document_title: Breathalyzer

question_text: what volume of breath does a breathalyzer collect

text: Breathalyzer

text: Origins[edit]

text: A 1927 paper produced by Emil Bogen,[3] who collected air in a football bladder and then tested this air for traces of alcohol, discovered that the alcohol content of 2 litres of expired air was a little greater than that of 1 cc of urine. However, research into the possibilities of using breath to test for alcohol in a person's body dates as far back as 1874, when Francis E. Anstie made the observation that small amounts of alcohol were excreted in breath.[4]

text: Also, in 1927 a Chicago chemist, William Duncan McNally, invented a breathalyzer in which the breath moving through chemicals in water would change color. One use for his invention was for housewives to test whether their husbands had been drinking.[5]

text: In late 1927, in a case in Marlborough, England, a Dr. Gorsky, Police Surgeon, asked a suspect to inflate a football bladder with his breath. Since the 2 liters of the man's breath contained 1.5 ml of ethanol,[dubious – discuss] Dr. Gorsky testified before the court that the defendant was "50% drunk".[6]

text: In 1931 the first practical roadside breath-testing device was the drunkometer developed by Rolla Neil Harger of the Indiana University School of Medicine. The drunkometer collected a motorist's breath sample directly into a balloon inside the machine.[7] The breath sample was then pumped through an acidified potassium permanganate solution. If there was alcohol in the breath sample, the solution changed color. The greater the color change, the more alcohol there was present in the breath. The drunkometer was manufactured and sold by Stephenson Corporation of Red Bank, New Jersey.

text: In 1954 Robert Frank Borkenstein (1912–2002) was a captain with the Indiana State Police and later a professor at Indiana University Bloomington. His Breathalyzer used chemical oxidation and photometry to determine alcohol concentrations. Subsequent breath analyzers have converted primarily to infrared spectroscopy. The invention of the Breathalyzer provided law enforcement with a non-invasive test providing immediate results to determine an individual's breath alcohol concentration at the time of testing.[1]

text: In 1967 in Britain, Bill Ducie and Tom Parry Jones developed and marketed the first electronic breathalyser. They established Lion Laboratories in Cardiff. Ducie was a chartered electrical engineer, and Tom Parry Jones was a lecturer at UWIST.[8] The Road Safety Act 1967 introduced the first legally enforceable maximum blood alcohol level for drivers in the UK, above which it became an offence to be in charge of a motor vehicle; and introduced the roadside breathalyser, made available to police forces across the country.[9] In 1979, Lion Laboratories' version of the breathalyser, known as the Alcolyser and incorporating crystal-filled tubes that changed colour above a certain level of alcohol in the breath, was approved for police use. Lion Laboratories won the Queen's Award for Technological Achievement for the product in 1980, and it began to be marketed worldwide.[8] The Alcolyser was superseded by the Lion Intoximeter 3000 in 1983, and later by the Lion Alcolmeter and Lion Intoxilyser.[10] These later models used a fuel cell alcohol sensor rather than crystals, providing a more reliable curbside test and removing the need for blood or urine samples to be taken at a police station. In 1991, Lion Laboratories was sold to the American company MPD, Inc.[8]

text: Chemistry[edit]

text: When the user exhales into a breath analyzer, any ethanol present in their breath is oxidized to acetic acid at the anode:

text: CH3CH2OH(g) + H2O(l) → CH3CO2H(l) + 4H+(aq) + 4e−

text: At the cathode, atmospheric oxygen is reduced:

text: O2(g) + 4H+(aq) + 4e− → 2H2O(l)

text: The overall reaction is the oxidation of ethanol to acetic acid and water.

text: CH3CH2OH(l) + O2(g) → CH3COOH(aq) + H2O(l)

text: The electric current produced by this reaction is measured by a microcontroller, and displayed as an approximation of overall blood alcohol content (BAC) by the Alcosensor.

text: Law enforcement[edit]

text: Breath analyzers do not directly measure blood alcohol content or concentration, which requires the analysis of a blood sample. Instead, they estimate BAC indirectly by measuring the amount of alcohol in one's breath. In general, two types of breathalyzer are used. Small hand-held breathalyzers are not reliable enough to provide evidence in court but reliable enough to justify an arrest. Larger breathalyzer devices found in police stations can then be used to produce court evidence.

text: Two breathalyzer technologies are most prevalent. Desktop analyzers generally use infrared spectrophotometer technology, electrochemical fuel cell technology, or a combination of the two. Hand-held field testing devices are generally based on electrochemical platinum fuel cell analysis and, depending upon jurisdiction, may be used by officers in the field as a form of "field sobriety test" commonly called PBT (preliminary breath test) or PAS (preliminary alcohol screening) or as evidential devices in POA (point of arrest) testing.

text: In Canada, a preliminary non-evidentiary screening device can be approved by Parliament as an approved screening device, and an evidentiary breath instrument can be similarly designated as an approved instrument. The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration maintains a Conforming Products List of breath alcohol devices approved for evidentiary use,[11] as well as for preliminary screening use.[12] In order to demand a person produce a breathalyzer sample an officer must have "reasonable suspicion" that the person drove with more than 80 mg alcohol per 100 mL of blood.[13] The demand must be within three hours of driving. Any driver that refuses can be charged under s.254[13] of the Criminal Code. Most states, including California and Michigan, have implied consent laws, which means that by applying for a driver's license, drivers are agreeing to take any breathalyzer test under suspicion of a DUI.[14] However, if the officer lacks reasonable suspicion and the person refuses there is no crime since the demand was not lawful and without the breathalyzer readings there is usually not probable grounds for arrest on the above driving over 80 charge.[15]

text: Public and private consumer use[edit]

text: All breath alcohol testers used by law enforcement in the United States of America must be approved by the Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.[16]

text: Public breathalyzers are becoming a method for consumers to test themselves at the source of alcohol consumption.[citation needed] These are used in pubs, bars, restaurants, charities, weddings and all types of licensed events.

text: Breath test evidence in the United States[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: The breath alcohol content reading is used in criminal prosecutions in two ways. The operator of a vehicle whose reading indicates a BAC over the legal limit for driving will be charged with having committed an illegal per se offense: that is, it is automatically illegal throughout the United States to drive a vehicle with a Breath Alcohol Concentration (BrAC) of 0.08% or higher. One exception is the state of Wisconsin, where a first time drunk driving offense is normally a civil ordinance violation.[17]

text: The uniformity is due to federal guidelines that states choose to adopt as motor vehicle laws are enacted by the individual states. It is said that the federal government ensures the passage of the federal guidelines by tying traffic safety highway funds to compliance with federal guidelines on certain issues, such as the federal government ensuring that the legal drinking age be the age of 21 across the 50 states. In earlier years, the range of the threshold varied considerably between States.

text: The breath analyzer reading will be offered as evidence of that crime, although the issue is what the BrAC was at the time of driving rather than at the time of the test. Some jurisdictions, such as the State of Washington, now allow the use of breath analyzer test results without regard as to how much time passed between operation of the vehicle and the time the test was administered. The suspect will also be charged with driving under the influence of alcohol (sometimes referred to as driving or operating while intoxicated). While BrAC tests are not necessary to prove a defendant was under the influence, laws in most states require the jury to presume that he was under the influence if his BrAC is found and believed to be over 0.08 (grams of alcohol/210 liters breath) when driving. In California, this is once again demonstrated by California Vehicle Code Section 23152(b) and Cal-Crim 2111, which states: "If the People have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a sample of the defendant's (blood/breath/urine) was taken within three hours of the defendant's [alleged] driving and that a chemical analysis of the sample showed a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent or more, you may, but are not required to, conclude that the defendant's blood alcohol level was 0.08 percent or more at the time of the alleged offense." This creates a rebuttable presumption, which means it is presumed, but that presumption can be rebutted if a jury finds it unreliable or if other evidence establishes a reasonable doubt as to whether the person actually drove with a breath or blood alcohol level of 0.08% or greater. This would not apply to States that have done away with the presumption, such as the State of Washington, as previously referenced.

text: Infrared instruments are also known as "evidentiary breath testers" and generally produce court-admissible results. Other instruments, usually hand held in design, are known as "preliminary breath testers" (PBT), and their results, while valuable to an officer attempting to establish probable cause for a drunk driving arrest, are generally not admissible in court. Some states, such as Idaho, permit data or "readings" from hand-held PBTs to be presented as evidence in court. If at all, they are generally only admissible to show the presence of alcohol or as a pass-fail field sobriety test to help determine probable cause to arrest. South Dakota does not permit data from any type of breath tester, and relies entirely on blood tests to ensure accuracy.

text: Historically, states initially tried to prohibit driving with a high level of BAC, and a BrAC test result was merely presented as indirect evidence of BAC. Where the defendant had refused to take a subsequent blood test, the only way the state could prove BAC was by presenting scientific evidence of how alcohol in the breath gets there from alcohol in the blood, along with evidence of how to convert from one to the other. DUI defense attorneys frequently contested the scientific reliability of such evidence.[18] In response, many states like California subsequently modified their BAC statutes so to directly prohibit a certain level of alcohol in the breath as an alternative to a prohibited level of BAC. In other words, the breath test result itself, the BrAC level, became the direct predicate evidence for conviction. In other states, such as New Jersey, the statute remains tied to BAC, but the BrAC results of certain machines have been judicially deemed presumptively accurate substitutes for blood testing when used as directed.[19]

text: Common sources of error[edit]

text: Police in Victoria, Australia, use breathalyzers that give a recognized 20% tolerance on readings. Noel Ashby, former Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner (Traffic & Transport), claims that this tolerance is to allow for different body types.[20]

text: Calibration[edit]

text: Many handheld breath analyzers sold to consumers use a silicon oxide sensor (also called a semiconductor sensor) to determine the blood alcohol concentration. These sensors are far more prone to contamination and interference from substances other than breath alcohol. The sensors require recalibration or replacement every six months. Higher end personal breath analyzers and professional-use breath alcohol testers use platinum fuel cell sensors. These too require recalibration but at less frequent intervals than semiconductor devices, usually once a year.[21]

text: Calibration is the process of checking and adjusting the internal settings of a breath analyzer by comparing and adjusting its test results to a known alcohol standard. Law enforcement breath analyzers need to be meticulously maintained and re-calibrated frequently to ensure accuracy.[citation needed]

text: There are two methods of calibrating a precision fuel cell breath analyzer, the Wet Bath and the Dry Gas method. Each method requires specialized equipment and factory trained technicians. It is not a procedure that can be conducted by untrained users or without the proper equipment.

