DOCSLIB.ORG

The Eleventh Amendment and the Nature of the Union

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Eleventh Amendment and the Nature of the Union GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2010 The Eleventh Amendment and the Nature of the Union Bradford R. Clark George Washington University Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Bradford R. Clark, The Eleventh Amendment and the Nature of the Union, 123 Harv. L. Rev. 1817 (2010). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VOLUME 123 JUNE 2010 NUMBER 8 © 2010 by The Harvard Law Review Association ARTICLES THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT AND THE NATURE OF THE UNION Bradford R. Clark TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1819 II. CURRENT THEORIES OF THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT ...................................... 1825 A. The Immunity Theory .................................................................................................... 1826 B. The Diversity Theory ...................................................................................................... 1830 C. The Compromise Theory ................................................................................................ 1832 D. The Inadequacy of Current Theories ............................................................................ 1835 III. THE LOST HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT ............ 1838 A. The Articles of Confederation ........................................................................................ 1839 B. The Constitutional Convention ..................................................................................... 1843 C. The Ratification Debates ............................................................................................... 1853 D. Article III and State Suability ..................................................................................... 1862 1. State-Citizen Diversity Jurisdiction ........................................................................ 1863 2. Federal Question Jurisdiction .................................................................................. 1870 3. Suits Between a State and Another State or a Foreign State ............................. 1873 IV. THE ADOPTION OF THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT ................................................ 1875 A. The Chisholm Decision .................................................................................................. 1876 B. The Aftermath of Chisholm ............................................................................................ 1886 C. The Adoption of the Eleventh Amendment .................................................................. 1891 V. T HE TEXT IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT ......................................................................... 1894 A. An Explanatory Amendment ......................................................................................... 1896 B. Reassessing the Article III Anomaly ............................................................................ 1899 1. Article III and the Eleventh Amendment in Historical Context. ......................... 1900 2. The Constitution. ....................................................................................................... 1903 3. The Laws of the United States. ................................................................................ 1908 4. Treaties. ....................................................................................................................... 1909 VI. IMPLICATIONS FOR MODERN JURISPRUDENCE ........................................................ 1911 VII. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 1917 1817 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1688564 THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT AND THE NATURE OF THE UNION Bradford R. Clark∗ Leading theories of the Eleventh Amendment start from the premise that its text makes no sense. These theories regard the Amendment as either underinclusive, overinclusive, or an incoherent compromise because it prohibits federal courts from hearing “any suit” against a state by out-of-state citizens, but does not prohibit suits against a state by its own citizens. Two of these theories would either expand or contract the immunity conferred by the text of the Amendment in order to avoid this absurd or anomalous result. This Article suggests that the Eleventh Amendment made sense as written when understood in its full historical context. In particular, the Articles of Confederation empowered Congress to require states to supply men, money, and supplies, but gave Congress no power to enforce its own commands. Prominent Founders initially argued that the only way to fix the Articles was to give Congress coercive power over