Tpes, Oae Hund .. Ed Dolla .. So .. Six Months Lmpris Nment Fede .. Al Cou
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
w~st.. tpes, Oae Hund.. ed Dolla.. s o.. Six Months lmpris nment ~ Fede.. al Cou.. ts in New Jel'sey 1789-1989 A 'oint Exhibition National Archives - Northeast Region The Historical Society of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey Gallery '50 & The New Jersey Room Special Collections & Archives Alexander Library 18 September 1989-5 January 1990 FOREWORD The Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789 was the single most important law passed by the first session of the new United States Congress. Shaped by two staunch Federalist Senators - Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut and New Jersey's William Paterson - the act established the principle of national supremacy within an unprecedented federal system. From the outset New Jersey played a leading role through leaders like Paterson, who went on to become an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and his colleague David Brearley, the state's initial federal district judge. Brearley was typical of President George Washington's thirty-three appointees--in his middle forties, a federalist, experienced in the law and government. After two adjournments because of "indisposition," this former delegate to the Constitional Convention opened the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey "in due form." As in other districts, the first session was devoted to organizational matters, namely the reading of commissions for Brearley, Richard stockton as Attorney, Thomas Lowrey as Marshal, and Jonathan Dayton as Clerk. Some of the state's most eminent attorneys were then admitted to practice before the court, men like William Paterson, Robert Morris, Elias Boudinot, and Frederick Frelinghuysen. Such were the beginnings of the United States district court for New Jersey. Prefaced by documentation of the court's antecedents in the Colonial period, this exhibition traces two-hundred years of the federal judiciary in New Jersey. THIRTEEN STRIPES, ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS OR SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT runs the gamut from common citizens to the famous and notorious. William Franklin, Charles Goodyear, Daniel Webster, civil War editors, Supreme Court Justice Joseph P. Bradley, Rutherford B. Hayes, Thomas Edison, switlik Parchute and Equipment Company, Nazis, Boss Frank Hague, speakeasies, Albert Anastiasia and Abner Zwillman - all figure in this state and national story. The sponsors of the exhibition take this opportunity to thank those who helped make it possible: co-curator Anthony J. Fantozzi; John J. Celardo for graphic design; Janice A. Kraus for exhibit design, installation, and good humored patience; Janet T. Reimer for skilled preservation; Edward T. Skipworth for extensive research on rare books and pictures; Janis Goldstein for arrangements; and Mary B. Bowling, Nancy Waters, George Tselos, and Marilyn L. Kyles of the Edison National Historic Site for arranging the loan of Edison materials. Robert c. Morris Director, National Archives-Northeast Region Ruth J. Simmons Director, Special Collections and Archives Rutgers University Libraries. September 11, 1989 THIRTY STRIPES, ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS OR SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT: FEDERAL COURTS IN NEW JERSEY 1789-1989 That the district courts shall have, exclusively of the courts of the several States, cognizance of all crimes and offences that shall be congnizable under the authority of the United States, committed within their respective districts, or upon the high seas; where no other punish ment than whipping, not exceeding thirty stripes, a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars, or a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months is to be inflicted. Judiciary Act of 1789 On September 24, 1789, a little over six months after the first Congress of the United States convened in New York, President George Washington signed into law "An Act to establish the Judicial courts of the United States. 11 Article III of the Constitution had sketchily provided for "one Supreme Court" and "such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. 11 Framed in large part by Senator Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut, the Judiciary Act of 1789 thus laid the foundation of the federal court system. The hierarchical framework placed a Supreme Court of six justices at the top of the structure. Three lower federal circuit courts, in the Eastern, Middle, and Southern United States would be presided over by a district court judge, and a maximum of two Supreme Court justices who would "ride the circuit." Thirteen lower federal district courts were created in the eleven ratifying states and the districts of Maine and Kentucky. Originally scheduled to meet on the first Thursday in November, 1789, the New Jersey District Court finally convened at New Brunswick on December 22 due to the illness of Judge David Brearley. Over the next two-hundred yearsj the court represented a major force helping to shape