text: The Dry-Gas Method utilizes a portable calibration standard which is a precise mixture of alcohol and inert nitrogen available in a pressurized canister. Initial equipment costs are less than alternative methods and the steps required are fewer. The equipment is also portable allowing calibrations to be done when and where required.

text: The Wet Bath Method utilizes an alcohol/water standard in a precise specialized alcohol concentration, contained and delivered in specialized simulator equipment. Wet bath apparatus has a higher initial cost and is not intended to be portable. The standard must be fresh and replaced regularly.

text: Some semiconductor models are designed specifically to allow the sensor module to be replaced without the need to send the unit to a calibration lab.

text: Non-specific analysis[edit]

text: One major problem with older breath analyzers is non-specificity: the machines identify not only the ethyl alcohol (or ethanol) found in alcoholic beverages but also other substances similar in molecular structure or reactivity.

text: The oldest breath analyzer models pass breath through a solution of potassium dichromate, which oxidizes ethanol into acetic acid, changing color in the process. A monochromatic light beam is passed through this sample, and a detector records the change in intensity and, hence, the change in color, which is used to calculate the percent alcohol in the breath. However, since potassium dichromate is a strong oxidizer, numerous alcohol groups can be oxidized by it, producing false positives. This source of false positives is unlikely as very few other substances found in exhaled air are oxidizable.

text: Infrared-based breath analyzers project an infrared beam of radiation through the captured breath in the sample chamber and detect the absorbance of the compound as a function of the wavelength of the beam, producing an absorbance spectrum that can be used to identify the compound, as the absorbance is due to the harmonic vibration and stretching of specific bonds in the molecule at specific wavelengths (see infrared spectroscopy). The characteristic bond of alcohols in infrared is the O-H bond, which gives a strong absorbance at a short wavelength. The more light is absorbed by compounds containing the alcohol group, the less reaches the detector on the other side—and the higher the reading. Other groups, most notably aromatic rings and carboxylic acids can give similar absorbance readings.[22]

text: Interfering compounds[edit]

text: Some natural and volatile interfering compounds do exist, however. For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has found that dieters and diabetics may have acetone levels hundreds or even thousands of times higher than those in others. Acetone is one of the many substances that can be falsely identified as ethyl alcohol by some breath machines. However, fuel cell based systems are non-responsive to substances like acetone.

text: Substances in the environment can also lead to false BAC readings. For example, methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), a common gasoline additive, has been alleged anecdotally to cause false positives in persons exposed to it. Tests have shown this to be true for older machines; however, newer machines detect this interference and compensate for it.[23] Any number of other products found in the environment or workplace can also cause erroneous BAC results. These include compounds found in lacquer, paint remover, celluloid, gasoline, and cleaning fluids, especially ethers, alcohols, and other volatile compounds.

text: Homeostatic variables[edit]

text: Breath analyzers assume that the subject being tested has a 2100-to-1 partition ratio in converting alcohol measured in the breath to estimates of alcohol in the blood. If the instrument estimates the BAC, then it measures weight of alcohol to volume of breath, so it will effectively measure grams of alcohol per 2100 ml of breath given. This measure is in direct proportion to the amount of grams of alcohol to every 1 ml of blood. Therefore, there is a 2100-to-1 ratio of alcohol in blood to alcohol in breath. However, this assumed partition ratio varies from 1300:1 to 3100:1 or wider among individuals and within a given individual over time. Assuming a true (and US legal) blood-alcohol concentration of .07%, for example, a person with a partition ratio of 1500:1 would have a breath test reading of .10%—over the legal limit.

text: Most individuals do, in fact, have a 2100-to-1 partition ratio in accordance with William Henry's law, which states that when the water solution of a volatile compound is brought into equilibrium with air, there is a fixed ratio between the concentration of the compound in air and its concentration in water. This ratio is constant at a given temperature. The human body is 37 degrees Celsius on average. Breath leaves the mouth at a temperature of 34 degrees Celsius. Alcohol in the body obeys Henry's Law as it is a volatile compound and diffuses in body water. To ensure that variables such as fever and hypothermia could not be pointed out to influence the results in a way that was harmful to the accused, the instrument is calibrated at a ratio of 2100:1, underestimating by 9 percent. In order for a person running a fever to significantly overestimate, he would have to have a fever that would likely see the subject in the hospital rather than driving in the first place. Studies suggest that about 1.8% of the population have a partition ratio below 2100:1. Thus, a machine using a 2100-to-1 ratio could actually overestimate the BAC. As much as 14% of the population has a partition ratio above 2100, thus causing the machine to under-report the BAC. Further, the assumption that the test subject's partition ratio will be average—that there will be 2100 parts in the blood for every part in the breath—means that accurate analysis of a given individual's blood alcohol by measuring breath alcohol is difficult, as the ratio varies considerably.

text: Variance in how much one breathes out can also give false readings, usually low.[24] This is due to biological variance in breath alcohol concentration as a function of the volume of air in the lungs, an example of a factor which interferes with the liquid-gas equilibrium assumed by the devices. The presence of volatile components is another example of this; mixtures of volatile compounds can be more volatile than their components, which can create artificially high levels of ethanol (or other) vapors relative to the normal biological blood/breath alcohol equilibrium.

text: Mouth alcohol[edit]

text: One of the most common causes of falsely high breath analyzer readings is the existence of mouth alcohol. In analyzing a subject's breath sample, the breath analyzer's internal computer is making the assumption that the alcohol in the breath sample came from alveolar air—that is, air exhaled from deep within the lungs. However, alcohol may have come from the mouth, throat or stomach for a number of reasons.[25] To help guard against mouth-alcohol contamination, certified breath-test operators are trained to observe a test subject carefully for at least 15–20 minutes before administering the test.

text: The problem with mouth alcohol being analyzed by the breath analyzer is that it was not absorbed through the stomach and intestines and passed through the blood to the lungs. In other words, the machine's computer is mistakenly applying the partition ratio (see above) and multiplying the result. Consequently, a very tiny amount of alcohol from the mouth, throat or stomach can have a significant impact on the breath-alcohol reading.

text: Other than recent drinking, the most common source of mouth alcohol is from belching or burping[citation needed]. This causes the liquids and/or gases from the stomach—including any alcohol—to rise up into the soft tissue of the esophagus and oral cavity, where it will stay until it has dissipated. The American Medical Association concludes in its Manual for Chemical Tests for Intoxication (1959): "True reactions with alcohol in expired breath from sources other than the alveolar air (eructation, regurgitation, vomiting) will, of course, vitiate the breath alcohol results." For this reason, police officers are supposed to keep a DUI suspect under observation for at least 15 minutes prior to administering a breath test. Instruments such as the Intoxilyzer 5000 also feature a "slope" parameter. This parameter detects any decrease in alcohol concentration of 0.006 g per 210 L of breath in 0.6 second, a condition indicative of residual mouth alcohol, and will result in an "invalid sample" warning to the operator, notifying the operator of the presence of the residual mouth alcohol. PBT's, however, feature no such safeguard.

text: Acid reflux, or gastroesophageal reflux disease, can greatly exacerbate the mouth-alcohol problem. The stomach is normally separated from the throat by a valve, but when this valve becomes herniated, there is nothing to stop the liquid contents in the stomach from rising and permeating the esophagus and mouth. The contents—including any alcohol—are then later exhaled into the breathalyzer. One study of 10 individuals suffering from this condition did not find any actual increase in Breath Ethanol.[26]

text: Mouth alcohol can also be created in other ways. Dentures, some have theorized, will trap alcohol, although experiments have shown no difference if the normal 15 minute observation period is observed.[27] Periodontal disease can also create pockets in the gums which will contain the alcohol for longer periods[citation needed]. Also known to produce false results due to residual alcohol in the mouth is passionate kissing with an intoxicated person[citation needed]. Recent use of mouthwash or breath fresheners can skew results upward as they can contain fairly high levels of alcohol[citation needed].

text: Testing during absorptive phase[edit]

text: Absorption of alcohol continues for anywhere from 20 minutes (on an empty stomach) to two-and-one-half hours (on a full stomach) after the last consumption. Peak absorption generally occurs within an hour. During the initial absorptive phase, the distribution of alcohol throughout the body is not uniform. Uniformity of distribution, called equilibrium, occurs just as absorption completes. In other words, some parts of the body will have a higher blood alcohol content (BAC) than others. One aspect of the non-uniformity before absorption is complete is that the BAC in arterial blood will be higher than in venous blood. Other false positive of high BAC and also blood reading are related to Patients with proteinuria and hematuria, due to kidney metabolization and failure. The metabolization rate of related patients with kidney damage is abnormal in relation to percent in alcohol in the breath. However, since potassium dichromate is a strong oxidizer, numerous alcohol groups can be oxidized by kidney and blood filtration, producing false positives.[28]

text: During the initial absorption phase, arterial blood alcohol concentrations are higher than venous. After absorption, venous blood is higher. This is especially true with bolus dosing. With additional doses of alcohol, the body can reach a sustained equilibrium when absorption and elimination are proportional, calculating a general absorption rate of 0.02/drink and a general elimination rate of 0.015/hour. (One drink is equal to 1.5 US fl oz (44 ml) of liquor, 12 US fl oz (350 ml) of beer, or 5 US fl oz (150 ml) of wine.[29])

text: Breath alcohol is a representation of the equilibrium of alcohol concentration as the blood gases (alcohol) pass from the (arterial) blood into the lungs to be expired in the breath. Arterial blood distributes oxygen throughout the body. Breath alcohol concentrations are generally lower than blood alcohol concentrations, because a true representation of blood alcohol concentration is only possible if the lungs were able to completely deflate. Vitreous (eye) fluid provides the most accurate account of blood alcohol concentration[citation needed].

