DOCSLIB.ORG

Gouverneur Morris, the Committee of Style, and the Creation of the Federalist Constitution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gouverneur Morris, the Committee of Style, and the Creation of the Federalist Constitution Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2019 Framer’s Intent: Gouverneur Morris, the Committee of Style, and the Creation of the Federalist Constitution William M. Treanor Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/2163 https://ssrn.com/abstract=3383183 Presentation to San Diego Originalism Conference, February 2019. This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Law and Philosophy Commons, and the Legal History Commons February 5, 2019 Presentation to San Diego Originalism Conference Working paper; Comments welcome and should be sent to [email protected] Framer’s Intent: Gouverneur Morris, the Committee of Style, and the Creation of the Federalist Constitution William Michael Treanor1 Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... 1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 4 I. The Committee of Style and Morris’s Constitution .................................................................... 8 a. The Mandate and Selection of the Committee ................................................................ 8 b. Gouverneur Morris ...................................................................................................... 16 c. Morris’s draft and the work of the Committee .............................................................. 25 d. The Convention’s Consideration of the Committee of Style’s draft ........................... 29 i. Offences against the law of nations clause ......................................................... 30 ii. The General Welfare Clause............................................................................. 32 II. Historians’ views of the Committee’s work ............................................................................ 36 III. The Significance of the Changes of the Committee of Style’s Changes The Supreme Court Caselaw ................................................................................................. 43 IV. Law Review Scholarship ....................................................................................................... 50 V. Gouverneur Morris’s Constitutional Vision ............................................................................ 57 a. Nationalism.................................................................................................................. 57 b. The Presidency ............................................................................................................ 61 c. Judiciary ...................................................................................................................... 63 i. Lower federal courts ......................................................................................... 63 ii. Judicial Review ................................................................................................ 65 1 d. Contract Clause and Property ....................................................................................... 67 e. Slavery and New States ................................................................................................ 72 VI. The Work of the Committee of Style ..................................................................................... 77 a. The Preamble ............................................................................................................... 78 b. Three Articles for Three Branches and Three Vesting Clauses ..................................... 87 c. The Qualifications Clause ............................................................................................ 95 d. The Federal Judiciary ................................................................................................... 98 i. Judicial Power clause ........................................................................................ 98 ii. Law of the Land Clause ................................................................................. 102 e. The Contract Clause ................................................................................................... 105 f. Engagements Clause ................................................................................................... 108 g. Slavery ...................................................................................................................... 109 h. New States Clause ..................................................................................................... 110 i. Impeachment Clause ................................................................................................... 111 j. Presidential Succession Clauses (section to be added) ................................................. 112 h. Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 112 VII. The Committee of Style and Constitutional Interpretation .................................................. 113 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 117 2 February 5, 2019 Presentation to San Diego Originalism Conference Framer’s Intent: Gouverneur Morris, the Committee of Style, and the Creation of the Federalist Constitution William Michael Treanor2 Abstract At the end of the proceedings of the federal constitutional convention, the delegates appointed the Committee on Style and Arrangement to bring together the textual provisions that the convention had previously agreed to and to prepare a final constitution. Pennsylvania delegate Gouverneur Morris was assigned to draft the document for the committee, and, with few revisions and little debate, the convention subsequently adopted the Committee’s proposed constitution. For more than two hundred years, questions have been raised as to whether Morris as drafter covertly made changes in the text in order to advance his constitutional vision, but the legal scholars and historians studying the convention have concluded that Morris was an honest scrivener. No prior article, however, has systematically compared the Committee’s draft to the previously adopted resolutions or