trumbull even went so far as to assert that this was already true prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act, although Senator Edgar Cowan of Pennsylvania, disagreed, stating that this was only true for the children of Caucasian immigrants.[15] Senator John Conness of California expressed support for the Amendment for giving a constitutional basis for birthright citizenship to all children born in the United States to any parentage (including Chinese noncitizen residents who do not intend to reside permanently in the United States), even though he (and others) thought it had already been guaranteed by the Act,[18] whereas Cowan opposed the Amendment (and Act), arguing that it would have the undesirable outcome of extending citizenship to the children of Chinese and Gypsy immigrants.[19]

text: Most of the debate on this section of the Amendment centered on whether the wording in the Civil Rights Act or Howard's proposal more effectively excluded Indians on reservations and in U.S. territories from citizenship. Doolittle asserted, and Senators Reverdy Johnson of Maryland and Thomas A. Hendricks of Indiana concurred, that all Indians were subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, so that the phrase "Indians not taxed" would be preferable,[20] but Trumbull and Howard disputed this, arguing that the U.S. government did not have full jurisdiction over Indian tribes, which governed themselves and made treaties with the United States.[21][22] Moreover, they objected to the phrase "Indians not taxed" on the basis that it could be construed as making citizenship dependent on wealth and also that it would allow states to manipulate who is a citizen in their state through tax policy.[23]

text: Birthright citizenship[edit]

text: The provisions in Section 1 have been interpreted to the effect that children born on United States soil, with very few exceptions, are U.S. citizens. This type of guarantee—legally termed jus soli, or "right of the territory"—does not exist in most of Europe, Asia or the Middle East, although it is part of English common law[24] and is common in the Americas.

text: Two Supreme Court precedents were set by the cases of Elk v. Wilkins[25] and United States v. Wong Kim Ark.[3] Elk v. Wilkins established that Indian tribes represented independent political powers with no allegiance to the United States, and that their peoples were under a special jurisdiction of the United States. Children born to these Indian tribes therefore did not automatically receive citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment if they voluntarily left their tribe.[26] Indian tribes that paid taxes were exempt from this ruling; their peoples were already citizens by an earlier act of Congress, and all non-citizen Indians were subsequently made citizens by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

text: In Wong Kim Ark the Supreme Court held that, under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, a man born within the United States to foreigners (in that case, Chinese citizens) who have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and are carrying on business in the United States[3] and who were not employed in a diplomatic or other official capacity by a foreign power, was a citizen of the United States.

text: A 2010 Congressional Research Service report, however, observed that, though it could be argued that Congress has no power to define "subject to the jurisdiction" and the terms of citizenship in a manner contrary to the Supreme Court's understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment as expressed in Wong Kim Ark and Elk, since Congress does have broad power to pass necessary and proper legislation to regulate immigration and naturalization under the Constitution, Art. I, § 8, cls. 4 & 18 of the constitution Congress arguably has the power to define "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" for the purpose of regulating immigration.[27]

text: Historian Eric Foner has explored the question of birthright citizenship and argues that "birthright citizenship stands as an example of the much-abused idea of American exceptionalism...birthright citizenship does make the United States (along with Canada) unique in the developed world. No European nation recognizes the principle."[28]

text: Loss of citizenship[edit]

text: The Fourteenth Amendment does not provide any procedure for revocation of United States citizenship. Under the Supreme Court precedent of Afroyim v. Rusk, loss of 14th-Amendment-based U.S. citizenship is possible only under the following circumstances:[29]

text:
Fraud in the naturalization process. Technically this is not loss of citizenship, but rather a voiding of the purported naturalization and a declaration that the immigrant never was a U.S. citizen.
Voluntary relinquishment of citizenship. This may be accomplished either through renunciation procedures specially established by the State Department or through other actions (e.g., treason) which demonstrate an intention to give up U.S. citizenship.[30] Such an act of expatriation must be accompanied by an intent to terminate United States citizenship.[31]

text: For jus sanguinis U.S. citizenship, i.e., citizenship for the children born abroad of U.S. citizen parents, which is established only by congressional statute and not the U.S. Constitution (including its amendments), these restrictions do not apply (e.g., cf. Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815 (1971)).

text: Right to travel[edit]

text: In Saenz v. Roe, the Supreme Court held that this clause protects an aspect of the right to travel.[32] Specifically, the Saenz Court said that the Citizenship Clause protects a citizen's right to resettle in other states and then be treated equally:

text: [T]he Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment expressly equates citizenship with residence: "That Clause does not provide for, and does not allow for, degrees of citizenship based on length of residence." Zobel, 457 U. S., at 69. It is equally clear that the Clause does not tolerate a hierarchy of 45 subclasses of similarly situated citizens based on the location of their prior residence. … [T]he protection afforded to the citizen by the Citizenship Clause of that Amendment is a limitation on the powers of the National Government as well as the States.

text: The Saenz Court also mentioned the majority opinion in the Slaughterhouse Cases, which had stated that "a citizen of the United States can, of his own volition, become a citizen of any State of the Union by a bona fide residence therein, with the same rights as other citizens of that State."[33]

text: Natural-born citizens[edit]

text: The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) at "natural-born" defines it as a person who becomes a citizen at birth (as opposed to becoming one later). It lists this definition as going back to the 16th century. OED cites a law of 1695 (Act 7 & 8 Will. III (1696) 478) that states, "A Natural born Subject of this Realm...Who shall be willing to Enter and Register himself for the Service of His Majesty." It also quotes Thomas Jefferson 1776 (in T. Jefferson Public Papers 344): "All persons who..propose to reside..and who shall subscribe the fundamental laws, shall be considered as residents and entitled to all the rights of persons natural born." Blacks Law Dictionary (10th Edition) defines 'Natural Born Citizen' as "A person born within the jurisdiction of a national government."[34] Webster's International Dictionary (3rd edition, 2000) defines "natural-born" as " especially: having the legal status of citizen or subject."

text: Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution requires that a candidate for President of the United States be a "natural-born citizen." According to the US Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual: "the fact that someone is a natural born citizen (citizen at birth) pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes."[35]

text: The majority opinion by Justice Horace Gray in United States v. Wong Kim Ark observed that:

text: The constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words ["citizen" and "natural born citizen"], either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except in so far as this is done by the affirmative declaration that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.'[3]

text: This observation by Gray about the term "natural-born citizen" was obiter dicta, since the case did not involve any controversy about presidential eligibility.[36]

text: Notes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 597.
^ Jump up to: a b Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2896.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898).
Jump up ^ Reyes, Carla. "Naturalization Law, Immigration Flow, and Policy" in Transforming America: Perspectives on U.S. Immigration, Volume 1, p. 149 (Michael LeMay ed., ABC-CLIO, 2013).
Jump up ^ Epps, Garrett. The Citizenship Clause: A "Legislative History". 60 American University Law Review 331, 352 (2010). "This language [in the Civil Rights Act of 1866] is significant but does not directly demonstrate anything about the 'clear intent' of the Citizenship Clause. First, it is a statute, enacted under the authority of some combination of the Naturalization Clause and the Thirteenth Amendment; the Fourteenth Amendment is a change to the Constitution, creating entirely new rights and providing government with new powers."
Jump up ^ Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253, 258 (1967). "Therefore, a bill was introduced [in 1818] to provide that a person could voluntarily relinquish his citizenship by declaring such relinquishment in writing before a district court and then departing from the country. The opponents of the bill argued that Congress had no constitutional authority, either express or implied, under either the Naturalization Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause, to provide that a certain act would constitute expatriation."
Jump up ^ Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 940 (1983). "It is also argued that these cases present a nonjusticiable political question, because Chadha is merely challenging Congress' authority under the Naturalization Clause, U.S.Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, and the Necessary and Proper Clause, U.S.Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 18."
Jump up ^ In contrast to the aforementioned sources, Black's Law Dictionary defines "Naturalization Clause" as being equivalent to the Citizenship Clause. See Epps, Garrett, ed. (2009). "Naturalization Clause". Black's Law Dictionary (9th ed.). St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing. p. 1126. ISBN 978-0-314-19949-2. Naturalization Clause. The constitutional provision stating that every person born or naturalized in the United States is a citizen of the United States and of the state of residence. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1. See jus soli.
Jump up ^ Robert, Pear (1996-08-07). "Citizenship Proposal Faces Obstacle in the Constitution". New York Times.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2893. Senator Reverdy Johnson said in the debate: "Now, all this amendment provides is, that all persons born in the United States and not subject to some foreign Power—for that, no doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter before us—shall be considered as citizens of the United States ... If there are to be citizens of the United States entitled everywhere to the character of citizens of the United States, there should be some certain definition of what citizenship is, what has created the character of citizen as between himself and the United States, and the amendment says citizenship may depend upon birth, and I know of no better way to give rise to citizenship than the fact of birth within the territory of the United States, born of parents who at the time were subject to the authority of the United States."
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2890, 2892-3, 2896.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2890.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2897.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 572. During the debate on the Civil Rights Act, Trumbull stated, "The Senator from Missouri and myself desire to arrive at the same point precisely, and that is to make citizens of everybody born in the United States who owe allegiance to the United States. We cannot make a citizen of a child of a foreign minister who is temporarily residing here. There is a difficulty in framing the amendment [to the Act] so as to make citizens of all people born in the United States who owe allegiance to it. I thought that might perhaps be the best form in which to put the amendment at one time, 'That all persons born in the United States and owing allegiance thereto are hereby declared to be citizens'; but upon investigation it was found that a sort of allegiance was due to the country from persons temporarily resident in it whom we would have no right to make citizens, and that that form would not answer."
^ Jump up to: a b Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 498. The debate on the Civil Rights Act contained the following exchange:

Mr. Cowan: I will ask whether it will not have the effect of naturalizing the children of Chinese and Gypsies born in this country?
Mr. Trumbull: Undoubtedly.
...
Mr. Trumbull: I should like to inquire of my friend from Pennsylvania, if the children of Chinese now born in this country are not citizens?
Mr. Cowan: I think not.
Mr. Trumbull: I understand that under the naturalization laws the children who are born here of parents who have not been naturalized are citizens. This is the law, as I understand it, at the present time. Is not the child born in this country of German parents a citizen? I am afraid we have got very few citizens in some of the counties of good old Pennsylvania if the children born of German parents are not citizens.
Mr. Cowan: The honorable Senator assumes that which is not the fact. The children of German parents are citizens; but Germans are not Chinese; Germans are not Australians, nor Hottentots, nor anything of the kind. That is the fallacy of his argument.
Mr. Trumbull: If the Senator from Pennsylvania will show me in the law any distinction made between the children of German parents and the children of Asiatic parents, I may be able to appreciate the point which he makes; but the law makes no such distinction; and the child of an Asiatic is just as much of a citizen as the child of a European.

Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2891-2.
Jump up ^ See veto message by President Andrew Johnson.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2891. During the debate on the Amendment, Conness declared, "The proposition before us, I will say, Mr. President, relates simply in that respect to the children begotten of Chinese parents in California, and it is proposed to declare that they shall be citizens. We have declared that by law [the Civil Rights Act]; now it is proposed to incorporate that same provision in the fundamental instrument of the nation. I am in favor of doing so. I voted for the proposition to declare that the children of all parentage, whatever, born in California, should be regarded and treated as citizens of the United States, entitled to equal Civil Rights with other citizens." He further added that "they [the Chinese] all return to their own country at some time or other".
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2891-2. Cowan expressed concern over the prospect of a state not being able to determine its own citizens. In particular, he identified two groups that he felt were unsuitable for citizenship but would have such bestowed upon their children by the Amendment: Chinese and Gypsies, the latter of which he described thus, "who owe to her [Pennsylvania] no allegiance; who pretend to owe none; who recognized no authority in her government; who have a distinct, independent government of their own ...; who pay no taxes; who never perform military service; who do nothing, in fact, which becomes the citizen, and perform none of the duties which devolve upon him, but, on the other hand, have no homes, pretend to own no land, live nowhere, settle as trespassers where ever they go." He subsequently cautioned against adopting the proposed Amendment, "Are these people, by a constitutional amendment, to be put out of the reach of the State in which they live? ... If the mere fact of being born in a country confers that right then they will have it. ... Therefore I think, before we assert broadly that everybody who shall be born in the United States shall be taken to be a citizen of the United States, we ought to exclude others besides Indians not taxed, because I look upon Indians not taxed as being much less pestiferous to society than I look upon Gypsies."
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2893-4.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2893. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lyman Trumbull, participating in the debate, stated the following: "What do we [the committee reporting the clause] mean by 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States'? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means." He then proceeded to expound upon what he meant by "complete jurisdiction": "Can you sue a Navajoe Indian in court? ... We make treaties with them, and therefore they are not subject to our jurisdiction. ... If we want to control the Navajoes, or any other Indians of which the Senator from Wisconsin has spoken, how do we do it? Do we pass a law to control them? Are they subject to our jurisdiction in that sense?. ... Would he [Sen. Doolittle] think of punishing them for instituting among themselves their own tribal regulations? Does the Government of the United States pretend to take jurisdiction of murders and robberies and other crimes committed by one Indian upon another? ... It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens."
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2895. Howard additionally stated the word jurisdiction meant "the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now" and that the United States possessed a "full and complete jurisdiction" over the person described in the amendment.
Jump up ^ Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2894-5.
Jump up ^ Today British nationality is defined in statute, which supersedes the common law.
Jump up ^ Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884).
Jump up ^ Urofsky, Melvin I.; Finkelman, Paul (2002). A March of Liberty: A Constitutional History of the United States. 1 (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-512635-1.
Jump up ^ Birthright Citizenship Under the 14th Amendment of Persons Born in the United States to Alien Parents (PDF) (Report). Congressional Research Service. August 12, 2010. p. 15 (page 18 of the PDF).
Jump up ^ Eric Foner, "Birthright Citizenship Is the Good Kind of American Exceptionalism," The Nation Aug. 27, 2015
Jump up ^ Afroyim v. Rusk 387 U.S. 253 (1967)
Jump up ^ U.S. State Department, Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality. Archived April 16, 2009, at the Wayback Machine.
Jump up ^ Vance v. Terrazas, 444 U.S. 252 (1980): "As we have said, Afroyim requires that the record support a finding that the expatriating act was accompanied by an intent to terminate United States citizenship."
Jump up ^ Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999).
Jump up ^ Slaughterhouse Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873).
Jump up ^ "citizen". Black's Law Dictionary (10th ed.). Thompson Reuters. 2009.
Jump up ^ "7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency."
Jump up ^ Sen Hu and Jlellin Dong, eds. (2010). The Rocky Road to Liberty: A Documented History of Chinese Immigration and Exclusion. Javvin. p. 189. CS1 maint: Extra text: authors list (link)

tag: ol


document_title: Automated teller machine

question_text: when did cash machines come into use uk

question_tokens: when did cash machines come into use uk

text: Automated teller machine

text: History[edit]

text: The idea of out-of-hours cash distribution developed from bankers' needs in Asia (Japan), Europe (Sweden and the United Kingdom) and North America (the United States).[10][11][12] Little is known of the Japanese device other than it was called "Computer Loan Machine" and supplied cash as a three-month loan at 5% p.a. after inserting a credit card. The device was operational in 1966.[13][14]

text: Adrian Ashfield invented the basic idea of a card combining the key and user’s identity in February 1962. This was granted UK Patent 959,713 for “Access Controller” in June 1964 and assigned to W. S. Atkins & Partners who employed Ashfield. He was paid ten shillings for this, the standard sum for all patents. It was originally intended to dispense petrol but the patent covered all uses.

text: In the US patent record, Luther George Simjian has been credited with developing a "prior art device". Specifically his 132nd patent (US3079603), which was first filed on 30 June 1960 (and granted 26 February 1963). The roll-out of this machine, called Bankograph, was delayed by a couple of years, due in part to Simjian's Reflectone Electronics Inc. being acquired by Universal Match Corporation.[15] An experimental Bankograph was installed in New York City in 1961 by the City Bank of New York, but removed after six months due to the lack of customer acceptance. The Bankograph was an automated envelope deposit machine (accepting coins, cash and cheques) and did not have cash dispensing features.[16][17]

text: It is widely accepted that the first cash machine was put into use by Barclays Bank in its Enfield Town branch in North London, United Kingdom, on 27 June 1967.[18] This machine was inaugurated by English comedy actor Reg Varney.[19] This instance of the invention is credited to the engineering team led by John Shepherd-Barron of printing firm De La Rue,[20] who was awarded an OBE in the 2005 New Year Honours.[21][22] Transactions were initiated by inserting paper cheques issued by a teller or cashier, marked with carbon-14 for machine readability and security, which in a later model were matched with a six-digit personal identification number (PIN).[20][23] Shepherd-Barron stated; "It struck me there must be a way I could get my own money, anywhere in the world or the UK. I hit upon the idea of a chocolate bar dispenser, but replacing chocolate with cash."[20]

text: The Barclays-De La Rue machine (called De La Rue Automatic Cash System or DACS)[24] beat the Swedish saving banks' and a company called Metior's machine (a device called Bankomat) by a mere nine days and Westminster Bank’s-Smith Industries-Chubb system (called Chubb MD2) by a month.[25] The online version of the Swedish machine is listed to have been operational on 6 May 1968, while claiming to be the first online ATM in the world (ahead of a similar claim by IBM and Lloyds Bank in 1971).[26] The collaboration of a small start-up called Speytec and Midland Bank developed a fourth machine which was marketed after 1969 in Europe and the US by the Burroughs Corporation. The patent for this device (GB1329964) was filed in September 1969 (and granted in 1973) by John David Edwards, Leonard Perkins, John Henry Donald, Peter Lee Chappell, Sean Benjamin Newcombe & Malcom David Roe.

text: Both the DACS and MD2 accepted only a single-use token or voucher which was retained by the machine, while the Speytec worked with a card with a magnetic stripe at the back. They used principles including Carbon-14 and low-coercivity magnetism in order to make fraud more difficult.

text: The idea of a PIN stored on the card was developed by a group of engineers working at Smiths Group on the Chubb MD2 in 1965 and which has been credited to James Goodfellow (patent GB1197183 filed on 2 May 1966 with Anthony Davies). The essence of this system was that it enabled the verification of the customer with the debited account without human intervention. This patent is also the earliest instance of a complete "currency dispenser system" in the patent record. This patent was filed on 5 March 1968 in the US (US 3543904) and granted on 1 December 1970. It had a profound influence on the industry as a whole. Not only did future entrants into the cash dispenser market such as NCR Corporation and IBM licence Goodfellow’s PIN system, but a number of later patents reference this patent as "Prior Art Device".[27]

text: Propagation[edit]

text: Devices designed by British (i.e. Chubb, De La Rue) and Swedish (i.e. Asea Meteor) quickly spread out. For example, given its link with Barclays, Bank of Scotland deployed a DACS in 1968 under the 'Scotcash' brand. Customers were given personal code numbers to activate the machines, similar to the modern PIN. They were also supplied with £10 vouchers. These were fed into the machine, and the corresponding amount debited from the customer's account.