text: Retrograde extrapolation[edit]

text: The breath analyzer test is usually administered at a police station, commonly an hour or more after the arrest. Although this gives the BrAC at the time of the test, it does not by itself answer the question of what it was at the time of driving. The prosecution typically provides an estimated alcohol concentration at the time of driving utilizing retrograde extrapolation, presented by expert opinion. This involves projecting back in time to estimate the BrAC level at the time of driving, by applying the physiological properties of absorption and elimination rates in the human body.[citation needed]

text: Extrapolation is calculated using five factors and a general elimination rate of 0.015/hour.

text: Breathalyzer sensors[edit]

text: Breath analyzer myths[edit]

text: There are a number of substances or techniques that can supposedly "fool" a breath analyzer (i.e., generate a lower blood alcohol content).

text: A 2003 episode of the science television show MythBusters tested a number of methods that supposedly allow a person to fool a breath analyzer test. The methods tested included breath mints, onions, denture cream, mouthwash, pennies and batteries; all of these methods proved ineffective. The show noted that using these items to cover the smell of alcohol may fool a person, but, since they will not actually reduce a person's BrAC, there will be no effect on a breath analyzer test regardless of the quantity used, if any, it appeared that using mouthwash only raised the BrAC. Pennies supposedly produce a chemical reaction, while batteries supposedly create an electrical charge, yet neither of these methods affected the breath analyzer results.[33]

text: The MythBusters episode also pointed out another complication: it would be necessary to insert the item into one's mouth (for example, eat an onion, rinse with mouthwash, conceal a battery), take the breath test, and then possibly remove the item — all of which would have to be accomplished discreetly enough to avoid alerting the police officers administering the test (who would obviously become very suspicious if they noticed that a person was inserting items into their mouth prior to taking a breath test). It would likely be very difficult, especially for someone in an intoxicated state, to be able to accomplish such a feat.[33]

text: In addition, the show noted that breath tests are often verified with blood tests (BAC, which are more accurate) and that even if a person somehow managed to fool a breath test, a blood test would certainly confirm a person's guilt.[33] However, it is not clear why a negative breath test would be verified by a subsequent blood test.

text: Other substances that might reduce the BrAC reading include a bag of activated charcoal concealed in the mouth (to absorb alcohol vapor), an oxidizing gas (such as N2O, Cl2, O3, etc.) that would fool a fuel cell type detector, or an organic interferent to fool an infrared absorption detector. The infrared absorption detector is more vulnerable to interference than a laboratory instrument measuring a continuous absorption spectrum since it only makes measurements at particular discrete wavelengths. However, due to the fact that any interference can only cause higher absorption, not lower, the estimated blood alcohol content will be overestimated.[citation needed] Additionally, Cl2 is rather toxic and corrosive.

text: A 2007 episode of the Spike network's show Manswers showed some of the more common and not-so-common ways of attempts to beat the breath analyzer, none of which work. Test 1 was to suck on a copper-coated coin such as a penny. Test 2 was to hold a battery on the tongue. Test 3 was to chew gum. None of these tests showed a "pass" reading if the subject had consumed alcohol.

text: Products that interfere with testing[edit]

text: On the other hand, it is alleged that products such as mouthwash or breath spray can "fool" breath machines by significantly raising test results. Listerine mouthwash, for example, contains 27% alcohol. The breath machine is calibrated with the assumption that the alcohol is coming from alcohol in the blood diffusing into the lung rather than directly from the mouth, so it applies a partition ratio of 2100:1 in computing blood alcohol concentration—resulting in a false high test reading. To counter this, officers are not supposed to administer a preliminary breath test for 15 minutes after the subject eats, vomits, or puts anything in their mouth.[34] In addition, most instruments require that the individual be tested twice at least two minutes apart. Mouthwash or other mouth alcohol will have somewhat dissipated after two minutes and cause the second reading to disagree with the first, requiring a retest. (Also see the discussion of the "slope parameter" of the Intoxilyzer 5000 in the "Mouth Alcohol" section above.)

text: A scientist tested the effects of Binaca breath spray on an Intoxilyzer 5000. He performed 23 tests with subjects who sprayed their throats and obtained readings as high as 0.81—far beyond lethal levels. The scientist also noted that the effects of the spray did not fall below detectable levels until after 18 minutes.[35]


document_title: Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States

question_text: when did interracial marriage become legal in california

root

text: Colonial era[edit]

text: The first laws criminalizing marriage and sex between whites and blacks were enacted in the colonial era in the English colonies of Virginia and Maryland, which depended economically on unpaid labor such as slavery.

tag: p

text: At first, in the 1660s, the first laws in Virginia and Maryland regulating marriage between whites and blacks only pertained to the marriages of whites with black (and mulatto) slaves and indentured servants. In 1664, Maryland enacted a law which criminalized such marriages—the 1681 marriage of Irish-born Nell Butler to an African slave was an early example of the application of this law. Virginia (1691) was the first English colony in North America to pass a law forbidding free blacks and whites to intermarry, followed by Maryland in 1692. This was the first time in American history that a law was invented that restricted access to marriage partners solely on the basis of "race", not class or condition of servitude.[7] Later these laws also spread to colonies in the Thirteen Colonies with fewer slaves and free blacks, such as Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. Moreover, after the independence of the United States had been established, similar laws were enacted in territories and states which outlawed slavery.

text: A sizable number of the early indentured servants in the British American colonies were brought over from the Indian subcontinent by the British East India Company.[8] Anti-miscegenation laws discouraging interracial marriage between white Americans and non-whites affected South Asian immigrants as early as the 17th century.[citation needed] For example, a Eurasian daughter born to an Indian father and Irish mother in Maryland in 1680 was classified as a "mulatto" and sold into slavery.[8] Anti-miscegenation laws there continued into the early 20th century. For example, the Bengali revolutionary Tarak Nath Das's white American wife, Mary K. Das, was stripped of her American citizenship for her marriage to an "alien ineligible for citizenship."[8] In 1918, there was considerable controversy in Arizona when an Indian farmer B. K. Singh married the sixteen-year-old daughter of one of his white tenants.[9]

text: In 1685, the French government issued a special Code Noir restricted to Louisiana, which banned the marriage of Catholics and non-Catholics in that colony.[10] However, interracial cohabitation and interracial sex were never prohibited in French Louisiana (see plaçage). The situation of the children (free or slave) followed the situation of the mother.[11] Under Spanish rule, interracial marriage was possible with parental consent under the age of 25 and without it when the partners were older. In 1806, three years after the U.S. gained control over the state, interracial marriage was once again banned.[12]

text: It has been argued[by whom?] that the first laws banning all marriage between whites and blacks, enacted in Virginia and Maryland, were a response by the planter elite to the problems they were facing due to the socio-economic dynamics of the plantation system in the Southern colonies. The bans in Virginia and Maryland were established at a time when slavery was not yet fully institutionalized. At the time, most forced laborers on the plantations were indentured servants, and they were mostly European. Some historians have suggested that the at-the-time unprecedented laws banning "interracial" marriage were originally invented by planters as a divide-and-rule tactic after the uprising of European and African indentured servants in cases such as Bacon's Rebellion. According to this theory, the ban on interracial marriage was issued to split up the ethnically mixed, increasingly "mixed-race" labor force into "whites," who were given their freedom, and "blacks," who were later treated as slaves rather than as indentured servants. By outlawing "interracial" marriage, it became possible to keep these two new groups separated and prevent a new rebellion.

text: After American independence[edit]

text: In 1776, seven out of the Thirteen Colonies that declared their independence enforced laws against interracial marriage. Although slavery was gradually abolished in the North after independence, this at first had little impact on the enforcement of anti-miscegenation laws. An exception was Pennsylvania, which repealed its anti-miscegenation law in 1780, together with some of the other restrictions placed on free blacks, when it enacted a bill for the gradual abolition of slavery in the state.

text: For the radical abolitionists who organized to oppose slavery in the 1830s, laws banning interracial marriage embodied the same racial prejudice that they saw at the root of slavery. Abolitionist leader William Lloyd Garrison took aim at Massachusetts' legal ban on interracial marriage as early as 1831. Anti-abolitionists defended the measure as necessary to prevent racial amalgamation and to maintain the Bay State's proper racial and moral order. Abolitionists, however, objected that the law, because it "distinguished between 'citizens on account of complexion,'" violated the broad egalitarian tenets of Christianity and republicanism as well as the state constitution's promise of equality. Beginning in the late 1830s, abolitionists began a several-year petition campaign that prompted the legislature to repeal the measure in 1843. Their efforts—both tactically and intellectually—constituted a foundational moment in the era's burgeoning minority-rights politics, which would continue to expand into the twentieth century.[13]

text: As the US expanded, however, all the new slave states as well as many new free states such as Illinois[14] and California[15] enacted such laws.

text: Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, South Carolina and Alabama legalized interracial marriage for some years during the Reconstruction period. Anti-miscegenation laws rested unenforced, were overturned by courts or repealed by the state government (in Arkansas[16] and Louisiana[17]). However, after white Democrats took power in the South during "Redemption", anti-miscegenation laws were re-enacted and once more enforced, and in addition Jim Crow laws were enacted in the South which also enforced other forms of racial segregation.[18] In Florida, the new Constitution of 1888 prohibited marriage between "a white person and a person of negro descent" (Article XVI, Section 24).

text: A number of northern and western states permanently repealed their anti-miscegenation laws during the 19th century. This, however, did little to halt anti-miscegenation sentiments in the rest of the country. Newly established western states continued to enact laws banning interracial marriage in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Between 1913 and 1948, 30 out of the then 48 states enforced anti-miscegenation laws.[19] Only Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Alaska, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia never enacted them.