discussed the implications of those changes for constitutional law. This article reveals how many changes Morris made to the text delegates had previously agreed to and how important those changes were (and are). It shows that many of the central elements of the Constitution (including the Preamble; the basic Article I, Article II, and Article III structure; and the contract clause) were wholly or largely the product of the Committee’s work. In total, Morris made twelve significant changes to the Constitution, and these textual changes advanced his constitutional goals, including strengthening the national government, the executive, and the judiciary; protecting private property; and fighting the spread of slavery. Finally, it shows that, in central debates in the early republic, Federalists, and, notably, fellow committee member Alexander Hamilton repeatedly drew on language crafted by the Committee as they fought for their expansive vision of the Constitution. In revising the constitutional text, Morris created the basis for what was to become the Hamiltonian reading of the Constitution. This history has significant implications for modern constitutional law. While the Supreme Court has never been presented with a case that reveals the extent of the Committee’s changes, in four cases it has confronted situations in which the Committee’s text arguably had a different meaning than the provision previously adopted by the convention, and the Court has consistently treated the Committee’s work as substantively meaningless and concluded that the prior resolutions were controlling. That approach should be rejected because it is at odds with the majoritarian premise of constitutional ratification by “the people.” The text that was ratified is controlling. At the same time, in most circumstances, Morris’s language was ambiguous. A modern public meaning originalist approach leads to the conclusion that Morris’s revisions made possible alternate readings of the Constitution: it supported what was to become the Federalist approach, but did not prevent Republican textualist readings. On important contemporary issues, focus on Morris’s text makes us aware of originalist understandings of the text that have been 3 frequently dismissed or wholly forgotten; although it does not eliminate the originalist basis for narrower readings, that focus provides new originalist support for broad understandings of congressional, judicial, and presidential power and for protection of private property. Framer’s Intent: Gouverneur Morris, the Committee of Style, and the Creation of the Federalist Constitution William Michael Treanor Introduction That document [the Constitution] was written by the fingers, which write this letter. Gouverneur Morris to Timothy Pickering,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Signers of the United States Declaration of Independence Table of Contents
    SIGNERS OF THE UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE 56 Men Who Risked It All Life, Family, Fortune, Health, Future Compiled by Bob Hampton First Edition - 2014 1 SIGNERS OF THE UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTON Page Table of Contents………………………………………………………………...………………2 Overview………………………………………………………………………………...………..5 Painting by John Trumbull……………………………………………………………………...7 Summary of Aftermath……………………………………………….………………...……….8 Independence Day Quiz…………………………………………………….……...………...…11 NEW HAMPSHIRE Josiah Bartlett………………………………………………………………………………..…12 William Whipple..........................................................................................................................15 Matthew Thornton……………………………………………………………………...…........18 MASSACHUSETTS Samuel Adams………………………………………………………………………………..…21 John Adams………………………………………………………………………………..……25 John Hancock………………………………………………………………………………..….29 Robert Treat Paine………………………………………………………………………….….32 Elbridge Gerry……………………………………………………………………....…….……35 RHODE ISLAND Stephen Hopkins………………………………………………………………………….…….38 William Ellery……………………………………………………………………………….….41 CONNECTICUT Roger Sherman…………………………………………………………………………..……...45 Samuel Huntington…………………………………………………………………….……….48 William Williams……………………………………………………………………………….51 Oliver Wolcott…………………………………………………………………………….…….54 NEW YORK William Floyd………………………………………………………………………….………..57 Philip Livingston…………………………………………………………………………….….60 Francis Lewis…………………………………………………………………………....…..…..64 Lewis Morris………………………………………………………………………………….…67
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Story of the Faulkner Murals by Lester S. Gorelic, Ph.D. the Story Of
    The Story of the Faulkner Murals By Lester S. Gorelic, Ph.D. The story of the Faulkner murals in the Rotunda begins on October 23, 1933. On this date, the chief architect of the National Archives, John Russell Pope, recommended the approval of a two- year competing United States Government contract to hire a noted American muralist, Barry Faulkner, to paint a mural for the Exhibit Hall in the planned National Archives Building.1 The recommendation initiated a three-year project that produced two murals, now viewed and admired by more than a million people annually who make the pilgrimage to the National Archives in Washington, DC, to view two of the Charters of Freedom documents they commemorate: the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America. The two-year contract provided $36,000 in costs plus $6,000 for incidental expenses.* The contract ended one year before the projected date for completion of the Archives Building’s construction, providing Faulkner with an additional year to complete the project. The contract’s only guidance of an artistic nature specified that “The work shall be in character with and appropriate to the particular design of this building.” Pope served as the contract supervisor. Louis Simon, the supervising architect for the Treasury Department, was brought in as the government representative. All work on the murals needed approval by both architects. Also, The United States Commission of Fine Arts served in an advisory capacity to the project and provided input critical to the final composition. The contract team had expertise in art, architecture, painting, and sculpture.