states. But the Convention and the ratifiers ultimately rejected this idea because they feared that the introduction of such power would lead to a civil war. To avoid this danger, the Founders designed the Constitution to give Congress legislative power over individuals rather than states. This novel approach eliminated the need for coercive power over states, and provided Federalists with a key argument for adopting the Constitution rather than amending the Articles. Antifederalists threatened to undermine this case for the Constitution by arguing that the state-citizen diversity provisions of Article III — authorizing suits “between” states and out-of-state citizens — could be construed to permit suits against states (and thus imply federal power to enforce any resulting judgments against states). Although Federalists denied this construction, the Supreme Court proceeded to read Article III to permit out-of-state citizens to sue states. Federalists and Antifederalists quickly joined forces to restore their preferred construction of Article III. In adopting the Eleventh Amendment, they saw no anomaly in prohibiting “any suit” against a state by out-of-state citizens because they did not understand the Constitution to authorize any suits against states by in-state citizens. Federal question jurisdiction did not expressly authorize such suits, and the Founders likely would not have perceived any real need for such jurisdiction given their understanding that the Constitution conferred neither legislative nor coercive power over states. Because the Eleventh Amendment, as written, made sense in light of the nature of the Union, the absurdity doctrine cannot justify departing from the terms of the Amendment. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ∗ William Cranch Research Professor of Law, The George Washington University Law School. For insightful comments, I thank A.J. Bellia, Curtis Bradley, Evan Caminker, Andy Coan, Dick Fallon, Philip Hamburger, Joan Larsen, John Manning, Maeva Marcus, Jon Molot, Henry Monaghan, Jim Pfander, Jeff Powell, Gil Seinfeld, Jon Siegel, Jeff Sutton, Ed Swaine, Amanda Tyler, Carlos Vázquez, and workshop participants at the George Washington, Michigan, Northwestern, and Notre Dame Law Schools. I also thank Jonathan Bond, John Kammerer, Ja- son Karasik, Max Kosman, Brittany Lewis-Roberts, Ryan Watson, Brian Wesoloski, and William Zapf for excellent research assistance. 1818 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1688564 2010] THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT 1819 The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.1 I. INTRODUCTION eading theories of the Eleventh Amendment place surprisingly lit- Ltle emphasis on the words of the Amendment. In fact, according to one prominent observer, “the [E]leventh [A]mendment is universally taken not to mean what it says.”2 The reason is that most courts and commentators regard the Amendment as either grossly under- or over- inclusive. In their view, the best way to understand and apply the Amendment is to look past its terms to its underlying purpose (as they define it). Modern theorists feel justified in expanding or contracting the immunity conferred by the text because they believe that following the Amendment as written would produce the anomalous — or even absurd — result of barring out-of-state citizens from suing states in federal court while leaving in-state citizens free to do so. As a result, leading theories of the Amendment tend to focus on why the Amend- ment cannot mean what it says. This Article offers a novel account of why the Eleventh Amend- ment made sense at the time it was adopted and simultaneously pro- vides insight into the Founders’ understanding of the nature of the Union. The Articles of Confederation authorized Congress to exercise legislative power over states rather than individuals, but provided no means of enforcement. The Founders concluded that the Articles could be made effective only by authorizing Congress to employ coer- cive military force against states who refused to comply with its affir- mative commands. The Founders rejected proposals to introduce coercive force, however, because they feared that the use of such pow- er would
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Construction of the Massachusetts Constitution