text: A Chubb-made ATM appeared in Sydney in 1969. This was the first ATM installed in Australia. The machine only dispensed $25 at a time and the bank card itself would be mailed to the user after the bank had processed the withdrawal.

text: Asea Metior's Bankomat was the first ATM installed in Spain on January 9, 1969 in downtown Madrid by Banesto. This device dispensed 1,000 peseta bills (1 to 5 max). Each user had to introduce a security personal key using a combination of the ten numeric buttons.[28] In March of the same year an ad with the instructions to use the Bancomat was published in the same newspaper.[29]

text: Docutel in the United States (1969)[edit]

text: After looking firsthand at the experiences in Europe, in 1968 the ATM was pioneered in the U.S. by Donald Wetzel, who was a department head at a company called Docutel.[22] Docutel was a subsidiary of Recognition Equipment Inc of Dallas, Texas, which was producing optical scanning equipment and had instructed Docutel to explore automated baggage handling and automated gasoline pumps.[30] In 1969, a venture capital consortium purchased Docutel with the aim of bringing its ATM to market without delay. By 1974, Docutel had acquired 70 percent of the U.S. market; but as a result of the early 1970s worldwide recession and its reliance on a single product line, Docutel lost its independence and was forced to merge with the U.S. subsidiary of Olivetti.

text: Wetzel was recognised by the United States Patent Office as having invented the ATM in the form of U.S. Patent # 3,761,682; the application had been filed in October 1971 and the patent was granted in 1973. However, the U.S. patent record cites at least three previous applications from Docutel, all relevant to the development of the ATM and where Wetzel does not figure, namely US Patent # 3,662,343, U.S. Patent # 3651976 and U.S. Patent # 3,68,569. These patents are all credited to Kenneth S. Goldstein, MR Karecki, TR Barnes, GR Chastian and John D. White.

text: On September 2, 1969, Chemical Bank installed the first ATM in the U.S. at its branch in Rockville Centre, New York. The first ATMs were designed to dispense a fixed amount of cash when a user inserted a specially coded card.[31] A Chemical Bank advertisement boasted "On Sept. 2 our bank will open at 9:00 and never close again."[32] Chemical's ATM, initially known as a Docuteller was designed by Donald Wetzel and his company Docutel. Chemical executives were initially hesitant about the electronic banking transition given the high cost of the early machines. Additionally, executives were concerned that customers would resist having machines handling their money.[33] In 1995, the Smithsonian National Museum of American History recognised Docutel and Wetzel as the inventors of the networked ATM.[34]

text: Continued improvements[edit]

text: The first modern ATM was an IBM 2984 and came into use at Lloyds Bank, High Street, Brentwood, Essex, UK in December 1972. The IBM 2984 was designed at the request of Lloyds Bank. The 2984 Cash Issuing Terminal was the first true ATM, similar in function to today's machines and named by Lloyds Bank: Cashpoint. Cashpoint is still a registered trademark of Lloyds Banking Group in the UK, but is often used as a generic trademark to refer to ATMs of all UK banks. All were online and issued a variable amount which was immediately deducted from the account. A small number of 2984s were supplied to a U.S. bank. A couple of well known historical models of ATMs include the IBM 3614, IBM 3624 and 473x series, Diebold 10xx and TABS 9000 series, NCR 1780 and earlier NCR 770 series.

text: The first switching system to enable shared automated teller machines between banks went into production operation on February 3, 1979 in Denver, Colorado, in an effort by Colorado National Bank of Denver and Kranzley and Company of Cherry Hill, New Jersey.[35]

text: The newest ATM at Royal Bank of Scotland allows customers to withdraw cash up to £100 without a card by inputting a six-digit code requested through their smartphones.[36]

text: Location[edit]

text: ATMs can be placed at any location but are most often placed near or inside banks, shopping centers/malls, airports, railway stations, metro stations, grocery stores, petrol/gas stations, restaurants, and other locations. ATMs are also found on cruise ships and on some US Navy ships, where sailors can draw out their pay.[37]

text: ATMs may be on- and off-premises. On-premises ATMs are typically more advanced, multi-function machines that complement a bank branch's capabilities, and are thus more expensive. Off-premises machines are deployed by financial institutions and Independent Sales Organisations (ISOs) where there is a simple need for cash, so they are generally cheaper single function devices.

text: In the US, Canada and some Gulf countries, banks may have drive-thru lanes providing access to ATMs using an automobile.

text: In recent times, countries like India and some countries in Africa are installing ATMs in rural areas, which are solar powered.[38]

text: Financial networks[edit]

text: Most ATMs are connected to interbank networks, enabling people to withdraw and deposit money from machines not belonging to the bank where they have their accounts or in the countries where their accounts are held (enabling cash withdrawals in local currency). Some examples of interbank networks include NYCE, PULSE, PLUS, Cirrus, AFFN, Interac, Interswitch, STAR, LINK, MegaLink and BancNet.

text: ATMs rely on authorization of a financial transaction by the card issuer or other authorizing institution on a communications network. This is often performed through an ISO 8583 messaging system.

text: Many banks charge ATM usage fees. In some cases, these fees are charged solely to users who are not customers of the bank where the ATM is installed; in other cases, they apply to all users.

text: In order to allow a more diverse range of devices to attach to their networks, some interbank networks have passed rules expanding the definition of an ATM to be a terminal that either has the vault within its footprint or utilises the vault or cash drawer within the merchant establishment, which allows for the use of a scrip cash dispenser.

text: ATMs typically connect directly to their host or ATM Controller on either ADSL or dial-up modem over a telephone line or directly on a leased line. Leased lines are preferable to plain old telephone service (POTS) lines because they require less time to establish a connection. Less-trafficked machines will usually rely on a dial-up modem on a POTS line rather than using a leased line, since a leased line may be comparatively more expensive to operate compared to a POTS line. That dilemma may be solved as high-speed Internet VPN connections become more ubiquitous. Common lower-level layer communication protocols used by ATMs to communicate back to the bank include SNA over SDLC, TC500 over Async, X.25, and TCP/IP over Ethernet.

text: In addition to methods employed for transaction security and secrecy, all communications traffic between the ATM and the Transaction Processor may also be encrypted using methods such as SSL.[39]

text: Global use[edit]

text: There are no hard international or government-compiled numbers totaling the complete number of ATMs in use worldwide. Estimates developed by ATMIA place the number of ATMs currently in use at 3 million units, or approximately 1 ATM per 3000 people in the world.[40][41]

text: To simplify the analysis of ATM usage around the world, financial institutions generally divide the world into seven regions, due to the penetration rates, usage statistics, and features deployed. Four regions (USA, Canada, Europe, and Japan) have high numbers of ATMs per million people.[42][43] Despite the large number of ATMs, there is additional demand for machines in the Asia/Pacific area as well as in Latin America.[44][45] Macau may have the highest density of ATMs at 254 ATMs per 100,000 adults.[46] ATMs have yet to reach high numbers in the Near East and Africa.[47]

text: The world's highest ATM is located at the Khunjerab Pass in Pakistan. Installed at an elevation of 15,397 feet by the National Bank of Pakistan, it is designed to work in temperatures of up to -40 degree Celsius.[48]

text: Hardware[edit]

text: An ATM is typically made up of the following devices:

text:
CPU (to control the user interface and transaction devices)
Magnetic or chip card reader (to identify the customer)
PIN pad EEP4 (similar in layout to a touch tone or calculator keypad), manufactured as part of a secure enclosure
Secure cryptoprocessor, generally within a secure enclosure
Display (used by the customer for performing the transaction)
Function key buttons (usually close to the display) or a touchscreen (used to select the various aspects of the transaction)
Record printer (to provide the customer with a record of the transaction)
Vault (to store the parts of the machinery requiring restricted access)
Housing (for aesthetics and to attach signage to)
Sensors and indicators

tag: ul

text: Due to heavier computing demands and the falling price of personal computer–like architectures, ATMs have moved away from custom hardware architectures using microcontrollers or application-specific integrated circuits and have adopted the hardware architecture of a personal computer, such as USB connections for peripherals, Ethernet and IP communications, and use personal computer operating systems.

text: Business owners often lease ATMs from service providers. However, based on the economies of scale, the price of equipment has dropped to the point where many business owners are simply paying for ATMs using a credit card.

text: New ADA voice and text-to-speech guidelines imposed in 2010, but required by March 2012[49] have forced many ATM owners to either upgrade non-compliant machines or dispose them if they are not upgradable, and purchase new compliant equipment. This has created an avenue for hackers and thieves to obtain ATM hardware at junkyards from improperly disposed decommissioned machines.[50]

text: The vault of an ATM is within the footprint of the device itself and is where items of value are kept. Scrip cash dispensers do not incorporate a vault.

text: Mechanisms found inside the vault may include:

text:
Dispensing mechanism (to provide cash or other items of value)
Deposit mechanism including a cheque processing module and bulk note acceptor (to allow the customer to make deposits)
Security sensors (magnetic, thermal, seismic, gas)
Locks (to ensure controlled access to the contents of the vault)
Journaling systems; many are electronic (a sealed flash memory device based on in-house standards) or a solid-state device (an actual printer) which accrues all records of activity including access timestamps, number of notes dispensed, etc. This is considered sensitive data and is secured in similar fashion to the cash as it is a similar liability.