text: Anti-miscegenation laws and the U.S. Constitution[edit]

text: At least three proposed constitutional amendments intended to bar interracial marriage in the United States were introduced in Congress.[20]

text: In 1871, Representative Andrew King (Democrat of Missouri) was the first politician in Congress to propose a constitutional amendment to make interracial marriage illegal nationwide. King proposed this amendment because he predicted (correctly, as the case of Loving v. Virginia later demonstrated) that the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868 to give equal civil rights to the emancipated ex-slaves (the Freedmen) as part of the process of Reconstruction, would render laws against interracial marriage unconstitutional.

text: In December 1912 and January 1913, Representative Seaborn Roddenbery (Democrat of Georgia) again introduced a proposal in the United States House of Representatives to insert a prohibition of miscegenation into the US Constitution and thus create a nationwide ban on interracial marriage. According to the wording of the proposed amendment, "Intermarriage between negros or persons of color and Caucasians... within the United States... is forever prohibited." Roddenbery's proposal was more severe because it defined the racial boundary between whites and "persons of color" by applying the one-drop rule. In his proposed amendment, anyone with "any trace of African or Negro blood" was banned from marrying a white spouse.

text: Roddenbery's proposed amendment was also a direct reaction to African American heavyweight champion Jack Johnson's marriages to white women, first to Etta Duryea and then to Lucille Cameron. In 1908, Johnson had become the first black boxing world champion, having beaten Tommy Burns. After his victory, the search was on for a white boxer, a "Great White Hope", to beat Johnson. Those hopes were dashed in 1910, when Johnson beat former world champion Jim Jeffries. This victory ignited race riots all over America as frustrated whites attacked celebrating African Americans.[21] Johnson's marriages to and affairs with white women further infuriated white Americans. In his speech introducing his bill before the United States Congress, Roddenbery compared the marriage of Johnson and Cameron to the enslavement of white women, and warned of future civil war that would ensue if interracial marriage was not made illegal nationwide:

text: No brutality, no infamy, no degradation in all the years of southern slavery, possessed such villainous character and such atrocious qualities as the provision of the laws of Illinois, Massachusetts, and other states which allow the marriage of the negro, Jack Johnson, to a woman of Caucasian strain. [applause]. Gentleman, I offer this resolution ... that the States of the Union may have an opportunity to ratify it. ...

text: Spurred on by Roddenbery's introduction of the anti-miscegenation amendment, politicians in many of the 19 states lacking anti-miscegenation laws proposed their enactment. In 1913, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which had abolished its anti-miscegenation law in 1843, enacted a measure (not repealed until 2008[22]) that prevented couples who could not marry in their home state from marrying in Massachusetts.[23]

text: In 1928, Senator Coleman Blease (Democrat of South Carolina) proposed an amendment that went beyond the previous ones, requiring that Congress set a punishment for interracial couples attempting to get married and for people officiating an interracial marriage. This amendment was also never enacted.

text: The constitutionality of anti-miscegenation laws was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1883 case Pace v. Alabama (106 U.S. 583). The Supreme Court ruled that the Alabama anti-miscegenation statute did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. According to the court, both races were treated equally, because whites and blacks were punished in equal measure for breaking the law against interracial marriage and interracial sex. This judgment was overturned in 1967 in the Loving v. Virginia case, where the Supreme Court declared anti-miscegenation laws a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and therefore unconstitutional.

text: The repeal of anti-miscegenation laws, 1948–1967[edit]

text: The constitutionality of anti-miscegenation laws only began to be widely called into question after World War II. In 1948, the California Supreme Court in Perez v. Sharp ruled that the Californian anti-miscegenation statute violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and was therefore unconstitutional. This was the first time since Reconstruction that a state court declared an anti-miscegenation law unconstitutional, and California was the first state since Ohio in 1887 to repeal its anti-miscegenation law.

text: As a result, during the 1950s, anti-miscegenation laws were repealed or overturned in state after state, except in the South. Nonetheless, in the 1950s, the repeal of anti-miscegenation laws was still a controversial issue in the U.S., even among supporters of racial integration.

text: In 1958, the political theorist Hannah Arendt, a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany,[24] who escaped from Europe during the Holocaust, wrote in an essay in response to the Little Rock Crisis, the Civil Rights struggle for the racial integration of public schools which took place in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957, that anti-miscegenation laws were an even deeper injustice than the racial segregation of public schools. The free choice of a spouse, she argued in Reflections on Little Rock, was "an elementary human right": "Even political rights, like the right to vote, and nearly all other rights enumerated in the Constitution, are secondary to the inalienable human rights to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence; and to this category the right to home and marriage unquestionably belongs." Arendt was severely criticized by fellow liberals, who feared that her essay would arouse the racist fears common among whites and thus hinder the struggle of African Americans for civil rights and racial integration. Commenting on the Supreme Court's ruling in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka against de jure racial segregation in education, Arendt argued that anti-miscegenation laws were more basic to racial segregation than racial segregation in education.

text: Arendt's analysis of the centrality of laws against interracial marriage to white supremacy echoed the conclusions of Gunnar Myrdal. In his essay Social Trends in America and Strategic Approaches to the Negro Problem (1948), Myrdal ranked the social areas where restrictions were imposed by Southern whites on the freedom of African-Americans through racial segregation from the least to the most important: jobs, courts and police, politics, basic public facilities, "social equality" including dancing and handshaking, and most importantly, marriage. This ranking was indeed reflective of the way in which the barriers against desegregation fell under the pressure of the protests of the emerging Civil Rights Movement. First, legal segregation in the army, in education and in basic public services fell, then restrictions on the voting rights of African-Americans were lifted. These victories were ensured by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But the bans on interracial marriage were the last to go, in 1967.

text: Most white Americans in the 1950s were opposed to interracial marriage and did not see laws banning interracial marriage as an affront to the principles of American democracy. A 1958 Gallup poll showed that 94 percent of white Americans disapproved of interracial marriage.[25] However, attitudes towards bans on interracial marriage quickly changed in the 1960s.

text: By the 1960s, civil rights organizations were helping interracial couples who were being penalized for their relationships to take their cases to the Supreme Court. Since Pace v. Alabama, the court had declined to make a judgment in such cases. But in 1964, the Warren Court decided to issue a ruling in the case of an interracial couple from Florida who had been convicted because they had cohabited. In McLaughlin v. Florida, the Supreme Court ruled that the Florida state law which prohibited cohabitation between whites and non-whites was unconstitutional and based solely on a policy of racial discrimination. However, the court did not rule on Florida's ban on marriage between whites and non-whites, despite the appeal of the plaintiffs to do so and the argument made by the state of Florida that its ban on cohabitation between whites and blacks was ancillary to its ban on marriage between whites and blacks. However, in 1967, the court did decide to rule on the remaining anti-miscegenation laws when it was presented with the case of Loving v. Virginia.

text: Loving v. Virginia[edit]

text: All bans on interracial marriage were lifted only after an interracial couple from Virginia, Richard and Mildred Loving, began a legal battle in 1963 for the repeal of the anti-miscegenation law which prevented them from living as a couple in their home state of Virginia. The Lovings were supported by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Japanese American Citizens League and a coalition of Catholic bishops.

text: In 1958, Richard and Mildred Loving had married in Washington, D.C. to evade Virginia's anti-miscegenation law (the Racial Integrity Act). Having returned to Virginia, they were arrested in their bedroom for living together as an interracial couple. The judge suspended their sentence on the condition that the Lovings leave Virginia and not return for 25 years. In 1963, the Lovings, who had moved to Washington, D.C, decided to appeal this judgment. In 1965, Virginia trial court Judge Leon Bazile, who heard their original case, refused to reconsider his decision. Instead, he defended racial segregation, writing:

text: Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay, and red, and placed them on separate continents, and but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend the races to mix."[26]

text: The Lovings then took their case to the Supreme Court of Virginia, which invalidated the original sentence but upheld the state's Racial Integrity Act. Finally, the Lovings turned to the U.S Supreme Court. The court, which had previously avoided taking miscegenation cases, agreed to hear an appeal. In 1967, 84 years after Pace v. Alabama in 1883, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Loving v. Virginia that:

text: Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not to marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

text: The Supreme Court condemned Virginia's anti-miscegenation law as "designed to maintain White supremacy".

text: Later events[edit]

text: In 1967, 17 Southern states (all the former slave states plus Oklahoma) still enforced laws prohibiting marriage between whites and non-whites. Maryland repealed its law in response to the start of the proceedings at the Supreme Court. After the ruling of the Supreme Court, the remaining laws were no longer enforceable. Nonetheless, it took South Carolina until 1998 and Alabama until 2000 to amend their states' constitutions to remove language prohibiting miscegenation. In the respective referendums, 62% of voters in South Carolina and 59% of voters in Alabama voted to make the amendments. In Alabama nearly 526,000 people voted against the amendment, including a majority of voters in some rural counties.[27][28][29]

text: In 2009, Keith Bardwell, a justice of the peace in Robert, Louisiana, refused to officiate a civil wedding for an interracial couple. A nearby justice of the peace, on Bardwell's referral, officiated the wedding; the interracial couple sued Keith Bardwell and his wife Beth Bardwell in federal court.[30] After facing wide criticism for his actions, including from Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, Bardwell resigned on November 3, 2009.[31]

text: Summary[edit]

text: Laws repealed before 1887[edit]

text:
State
First law passed
Law repealed
Races whites were banned from marrying
Note

Illinois
1829
1874
Blacks

Iowa
1839
1851
Blacks

Kansas
1855
1859
Blacks
Law repealed before reaching statehood

Maine
1821
1883
Blacks, Native Americans

Massachusetts
1705
1843
Blacks, Native Americans
Passed the 1913 law preventing out-of-state couples from circumventing their home-state anti-miscegenation laws, which itself was repealed on July 31, 2008

Michigan
1838
1883
Blacks

New Mexico
1857
1866
Blacks
Law repealed before reaching statehood

Ohio
1861
1887
Blacks
Last state to repeal its anti-miscegenation law before California did so in 1948

Pennsylvania
1725
1780
Blacks

Rhode Island
1798
1881
Blacks, Native Americans

Washington
1855
1868
Blacks, Native Americans
Law repealed before reaching statehood

Wyoming
1869
1882
Blacks, Asians, Filipinos
Law repealed before reaching statehood, re-enacted after statehood, in 1913[33]

tag: table

text: Laws repealed 1948–1967[edit]

text:
State
First law passed
Law repealed
Races whites were banned from marrying
Note

Arizona
1865
1962
All non-Whites
("Filipinos") and Indians ("Hindus") added to list of "races" in 1931. As interpreted by the Supreme Court of Arizona in State v. Pass, 59 Ariz. 16, 121 P.2d 882 (1942), the law prohibited persons of mixed racial heritage from marrying anyone.

