DOCSLIB.ORG

Constitutionality of the D.C. House Voting Rights Bill in Light of Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment and the History of the Creation of the District

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

File: SCARBERRY.dc voting.POST-AUTHOR (v5).docCreated on: 6/16/2009 3:27:00 PM Last Printed: 6/16/2009 4:20:00 PM ALABAMA LAW REVIEW Volume 60 2009 Number 4 HISTORICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATION FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE D.C. HOUSE VOTING RIGHTS BILL IN LIGHT OF SECTION TWO OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT AND THE HISTORY OF THE CREATION OF THE DISTRICT Mark S. Scarberry* A State is represented in the Senate and in the House as a State. There is no constitutional capacity for representation except through State organization. Representatives in this House are ap- portioned by the Constitution among the several States. —Representative George S. Boutwell, a leading “Radical” Republi- can, after arguing for constitutional amendments, including a version of 1 what would become Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment. * Professor of Law, Pepperdine University School of Law. The author would like to thank Professors Edward J. Larson, Akhil Reed Amar, Christine Chambers Goodman, Robert J. Pushaw, Douglas W. Kmiec, and Edward A. Hartnett for their helpful suggestions. The author also would like to thank his dean, the Hon. Kenneth W. Starr (Duane and Kelly Roberts Dean and Professor of Law at the Pepperdine University School of Law), for his support and encouragement and for engaging in constructive dialogue on the subject of this Article. Copyright © 2009 by Alabama Law Review and Mark S. Scarberry. 1. CONG. GLOBE, 39th Cong., 1st Sess. 2509 (May 9, 1866); see infra text accompanying note 171 (giving longer quotation including these two sentences). Representative Boutwell, “a guiding member of the House Judiciary Committee,” had served as Governor of Massachusetts and (from 1862 to 1863) as the first Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Michelle LaFrance, Boutwell, George S., in 1 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE RECONSTRUCTION ERA 100 (Richard Zuczek ed., 2006); see also Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, Boutwell, George Sewel, http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000674 (last visited Apr. 17, 2009). He served as one of the nine House members on the Joint Committee on Reconstruction and later was the “leader of the House forces supporting a Fifteenth Amendment.” JAMES M. MCPHERSON, THE STRUGGLE FOR EQUALITY: ABOLITIONISTS AND THE NEGRO IN THE CIVIL WAR AND RECONSTRUCTION 426 (1964); see also BENJAMIN B. KENDRICK, THE JOURNAL OF THE JOINT 783 File: SCARBERRY.dc voting.POST-AUTHOR (v5).doc Created on: 6/16/2009 3:27:00 PM Last Printed: 6/16/2009 4:20:00 PM 784 Alabama Law Review [Vol. 60:4:783 If the citizens of the District are to have voting representation in the Congress, a constitutional amendment is essential; statutory action alone will not suffice. —House Committee on the Judiciary, in a 1967 report submitted by its long-time Democratic chairman, Representative Emanuel Celler.2 I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 785 A. The Setting—The Proposed D.C. House Voting Rights Act, The Need for Careful Consideration by Congress and the President of its Constitutionality, and the Only Initially Somewhat Plausible Argument for its Constitutionality: The Argument from Inadvertence ............................................................. 785 B. Two Crises Concerning the Composition of Congress ............. 795 C. The District Clause, Constitutional Limitations, the Argument From Inadvertence, and Feasible Alternatives for Providing District Citizens with Representation .......................................... 806 II. THE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT THE FAILURE OF SECTION TWO OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FOR REPRESENTATION FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WAS NOT INADVERTENT ............................................................... 815 A. An Overview .............................................................. 815 B. The Detailed Evidence .................................................. 818 COMMITTEE OF FIFTEEN ON RECONSTRUCTION 39 (1914), available at http://books.google.com/books?id=pg9CAAAAIAAJ; LaFrance, supra, at 100 (“Boutwell’s com- mitment to freedmen’s civil rights and universal suffrage compelled him to become one of the primary voices to guide drafts of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and early drafts of plans that would later form the basis of congressional strategies for southern Reconstruc- tion.”). 2. H.R. REP. NO. 90-819, at 4 (1967); see also Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, Celler, Emanuel, http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=C000264 (last visited Apr. 17, 2009). An identical statement appears in the House Judiciary Committee Report that accompanied the proposed constitutional amendment, H.R.J. Res. 554, 95th Cong. (1978), that would have granted the District both House and Senate representation had it been ratified by sufficient states. H.R. REP. NO. 110-52, pt. 2, at 30 (2007) (quoting H.R. REP. NO. 95-886, at 4 (1978)); see also District of Columbia Representation and Vote: Hearings Before Subcomm. No. 5 of the Comm. on the Judiciary of the H.R. on H. J. Res. 529, 86th Cong. 824–25 (1960) [hereinafter D.C. Representation and Vote] (statement of Sen. Hubert H. Humphrey) (“Mr. Chairman, the only reason that people are denied the right to vote here [in the District] is . geography. The only way that this geographical set of circumstances can be corrected, in my mind, is by a constitutional amendment.”) Only sixteen states ratified H.R.J. Res. 554 by its 1985 deadline, far short of the thirty-eight that would have con- stituted the