text: ATM vaults are supplied by manufacturers in several grades. Factors influencing vault grade selection include cost, weight, regulatory requirements, ATM type, operator risk avoidance practices and internal volume requirements.[51] Industry standard vault configurations include Underwriters Laboratories UL-291 "Business Hours" and Level 1 Safes,[52] RAL TL-30 derivatives,[53] and CEN EN 1143-1 - CEN III and CEN IV.[54][55]

text: ATM manufacturers recommend that a vault be attached to the floor to prevent theft,[56] though there is a record of a theft conducted by tunnelling into an ATM floor.[57]

text: Software[edit]

text: With the migration to commodity Personal Computer hardware, standard commercial "off-the-shelf" operating systems and programming environments can be used inside of ATMs. Typical platforms previously used in ATM development include RMX or OS/2.

text: Today, the vast majority of ATMs worldwide use a Microsoft Windows operating system, primarily Windows XP Professional or Windows XP Embedded.[citation needed][needs update] A small number of deployments may still be running older versions of the Windows OS, such as Windows NT, Windows CE, or Windows 2000.

text: There is a computer industry security view that general public desktop operating systems(os) have greater risks as operating systems for cash dispensing machines than other types of operating systems like (secure) real-time operating systems (RTOS). RISKS Digest has many articles about ATM operating system vulnerabilities.[58]

text: Linux is also finding some reception in the ATM marketplace. An example of this is Banrisul, the largest bank in the south of Brazil, which has replaced the MS-DOS operating systems in its ATMs with Linux. Banco do Brasil is also migrating ATMs to Linux. Indian-based Vortex Engineering is manufacturing ATMs which operate only with Linux. Common application layer transaction protocols, such as Diebold 91x (911 or 912) and NCR NDC or NDC+ provide emulation of older generations of hardware on newer platforms with incremental extensions made over time to address new capabilities, although companies like NCR continuously improve these protocols issuing newer versions (e.g. NCR's AANDC v3.x.y, where x.y are subversions). Most major ATM manufacturers provide software packages that implement these protocols. Newer protocols such as IFX have yet to find wide acceptance by transaction processors.[59]

text: With the move to a more standardised software base, financial institutions have been increasingly interested in the ability to pick and choose the application programs that drive their equipment. WOSA/XFS, now known as CEN XFS (or simply XFS), provides a common API for accessing and manipulating the various devices of an ATM. J/XFS is a Java implementation of the CEN XFS API.

text: While the perceived benefit of XFS is similar to the Java's "Write once, run anywhere" mantra, often different ATM hardware vendors have different interpretations of the XFS standard. The result of these differences in interpretation means that ATM applications typically use a middleware to even out the differences among various platforms.

text: With the onset of Windows operating systems and XFS on ATMs, the software applications have the ability to become more intelligent. This has created a new breed of ATM applications commonly referred to as programmable applications. These types of applications allows for an entirely new host of applications in which the ATM terminal can do more than only communicate with the ATM switch. It is now empowered to connected to other content servers and video banking systems.

text: Notable ATM software that operates on XFS platforms include Triton PRISM, Diebold Agilis EmPower, NCR APTRA Edge, Absolute Systems AbsoluteINTERACT, KAL Kalignite Software Platform, Phoenix Interactive VISTAatm, Wincor Nixdorf ProTopas, Euronet EFTS and Intertech inter-ATM.

text: With the move of ATMs to industry-standard computing environments, concern has risen about the integrity of the ATM's software stack.[60]

text: Security[edit]

text: Security, as it relates to ATMs, has several dimensions. ATMs also provide a practical demonstration of a number of security systems and concepts operating together and how various security concerns are addressed.

text: Physical[edit]

text: Early ATM security focused on making the terminals invulnerable to physical attack; they were effectively safes with dispenser mechanisms. A number of attacks resulted, with thieves attempting to steal entire machines by ram-raiding.[61] Since the late 1990s, criminal groups operating in Japan improved ram-raiding by stealing and using a truck loaded with heavy construction machinery to effectively demolish or uproot an entire ATM and any housing to steal its cash.

text: Another attack method, plofkraak, is to seal all openings of the ATM with silicone and fill the vault with a combustible gas or to place an explosive inside, attached, or near the machine. This gas or explosive is ignited and the vault is opened or distorted by the force of the resulting explosion and the criminals can break in.[62] This type of theft has occurred in the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Denmark, Germany and Australia.[63][64] These types of attacks can be prevented by a number of gas explosion prevention devices also known as gas suppression system. These systems use explosive gas detection sensor to detect explosive gas and to neutralise it by releasing a special explosion suppression chemical which changes the composition of the explosive gas and renders it ineffective.

text: Several attacks in the UK (at least one of which was successful) have involved digging a concealed tunnel under the ATM and cutting through the reinforced base to remove the money.[57]

text: Modern ATM physical security, per other modern money-handling security, concentrates on denying the use of the money inside the machine to a thief, by using different types of Intelligent Banknote Neutralisation Systems.

text: A common method is to simply rob the staff filling the machine with money. To avoid this, the schedule for filling them is kept secret, varying and random. The money is often kept in cassettes, which will dye the money if incorrectly opened.

text: Transactional secrecy and integrity[edit]

text: The security of ATM transactions relies mostly on the integrity of the secure cryptoprocessor: the ATM often uses general commodity components that sometimes are not considered to be "trusted systems".

text: Encryption of personal information, required by law in many jurisdictions, is used to prevent fraud. Sensitive data in ATM transactions are usually encrypted with DES, but transaction processors now usually require the use of Triple DES.[65] Remote Key Loading techniques may be used to ensure the secrecy of the initialisation of the encryption keys in the ATM. Message Authentication Code (MAC) or Partial MAC may also be used to ensure messages have not been tampered with while in transit between the ATM and the financial network.

text: Customer identity integrity[edit]

text: There have also been a number of incidents of fraud by Man-in-the-middle attacks, where criminals have attached fake keypads or card readers to existing machines. These have then been used to record customers' PINs and bank card information in order to gain unauthorised access to their accounts. Various ATM manufacturers have put in place countermeasures to protect the equipment they manufacture from these threats.[66][67]

text: Alternative methods to verify cardholder identities have been tested and deployed in some countries, such as finger and palm vein patterns,[68] iris, and facial recognition technologies. Cheaper mass-produced equipment has been developed and is being installed in machines globally that detect the presence of foreign objects on the front of ATMs, current tests have shown 99% detection success for all types of skimming devices.[69]

text: Device operation integrity[edit]

text: Openings on the customer side of ATMs are often covered by mechanical shutters to prevent tampering with the mechanisms when they are not in use. Alarm sensors are placed inside ATMs and their servicing areas to alert their operators when doors have been opened by unauthorised personnel.

text: To protect against hackers, ATMs have a built-in firewall. Once the firewall has detected malicious attempts to break into the machine remotely, the firewall locks down the machine.

text: Rules are usually set by the government or ATM operating body that dictate what happens when integrity systems fail. Depending on the jurisdiction, a bank may or may not be liable when an attempt is made to dispense a customer's money from an ATM and the money either gets outside of the ATM's vault, or was exposed in a non-secure fashion, or they are unable to determine the state of the money after a failed transaction.[70] Customers often commented that it is difficult to recover money lost in this way, but this is often complicated by the policies regarding suspicious activities typical of the criminal element.[71]

text: Customer security[edit]

text: In some countries, multiple security cameras and security guards are a common feature.[72] In the United States, The New York State Comptroller's Office has advised the New York State Department of Banking to have more thorough safety inspections of ATMs in high crime areas.[73]

text: Consultants of ATM operators assert that the issue of customer security should have more focus by the banking industry;[74] it has been suggested that efforts are now more concentrated on the preventive measure of deterrent legislation than on the problem of ongoing forced withdrawals.[75]

text: At least as far back as July 30, 1986, consultants of the industry have advised for the adoption of an emergency PIN system for ATMs, where the user is able to send a silent alarm in response to a threat.[76] Legislative efforts to require an emergency PIN system have appeared in Illinois,[77] Kansas[78] and Georgia,[79] but none have succeeded yet. In January 2009, Senate Bill 1355 was proposed in the Illinois Senate that revisits the issue of the reverse emergency PIN system.[80] The bill is again supported by the police and denied by the banking lobby.[81]

text: In 1998, three towns outside Cleveland, Ohio, in response to an ATM crime wave, adopted legislation requiring that an emergency telephone number switch be installed at all outdoor ATMs within their jurisdiction. In the wake of a homicide in Sharon Hill, Pennsylvania, the city council passed an ATM security bill as well.

text: In China and elsewhere, many efforts to promote security have been made. On-premises ATMs are often located inside the bank's lobby, which may be accessible 24 hours a day. These lobbies have extensive security camera coverage, a courtesy telephone for consulting with the bank staff, and a security guard on the premises. Bank lobbies that are not guarded 24 hours a day may also have secure doors that can only be opened from outside by swiping the bank card against a wall-mounted scanner, allowing the bank to identify which card enters the building. Most ATMs will also display on-screen safety warnings and may also be fitted with convex mirrors above the display allowing the user to see what is happening behind them.

text: As of 2013, the only claim available about the extent of ATM-connected homicides is that they range from 500 to 1,000 per year in the US, covering only cases where the victim had an ATM card and the card was used by the killer after the known time of death.[82]

text: Uses[edit]

text: Originally developed as cash dispensers, ATMs have evolved to include many other bank-related functions:

text:
Paying routine bills, fees, and taxes (utilities, phone bills, social security, legal fees, income taxes, etc.)
Printing bank statements
Updating passbooks
Cash advances
Cheque Processing Module
Paying (in full or partially) the credit balance on a card linked to a specific current account.
Transferring money between linked accounts (such as transferring between accounts)
Deposit currency recognition, acceptance, and recycling[83][84]

text: In some countries, especially those which benefit from a fully integrated cross-bank network (e.g.: Multibanco in Portugal), ATMs include many functions that are not directly related to the management of one's own bank account, such as:

text:
Loading monetary value into stored value cards
Adding pre-paid cell phone / mobile phone credit.
Purchasing

Concert tickets
Gold[85]
Lottery tickets
Movie tickets
Postage stamps.
Train tickets
Shopping mall gift certificates.