    [Show full text]
  • Public School Teachers' Department Improving The
    PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS' DEPARTMENT Edited by LEROY J. KOEHLER State Teachers College, East Stroudsburg, Pa. IMPROVING THE TEACHING OF PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY BY NATHAN G. MEYER Assistant County Superintendent, Monroe County, Pa. ACCORDING to Professor J. E. Woodbridge of Teachers College, Columbia University, the purpose of history is "to give one perspective so that he may formulate a philosophy of life." If this is true, then every teacher, and especially every teacher of history, should have had as a prerequisite to teaching a dynamic course in the whole field of world history, including local history. If there are, as some historians agree, really many histories, one for each important person or thing of the past which cannot be absolutely terminated, then it follows that most of the note- worthy persons and things of the remote past can be related to the corresponding persons or things in the local present. Let me illustrate this statement as it applies to a thing. A history teacher in Philadelphia might arouse the interest of her pupils in the Circus Maximus by this question: "Which is larger, the Circus Maximus or the stadium of the University of Pennsylvania?" The answer and discussion of the size of an amphitheater of the past with a local stadium of the present would give a new mean- ing to the Circus Maximus. Recently I visited a school in Monroe county in which I found a good example of the fact that the history of an important person, Abraham Lincoln, has not been absolutely terminated. The teacher I refer to had enriched his history teaching of Abraham Lincoln by using the picture of a girl, now attending a public school, who is a descendant of the family of Abraham Lincoln's sweetheart, Anne Rutledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Fascinating Facts About the U.S. Constitution
    The U.S. Constitution & Amendments: Fascinating Facts (Continued) Fascinating Facts About The U.S. Constitution The U.S. Constitution has 4,400 words. It is the The Constitution does not set forth requirements oldest and shortest written Constitution of any major for the right to vote. As a result, at the outset of government in the world. the Union, only male property-owners could vote. ___________________ African Americans were not considered citizens, and women were excluded from the electoral process. Of the spelling errors in the Constitution, Native Americans were not given the right to vote “Pensylvania” above the signers’ names is probably until 1924. the most glaring. ___________________ ___________________ James Madison, “the father of the Constitution,” Thomas Jefferson did not sign the Constitution. was the first to arrive in Philadelphia for the He was in France during the Convention, where Constitutional Convention. He arrived in February, he served as the U.S. minister. John Adams was three months before the convention began, bearing serving as the U.S. minister to Great Britain during the blueprint for the new Constitution. the Constitutional Convention and did not attend ___________________ either. ___________________ Of the forty-two delegates who attended most of the meetings, thirty-nine actually signed the Constitution. The Constitution was “penned” by Jacob Shallus, Edmund Randolph and George Mason of Virginia A Pennsylvania General Assembly clerk, for $30 and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts refused to ($726 today). sign in part due to the lack of a bill of rights. ___________________ ___________________ Since 1952, the Constitution has been on display When it came time for the states to ratify the in the National Archives Building in Washington, Constitution, the lack of any bill of rights was the DC.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, August 23, 1793, with Drafts and List of Dispatches to Morris, from the Works of Thomas Jefferson in Twelve Volumes