state, regional and national history. This exhibition undertakes to chronicle this federal influence during the bicentennial of the Judiciary Act and the United states District Court for the District of New Jersey. ESTABLISHING THE COURT Minutes of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, December 22, 1789 - February 28, 1873 After two adjournments because of David Brearley's "indisposition," the New Jersey district court was opened in due form in New Brunswick. The first order of business involved reading the commissions of Brearley as Judge of the District, Richard Stockton as Attorney, Thomas Lowrey as Marshal, and Jonathan Dayton as Clerk. An ardent enough Whig to have been arrested for high treason at the beginning of the Revolution, Brearley served as an officer during the War, was a member of the New Jersey constitutional convention, and in 1779 won election as Chief Justice of the state supreme court. In the Federal Constitutional Convention of 1787, Brearley and his close colleague William Paterson argued the cause of the small states. Brearley presided over the state convention that ratified the Constitution and was district judge until his death August 16, 1790. LAWYERS Roll of Attorneys of the Middle Circuit Court, New Jersey District, 1790 - 1796 During its first session the district court admitted "the following gentlemen ... Attornies and Counsellors at law of this court." William Paterson Richard Stockton Abraham Ogden Samuel W. Stockton Elias Boudinot Matthew Williamson Elisha Boudinot Aaron Ogden John De Hart Frederick Frelinghuysen Robert Ogden Andrew Kirkpatrick Joseph Taylor Richard Howell Robert Morris Aaron D. Woodruff The minutes and roll of attorneys record adminissions from 1790 to 1796. NEW JERSEY VS. NEW YORK-- 1764 James Hawkes vs. The Brig sarah. Minutes of the Vice Admiralty Court of the Province of New York, March 9, 1764 William Franklin. Protest Filed July 1, 1764 Jurisdictional disputes across the Hudson are nothing new. In 1764 New Jersey Governor William Franklin formally protested the filing of a libel against the brigantine Sarah in the New York admiralty court. Although his Majesty's ship Sardine sei~ed the Sarah off Sandy Hook, Lieutenant Governor Cadwallader Colden of New York claimed one-third of the proceeds from the sale of the brigantine and her cargo. EVADING THE NAVIGATION ACTS Jonathan Deane vs. The Brigantine Henry, 1761 Federal admiralty jurisdiction actually antedated passage of the Judiciary Act of 1789. Prior to the American Revol~tion, colonial judges exercised vice-admiralty authority, presiding over numerous actions against those accused of defying the Navigation, Sugar, Townshend, and Tea Acts. During the war, each state established an admiralty court and a resolution of the Continental Congress provided that appeals in prize cases would be "allowed to the Congress or such a person or persons they shall appoint for the trial of appeals." Operating from 1776 to 1780, a committee in Congress was superseded by the new nation's first federal court -- the court of Appeals in Case of Capture. This 1761 case before Judge Richard Morris in the Court of Vice Admiralty for New Jersey at Perth Amboy charged the commander of the brigantine Henry with smuggling brandy, geneva, starch, and other goods from Europe and the East Indies. Morris presided over the court for New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut until 1775. As frequently happened in such cases, the defendant did not contest the seizure. such smuggling was common enough in the area to prompt a French naval officer after the Revolutionary War to say that New York merchants "engage in contraband trade with marvellous skill." COPYRIGHTAND TRADEMARK Copyright and Trademark Book, 1792 - 1845 THE AMERICAN PREACHER Elizabeth - Town, 1791 Frederick Frelinghuysen. AN ORATION ON THE DEATH OF GEN. GEORGE WASHINGTON New Brunswick, 1800 William Griffith. A TREATISE ON THE JURISDICTION AND PROCEEDINGS OF JUSTICES OF THE PEACE IN CIVIL SUITS Burlington, 1796 THE MILITARY SYSTEM FOR THE NEW JERSEY CAVALRY New Brunswick, 1793 THE NEW JERSEY TROOPER'S POCKET COMPANION Newark, 1799 Shown here is the register of copyrights from the federal district court for New Jersey and a cross section of the titles listed. EDISON LAMP PATENT CASE The United states Electric Lighting Company vs. the Edison I~mp Company, 1891 Edison and Weston Light Bulbs Artifacts courtesy of Edison National'Historic Site Electrical engineer and industrialist Edward Weston claimed Thomas A. Edison had infringed on an 1884 patent improving the process of manufacturing carbon conductors for incandescent lights. The Edison Lamp Company responded by denying that the Newark resident was the first and sole inventor, citing patents and publications as early as 1857. Included are desc:!.-iptions of Edison patents d2ti:1g from 1881. The leading manufact~rer of electroplating dynamos in the United States, Weston after 1888 achieved great success as a designer and manufacturer of precision electrical measuring instruments. This proceeding thus brings together two of the nation's most important inventors and manufacturers in a case involving credit for the electric light.