Donating to charities[86]

text: Increasingly, banks are seeking to use the ATM as a sales device to deliver pre approved loans and targeted advertising using products such as ITM (the Intelligent Teller Machine) from Aptra Relate from NCR.[87] ATMs can also act as an advertising channel for other companies.[88]*

text: However, several different ATM technologies have not yet reached worldwide acceptance, such as:

text:
Videoconferencing with human tellers, known as video tellers[89]
Biometrics, where authorization of transactions is based on the scanning of a customer's fingerprint, iris, face, etc.[90][91][92]
Cheque/cash Acceptance, where the machine accepts and recognises cheques and/or currency without using envelopes[93] Expected to grow in importance in the US through Check 21 legislation.
Bar code scanning[94]
On-demand printing of "items of value" (such as movie tickets, traveler's cheques, etc.)
Dispensing additional media (such as phone cards)
Co-ordination of ATMs with mobile phones[95]
Integration with non-banking equipment[96][97]
Games and promotional features[98]
CRM through the ATM

text: In Canada, ATMs are called guichets automatiques in French and sometimes "bank machines" in English. The Interac-shared cash network does not allow for the selling of goods from ATMs, due to specific security requirements for PIN entry when buying goods.[99] CIBC machines in Canada, are able to top-up the minutes on certain pay as you go phones.

text: Reliability[edit]

text: Before an ATM is placed in a public place, it typically has undergone extensive testing with both test money and the backend computer systems that allow it to perform transactions. Banking customers also have come to expect high reliability in their ATMs,[100] which provides incentives to ATM providers to minimise machine and network failures. Financial consequences of incorrect machine operation also provide high degrees of incentive to minimise malfunctions.[101]

text: ATMs and the supporting electronic financial networks are generally very reliable, with industry benchmarks typically producing 98.25% customer availability for ATMs[102] and up to 99.999% availability for host systems that manage the networks of ATMs. If ATM networks do go out of service, customers could be left without the ability to make transactions until the beginning of their bank's next time of opening hours.

text: This said, not all errors are to the detriment of customers; there have been cases of machines giving out money without debiting the account, or giving out higher value notes as a result of incorrect denomination of banknote being loaded in the money cassettes.[103] The result of receiving too much money may be influenced by the card holder agreement in place between the customer and the bank.[104][105]

text: Errors that can occur may be mechanical (such as card transport mechanisms; keypads; hard disk failures; envelope deposit mechanisms); software (such as operating system; device driver; application); communications; or purely down to operator error.

text: To aid in reliability, some ATMs print each transaction to a roll-paper journal that is stored inside the ATM, which allows its users and the related financial institutions to settle things based on the records in the journal in case there is a dispute. In some cases, transactions are posted to an electronic journal to remove the cost of supplying journal paper to the ATM and for more convenient searching of data.

text: Improper money checking can cause the possibility of a customer receiving counterfeit banknotes from an ATM. While bank personnel are generally trained better at spotting and removing counterfeit cash,[106][107] the resulting ATM money supplies used by banks provide no guarantee for proper banknotes, as the Federal Criminal Police Office of Germany has confirmed that there are regularly incidents of false banknotes having been dispensed through ATMs.[108] Some ATMs may be stocked and wholly owned by outside companies, which can further complicate this problem. Bill validation technology can be used by ATM providers to help ensure the authenticity of the cash before it is stocked in the machine; those with cash recycling capabilities include this capability.[109]

text: Fraud[edit]

text: As with any device containing objects of value, ATMs and the systems they depend on to function are the targets of fraud. Fraud against ATMs and people's attempts to use them takes several forms.

text: The first known instance of a fake ATM was installed at a shopping mall in Manchester, Connecticut in 1993. By modifying the inner workings of a Fujitsu model 7020 ATM, a criminal gang known as the Bucklands Boys stole information from cards inserted into the machine by customers.[110]

text: WAVY-TV reported an incident in Virginia Beach in September 2006 where a hacker, who had probably obtained a factory-default administrator password for a filling station's white-label ATM, caused the unit to assume it was loaded with US$5 bills instead of $20s, enabling himself—and many subsequent customers—to walk away with four times the money withdrawn from their accounts.[111] This type of scam was featured on the TV series The Real Hustle.

text: ATM behaviour can change during what is called "stand-in" time, where the bank's cash dispensing network is unable to access databases that contain account information (possibly for database maintenance). In order to give customers access to cash, customers may be allowed to withdraw cash up to a certain amount that may be less than their usual daily withdrawal limit, but may still exceed the amount of available money in their accounts, which could result in fraud if the customers intentionally withdraw more money than what they had in their accounts.[112]

text: Card fraud[edit]

text: In an attempt to prevent criminals from shoulder surfing the customer's personal identification number (PIN), some banks draw privacy areas on the floor.

text: For a low-tech form of fraud, the easiest is to simply steal a customer's card along with its PIN. A later variant of this approach is to trap the card inside of the ATM's card reader with a device often referred to as a Lebanese loop. When the customer gets frustrated by not getting the card back and walks away from the machine, the criminal is able to remove the card and withdraw cash from the customer's account, using the card and its PIN.

text: This type of fraud has spread globally. Although somewhat replaced in terms of volume by skimming incidents, a re-emergence of card trapping has been noticed in regions such as Europe, where EMV chip and PIN cards have increased in circulation.[113]

text: Another simple form of fraud involves attempting to get the customer's bank to issue a new card and its PIN and stealing them from their mail.[114]

text: By contrast, a newer high-tech method of operating, sometimes called card skimming or card cloning, involves the installation of a magnetic card reader over the real ATM's card slot and the use of a wireless surveillance camera or a modified digital camera or a false PIN keypad to observe the user's PIN. Card data is then cloned into a duplicate card and the criminal attempts a standard cash withdrawal. The availability of low-cost commodity wireless cameras, keypads, card readers, and card writers has made it a relatively simple form of fraud, with comparatively low risk to the fraudsters.[115]

text: In an attempt to stop these practices, countermeasures against card cloning have been developed by the banking industry, in particular by the use of smart cards which cannot easily be copied or spoofed by unauthenticated devices, and by attempting to make the outside of their ATMs tamper evident. Older chip-card security systems include the French Carte Bleue, Visa Cash, Mondex, Blue from American Express[116] and EMV '96 or EMV 3.11. The most actively developed form of smart card security in the industry today is known as EMV 2000 or EMV 4.x.

text: EMV is widely used in the UK (Chip and PIN) and other parts of Europe, but when it is not available in a specific area, ATMs must fall back to using the easy–to–copy magnetic stripe to perform transactions. This fallback behaviour can be exploited.[117] However, the fallback option has been removed on the ATMs of some UK banks, meaning if the chip is not read, the transaction will be declined.

text: Card cloning and skimming can be detected by the implementation of magnetic card reader heads and firmware that can read a signature embedded in all magnetic stripes during the card production process. This signature, known as a "MagnePrint" or "BluPrint", can be used in conjunction with common two-factor authentication schemes used in ATM, debit/retail point-of-sale and prepaid card applications.

text: The concept and various methods of copying the contents of an ATM card's magnetic stripe onto a duplicate card to access other people's financial information was well known in the hacking communities by late 1990.[118]

text: In 1996, Andrew Stone, a computer security consultant from Hampshire in the UK, was convicted of stealing more than £1 million by pointing high-definition video cameras at ATMs from a considerable distance and recording the card numbers, expiry dates, etc. from the embossed detail on the ATM cards along with video footage of the PINs being entered. After getting all the information from the videotapes, he was able to produce clone cards which not only allowed him to withdraw the full daily limit for each account, but also allowed him to sidestep withdrawal limits by using multiple copied cards. In court, it was shown that he could withdraw as much as £10,000 per hour by using this method. Stone was sentenced to five years and six months in prison.[119]

text: Related devices[edit]

text: A talking ATM is a type of ATM that provides audible instructions so that people who cannot read a screen can independently use the machine, therefore effectively eliminating the need for assistance from an external, potentially malevolent source. All audible information is delivered privately through a standard headphone jack on the face of the machine. Alternatively, some banks such as the Nordea and Swedbank use a built-in external speaker which may be invoked by pressing the talk button on the keypad.[120] Information is delivered to the customer either through pre-recorded sound files or via text-to-speech speech synthesis.

text: A postal interactive kiosk may share many components of an ATM (including a vault), but it only dispenses items related to postage.[121][122]

text: A scrip cash dispenser may have many components in common with an ATM, but it lacks the ability to dispense physical cash and consequently requires no vault. Instead, the customer requests a withdrawal transaction from the machine, which prints a receipt. The customer then takes this receipt to a nearby sales clerk, who then exchanges it for cash from the till.[123]

text: A teller assist unit (TAU) is distinct in that it is designed to be operated solely by trained personnel and not by the general public, does integrate directly into interbank networks, and usually is controlled by a computer that is not directly integrated into the overall construction of the unit.