    Library of Congress Thomas Jefferson to Gouverneur Morris, August 23, 1793, with Drafts and List of Dispatches to Morris, from The Works of Thomas Jefferson in Twelve Volumes. Federal Edition. Collected and Edited by Paul Leicester Ford. TO THE U. S. MINISTER TO FRANCE J. MSS. (GOUVERNEUR MORRIS) Philadelphia, August 23, 1793. Dear Sir, —The letter of the 16th instant, with its documents accompanying this, will sufficiently inform you of the transactions, which have taken place between Mr. Genet, the minister of France, and the Government here, and of the painful necessity they have brought on, of desiring his recall. The letter has been prepared, in the view of being itself, with its documents, laid before the Executive of the French Government. You will, therefore, be pleased to lay it before them, doing everything which can be done on your part, to procure it a friendly and dispassionate reception and consideration. The President would indeed think it greatly unfortunate, were they to take it in any other light; and, therefore, charges you, very particularly, with the case of presenting this proceeding in the most soothing view, and as the result of an unavoidable necessity on his part. Mr. Genet, soon after his arrival, communicated the decree of the National Convention of February 19, 1793, authorizing their Executive to propose a treaty with us on liberal principles, such as might strengthen the bonds of good will, which unite the two nations; and informed us in a letter of May 23, that he was authorized to treat accordingly. The Senate being then in recess, and not to meet again till fall, I apprized Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Founding Fathers: a Brief Overview
    The Founding Fathers: A Brief Overview The 55 delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention were a distinguished body of men who represented a cross section of 18th-century American leadership. Almost all of them were well-educated men of means who were dominant in their communities and states, and many were also prominent in national affairs. Virtually every one had taken part in the Revolution; at least 29 had served in the Continental forces, most of them in positions of command. Political Experience The group, as a whole, had extensive political experience. At the time of the convention, four-fifths, or 41 individuals, were or had been members of the Continental Congress. Mifflin and Gorham had served as president of the body. The only ones who lacked congressional experience were Bassett, Blair, Brearly, Broom, Davie, Dayton, Alexander Martin, Luther Martin, Mason, McClurg, Paterson, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Strong, and Yates. Eight men (Clymer, Franklin, Gerry, Robert Morris, Read, Sherman, Wilson, and Wythe) had signed the Declaration of Independence. Six (Carroll, Dickinson, Gerry, Gouverneur Morris, Robert Morris, and Sherman) had affixed their signatures to the Articles of Confederation. But only two, Sherman and Robert Morris, underwrote all three of the nation's basic documents. Practically all of the 55 delegates had experience in colonial and state government. Dickinson, Franklin, Langdon, Livingston, Alexander Martin, Randolph, Read, and Rutledge had been governors, and the majority had held county and local offices. Occupations The delegates practiced a wide range of occupations, and many men pursued more than one career simultaneously. Thirty-five were lawyers or had benefited from legal training, though not all of them relied on the profession for a livelihood.
    [Show full text]
  • WILLIAM MORRIS MEREDITH 1799-1873 by RICHARD LEWIS ASHIHURST, O She Peinsylvania Bar
    THE AMERICAN LAW REGISTER FOUNDED 18S2 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF LAW VOL. {6 N.S.} APRIL, 1907 No. 4. WILLIAM MORRIS MEREDITH 1799-1873 by RICHARD LEWIS ASHIHURST, O she Peinsylvania Bar. William Morris Meredith was a conspicuous figure in Pennsylvania during the middle fifty years of the 19th Century, and played a highly important part in its his- tory. It may further be truthfully said that during that time he exercised at certain critical periods a powerful influence and left a distinct impress on the life of the Nation. Whether owing to the proverbial evanescent nature of the triumphs of the forum, or to the reserve, to call it by no stronger name, so often shown by his State and City in their appreciation of their greatest citizens, there are probably few so great Americans so little remembered outside of Pennsylvania. Born at the beginning of the Century his earnest professional activity covered a pe- riod of more than half a century ending only with his Copyright. zgo7. by 3. B.Liscorr CouItAN. All righu reserved. it 201 WILLIAM MORRIS MEREDITH. death in 1873, and during the longer portion of this period he was the recognized leader of the Bar of Penn- sylvania, and besides the prominent State and City posi- tions he filled, he had been as Secretary of the Trea- sury under Taylor the controlling spirit of the last truly Whig administration of the Federal Government. William Morris Meredith was born June 8, 1799, in the home of his father, William Meredith, in Philadelphia. Law had already taken a strong hold on the Meredith family.