California
1850
1948
Blacks, Asians, Filipinos
Until Roldan v. Los Angeles County, it was unclear whether the law applied to Filipinos.[34] Anti-miscegenation law overturned by state judiciary in Supreme Court of California case Perez v. Sharp. Most Hispanics were included in White category.

Colorado
1864
1957
Blacks

Idaho
1864
1959
Blacks, Native Americans, Asians

Indiana
1818
1965
Blacks

Maryland
1692
1967
Blacks, Filipinos
Repealed its law in response to the start of the Loving v. Virginia case, and was the last state to repeal its law before the Supreme Court made all such laws unenforceable. Maryland also was one of the states to ban marriages between some peoples of color, preventing black–Filipino marriages in addition to Filipino–white and black–white marriages.

Montana
1909
1953
Blacks, Asians

Nebraska
1855
1963
Blacks, Asians

Nevada
1861
1959
Blacks, Native Americans, Asians, Filipinos

North Dakota
1909
1955
Blacks

Oregon
1862
1951
Blacks, Native Americans, Asians, Native Hawaiians

South Dakota
1909
1957
Blacks, Asians, Filipinos

Utah
1852
1963
Blacks, Asians, Filipinos
Initially enacted via the Act in Relation to Service

Wyoming
1913
1965
Blacks, Asians, Filipinos

text: Laws overturned on 12 June 1967 by Loving v. Virginia[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text:
State
First law passed
Races whites were banned from marrying
Note

Alabama
1822
Blacks
Repealed during Reconstruction, law later reinstated

Arkansas
1838
Blacks
Repealed during Reconstruction, law later reinstated

Delaware
1721
Blacks

Florida
1832
Blacks
Repealed during Reconstruction, law later reinstated (note law reinstated banning just blacks)

Georgia
1750
All non-whites

Kentucky
1792
Blacks

Louisiana
1724
Blacks
Repealed during Reconstruction, law later reinstated

Mississippi
1822
Blacks
Repealed during Reconstruction under the 1868 constitution, law later reinstated by the 1890 constitution.

Missouri
1835
Blacks, Asians

North Carolina
1715
Blacks, Native Americans
Starting in 1887, North Carolina also prevented marriages between Blacks and "Croatan Indians", but all other marriages between people of color were not covered by legislation

Oklahoma
1897
Blacks
Oklahoma's law was unique in its phrasing, preventing marriages of "any person of African descent ... to any person not of African descent." This statute was invoked occasionally to void marriages between blacks and Native Americans.[35]

South Carolina
1717
All non-whites
Repealed during Reconstruction, law later reinstated

Tennessee
1741[citation needed]
Blacks, Native Americans

Texas
1837
All non-whites

Virginia
1691
All non-whites
Previous anti-miscegenation law made more severe by Racial Integrity Act of 1924

West Virginia
1863
Blacks

text: Proposed anti-miscegenation amendments to the U.S. Constitution[edit]

text: At least three proposed Constitutional amendments to bar interracial marriage have been introduced before the U.S. Congress.[36]

text:
In 1871, Representative Andrew King, a Democrat of Missouri, was the first politician to propose banning interracial marriage nation-wide. King proposed this amendment because he feared that the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868 to give ex-slaves citizenship (the Freedmen) as part of the process of Reconstruction, would someday render laws against interracial marriage "unconstitutional". He was correct, as the case of Loving v. Virginia in 1967 demonstrated.
In December 1912 and January 1913, Representative Seaborn Roddenbery, a Democrat of Georgia, again introduced a proposal in the House of Representatives to insert a prohibition of miscegenation into the US Constitution. According to the wording of the proposed amendment, "Intermarriage between Negroes or persons of color and Caucasians... within the United States... is forever prohibited." Roddenbery's proposal was more severe because it defined the racial boundary between whites and "persons of color" by applying the one-drop rule. In his proposed amendment, anyone with "any trace of African or Negro blood" was banned from marrying a white spouse.

tag: ul

text: No brutality, no infamy, no degradation in all the years of southern slavery, possessed such villainous character and such atrocious qualities as the provision of the laws of Illinois, Massachusetts, and other states which allow the marriage of the Negro, Jack Johnson, to a woman of Caucasian strain. [Applause]. Gentleman, I offer this resolution ... that the States of the Union may have an opportunity to ratify it. ... Intermarriage between whites and blacks is repulsive and averse to every sentiment of pure American spirit. It is abhorrent and repugnant to the very principles of Saxon government. It is subversive of social peace. It is destructive of moral supremacy, and ultimately this slavery of white women to black beasts will bring this nation a conflict as fatal as ever reddened the soil of Virginia or crimsoned the mountain paths of Pennsylvania. ... Let us uproot and exterminate now this debasing, ultra-demoralizing, un-American and inhuman leprosy

text: Congressional Record, 62d. Congr., 3d. Sess., December 11, 1912, pp. 502–503.

text: In 1928, Senator Coleman Blease, a Democrat of South Carolina, proposed an amendment that went beyond the previous ones, requiring that Congress set a punishment for interracial couples attempting to get married and for people officiating an interracial marriage. This amendment was also never enacted.[37]

text: Footnotes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ Fredrickson, George M. (1987), The Black Image in the White Mind, Wesleyan University Press, p. 172, ISBN 0-8195-6188-6
Jump up ^ Woodson, Carter G. (1918), "The Beginnings of the Miscegenation of the Whites and Blacks", The Journal of Negro History, 3 (4): 335–353, doi:10.2307/2713814, JSTOR 2713814
Jump up ^ "Preserving Racial Identity: Population Patterns and the Application of Anti-Miscegenation Statutes to Asian Americans, 1910-1950". SSRN 283998 .  Missing or empty |url= (help)
Jump up ^ Martin, Byron Curti, Racism in the United States: A History of the Anti-Miscegenation Legislation and Litigation, pp. 1026, 1033–4, 1062–3, 1136–7  (See version of article in the USC Digital collection) }
Jump up ^ Courtroom History, Loving Day, archived from the original on 31 December 2007, retrieved 2008-01-02
Jump up ^ Edward Stein (2004), Past and Present Proposed Amendments to the United States Constitution regarding marriage (pdf), 82 (3), Washing State University Law Quarterly, retrieved 2008-01-04 , archived from the original Archived March 7, 2008, at the Wayback Machine. on 2006-08-12.
Jump up ^ Frank W Sweet (January 1, 2005), The Invention of the Color Line: 1691—Essays on the Color Line and the One-Drop Rule, Backentyme Essays, archived from the original on 2007-04-09, retrieved 2008-01-04
^ Jump up to: a b c Francis C. Assisi (2005), Indian-American Scholar Susan Koshy Probes Interracial Sex, INDOlink, archived from the original on 30 January 2009, retrieved 2009-01-02
Jump up ^ Echoes of Freedom: South Asian Pioneers in California, 1899-1965 - Chapter 9: Home Life, The Library, University of California, Berkeley, archived from the original on 18 February 2009, retrieved 2009-01-08
Jump up ^ Interracial Marriage and Cohabitation Laws, Redbone Heritage Foundation, retrieved 2008-01-04
Jump up ^ {fr} A. Mérignhac, Précis de législation & d'économie coloniales, librairie de la société du recueil Sirey, Paris 1912, p. 45
Jump up ^ Kimberly S. Hanger, Bounded Lives, Bounded Places: Free Black Society in Colonial New Orleans,1769-1803. Durham N.C., and London: Duke University Press, 1997.
Jump up ^ Kyle G. Volk, Moral Minorities and the Making of American Democracy (Oxford University Press, 2014), 104-116.
Jump up ^ Steiner, Mark. "The Lawyer as Peacemaker: Law and Community in Abraham Lincoln’s Slander Cases" Archived September 19, 2011, at the Wayback Machine.. The History Cooperative
Jump up ^ enacted similar anti-miscegenation laws."Chinese Laborers in the West" Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Program
Jump up ^ Robinson II, Charles F., University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. The Encyclopedia of Arkansas History & Culture. (accessed January 4, 2007).
Jump up ^ Miscegenation and competing definitions of race in twentieth-century Louisiana.
Jump up ^ Wallenstein, Peter, Tell the Court I love my wife
Jump up ^ Where were interracial couples illegal?, Loving Day, archived from the original on 31 December 2007, retrieved 2008-01-04
Jump up ^ John R. Vile (2003), Encyclopedia of constitutional amendments, proposed amendments, and amending issues, 1789-2002 (second ed.), ABC-CLIO, p. 243, ISBN 978-1-85109-428-8
Jump up ^ Rust and Rust, 1985, p. 147
^ Jump up to: a b "Governor signs law allowing out-of-state gays to wed". The Boston Globe. 2008-07-31. Retrieved 2009-09-11.
^ Jump up to: a b "Big marriage rulings are coming in the next month". Gay People's Chronicle. 2006-02-17. Retrieved 2009-09-11.
Jump up ^ John McGowan (15 December 1997). Hannah Arendt: An Introduction. University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 9781452903385.
Jump up ^ Gallup, Inc. "In U.S., 87% Approve of Black-White Marriage, vs. 4% in 1958". Gallup.com. Retrieved 1 May 2016.
Jump up ^ Tucker, Neely (June 13, 2006). "Loving Day Recalls a Time When the Union of a Man And a Woman Was Banned". Washington Post.
Jump up ^ Alabama removes ban on interracial marriage, USA Today, November 7, 2000, archived from the original on September 14, 2002, retrieved 2008-01-04
Jump up ^ Suzy Hansen. "Mixing it up". Salon. Retrieved 1 May 2016.
Jump up ^ https://web.archive.org/web/20141016171345/http://blogs.kqed.org/lowdown/2013/03/24/less-than-50-years-ago-the-supreme-court-put-an-end-to-race-based-marriage-bans/. Archived from the original on October 16, 2014. Retrieved August 14, 2014.  Missing or empty |title= (help)
Jump up ^ Eileen Sullivan and the Associated Press, "Man's halt of interracial marriage sparks outrage" in New York Times, October 16, 2009; Humphrey v. Bardwell on Justia.
Jump up ^ "La. justice quits after interracial flap - US news - Life - Race & ethnicity - msnbc.com". msnbc.msn.com. November 3, 2009. Retrieved 2011-04-18.
Jump up ^ Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, South Carolina and Alabama repealed their laws during the Reconstruction period, but the laws were later reinstated and remained in force until 1967.
Jump up ^ Bern Haggerty, Profile, WILLIAM JEFFERSON HARDIN: TWO STORIES ABOUT WYOMING'S FIRST BLACK LEGISLATOR, Wyoming Lawyer (February, 2000) (citing 1882 Wyo. Terr. Sess. Laws ch. 54)
Jump up ^ Min, Pyong-Gap (2006), Asian Americans: contemporary trneds and issues, Pine Forge Press, p. 189, ISBN 978-1-4129-0556-5
Jump up ^ See for example Stevens v. United States, 146 F.2d 120 (1944)
Jump up ^ John R. Vile (2003), Encyclopedia of constitutional amendments, proposed amendments, and amending issues, 1789-2002 (second ed.), ABC-CLIO, p. 243, ISBN 9781851094288
Jump up ^ Anti-Miscagenation laws, Reference.com