text: A Web ATM is an online interface for ATM card banking that uses a smart card reader. All the usual ATM functions are available, except for withdrawing cash. Most banks in Taiwan provide these online services.[124][125]


document_title: Privy Council of the United Kingdom

question_text: who preside over the privy council of great britain

text: Privy Council of the United Kingdom

text: History[edit]

text: The Privy Council of the United Kingdom was preceded by the Privy Council of Scotland and the Privy Council of England. The key events in the formation of the modern Privy Council are given below:

text: In Anglo-Saxon England, Witenagemot was an early equivalent to the Privy Council of England. During the reigns of the Norman monarchs, the English Crown was advised by a royal court or curia regis, which consisted of magnates, ecclesiastics and high officials. The body originally concerned itself with advising the sovereign on legislation, administration and justice.[1] Later, different bodies assuming distinct functions evolved from the court. The courts of law took over the business of dispensing justice, while Parliament became the supreme legislature of the kingdom.[2] Nevertheless, the Council retained the power to hear legal disputes, either in the first instance or on appeal.[3] Furthermore, laws made by the sovereign on the advice of the Council, rather than on the advice of Parliament, were accepted as valid.[4] Powerful sovereigns often used the body to circumvent the Courts and Parliament.[4] For example, a committee of the Council—which later became the Court of the Star Chamber—was during the 15th century permitted to inflict any punishment except death, without being bound by normal court procedure.[5] During Henry VIII's reign, the sovereign, on the advice of the Council, was allowed to enact laws by mere proclamation. The legislative pre-eminence of Parliament was not restored until after Henry VIII's death.[6] Though the royal Council retained legislative and judicial responsibilities, it became a primarily administrative body.[7] The Council consisted of forty members in 1553,[8] but the sovereign relied on a smaller committee, which later evolved into the modern Cabinet.

text: By the end of the English Civil War, the monarchy, House of Lords, and Privy Council had been abolished. The remaining parliamentary chamber, the House of Commons, instituted a Council of State to execute laws and to direct administrative policy. The forty-one members of the Council were elected by the House of Commons; the body was headed by Oliver Cromwell, de facto military dictator of the nation. In 1653, however, Cromwell became Lord Protector, and the Council was reduced to between thirteen and twenty-one members, all elected by the Commons. In 1657, the Commons granted Cromwell even greater powers, some of which were reminiscent of those enjoyed by monarchs. The Council became known as the Protector's Privy Council; its members were appointed by the Lord Protector, subject to Parliament's approval.[9]

text: In 1659, shortly before the restoration of the monarchy, the Protector's Council was abolished.[9] Charles II restored the Royal Privy Council, but he, like previous Stuart monarchs, chose to rely on a small group of advisers.[10] Under George I even more power transferred to this committee. It now began to meet in the absence of the sovereign, communicating its decisions to him after the fact.

text: Thus, the British Privy Council, as a whole, ceased to be a body of important confidential advisers to the sovereign; the role passed to a committee of the Council, now known as the Cabinet.[11]

text: Origin of the term[edit]

text: According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the definition of the word privy in Privy Council is obsolete meaning "of or pertaining exclusively to a particular person or persons, one's own";[12] hence the Council is personal to the sovereign. It is closely related to the word private, and derives from the French word privé.

text: Composition[edit]

text: The sovereign, when acting on the Council's advice, is known as the King-in-Council or Queen-in-Council.[13] The members of the Council are collectively known as The Lords of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council[14] (sometimes The Lords and others of ...).[15] The chief officer of the body is the Lord President of the Council, who is the fourth highest Great Officer of State,[16] a Cabinet member and normally, either the Leader of the House of Lords or of the House of Commons.[17] Another important official is the Clerk, whose signature is appended to all orders made in the Council.[18]

text: Both Privy Counsellor and Privy Councillor may be correctly used to refer to a member of the Council. The former, however, is preferred by the Privy Council Office,[19] emphasising English usage of the term Counsellor as "one who gives counsel", as opposed to "one who is a member of a council". A Privy Counsellor is traditionally said to be "sworn of" the Council after being received by the sovereign.[20]

text: The sovereign may appoint anyone a Privy Counsellor,[21] but in practice appointments are made only on the advice of Her Majesty's Government. The majority of appointees are senior politicians, including Ministers of the Crown, the few most senior figures of Loyal Opposition, the Parliamentary leader of the third-largest party, a couple of the most senior figures in the devolved British governments and senior politicians from Commonwealth countries. Besides these, the Council includes a very few members of the Royal Family (usually the consort and heir apparent only), a few dozen judges from British and Commonwealth countries, a few clergy and a small number of senior civil servants.

text: There is no statutory limit to its membership:[22] at January 2012, there were about 600 members;[23] they had risen in number to over 650 by June 2015.[24]

text: However, the members have no automatic right to attend all Privy Council meetings, and only some are summoned regularly to meetings (in practice at the Prime Minister's discretion).

text: The Church of England's three senior bishops—the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York[22] and the Bishop of London[25]—become Privy Counsellors upon appointment. Senior members of the Royal Family may also be appointed, but this is confined to the current consort and heir apparent and consort.[22] Prince Philip is at present the most senior member by length of service,[23] and he is the only current Privy Counsellor not appointed by the reigning monarch, having been sworn of the Council by her father. The Private Secretary to the Sovereign is always appointed a Privy Counsellor,[26] as are the Lord Chamberlain, the Speaker of the House of Commons, and the Lord Speaker. Justices of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom,[27] judges of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales,[28] senior judges of the Inner House of the Court of Session (Scotland's highest law court)[29] and the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland[30] also join the Privy Council ex officio.

text: The balance of Privy Counsellors is largely made up of politicians. The Prime Minister, Cabinet ministers and the Leader of HM Opposition are traditionally sworn of the Privy Council upon appointment.[22] Leaders of major parties in the House of Commons, First Ministers of the devolved assemblies,[31] some senior Ministers outside Cabinet, and on occasion other respected senior parliamentarians are appointed Privy Counsellors.

text: Because Privy Counsellors are bound by oath to keep matters discussed at Council meetings secret, the appointment of the Leaders of Opposition Parties as Privy Counsellors allows the Government to share confidential information with them "on Privy Council terms".[22] This usually only happens in special circumstances, such as in matters of national security. For example, Tony Blair met Iain Duncan Smith (then Leader of HM Opposition) and Charles Kennedy (then Leader of the Liberal Democrats) "on Privy Council terms" to discuss the evidence for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.[32]

text: Although the Privy Council is primarily a British institution, officials from some other Commonwealth realms are also appointed.[22] By 2000, the most notable instance was New Zealand, whose Prime Minister, senior politicians, Chief Justice and Court of Appeal Justices were traditionally appointed Privy Counsellors.[33] However, appointments of New Zealand members have since been discontinued. The Prime Minister, the Speaker, the Governor-General and the Chief Justice of New Zealand are still accorded the style Right Honourable, but without membership of the Council.[34] Until the late 20th century, the Prime Ministers and Chief Justices of Canada and Australia were also appointed Privy Counsellors.[35][36] Canada also has its own Privy Council, the Queen's Privy Council for Canada (see below). Prime Ministers of some other Commonwealth countries that retain the Queen as their sovereign continue to be sworn of the Council.[22]

text: Privy Council oath and initiation rite[edit]

text: It was formerly regarded by the Privy Council as criminal, and possibly treasonous, to disclose the oath administered to Privy Counsellors as they take office.[37] However, the oath was officially made public by the Blair Government in a written parliamentary answer in 1998, as follows.[38] It had also been read out in full in the House of Lords during debate by Lord Rankeillour on 21 December 1932.[39]

text: You do swear by Almighty God to be a true and faithful Servant unto the Queen's Majesty, as one of Her Majesty's Privy Council. You will not know or understand of any manner of thing to be attempted, done, or spoken against Her Majesty's Person, Honour, Crown, or Dignity Royal, but you will let and withstand the same to the uttermost of your Power, and either cause it to be revealed to Her Majesty Herself, or to such of Her Privy Council as shall advertise Her Majesty of the same. You will, in all things to be moved, treated, and debated in Council, faithfully and truly declare your Mind and Opinion, according to your Heart and Conscience; and will keep secret all Matters committed and revealed unto you, or that shall be treated of secretly in Council. And if any of the said Treaties or Counsels shall touch any of the Counsellors, you will not reveal it unto him, but will keep the same until such time as, by the Consent of Her Majesty, or of the Council, Publication shall be made thereof. You will to your uttermost bear Faith and Allegiance unto the Queen's Majesty; and will assist and defend all Jurisdictions, Pre-eminences, and Authorities, granted to Her Majesty, and annexed to the Crown by Acts of Parliament, or otherwise, against all Foreign Princes, Persons, Prelates, States, or Potentates. And generally in all things you will do as a faithful and true Servant ought to do to Her Majesty. So help you God.[38]

text: A form of this oath dates back to at least 1570.[40]

text: Privy counsellors can choose to affirm their allegiance in similar terms should they prefer not to take a religious oath.[41] At the induction ceremony, the order of precedence places Anglicans (being those of the established church) before others.[42]

text: The initiation ceremony for newly appointed privy counsellors is held in private and typically requires kneeling on a stool before the sovereign and then kissing hands.[43][44] According to The Royal Encyclopaedia: "The new privy counsellor or minister will extend his or her right hand, palm upwards, and, taking the Queen's hand lightly, will kiss it with no more than a touch of the lips."[44] The ceremony has caused difficulties for privy counsellors who advocate republicanism; Tony Benn said in his diaries that he kissed his own thumb, rather than the Queen's hand, while Jeremy Corbyn reportedly did not kneel.[44] Not all members of the privy council go through the initiation ceremony; appointments are frequently made by an Order in Council, although it is "rare for a party leader to use such a course."[45]