    [Show full text]
  • A Great Compromise
    A Great Compromise: The Sherman Plan Saves the Constitutional Convention of 1787 Lucy Phelan Junior Division Historical Paper Paper Length: 2,495 Words 2 INTRODUCTION In May 1787, delegates from twelve of the thirteen United States met in a federal Convention to “devise such further provisions as shall appear to them necessary to render the Constitution of the federal Government adequate to the exigencies of the Union.”1 Simply stated, there was an urgent need to fix the political system under the existing Articles of Confederation. However, differences over the structure of the legislative branch quickly led to conflict. Some, particularly delegates from larger-population states, envisioned a strong National legislature with representatives elected by the people (“proportional representation”). Others from smaller states disagreed, fearing a power grab by the larger states, and supported equal representation for each state. This conflict threatened to destroy the Convention. After large-state efforts to force proportional representation in both legislative houses, small-state delegates stopped cooperating altogether. The two sides became deadlocked. Roger Sherman’s Great Compromise of proportional representation in the lower house and equal representation in the upper broke the stalemate. The delegates resumed the Convention and finished writing a new Constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation and corresponding system of government. Ratified two years later, this Constitution has successfully weathered another 230 years of tension, conflict and even turmoil in American history and politics. The Constitution of 1787 continues to serve as the basis of the United States Government today.2 1 Pauline Maier, Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787 – 1788 (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2011), 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Access to Records Documenting the Sale of Southeastern Mill Villages Caps Project to Preserve History of the South Carolina Textile Industry
    Vol. 24:3 ISSN 0160-8460 December 1996 Access to Records Documenting the Sale of Southeastern Mill Villages Caps Project to Preserve History of the South Carolina Textile Industry As part of Clemson University Libraries’ South changing the nature of the closely knit mill communities Carolina Textile Research Resources Access grant from at the time of their sale. the NHPRC, a unique collection of records including The records are arranged alphabetically by the many plat maps documenting the sale of textile mill name of the textile firm and usually contain villages to mill workers is now available. During the correspondence, records of financial disbursements, and course of this project, which extended from 1991-1994, sometimes insurance and other materials related to the the University Libraries was approached by Mr. Alester sales. Most of the sales and the bulk of the records are G. Furman III, a prominent Greenville, South Carolina, from the 1950s and 1960s. There is an individual businessman, regarding the disposition of some of his folder(s) for each mill community which often contains firm’s papers. Mr. Furman’s real estate company served detailed listings of the names of the purchasers of homes as the agent for the sale of approximately one hundred and the amount of the purchase, method of payment, textile mill villages between 1940 and 1960. George and status reports related to the liquidation of all Vogt, then Director of the South Carolina Department properties and transfer of funds held in account. In the of Archives and History, was instrumental in referring case of the J.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Broadsides Printed Quickly and Posted Throughout a Town
