Argues that the legacies of Victorian public health in England and Wales were not just better health and cleaner cities but also new ideas of property, liability, and community. This book argues that the legacies of nineteenth-century public health in England and Wales were not just better health and cleaner cities but also new ideas of property and people. Between 1815 and 1872, the work of public healthactivists led to multiple redefinitions of both, shifting the boundaries between public and private nuisances, public and private services, taxable and nontaxable property, cities and suburbs, the state and the individual, and, finally, between different kinds of individuals. These boundary-making processes were themselves inflected by different material, political, and ideological developments in the areas of disease, demography, democracy, and domesticity. The changes in boundaries manifested themselves in the creation of new nuisance laws and in the minute control by the state of private domestic arrangements. Most important, these changes also promoted a radical shiftin ideas on who should bear financial responsibility for the health of others, stimulating in the process a controversy on the nature of community. Public health thus served as an important, if contradictory, site in the creationof communities, enhancing the right to health for some while simultaneously restricting in the name of health the privacy rights of others. Relying on underused legal sources, this book presents a fresh view of the local originsand legal and political significance of the public health movement of the nineteenth century. James G. Hanley is associate professor of history at the University of Winnipeg.

Actuator rate limiting has contributed to Pilot-Induced Oscillations (PIO) on almost every new fly-by-wire aircraft. Actuator rate limiting affected aircraft handling qualities in two ways: it exposed the aircraft's unaugmented flight dynamics and shifted the phase between the pilot input and actuator output. Phase shifting was the primary cause of PIO due to rate limiting. Two proposed solutions both placed a flight control system filter between the pilot command and actuator input. The first, referred to as Feedback-with- Bypass (FWB) and developed by Dr. Lars Rundqwist of SAAB Aircraft, used a low-pass filter to add phase lead to the pilot command. The second, referred to as Derivative- Switching (DS) and developed by Dr. Brad Liebst and Capt. Mike Chapa of AFIT, used the first and second derivatives of the pilot's command to reverse the actuator output in phase with the pilot input during actuator rate limiting. The objective of this study was to compare the ability of these two flight control system filters to prevent PIO during actuator rate limiting, and the filters' effects on aircraft handling qualities.