text: Term of office[edit]

text: Membership is conferred for life. Formerly, the death of a monarch ("demise of the Crown") brought an immediate dissolution of the Council, as all Crown appointments automatically lapsed.[46] By the 18th century, it was enacted that the Council would not be dissolved until up to six months after the demise of the Crown.[47] By convention, however, the sovereign would reappoint all members of the Council after its dissolution.[48][49] In practice, therefore, membership continued without a break.[22] In 1901 the law was changed to ensure that Crown Appointments became wholly unaffected by any succession of monarch.[50]

text: The sovereign however may remove an individual from the Privy Council. On 8 June 2011, the former MP Elliot Morley was expelled following his conviction on charges of false accounting in connection with the British parliamentary expenses scandal.[51][52] Before this, the last individual to be expelled from the Council against his will was Sir Edgar Speyer, Bt., who was removed on 13 December 1921[53][54] for collaborating with the enemy German Empire, during the First World War.[55] Individuals can choose to resign, sometimes to avoid expulsion: three members voluntarily left the Privy Council in the 20th century: Jonathan Aitken, on 25 June 1997[56] following allegations of perjury;[55][57] John Profumo,[55] who resigned on 26 June 1963;[58][59] and John Stonehouse,[55] who resigned on 17 August 1976.[58][60] On 4 February 2013, Chris Huhne announced that he would voluntarily leave the Privy Council after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice.[61]

text: Lord Prescott stood down on 6 July 2013 in protest against delays in the introduction of press regulation, expecting others to follow.[62] Denis MacShane was resigned on 9 October 2013 before a High Court hearing at which he pleaded guilty of false accounting and was subsequently imprisoned.[63]

text: Meetings[edit]

text: Meetings of the Privy Council are normally held once each month wherever the sovereign may be in residence at the time.[64] The quorum, according to the Privy Council Office, is three,[65] though some statutes provide for other quorums (for example, section 35 of the Opticians Act 1989[66] provides for a lower quorum of two).

text: The sovereign attends the meeting, though his or her place may be taken by two or more Counsellors of State.[67][68] Under the Regency Acts 1937 to 1953,[69] Counsellors of State may be chosen from among the sovereign's spouse and the four individuals next in the line of succession who are over 21 years of age (18 for the heir to the throne).[68] Customarily the sovereign remains standing at meetings of the Privy Council, so that no other members may sit down,[19] thereby keeping meetings short. The Lord President reads out a list of Orders to be made, and the sovereign merely says "Approved".[70]

text: Few Privy Counsellors are required to attend regularly. The settled practice is that day-to-day meetings of the Council are attended by four Privy Counsellors, usually the relevant Minister to the matters pertaining.[67] The Cabinet Minister holding the office of Lord President of the Council, currently the Rt Hon. Andrea Leadsom MP,[71] invariably presides.[72] Under Britain's modern conventions of parliamentary government and constitutional monarchy, every order made in Council is drafted by a Government Department and has already been approved by the Minister responsible—thus actions taken by the Queen-in-Council are formalities required for validation of each measure.[67]

text: Full meetings of the Privy Council are held only when the reigning sovereign announces his or her own engagement (which last happened on 23 November 1839,[73] in the reign of Queen Victoria); or when there is a demise of the Crown, either by the death or abdication of the monarch.[32] A full meeting of the Privy Council was also held on 6 February 1811, when George, Prince of Wales was sworn in as Prince Regent by Act of Parliament.[74] The current statutes regulating the establishment of a regency in the case of minority or incapacity of the sovereign also require any regents to swear their oaths before the Privy Council.[75]

text: In the case of a demise of the Crown, the Privy Council—together with the Lords Spiritual, the Lords Temporal, the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London as well as representatives of Commonwealth realms—makes a proclamation declaring the accession of the new sovereign and receives an oath from the new monarch relating to the security of the Church of Scotland, as required by law. It is also customary for the new sovereign to make an allocution to the Privy Council on that occasion, and this Sovereign's Speech is formally published in The London Gazette. Any such Special Assembly of the Privy Council, convened to proclaim the accession of a new sovereign and witness the monarch's statutory oath, is known as an Accession Council. The last such meetings were held on 6 and 8 February 1952: as Elizabeth II was abroad when the last demise of the Crown took place, the Accession Council met twice, once to proclaim the sovereign (meeting of 6 February 1952), and then again after the new queen had returned to Britain, to receive from her the oath required by statute (meeting of 8 February 1952).[76]

text: Functions[edit]

text: The sovereign exercises executive authority by making Orders in Council upon the advice of the Privy Council. Orders-in-Council, which are drafted by the government rather than by the sovereign, are secondary legislation and are used to make government regulations and to make government appointments. Furthermore, Orders-in-Council are used to grant Royal Assent for Measures of the National Assembly for Wales,[77][78] and laws passed by the legislatures of British Crown dependencies.[79]

text: Distinct from Orders-in-Council are Orders of Council: the former are issued by the sovereign upon the advice of the Privy Council, whereas the latter are made by members of the Privy Council without requiring the sovereign's approval. They are issued under the specific authority of Acts of Parliament, and most commonly are used for the regulation of public institutions.[79]

text: The sovereign also grants Royal Charters on the advice of the Privy Council. Charters bestow special status to incorporated bodies; they are used to grant "chartered" status to certain professional, educational or charitable bodies, and sometimes also city and borough status to towns.[80] The Privy Council therefore deals with a wide range of matters, including university and livery company statutes,[81] the grant of academic degree-awarding powers (e.g. taught degree awarding powers (TDAP))[82], churchyards,[83] coinage and dates of bank holidays.[64]

text: Committees[edit]

text: The Privy Council comprises a number of Standing Committees:[84]

text:
Baronetage Committee
Cabinet of the United Kingdom
Committee for the Affairs of Jersey and Guernsey
Committee for the Purposes of the Crown Office Act 1877
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
Scottish Universities Committee
Universities Committee

text: The Baronetage Committee was established by a 1910 Order in Council, during Edward VII's reign, to scrutinise all succession claims (and thus reject doubtful ones) to be placed on the Roll of Baronets.[84]

text: The Committee for the Affairs of Jersey and Guernsey recommends approval of Channel Islands legislation.[84]

text: The Committee for the purposes of the Crown Office Act 1877 consists of the Lord Chancellor and Lord Privy Seal as well as a Secretary of State. The Committee which last met in 1988 is concerned with the design and usage of wafer seals.[84]

text: The Scottish Universities Committee considers proposed amendments to the statutes of Scotland's four ancient universities.[84] The Universities Committee, which last met in 1995, considers petitions against statutes made by Oxford and Cambridge Universities and their colleges.[84]

text: The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,[85] consists of senior judges who are Privy Counsellors.[86] The decision of the Committee is presented in the form of "advice" to the monarch, but in practice it is always followed by the sovereign (as Crown-in-Council), who formally approves the recommendation of the Judicial Committee.[87]

text: Within the United Kingdom, the Judicial Committee hears appeals from ecclesiastical courts, the Court of Admiralty of the Cinque Ports, prize courts and the Disciplinary Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, appeals against schemes of the Church Commissioners and appeals under certain Acts of Parliament (e.g., the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975).[88] The Crown-in-Council was formerly the Supreme Appeal Court for the entire British Empire,[89] but a number of Commonwealth countries have now abolished the right to such appeals.[90] The Judicial Committee continues to hear appeals from several Commonwealth countries, from British Overseas Territories, Sovereign Base Areas and Crown dependencies.[88] The Judicial Committee had direct jurisdiction in cases relating to the Scotland Act 1998, the Government of Wales Act 1998 and the Northern Ireland Act 1998, but this was transferred to the new Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in 2009.[86]

text: In addition to the Standing Committees, ad hoc Committees are notionally set up to consider and report on Petitions for Royal Charters of Incorporation and to approve changes to the bye-laws of bodies created by Royal Charter.[84]

text: Committees of Privy Counsellors are occasionally established to examine specific issues. Such Committees are independent of the Privy Council Office and therefore do not report directly to the Lord President of the Council.[84] Examples of such Committees include:[84]

text:
the Butler Committee—operation of the intelligence services in the runup to military intervention in Iraq
the Chilcot Committee—for the Chilcot Inquiry on the use of intercept materials
the Gibson Committee of enquiry set up in 2010—to consider whether the UK security services were complicit in torture of detainees.