    MAKING THE REVOLUTION: AMERICA, 1763-1791 PRIMARY SOURCE COLLECTION __BROADSIDE NEWS__ of the American Revolution * Wartime news based on “fresh intelligence” was spread through one-page broadsides printed quickly and posted throughout a town. 1776. News: British evacuation of Boston, March 17. Content: Letter dated March 21 from Boston resident to a resident of (probably) New York City. As reported from: Boston, Massachusetts. As reported (printed) in: New York City, New York (?). 1777. News: Repulsion of British at Saratoga, Oct. 6. Content: Letter dated Oct. 9 from Gen. John Glover, near Stillwater, New York, to Gen. William Heath, Boston. As reported from: Boston, October 13. As reported (printed) in: Portsmouth, New Hampshire. 1777. News: Repulsion of British attacks on New Jersey forts near Philadelphia, Oct. 23. Content: Three letters dated Oct. 23 from officers in Red Bank, New Jersey, to Gen. Washington. As reported from: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, by order of the Continental Congress (printed in Lancaster, Penn.) 1779. News: Battle of Stono Ferry, S.C., June 20. Content: News from a man “this moment arrived” in Providence (perhaps June 21), as heard in Philadelphia from a man newly arrived from South Carolina; confirmed by Boston men who heard news from another S.C. man. As reported from: Providence, Rhode Island, June 21 (?), 4pm. As reported (printed) in: Worcester, Massachusetts, June 21. 1780. News: American repulsion of British attack during siege of Charleston, S.C., April 25. Content: Letter (excerpt) dated May 10 from Edenton, N.C., postmaster reporting news “from very good Authority.” As reported from: Edenton, North Carolina, May 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Doctor Benjamin Franklin's Dream America
    Doctor Benjamin Franklin’s Dream America Damien Lincoln Ober n EQUUS © Damien Lincoln Ober, 2014 Cover image: John Turnball’s “Declaration of Independence” Target List. ISBN 978-0-9571213-8-6 Equus Press Birkbeck College (William Rowe), 43 Gordon Square, London, WC1 H0PD, United Kingdom Typeset by lazarus Printed in the Czech Republic by PB Tisk All rights reserved Composed in 11pt Garamond, based on type designs by the 16th century punch-cutter Claude Garamond, , with headings in Futura Light, composed in 1927 by Paul Renner, and Reservoir Grunge, designed by Zeta Fonts in 2003. DOCTOR BENJAMIN FRANKLIN’S DREAM AMERICA for Kate th@ all r cre8d =; th@ they r endowd by their cre8or with certn inalien- able rights; th@ among these r life, librty and the purst of happines – Thomas Jefferson John Morton :: April 1st 1777 Francis Lightfoot Lee :: January 11th 1797 Button Gwinnett :: May 19th 1777 Carter Braxton :: October 10th 1779 Philip Livingston :: June 12th 1778 Oliver Walcott :: December 1st 1797 John Hart :: May 11th 1779 Lewis Morris :: January 22nd 1798 George Ross :: July 14th 1779 James Wilson :: August 28th 1798 Joseph Hewes :: November 10th 1779 George Read :: September 21st 1798 George Taylor :: February 23rd 1781 William Paca :: October 23rd 1799 Richard Stockton :: February 28th 1781 Edward Rutledge :: January 23rd 1800 Caesar Rodney :: June 29th 1784 Matthew Thornton :: June 24th 1803 Stephen Hopkins :: July 13th 1785 Samuel Adams :: October 2nd 1803 William Whipple :: November 28th 1785 Francis Lewis :: December 21st 1803 Arthur Middleton :: January 1st 1787 George Walton :: February 2nd 1804 Thomas Stone :: October 1st 1787 Robert Morris :: May 9th 1806 John Penn :: September 14th 1788 George Wythe :: June 8th 1806 Thomas Nelson Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Hunter Morris and the Politics of Indian Affairs in Pennsylvania, 1754-1755
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1995 Robert Hunter Morris and the Politics of Indian Affairs in Pennsylvania, 1754-1755 Charles Michael Downing College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Indigenous Studies Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Downing, Charles Michael, "Robert Hunter Morris and the Politics of Indian Affairs in Pennsylvania, 1754-1755" (1995). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626005. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-y2wn-7396 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ROBERT HUNTER MORRIS AND THE POLITICS OF INDIAN AFFAIRS IN PENNSYLVANIA, 1754-1755 A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of History The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Charles Michael Downing 1995 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Author Approved, August 1995 A xm JUL James Axtell bhn E. Si James P. Whittenbui TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]