tag: ol

text: Additional sources[edit]

text: "Jack Johnson and White Women: The National Impact", Al-Tony Gilmore, Journal of Negro History (Vol. 58, No. 1, 18-38, Jan., 1973).

text: Further reading[edit]

text:
Pascoe, Peggy. What Comes Naturally: Miscegenation Law and the Making of Race in America. Oxford University Press, 2009.
Spiro, Jonathan P. (2009), Defending the Master Race: Conservation, Eugenics, and the Legacy of Madison Grant, Univ. of Vermont Press, ISBN 978-1-58465-715-6, lay summary (29 September 2010)
Tucker, William H. (2007), The funding of scientific racism: Wickliffe Draper and the Pioneer Fund, University of Illinois Press, ISBN 978-0-252-07463-9, lay summary (4 September 2010)
Strandjord, Corinne. Filipino Resistance to Anti-Miscegenation Laws in Washington State Great Depression in Washington State Project, 2009.
Johnson, Stefanie. Blocking Racial Intermarriage Laws in 1935 and 1937: Seattle's First Civil Rights Coalition Seattle Civil Rights and Labor History Project, 2005.


document_title: Christmas Island

question_text: how much did singapore sell christmas island for

question_tokens: how much did singapore sell christmas island for

text: Christmas Island

text: History[edit]

text: First visits by Europeans, 1643[edit]

text: Captain William Mynors of the Royal Mary, an English East India Company vessel, named the island when he sailed past it on Christmas Day, in 1643.[4] The island was included on English and Dutch navigation charts as early as the beginning of the 17th century, but it was not until 1666 that a map published by Dutch cartographer Pieter Goos included the island. Goos labelled the island "Mony" or "Moni",[5] the meaning of which is unclear.[6]

text: English navigator William Dampier, aboard the English ship Cygnet, made the earliest recorded visit to the sea around the island in March 1688.[5] He found it uninhabited.[7][5] Dampier gave an account of the visit which can be found in his Voyages.[8] Dampier was trying to reach Cocos from New Holland. His ship was blown off course in an easterly direction, arriving at Christmas Island twenty-eight days later. Dampier landed at the Dales (on the west coast). Two of his crewmen became the first Europeans to set foot on Christmas Island.[9]

text: Captain Daniel Beeckman of the Eagle passed the island on 5 April 1714, chronicled in his 1718 book, A Voyage to and from the Island of Borneo, in the East-Indies.[10]

text: Exploration and annexation[edit]

text: The first attempt at exploring the island was in 1857 by the crew of the Amethyst. They tried to reach the summit of the island, but found the cliffs impassable.

text: During the 1872–76 Challenger expedition to Indonesia, naturalist John Murray carried out extensive surveys.[11]

text: In 1886, Captain John Maclear of HMS Flying Fish, having discovered an anchorage in a bay that he named "Flying Fish Cove", landed a party and made a small collection of the flora and fauna.[5] In the next year, Pelham Aldrich, on board HMS Egeria, visited the island for ten days, accompanied by J. J. Lister, who gathered a larger biological and mineralogical collection.[5]

text: Among the rocks then obtained and submitted to Murray for examination were many of nearly pure phosphate of lime. This discovery led to annexation of the island by the British Crown on 6 June 1888.[11]

text: Settlement and exploitation[edit]

text:
Soon afterwards, a small settlement was established in Flying Fish Cove by G. Clunies Ross, the owner of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands some 900 kilometres (560 mi) to the southwest, to collect timber and supplies for the growing industry on Cocos.
Phosphate mining began in 1899 using indentured workers from Singapore, Malaya, and China. John Davis Murray, a mechanical engineer and recent graduate of Purdue University, was sent to supervise the operation on behalf of the Phosphate Mining and Shipping Company. Murray was known as the "King of Christmas Island" until 1910, when he married and settled in London.[12][13]

text: The island was administered jointly by the British Phosphate commissioners and district officers from the United Kingdom Colonial Office through the Straits Settlements, and later the Crown Colony of Singapore. Hunt (2011) provides a detailed history of Chinese indentured labour on the island during those years. In 1922, scientists attempted unsuccessfully to view a solar eclipse from the island to test Einstein's Theory of Relativity.[14]

text: Japanese invasion[edit]

text: From the outbreak of the South-East Asian theatre of World War II in December 1941, Christmas Island was a target for Japanese occupation because of its rich phosphate deposits.[15] A naval gun was installed under a British officer and four NCOs and 27 Indian soldiers.[15] The first attack was carried out on 20 January 1942, by Japanese submarine I-59, which torpedoed a Norwegian freighter, the Eidsvold.[16] The vessel drifted and eventually sank off West White Beach. Most of the European and Asian staff and their families were evacuated to Perth.

text: In late February and early March 1942, there were two aerial bombing raids. Shelling from a Japanese naval group on 7 March led the district officer to hoist the white flag.[15] But after the Japanese naval group sailed away, the British officer raised the Union flag once more.[15] During the night of 10–11 March, a mutiny of the Indian troops, abetted by Sikh policemen, led to the killing of the five British soldiers and the imprisonment of the remaining 21 Europeans.[15]

text: At dawn on 31 March 1942, a dozen Japanese bombers launched the attack, destroying the radio station. The same day, a Japanese fleet of nine vessels arrived, and the island was surrendered. About 850 men of the Japanese 21st and 24th Special Base Forces and 102nd Construction Unit came ashore at Flying Fish Cove and occupied the island.[15] They rounded up the workforce, most of whom had fled to the jungle. Sabotaged equipment was repaired and preparations were made to resume the mining and export of phosphate. Only twenty men from the 21st Special Base Force were left as a garrison.[15]

text: Isolated acts of sabotage and the torpedoing of the Nissei Maru at the wharf on 17 November 1942[17] meant that only small amounts of phosphate were exported to Japan during the occupation. In November 1943, over 60% of the island's population was evacuated to Surabayan prison camps, leaving a total population of just under 500 Chinese and Malays and 15 Japanese to survive as best they could. In October 1945, HMS Rother re-occupied Christmas Island.[18][19][20][21]

text: After the war, seven mutineers were traced and prosecuted by the Military Court in Singapore. In 1947, five of them were sentenced to death. However, following representations made by the newly independent government of India, their sentences were reduced to penal servitude for life.[15]

text: Transfer to Australia[edit]

text: At Australia's request, the United Kingdom transferred sovereignty to Australia, with a M$20 million payment from the Australian government to Singapore as compensation for the loss of earnings from the phosphate revenue.[22] The United Kingdom’s Christmas Island Act was given royal assent on 14 May 1958, enabling Britain to transfer authority over Christmas Island from Singapore to Australia by an order-in-council.[23] Australia's Christmas Island Act was passed in September 1958 and the island was officially placed under the authority of the Commonwealth of Australia on 1 October 1958.[24]

text: Under Commonwealth Cabinet Decision 1573 of 9 September 1958, D. E. Nickels was appointed the first official representative of the new territory.[25] In a media statement on 5 August 1960, the minister for territories, Paul Hasluck, said, among other things, that, "His extensive knowledge of the Malay language and the customs of the Asian people... has proved invaluable in the inauguration of Australian administration... During his two years on the island he had faced unavoidable difficulties... and constantly sought to advance the island's interests."

text: John William Stokes succeeded him and served from 1 October 1960, to 12 June 1966. On his departure he was lauded by all sectors of the island community. In 1968, the official secretary was retitled an administrator and, since 1997, Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands together are called the Australian Indian Ocean Territories and share a single administrator resident on Christmas Island. Recollections of the island's history and lifestyle, and lists and timetables of the island's leaders and events since its settlement are at the World Statesmen site[26] and in Neale (1988), Bosman (1993), Hunt (2011) and Stokes (2012).