    Construction of the Massachusetts Constitution ROBERT J. TAYLOR J. HI s YEAR marks tbe 200tb anniversary of tbe Massacbu- setts Constitution, the oldest written organic law still in oper- ation anywhere in the world; and, despite its 113 amendments, its basic structure is largely intact. The constitution of the Commonwealth is, of course, more tban just long-lived. It in- fluenced the efforts at constitution-making of otber states, usu- ally on their second try, and it contributed to tbe shaping of tbe United States Constitution. Tbe Massachusetts experience was important in two major respects. It was decided tbat an organic law should have tbe approval of two-tbirds of tbe state's free male inbabitants twenty-one years old and older; and tbat it sbould be drafted by a convention specially called and chosen for tbat sole purpose. To use the words of a scholar as far back as 1914, Massachusetts gave us 'the fully developed convention.'^ Some of tbe provisions of the resulting constitu- tion were original, but tbe framers borrowed heavily as well. Altbough a number of historians have written at length about this constitution, notably Prof. Samuel Eliot Morison in sev- eral essays, none bas discussed its construction in detail.^ This paper in a slightly different form was read at the annual meeting of the American Antiquarian Society on October IS, 1980. ' Andrew C. McLaughlin, 'American History and American Democracy,' American Historical Review 20(January 1915):26*-65. 2 'The Struggle over the Adoption of the Constitution of Massachusetts, 1780," Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society 50 ( 1916-17 ) : 353-4 W; A History of the Constitution of Massachusetts (Boston, 1917); 'The Formation of the Massachusetts Constitution,' Massachusetts Law Quarterly 40(December 1955):1-17.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocm01251790-1863.Pdf (10.24Mb)
    u ^- ^ " ±i t I c Hon. JONATHAN E. FIELD, President. 1. —George Dwight. IJ. — K. M. Mason. 1. — Francis Briwiej'. ll.-S. .1. Beal. 2.— George A. Shaw. .12 — Israel W. Andrews. 2.—Thomas Wright. 12.-J. C. Allen. 3. — W. F. Johnson. i'i. — Mellen Chamberlain 3.—H. P. Wakefield. 13.—Nathan Crocker. i.—J. E. Crane. J 4.—Thomas Rice, .Ir. 4.—G. H. Gilbert. 14.—F. M. Johnson. 5.—J. H. Mitchell. 15.—William L. Slade. 5. —Hartley Williams. 15—H. M. Richards. 6.—J. C. Tucker. 16. —Asher Joslin. 6.—M. B. Whitney. 16.—Hosea Crane. " 7. —Benjamin Dean. 17.— Albert Nichols. 7.—E. O. Haven. 17.—Otis Gary. 8.—William D. Swan. 18.—Peter Harvey. 8.—William R. Hill. 18.—George Whitney. 9.—.]. I. Baker. 19.—Hen^^' Carter. 9.—R. H. Libby. 19.—Robert Crawford. ]0.—E. F. Jeiiki*. 10.-—Joseph Breck. 20. —Samuel A. Brown. .JOHN MORIS?5KV, Sevii^aiU-ut-Anns. S. N. GIFFORU, aerk. Wigatorn gaHei-y ^ P=l F ISSu/faT-fii Lit Coiranoittoralllj of llitss3t|ttsttts. MANUAL FOR THE USE OF THE G-ENERAL COURT: CONTAINING THE RULES AND ORDERS OF THE TWO BRANCHES, TOGETHER WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH, AND THAT OF THE UNITED STATES, A LIST OF THE EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENTS OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT, STATE INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR OFFICERS, COUNTY OFFICERS, AND OTHER STATISTICAL INFORMATION. Prepared, pursuant to Orders of the Legislature, BY S. N. GIFFORD and WM. S. ROBINSON. BOSTON: \yRIGHT & POTTER, STATE PRINTERS, No. 4 Spring Lane. 1863. CTommonbtaltfj of iBnssacf)useits.
    [Show full text]
  • Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America Thomas S
    Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville Alumni Book Gallery 2007 Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America Thomas S. Mach Cedarville University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/alum_books Part of the Nonfiction Commons, Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Mach, Thomas S., "Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America" (2007). Alumni Book Gallery. 468. https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/alum_books/468 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Cedarville, a service of the Centennial Library. It has been accepted for inclusion in Alumni Book Gallery by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Cedarville. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America Keywords George H. Pendleton, biography, politics Disciplines History | Nonfiction | Political History | United States History Publisher Kent State University Press Publisher's Note This chapter was published as "The Early Years" (pp. 8-31) in "Gentleman George" Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America by Thomas S. Mach. Copyright © 2007 by The Kent State University Press. All rights reserved. No part of this chapter may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or distributed, in any form, by any means, electronic, mechanical, photographic, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Kent State University Press. For educational re-use, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center (508-744-3350). For all other permissions, please contact Carol Heller at [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • View of History Which Is Somewhat Familiar