text: Notable orders[edit]

text: The Civil Service is formally governed by Privy Council Orders, as an exercise of the Royal prerogative. One such order implemented HM Government's ban of GCHQ staff from joining a Trade Union.[91][92] Another, the Civil Service (Amendment) Order in Council 1997, permitted the Prime Minister to grant up to three political advisers management authority over some Civil Servants.[93][94]

text: In the 1960s, the Privy Council made an order to evict the 2,000 inhabitants of the 65-island Chagos Archipelago in the Indian Ocean, in preparation for the establishment of a joint United States–United Kingdom military base on the largest outlying island, Diego Garcia, some 60 miles (97 km) distant. In 2000 the Court of Appeal ruled the 1971 Immigration Ordinance preventing resettlement unlawful. In 2004, the Privy Council, under Jack Straw's tenure, overturned the ruling. In 2006 the High Court of Justice found the Privy Council's decision to be unlawful. Sir Sydney Kentridge described the treatment of the Chagossians as "outrageous, unlawful and a breach of accepted moral standards": Justice Kentridge stated that there was no known precedent "for the lawful use of prerogative powers to remove or exclude an entire population of British subjects from their homes and place of birth",[93][95][96] and the Court of Appeal were persuaded by this argument, but the Law Lords (at that time the UK's highest law court) found its decision to be flawed and overturned the ruling by a 3–2 decision thereby upholding the terms of the Ordinance.[97]

text: Rights and privileges of members[edit]

text: The Privy Council as a whole is termed "The Most Honourable" whilst its members individually, the Privy Counsellors, are entitled to be styled "The Right Honourable".[98]

text: Each Privy Counsellor has the right of personal access to the sovereign. Peers were considered to enjoy this right individually; members of the House of Commons possess the right collectively. In each case, personal access may only be used to tender advice on public affairs.[99]

text: Only Privy Counsellors can signify royal consent to the examination of a Bill affecting the rights of the Crown.[100]

text: Members of the Privy Council are privileged to be given advance notice of any prime ministerial decision to commit HM Armed Forces in enemy action.[101]

text: Privy Counsellors have the right to sit on the steps of the Sovereign's Throne in the Chamber of the House of Lords during debates, a privilege which was shared with heirs apparent of those hereditary peers who were to become members of the House of Lords before Labour's partial Reform of the Lords in 1999, diocesan bishops of the Church of England yet to be Lords Spiritual, retired bishops who formerly sat in the House of Lords, the Dean of Westminster, Peers of Ireland, the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery and the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.[102] While Privy Counsellors have the right to sit on the steps of the Sovereign's Throne they do so only as observers and are not allowed to participate in any of the workings of the House of Lords. Nowadays this privilege is rarely exercised. A notable recent instance of the exercising of this privilege was used by the Prime Minister, Theresa May, who watched the opening of the debate of the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill 2017 in the House of Lords.[103]

text: Privy Counsellors are accorded a formal rank of precedence, if not already having a higher one.[104] At the beginning of each new Parliament, and at the discretion of the Speaker, those members of the House of Commons who are Privy Counsellors usually take the oath of allegiance before all other members except the Speaker and the Father of the House, who is the most senior member of the House.[105] Should a Privy Counsellor rise to speak in the House of Commons at the same time as another Honourable Member, the Speaker usually gives priority to the "Right Honourable" Member.[106] This parliamentary custom, however, was discouraged under New Labour after 1998, despite the Government not being supposed to exert influence over the Speaker.[107]

text: All those sworn of the Privy Council below the rank of marquess, including barons, viscounts and earls, are accorded the style "The Right Honourable"; privy counsellor non-royal dukes are styled "The Most Noble" and marquesses, "The Most Honourable". Modern custom as recommended by Debrett's is to use the post-nominal letters "PC" (optionally in superscript) in a social style of address for peers who are Privy Counsellors.[108] For commoners, "The Right Honourable" is sufficient identification of their status as a Privy Counsellor and they do not use the post-nominal letters "PC".[33][108][109] The Ministry of Justice revises current practice of this convention from time to time.[110]

text: Other councils[edit]

text: The Privy Council is one of the four principal councils of the sovereign. The other three are the courts of law, the Commune Concilium (Common Council, or Parliament) and the Magnum Concilium (Great Council, or the assembly of all the Peers of the Realm). All are still in existence, or at least have never been formally abolished, but the Magnum Concilium has not been summoned since 1640 and was considered defunct even then.[99][111]

text: Several other Privy Councils have advised the sovereign. England and Scotland once had separate Privy Councils (the Privy Council of England and Privy Council of Scotland). The Acts of Union 1707 united the two countries into the Kingdom of Great Britain and in 1708 the Parliament of Great Britain abolished the Privy Council of Scotland.[112][113] Thereafter there was one Privy Council of Great Britain sitting in London.[114] Ireland, on the other hand, continued to have a separate Privy Council even after the Act of Union 1800. The Privy Council of Ireland was abolished in 1922, when the southern part of Ireland separated from the United Kingdom; it was succeeded by the Privy Council of Northern Ireland, which became dormant after the suspension of the Parliament of Northern Ireland in 1972. No further appointments have been made since then, and only three appointees were still living as of November 2017.[115]

text: Canada has had its own Privy Council—the Queen's Privy Council for Canada—since 1867.[116] While the Canadian Privy Council is specifically "for Canada", the Privy Council discussed above is not "for the United Kingdom"; in order to clarify the ambiguity where necessary, the latter was traditionally referred to as the Imperial Privy Council. Equivalent organs of state in other Commonwealth realms, such as Australia and New Zealand, are called Executive Councils.[117][118]


question_text: what is field 20 in a swift message

question_tokens: what is field 20 in a swift message

text: MT103 is a SWIFT payment message type/format used for cash transfer specifically for cross border/international wire transfer.

text: Specification of SWIFT MT[edit]

text: SWIFT messages consist of five blocks of the data including three headers, message content, and a trailer. Message types are crucial to identifying content.

text: Below are different SWIFT message types

text:
Message Type
Description

MT0xx
System Messages

MT1xx
Customer Payments and Cheques

MT2xx
Financial Institution Transfers

MT3xx
Treasury Markets

MT4xx
Collection and Cash Letters

MT5xx
Securities Markets

MT6xx
Treasury Markets - Metals and Syndications

MT7xx
Documentary Credits and Guarantees

MT8xx
Travelers Cheques

MT9xx
Cash Management and Customer Status

tag: table

text: All SWIFT messages include the literal "MT" (Message Type). This is followed by a three-digit number that denotes the message category, group and type. Consider the following example -- MT103:

text: The first digit (1) represents the category. A category denotes messages that relate to particular financial instruments or services such as Cash Transfer(1), Treasury (3), or Cash Management (9). The category denoted by 1 is Cash Transfer.

text: The second digit (0) represents a group of related parts in a transaction life cycle. The group indicated by 0 is a Financial Institution Transfer.

text: The third digit (3) is the type that denotes the specific message. There are several hundred message types across the categories. The type represented by 3 is a notification.[1]

text: MT103 Fields[edit]

text: Below are the fields of an MT 103 message . These fields are referred to as tags.

text:
Field
Field Name

:20
Transaction Reference Number

:23B
Bank Operation Code

:32A
Value Date / Currency / Interbank Settled

:33B
Currency / Original Ordered Amount

:50A, F or K
Ordering Customer (Payer)

:52A or D
Ordering Institution (Payer's Bank)

:53A, B or D
Sender's Correspondent (Bank)

:54A, B or D
Receiver's Correspondent (Bank)

:56A, C or D
Intermediary (Bank)

:57A, B, C or D
Account with Institution (Beneficiary's Bank)

:59 or 59A
Beneficiary

:70
Remittance Information

:71A
Details of Charges (OUR/SHA/BEN)

:72
Sender to Receiver Information

:77A
Regulatory Reporting

text: In the above table, tags 52, 53, 54, 56, and 57 preferably contain Business Identifier Codes BIC, whereas tags 50 and 59 preferably contain an account number or BIC.[2]


document_title: Chauncey Leopardi

question_text: who plays the bully in freaks and geeks

question_tokens: who plays the bully in freaks and geeks

text: Chauncey Leopardi

text: Career[edit]

text: Leopardi has been in films since he was 5, and is known for his role at eleven years old as Michael "Squints" Palledorous in the 1993 film The Sandlot.[1][2] Leopardi also made a single appearance in Boy Meets World, in the pilot episode. He also appeared in runs as bully Alan White on the short-lived NBC series Freaks and Geeks and as the geeky Navy sailor, Kyle, on The CW network's Gilmore Girls. He has appeared in various other films and television series, including the 1995 comedy Houseguest. In 2007, he reprised his role of Michael 'Squints' Palledorous in the third installment of The Sandlot series, fourteen years after the original movie. During the late 1990s, he played a recurring role as Otto the Nome Prince in the ABC cartoon series The Oz Kids.

text: Filmography[edit]

text:
Coldwater (2013) - Eddie
The Sandlot: Heading Home (2007) - Michael 'Squints' Palledorous
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (2005) (TV) - Lawrence Lafontaine
Gilmore Girls (2003-2005) (TV) - Kyle, 5 episodes
Snoops (2000) (TV) - Mike Johnson
Freaks and Geeks (1999-2000) (TV) - Alan White, 9 episodes
Walker, Texas Ranger (1999) (TV) - Bobby Landrum
Permanent Midnight (1998) - Jerry at 16
7th Heaven (1998) (TV) - Todd's Friend
The Opposite of Sex (1998) - Joe
Trojan War (1997) - Freshman
The Larry Sanders Show (1997) (TV) - Charlie
The Paper Brigade (1997) - Charlie Parker
Virtual Oz (1996) (TV) - Otto (voice)
Sticks and Stones (1996) - Mouth
The Big Green (1995) - Evan Schiff
Casper (1995) - Nicky
Houseguest (1995) - Jason Young
Safe (1995) - Rory
Huck and the King of Hearts (1994) - Huck
Boy Meets World (1993) (TV) - Nicholas
The Sandlot (1993) - Michael 'Squints' Palledorous
The Commish (1993) (TV) - Sam Alexowski
Evening Shade (1992) (TV) - Joel
Father of the Bride (1991) - Cameron
L.A. Law (1990) (TV) - Eric Perkins, Age 7, 2 episodes

text: Commercial appearances[edit]

text:
KFC-Snacker Commercial (2008) - Friend with back pack on
7-up Commercial (1998) - Stand in