text: The settlement of Silver City was built in the 1970s, with aluminium-clad houses that were supposed to be cyclone-proof.[27] The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami centred off the western shore of Sumatra in Indonesia, resulted in no reported casualties, but some swimmers were swept some 150 metres (490 ft) out to sea for a time before being swept back in.[28]

text: Refugee and immigration detention[edit]

text: From the late 1980s and early 1990s, boats carrying asylum seekers, mainly departing from Indonesia, began landing on the island. In 2001, Christmas Island was the site of the Tampa controversy, in which the Australian government stopped a Norwegian ship, MV Tampa, from disembarking 438 rescued asylum-seekers. The ensuing standoff and the associated political reactions in Australia were a major issue in the 2001 Australian federal election.[29]

text: The Howard government operated the "Pacific Solution" from 2001 to 2007, excising Christmas Island from Australia's migration zone so that asylum seekers on the island could not apply for refugee status. Asylum seekers were relocated from Christmas Island to Manus Island and Nauru. In 2006, an immigration detention centre, containing approximately 800 beds, was constructed on the island for the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. Originally estimated to cost A$276 million,[30] the final cost was over $400 million.[31]

text: In 2007, the Rudd government decommissioned Manus Regional Processing Centre and Nauru detention centre; processing would then occur on Christmas Island itself.[32]

text: In December 2010, 48 asylum-seekers died just off the coast of the island in what became known as the Christmas Island boat disaster when the boat they were on, hit rocks off Flying Fish Cove, and then smashed against nearby cliffs.[33][34]

text: In the case Plaintiff M61/2010E v Commonwealth of Australia, the High Court of Australia ruled, in a 7–0 joint judgment, that asylum seekers detained on Christmas Island were entitled to the protections of the Migration Act. Accordingly, the Commonwealth was obliged to afford asylum seekers a minimum of procedural fairness when assessing their claims.[35]

text: As of 20 June 2013, after the interception of four boats in six days, carrying 350 people, the Immigration Department stated that there were 2,960 "irregular maritime arrivals" being held in the island's five detention facilities, which exceeded not only the "regular operating capacity" of 1,094 people, but also the "contingency capacity" of 2,724.[36]

text: Geography[edit]

text: Located at 10°30′S 105°40′E / 10.500°S 105.667°E / -10.500; 105.667, the island is about 19 kilometres (12 mi) in greatest length and 14.5 km (9.0 mi) in breadth. The total land area is 135 square kilometres (52 sq mi), with 138.9 km (86.3 mi) of coastline. The island is the flat summit of an underwater mountain more than 4,500 metres (14,800 ft) high,[37] which rises from about 4,200 m (13,780 ft) below the sea and only about 300 m (984 ft) above it.[38]

text: The mountain was originally a volcano, and some basalt is exposed in places such as The Dales and Dolly Beach, but most of the surface rock is limestone accumulated from coral growth. The karst terrain supports numerous anchialine caves.[39] The summit of this mountain peak is formed by a succession of tertiary limestones ranging from the Eocene or Oligocene up to recent reef deposits, with intercalations of volcanic rock in the older beds.[40]

text: Steep cliffs along much of the coast rise abruptly to a central plateau. Elevation ranges from sea level to 361 m (1,184 ft) at Murray Hill. The island is mainly tropical rainforest, 63% of which is national park land. The narrow fringing reef surrounding the island poses a maritime hazard.

text: Christmas Island lies 2,600 kilometres (1,600 mi) northwest of Perth, Western Australia, 350 km (220 mi) south of Indonesia, 975 km (606 mi) ENE of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, and 2,748 km (1,708 mi) west of Darwin, Northern Territory. Its closest point to the Australian mainland is 1,560 km (970 mi) from the town of Exmouth, Western Australia.[41]

text: Beaches[edit]

text: Christmas Island has 80 kilometres of shoreline but only small parts of the shoreline are easily accessible. The island's perimeter is embodied by sharp cliff faces, making many of the island's beaches difficult to get to. Some of the easily accessible beaches include Flying Fish Cove (main beach), Lily Beach, Ethel Beach, and Isabel Beach, while the more difficult beaches to access include Greta Beach, Dolly Beach, Winifred Beach, Merrial Beach, and West White Beach, which all require a vehicle with four wheel drive and a difficult walk through dense rainforest.[42]

text: Climate[edit]

text: Christmas Island is located towards the southern edge of the equatorial region. Climate is tropical and temperatures vary little throughout the year. The highest temperature is usually around 29 °C (84 °F) in March and April, while the lowest temperature is 23 °C (73 °F) and occurs in August. There is a dry season from July to November with only occasional showers. The wet season is between November and May, and includes monsoons, with downpours of rain at random times of the day. Tropical cyclones also occur in the wet season, bringing very strong winds, rain and enormous seas.

text:
hideClimate data for Christmas Island Airport

Month

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Year

Record high °C (°F)

30.7 (87.3)

31.5 (88.7)

31.5 (88.7)

31.4 (88.5)

30.5 (86.9)

29.8 (85.6)

29.3 (84.7)

29.5 (85.1)

30.9 (87.6)

31.4 (88.5)

31.8 (89.2)

31.2 (88.2)

31.8 (89.2)

Average high °C (°F)

28.0 (82.4)

28.0 (82.4)

28.3 (82.9)

28.3 (82.9)

27.8 (82)

27.1 (80.8)

26.3 (79.3)

26.1 (79)

26.3 (79.3)

26.9 (80.4)

27.3 (81.1)

27.8 (82)

27.4 (81.3)

Average low °C (°F)

22.7 (72.9)

22.7 (72.9)

23.1 (73.6)

23.5 (74.3)

23.8 (74.8)

23.3 (73.9)

22.6 (72.7)

22.2 (72)

22.3 (72.1)

22.7 (72.9)

22.9 (73.2)

22.6 (72.7)

22.9 (73.2)

Record low °C (°F)

18.8 (65.8)

18.4 (65.1)

18.6 (65.5)

18.3 (64.9)

19.3 (66.7)

14.1 (57.4)

16.2 (61.2)

17.7 (63.9)

16.7 (62.1)

18.2 (64.8)

18.0 (64.4)

18.0 (64.4)

14.1 (57.4)

Average rainfall mm (inches)

297.2 (11.701)

344.5 (13.563)

302.7 (11.917)

227.5 (8.957)

186.7 (7.35)

172.3 (6.783)

99.7 (3.925)

42.3 (1.665)

57.4 (2.26)

78.5 (3.091)

156.8 (6.173)

222.1 (8.744)

2,183 (85.945)

Source: Australian Bureau of Meteorology[43]

text: Demographics[edit]

text: As of the 2016 Australian census, the population of Christmas Island is 1,843.[1] 21.2% of the population had Chinese ancestry (up from 18.3% in 2001), 12.7% had generic Australian ancestry (11.7% in 2001), 12% had Malay ancestry (9.3% in 2001), 10% had English ancestry (8.9% in 2001), and 2.3% of the population was of Irish origin (the same share as in 2001). 48.1% of the population has undetermined ancestry as of 2016, most of them are people born in Christmas Island and many are of Chinese and Malay origin.[1] 27.8% of the population spoke English as their family language, while 17.2% spoke Mandarin Chinese, 17.2% spoke Malay, 3.7% Cantonese, 1.5% Southern Min, and 1% Tagalog.[1] Additionally, there are small local populations of Malaysian Indians and Eurasians.[44][45]

text:
Religion in Christmas Island[1]

Religion

2011

2016

Islam
14.8%
19.4%

Buddhism
16.8%
18.1%

Christianity
10.8%
8.9%

Not religious
9.2%
15.2%

Other religion
48.4%
38.4%

text: Government[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Christmas Island is a non-self-governing territory of Australia, currently administered by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development. Administration was carried out by the Attorney-General's Department[46] until 14 September 2010,[47] and prior to this by the Department of Transport and Regional Services before 29 November 2007.[48] The legal system is under the authority of the Governor-General of Australia and Australian law. An administrator appointed by the Governor-General represents the monarch and Australia.

text: The Australian government provides services through the Christmas Island Administration and the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development. Under the federal government's Territories Law Reform Act 1992, which came into force on 1 July 1992, Western Australian laws are applied to Christmas Island "so far as they are capable of applying in the territory";[49] non-application or partial application of such laws is at the discretion of the federal government. The act also gives Western Australian courts judicial power over Christmas Island. Christmas Island remains constitutionally distinct from Western Australia, however; the power of the state to legislate for the territory is delegated by the federal government. The kind of services typically provided by a state government elsewhere in Australia are provided by departments of the Western Australian government, and by contractors, with the costs met by the federal government. A unicameral Shire of Christmas Island with nine seats provides local government services and is elected by popular vote to serve four-year terms. Elections are held every two years, with four or five of the members standing for election.

text: In early 1986, the Christmas Island Assembly held a design competition for an island flag; the winning design was adopted as the informal flag of the territory for over a decade, and in 2002 it was made the official flag of Christmas Island.

text: Federal politics[edit]

text:
Senate, 2016[50]

Labor

51.80%

Country Liberal

28.54%

Greens

8.87%

HEMP/Sex

4.80%

Rise Up Australia

3.60%

Others

2.40%

text:
House of Representatives, 2016[51]

Labor

61.95%

Country Liberal

24.63%

Greens

7.56%

Others

5.85%

text:
Christmas Island residents who are Australian citizens also vote in federal elections. Christmas Island residents are represented in the House of Representatives by the Division of Lingiari in the Northern Territory and in the Senate by Northern Territory senators.[52] At the 2016 federal election, the Labor Party received absolute majorities from Christmas Island electors in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
[50][51]

text: Economy[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Phosphate mining had been the only significant economic activity, but in December 1987 the Australian government closed the mine. In 1991, the mine was reopened by a consortium which included many of the former mine workers as shareholders. With the support of the government, the $34 million Christmas Island Casino and Resort opened in 1993, but was closed in 1998. As of  2011[update], the resort has re-opened without the casino.