    1902.] Report of the Council. 129 HEPOKT OF THE COUNCIL. THE Library, as is evident to the eye, is in good con- dition, and the Librarian's report shows it is receiving many gifts of value, for which we are duly grateful. We have to record the deaths, during the last six months, of four American members and two foreign mem- bers, namely :—Charles Kendall Adams, LL.D. ; Edward Eggleston, L.H.D. ; Horace Gray, LL.D. ; John Wesley Powell, LL.D. ; John Bellows, A. M. ; Sir John George Bourinot, D.C.L. We are glad to announce that the U. S. Bureau of Ethnology informs us that Dr. TrumbuU's Dictionary of Eliot's Indian Bible is now printed in full ; and the vol- umes will soon be ready for distribution. It has received the careful supervision of Dr. Albert S. Gatschet of that Bureau ; and the students of the Algonquin language are greatly indebted to him for the care and learning with which he has edited it and carried it through the press. For the Council, WILLIAM B. WEEDEN, CHAKLES A. CHASE. 130 American Antiquarian Society. [Oct., THEEE COMMONWEALTHS, MASSAGHUSETT|S, CONNECTICUT, EHODE ISLAND ; THEIR EARLY DEVELOPMENT. BY WILLIAM B. WEEDEN. NEW ENGLAND was settled by one of those profound impulses in the popular mind which are not easily defined. The leading motive in this case was a desire for freer gov- ernment, and it was formulated under the motto, freedom of worship, growing out of the division of parties in Eng- land. The nonconforming element in the mother country, afterward and for a time, overcame the conserving forces of English society.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Doc. 108-222
    34 Biographical Directory DELEGATES IN THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS CONNECTICUT Dates of Attendance Andrew Adams............................ 1778 Benjamin Huntington................ 1780, Joseph Spencer ........................... 1779 Joseph P. Cooke ............... 1784–1785, 1782–1783, 1788 Jonathan Sturges........................ 1786 1787–1788 Samuel Huntington ................... 1776, James Wadsworth....................... 1784 Silas Deane ....................... 1774–1776 1778–1781, 1783 Jeremiah Wadsworth.................. 1788 Eliphalet Dyer.................. 1774–1779, William S. Johnson........... 1785–1787 William Williams .............. 1776–1777 1782–1783 Richard Law............ 1777, 1781–1782 Oliver Wolcott .................. 1776–1778, Pierpont Edwards ....................... 1788 Stephen M. Mitchell ......... 1785–1788 1780–1783 Oliver Ellsworth................ 1778–1783 Jesse Root.......................... 1778–1782 Titus Hosmer .............................. 1778 Roger Sherman ....... 1774–1781, 1784 Delegates Who Did Not Attend and Dates of Election John Canfield .............................. 1786 William Hillhouse............. 1783, 1785 Joseph Trumbull......................... 1774 Charles C. Chandler................... 1784 William Pitkin............................. 1784 Erastus Wolcott ...... 1774, 1787, 1788 John Chester..................... 1787, 1788 Jedediah Strong...... 1782, 1783, 1784 James Hillhouse ............... 1786, 1788 John Treadwell ....... 1784, 1785, 1787 DELAWARE Dates of Attendance Gunning Bedford,
    [Show full text]
  • Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America Thomas S
    Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville Faculty Books 2007 Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America Thomas S. Mach Cedarville University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/faculty_books Part of the Nonfiction Commons, Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Mach, Thomas S., "Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America" (2007). Faculty Books. 54. http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/faculty_books/54 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Cedarville, a service of the Centennial Library. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Books by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Cedarville. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Gentleman George Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America Disciplines History | Nonfiction | Political History | United States History Publisher Kent State University Press Publisher's Note This chapter was published as "The Early Years" (pp. 8-31) in "Gentleman George" Hunt Pendleton: Party Politics and Ideological Identity in Nineteenth-Century America by Thomas S. Mach. Copyright © 2007 by The Kent State University Press. All rights reserved. No part of this chapter may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or distributed, in any form, by any means, electronic, mechanical, photographic, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Kent State University Press. For educational re-use, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center (508-744-3350). For all other permissions, please contact Carol Heller at [email protected]. ISBN 9780873389136 This book is available at DigitalCommons@Cedarville: http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/faculty_books/54 The Early Years he mighty Ohio River brought much more than life-giving water to the burgeoning city of Cincinnati in 1825.
    [Show full text]
  • The Province House and Its Occupants
    The Province House and its Occupants By WALTER KENDALL WATKINS Edited by RICHARD M. CANDEE HE way to Roxbury, as Wash- by the familial greetings of a letter from ington Street was called in the Sergeant to “Bro. Corwin, Bro. Jona- T first century of Boston’s history, than and Bro. Browne” for John and was bordered north of West Street by the Jonathan Corwin and William Browne homes of some of the principal settlers. who married their sister Hannah Corwin. South of the Town House (the Old State Samuel Sewall noted in his Diary for House) was the South End of the town December 23, 1681 “two of the chief during these years, while the land behind Gentlewomen in Towne dyed, . viz. the Old South Meeting House remained Mrs. Mary Davis and Mrs. Eliza. Sar- pasture for a century more. The west gent (sic) .“* His second marriage, in side of Washington Street was an excel- 1682, was to Elizabeth, daughter of lent location for a house on the main Henry Shrimpton. street, with a fine prospect of the harbor In 1690 the deacons of the Old South and its islands. Church met at Judge Sewall’s house to The first great Boston fire destroyed arrange for documents and deedsrelating these homes on January 14, 1653, to the church to be placed in a chest and among them that of William Aspinwall, depositedin Mr. Sergeant’s house “it be- town recorder, which stood near the ing of brick and convenient.” Sewall present junction of Washington and also notes, after a hailstorm of April 20, Bromfield Streets.
    [Show full text]
  • “THE FINEST SOIL in the WORLD for the CULTURE of LAURELS…” One of Gen
    A modern re-enactment, on the original battle site, of Eutaw Springs; at which engagement Pierce was wounded. “THE FINEST SOIL IN THE WORLD FOR THE CULTURE OF LAURELS…” One of Gen. Greene’s aides, Capt. William Pierce, Relays News from the Southern Department. Originally a captain in the 1st Continental artillery (beginning on 30 Nov. 1776), William Leigh Pierce (1740-1789), from Virginia, was in mid-November 1780, along with Captain Nathaniel Pendleton, enlisted by Maj. Gen. Nathanael Greene in Richmond; when in Nov. 1780 the latter was making his way south to assume command of the southern army. On 30 September 1783, he was brevetted (i.e., raised in rank but without additional pay) to Major, and after the war entered politics; serving as a delegate from Georgia for the Federal Convention in 1787. While he did not remain in Phladelphia long enough to sign the Constitution (indeed, he died in only 1789), Pierce did participate and have a tangible impact on some of the debate that went on beforehand; including with respect to guidelines for how members of Congress and Senators are to be elected. Yet of particular consequence, he wrote brief sketches of the Convention delegates which are viewed as being of singular value to historians of the Constitution; though it must in fairness to the delegates be said that these sketches, while useful, are too terse to be taken as entirely just or accurate portraits.1 Collected for this entry in our series are a series of letters Pierce wrote in 1781-1782, and which were sent to Virginia militia cavalry officer2 and subsequently eminent and much respected jurist and Federal judge, Saint George Tucker (1752-1827).