text: The Australian government in 2001 agreed to support the creation of a commercial spaceport on the island, however this has not yet been constructed, and appears that it will not proceed. The Howard government built a temporary immigration detention centre on the island in 2001 and planned to replace it with a larger, modern facility at North West Point until Howard's defeat in the 2007 elections.

text: Culture[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: The culture of Christmas Island is unique, for people of many different ethnicities inhabit the area. Historically, the majority of Christmas Islanders were those of Chinese, Malay and Indian origins, the initial permanent settlers, and as a result they have significantly influenced the local culture.[53] Today, the majority of residents are Chinese, with significant numbers of European Australians and Malays as well as smaller Indian and Eurasian communities too. The main languages of Christmas Island are English and Chinese. Dress is usually modest, and tourists should keep a wrap, such as a sarong or pareo, on hand to cover shorts, bathing suits, and tank tops. It is common to remove shoes when entering a house and to also avoid touching anyone's head.

text: Religious beliefs are diverse, but people are very tolerant of each other's religions. The religions practised include Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, Islam, and Christianity. There is a Mosque in Flying Fish Cove. With all of these religions, there are many religious festivals, such as Spring Festival, Hari Raya, Christmas and Easter.[54] Additionally, there is a Bahá'í centre on the island[55]

text: Attractions[edit]

text: Christmas Island is well known for its biological diversity. There are many rare species of animals and plants on the island, making nature-walking a popular activity. Along with the diversity of species, many different types of caves exist, such as plateau caves, coastal caves, raised coastal caves and alcoves, sea caves, fissure caves, collapse caves and basalt caves; most of these are near the sea and have been formed by the action of water. Altogether, there are approximately 30 caves on the island,[56] with Lost Lake Cave, Daniel Roux Cave and Full Frontal Cave being the most well-known. The many freshwater springs include Hosnies Spring Ramsar, which also has a mangrove stand.

text: The Dales is a rainforest in the western part of the island and consists of seven deep valleys, all of which were formed by spring streams. Hugh's Dale waterfall is part of this area and is a popular attraction. The annual breeding migration of the Christmas Island red crabs is a popular event.

text: Fishing is another common activity. There are many distinctive species of fish in the oceans surrounding Christmas Island. Snorkeling and swimming in the ocean are two other activities that are extremely popular. Walking trails are also very popular, for there are many beautiful trails surrounded by extravagant flora and fauna. 63% of the island is national park making it one of the main attractions to experience when visiting.

text: Flora and fauna[edit]

text: Christmas Island was uninhabited until the late 19th century, allowing many species to evolve without human interference. Two-thirds of the island has been declared a National Park, which is managed by the Australian Department of Environment and Heritage through Parks Australia. Christmas Island has always been known for its unique species, both of flora and fauna.

text: Flora[edit]

text: The dense rainforest has grown in the deep soils of the plateau and on the terraces. The forests are dominated by 25 tree species. Ferns, orchids and vines grow on the branches in the humid atmosphere beneath the canopy. The 135 plant species include at least 18 that are found nowhere else. The rainforest is in great condition despite the mining activities over the last 100 years. Areas that have been damaged by mining are now a part of an ongoing rehabilitation project. The island is small and covers 135 square kilometres of land which 63% of that land has been declared National Park.[57]

text: Christmas Island's endemic plants include the trees Arenga listeri, Pandanus elatus and Dendrocnide peltata var. murrayana; the shrubs Abutilon listeri, Colubrina pedunculata, Grewia insularis and Pandanus christmatensis; the vines Hoya aldrichii and Zehneria alba; the herbs Asystasia alba, Dicliptera maclearii and Peperomia rossii; the grass Ischaemum nativitatis; the fern Asplenium listeri; and the orchids Brachypeza archytas, Flickingeria nativitatis, Phreatia listeri and Zeuxine exilis.[58]

text: Fauna[edit]

text: Two species of native rats, the Maclear's and bulldog rats, have become extinct since the island was settled, while the Javan rusa has been introduced. The endemic Christmas Island shrew has not been seen since the mid-1980s and may be already extinct, while the Christmas Island pipistrelle (a small bat) is critically endangered and probably also extinct.[59]

text: The Christmas Island flying fox (fruit bat), an important pollinator and rainforest seed-disperser, is also in decline and under increasing pressure from land clearing and introduced pest species. The flying fox's low rate of reproduction (one pup each year) and high infant mortality rate makes it especially vulnerable. Flying foxes are an `umbrella` species helping forests regenerate and other species survive in stressed environments.

text: The land crabs and seabirds are the most noticeable fauna on the island. Christmas Island has been identified by BirdLife International as both an Endemic Bird Area and an Important Bird Area because it supports five endemic species and five subspecies as well as over one percent of the world populations of five other seabirds.[60]

text: Twenty terrestrial and intertidal species of crab have been described here, of which thirteen are regarded as true land crabs, being dependent on the ocean only for larval development. Robber crabs, known elsewhere as coconut crabs, also exist in large numbers on the island. The annual red crab mass migration (around 100 million animals) to the sea to spawn has been called one of the wonders of the natural world.[61] This takes place each year around November – after the start of the wet season and in synchronisation with the cycle of the moon. Once at the ocean, the mothers release the embryos where they can survive and grow until they are able to live on land.

text: The island is a focal point for seabirds of various species. Eight species or subspecies of seabirds nest on it. The most numerous is the red-footed booby, which nests in colonies, using trees on many parts of the shore terrace. The widespread brown booby nests on the ground near the edge of the seacliff and inland cliffs. Abbott's booby (listed as endangered) nests on tall emergent trees of the western, northern and southern plateau rainforest, the only remaining nesting habitat for this bird in the world.

text: Another endangered and endemic bird, the Christmas frigatebird, has nesting areas on the northeastern shore terraces. The more widespread great frigatebirds nest in semi-deciduous trees on the shore terrace, with the greatest concentrations being in the North West and South Point areas. The common noddy and two species of bosun or tropicbirds, with their brilliant gold or silver plumage and distinctive streamer tail feathers, also nest on the island.

text: Of the ten native land birds and shorebirds, seven are endemic species or subspecies. This includes the Christmas thrush and the Christmas imperial pigeon. Some 86 migrant bird species have been recorded as visitors to the island.

text: Six species of butterfly are known to occur on Christmas Island. These are the Christmas swallowtail (Papilio memnon), striped albatross (Appias olferna), Christmas emperor (Polyura andrewsi), king cerulean (Jamides bochus), lesser grass-blue (Zizina otis), and Papuan grass-yellow (Eurema blanda).[62]

text: Media[edit]

text: Christmas Island has access to a range of modern communication services.

text: Radio broadcasts from Australia include ABC Radio National, ABC Kimberley, Triple J and Red FM. All services are provided by satellite links from the mainland. Broadband internet became available to subscribers in urban areas in mid-2005 through the local internet service provider, CIIA (formerly dotCX).

text: Christmas Island, due to its close proximity to Australia's northern neighbours, falls within many of the satellite footprints throughout the region. This results in ideal conditions for receiving various Asian broadcasts, which locals sometimes prefer to those emanating from Western Australia. Additionally, ionospheric conditions are conducive to terrestrial radio transmissions, from HF through VHF and sometimes into UHF. The island plays home to a small array of radio equipment that spans a good chunk of the usable spectrum. A variety of government owned and operated antenna systems are employed on the island to take advantage of this.

text: Television[edit]

text: Free-to-air digital television stations from Australia are broadcast in the same time zone as Perth, and are broadcast from three separate locations:

text:
Broadcaster

Drumsite

Phosphate Hill

Rocky Point

ABC

ABC 6

ABC 34

ABC 40

SBS

SBS 7

SBS 35

SBS 41

WAW

WAW 8

WAW 36

WAW 42

WOW

WOW 10

WOW 36

WOW 43

WDW

WDW 11

WDW 38

WDW 44

text: Cable television from Australia, Malaysia, Singapore and the United States commenced in January 2013.

text: Telecommunications[edit]

text: Telephone services are provided by Telstra and are a part of the Australian network with the same prefix as Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory (08). A GSM mobile telephone system powered by 900 MHz[64] replaced the old analogue network in February 2005.

text: Postage stamps[edit]

text: A postal agency was opened on the island in 1901 and sold stamps of the Strait Settlements.[65]

text: After the Japanese occupation (1942–45), postage stamps of the British Military Administration in Malaya were in use, then stamps of Singapore.[66]

text: In 1958, the island received its own postage stamps after being put under Australian custody. It had a large philatelic and postal independence, managed first by the Phosphate Commission (1958–1969) and then by the island's administration (1969–93).[65] This ended on 2 March 1993 when Australia Post became the island's postal operator; Christmas Island stamps may be used in Australia and Australian stamps may be used on the island.[66]

text: Transport[edit]

text: A container port exists at Flying Fish Cove with an uncompleted alternative container-unloading point to the east of the island at Norris Point, intended for use during the December-to-March "swell season" of rough seas.

text: The standard gauge 18-km Christmas Island Phosphate Co.'s Railway from Flying Fish Cove to the phosphate mine was constructed in 1914. It was closed in December 1987, when the Australian government closed the mine, and since has been recovered as scrap, leaving only earthworks in places.

text: Virgin Australia Regional Airlines provides two weekly flights to Christmas Island Airport from Perth, Western Australia, and ad hoc charter flight from/to Jakarta organised by the Christmas Island Travel Exchange.

text: There is a recreation centre at Phosphate Hill operated by South Australian-based CASA Leisure Pty Ltd. There is also a taxi service. The road network covers most of the island and is of generally good quality, although four-wheel drive vehicles are needed to reach some of the more distant parts of the rainforest or the more isolated beaches on the rough dirt roads.

text: Education[edit]

text: The island-operated crèche is in the Recreation Centre.[67] Christmas Island District High School, catering to students in grades P-12, is run by the Western Australian Education Department. There are no universities on Christmas Island.

text: The island has one public library.[68]