    [Show full text]
  • Names and Addresses of Living Bachelors and Masters of Arts, And
    id 3/3? A3 ^^m •% HARVARD UNIVERSITY. A LIST OF THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF LIVING ALUMNI HAKVAKD COLLEGE. 1890, Prepared by the Secretary of the University from material furnished by the class secretaries, the Editor of the Quinquennial Catalogue, the Librarian of the Law School, and numerous individual graduates. (SKCOND YEAR.) Cambridge, Mass., March 15. 1890. V& ALUMNI OF HARVARD COLLEGE. \f *** Where no StateStat is named, the residence is in Mass. Class Secretaries are indicated by a 1817. Hon. George Bancroft, Washington, D. C. ISIS. Rev. F. A. Farley, 130 Pacific, Brooklyn, N. Y. 1819. George Salmon Bourne. Thomas L. Caldwell. George Henry Snelling, 42 Court, Boston. 18SO, Rev. William H. Furness, 1426 Pine, Philadelphia, Pa. 1831. Hon. Edward G. Loring, 1512 K, Washington, D. C. Rev. William Withington, 1331 11th, Washington, D. C. 18SS. Samuel Ward Chandler, 1511 Girard Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. 1823. George Peabody, Salem. William G. Prince, Dedham. 18S4. Rev. Artemas Bowers Muzzey, Cambridge. George Wheatland, Salem. 18S5. Francis O. Dorr, 21 Watkyn's Block, Troy, N. Y. Rev. F. H. Hedge, North Ave., Cambridge. 18S6. Julian Abbott, 87 Central, Lowell. Dr. Henry Dyer, 37 Fifth Ave., New York, N. Y. Rev. A. P. Peabody, Cambridge. Dr. W. L. Russell, Barre. 18S7. lyEpes S. Dixwell, 58 Garden, Cambridge. William P. Perkins, Wa}dand. George H. Whitman, Billerica. Rev. Horatio Wood, 124 Liberty, Lowell. 1828] 1838. Rev. Charles Babbidge, Pepperell. Arthur H. H. Bernard. Fredericksburg, Va. §3PDr. Henry Ingersoll Bowditch, 113 Boylston, Boston. Rev. Joseph W. Cross, West Boylston. Patrick Grant, 3D Court, Boston. Oliver Prescott, New Bedford.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocm01251790-1865.Pdf (10.56Mb)
    11 if (^ Hon. JONATHAN Ii'IBIiD, President. RIGHT. - - Blaisdell. - Wentworth. 11 Josiah C — Jacob H. Loud. 11. _ William L. Keed. Tappan -Martin Griffin. 12.- - Francis A. Hobart. — E. B. Stoddard. 12. — John S. Eldridge. - 2d. - Pitman. 1.3.- James Easton, — George Hej'wood. 13. — William VV.CIapp, Jr. Robert C. Codman. 14.- - Albert C Parsons. — Darwin E. 'Ware. 14. — Hiram A. Stevens. -Charles R - Kneil. - Barstow. 15.- Thomas — Francis Childs. 15 — Henr)' Alexander, Jr- Henry 16.- - Francis E. Parker. — Freeman Cobb. 16.— Paul A. Chadbourne. - George Frost. - Southwick. - Samuel M. Worcester. 17. Moses D. — Charles Adams, Jr. 17. — John Hill. 18. -Abiiah M. Ide. 18. — Eben A. Andrews. -Alden Leiand. — Emerson Johnson. Merriam. Pond. -Levi Stockbridge. -Joel — George Foster. 19. — Joseph A. Hurd. - Solomon C. Wells, 20. -Yorick G. — Miio Hildreth. S. N. GIFFORD, Clerk. JOHN MORISSEY. Serffeant-nt-Arms. Cflininontofaltl of llassadprfts. MANUAL FOR THE USE OP THE GENERAL COURT CONTAlN'mG THE RULES AND ORDERS OF THE TWO BRANCHES, TOGETHER WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH, AND THAT OF THE UNITED STATES, A LIST OF THE EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENTS OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT, STATE INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR OFFICERS, COUNTY OFFICERS, AND OTHER STATISTICAL INFORMATION. i'C^c Prepared, pursuant to Orders of the Legislature, BY S. N. GIFFORD and WM. S. ROBINSON. BOSTON: \7RIGHT & POTTER, STATE PRINTERS, No. 4 Spring Lane. 186 5. Ccmmotttoealtfj of iHassncfjugetts. In Senate, January 10, 1865. Ordered, That the Clerks of the two branches cause to be printed and bound m suitable form two thousand copies of the Rules and Orders of the two branches, with lists of the several Standing and Special Committees, together with such other matter as has been prepared, in pursuance to an Order of the last legisla- ture.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This PDF File
    Journal of Backcountry Studies EDITOR’S NOTE: John R. Maass, Ph.D. Ohio State, 2007, is a member of the JBS Editorial Board “From Principles of Humanity and Virtue”: Moderation and the Revolutionary Settlement in North Carolina BY JOHN R. MAASS The struggle for American independence in North Carolina was a civil war, especially after the British concentrated their Southern offensive there in late 1778. It was not only a traditional military contest between regular armies in the field, but a bloody internecine struggle marked by plundering, property destruction, violence and murder as well. Lord Cornwallis’s invasion of the North Carolina Piedmont, as well as the partisan warfare welling up in the wake of the Race to the Dan and the retreat from Guilford Courthouse to Wilmington, occurred primarily in the North Carolina backcountry. These concurrent conflicts created great difficulties for Patriot military and civilian leaders in eastern North Carolina as they attempted to establish political legitimacy through the restoration of order and stability. From his home in Edenton, North Carolina, attorney James Iredell wrote a short letter in June 1784 to his friend Archibald Neilson, a merchant and former secretary to the last royal governor of North Carolina. An ardent loyalist, Neilson hastily left the state once war seemed imminent in 1775. Having not heard from Neilson in years, Iredell welcomed the renewal of an interrupted friendship “between old Friends, however separated by the war or political sentiments.” He lamented the vindictive spirit demonstrated throughout the war years—and since then—against those like Neilson who remained attached to the crown and had suffered so much because of their loyalty.
    [Show full text]
  • Oname [Owner of Property Hlocation of Legal
    Form No. 10-300 (Rev. 10-74) UNITED STATESDEPARTMEWOF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY -- NOMINATION FORM SEE INSTRUCTIONS IN HOWTO COMPLETE NATIONAL REGISTER FORMS TYPE ALL ENTRIES -- COMPLETE APPLICABLE SECTIONS ONAME HISTORIC Paneuil Hall AND/OR COMMON Paneuil Hall LOCATION STREET & NUMBER Dock Sauare (ifeneuil Hall —NOT FOR PUBLICATION CITY, TOWN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT Boston _ VICINITY OF Eighth STATE CODE COUNTY CODE Massachusetts In?«; Q CLA SSIFI C ATI ON CATEGORY OWNERSHIP STATUS PRESENT USE —DISTRICT X_PUBLIC ^.OCCUPIED —AGRICULTURE X.MUSEUM X-BUILDING(S) —PRIVATE —UNOCCUPIED ^.COMMERCIAL —PARK —STRUCTURE —BOTH —WORK IN PROGRESS —EDUCATIONAL —PRIVATE RESIDENCE —SITE PUBLIC ACQUISITION ACCESSIBLE —ENTERTAINMENT —RELIGIOUS —OBJECT _IN PROCESS X.YES: RESTRICTED —GOVERNMENT —SCIENTIFIC —BEING CONSIDERED — YES: UNRESTRICTED —INDUSTRIAL —TRANSPORTATION —NO —MILITARY XpIHER BUbliC [OWNER OF PROPERTY NAME City of Boston, Office of the Mayor STREETS NUMBER New City Hall CITY. TOWN STATE Boston VICINITY OF Massachusetts HLOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION COURTHOUSE. REGISTRY OF DEEDS. ETC Suffolk County Registry of Deeds STREET* NUMBER Suffolk County Court House, Somerset Street CITY. TOWN STATE Boston Massachusetts REPRESENTATION IN EXISTING SURVEYS TITLE Historic American Buildings Survey DATE 1935, 1937 ]L FEDERAL _STATE —COUNTY _LOCAL DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS Library of Congress, Division of Prints and Photographs CITY, TOWN STATE Washington. D.C. DESCRIPTION CONDITION CHECK ONE CHECK ONE —EXCELLENT _DETERIORATED —UNALTERED X-ORIGINALSITE —GOOD —RUINS X-ALTERED —MOVED DATE- X_FAIR —UNEXPOSED DESCRIBE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL (IF KNOWN) PHYSICAL APPEARANCE Faneuil Hall stands at the eastern edge of Dock Square (intersection of Congress and North Streets) in Boston, Massachusetts. To the west of the historic building is Boston's New City Hall, a massive concrete structure constructed in the late 1960*s.
    [Show full text]