required three-quarters of the states. See KENNETH R. THOMAS, CRS REPORT FOR CONGRESS, THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF AWARDING THE DELEGATE FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA A VOTE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 20 (2007), reprinted in Equal Representation in Congress: Providing Voting Rights to the District of Columbia: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on Homeland Sec. and Governmental Affairs, 110th Cong. 202 (2007) [hereinaf- ter Equal Representation in Congress]. File: SCARBERRY.dc voting.POST-AUTHOR (v5).docCreated on: 6/16/2009 3:27:00 PM Last Printed: 6/16/2009 4:20:00 PM 2009] History and Congressional Representation for D.C. 785 1. Formation of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction and Proposal of Precursors to Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment, Focusing on how House Seats Would be Apportioned Among the States ................................... 819 2. The District as Opening Wedge: Abolition ...................... 829 3. The District as Opening Wedge: African-American Suffrage and Initial Consideration of the District Suffrage Bills ............ 831 4. The Fall 1866 Elections ............................................ 845 5. The President’s Proposal that the District be Given a Nonvoting Delegate to the House, the Enactment of the District Suffrage Bill Over President Johnson’s Veto, and the Ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment in the Context of that Veto Override ............................................................. 846 III. HISTORICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE TIME OF THE FOUNDING SHOWING THAT THE FAILURE OF ARTICLE I OF THE CONSTITUTION TO PROVIDE REPRESENTATION FOR THE DISTRICT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN INADVERTENT ............................................................... 864 A. The Centrality of Issues Concerning the Seat of Government from 1775 to 1790 ............................................................ 869 B. The Expectation That the Capital Could Easily Become a Commercial City with a Substantial Population ................... 877 C. The Importance of Avoiding Undue Influence from the Location Where the Capital Was Sited .......................................... 885 IV. CONCLUSION ................................................................. 886 I. INTRODUCTION A. The Setting—The Proposed D.C. House Voting Rights Act, The Need for Careful Consideration by Congress and the President of its Constitu- tionality, and the Only Initially Somewhat Plausible Argument for its Con- stitutionality: The Argument from Inadvertence Congress stands ready to attempt to amend the constitutional provi- sions for the composition of the House of Representatives—Article I and, crucially, Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment—by a simple statute that would purport to grant the District of Columbia a voting member in the House: the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009.3 As 3. See District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009, S. 160, 111th Cong. (2009). The bill, if constitutional, would permanently expand the size of the House of Representatives by two, to 427, with the District of Columbia receiving one of the seats and Utah almost certainly receiving the other, pending reapportionment following the 2010 census. S. REP. NO. 110-123, at 1–2 (2007) (ana- lyzing similar bill introduced in 110th Congress, District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007, S. 1257, 110th Cong. (2007)). File: SCARBERRY.dc voting.POST-AUTHOR (v5).doc Created on: 6/16/2009 3:27:00 PM Last Printed: 6/16/2009 4:20:00 PM 786 Alabama Law Review [Vol. 60:4:783 a Senator, President Obama supported the Act—the 2007 version of which was only barely defeated in Congress4—and thus it appears nearly certain, As is discussed fully infra note 4, the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007, S. 1257, 110th Cong. (2007), failed in the Senate only because its supporters fell three votes short of the sixty votes needed to invoke cloture. A
Recommended publications
  • From the Vice Chancellor and Dean for Agriculture and Life Sciences

    From the Vice Chancellor and Dean for Agriculture and Life Sciences

    From the Vice Chancellor and Dean for Agriculture and Life Sciences As I reflect on the decades since the Morrill Land-Grant College Act was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln in 1862, I have a renewed respect for our nation’s land-grant university system. When the land-grant colleges opened their doors, they revolutionized higher education in America, making it possible for average citizens to get a practical education that would improve lives and livelihoods — while creating a workforce to help build a great nation. What makes the land-grant system even greater is the collaboration with experiment station research (Hatch Act of 1887) and the connection to the people through cooperative extension (Smith-Lever Act of 1914), which brought education and research to local communities. In Texas, we take the land-grant system one step further with the addition of our service missions: to protect our forests and animal and human health. When the Texas A&M Forest Service was created in 1915, the state’s vast forest resources came under the protection of the land-grant system. In 1969, with the opening of the Texas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory, The Texas A&M University System became a partner in the protection of animal health and the prevention and control of zoonotic diseases. Texas A&M AgriLife has carried out the land-grant university mission of teaching, research, extension, and service for more than a century, moving seamlessly within the land-grant design as our nation’s history unfolded. We have grown with each decade, increasing our educational opportunities and student numbers, expanding our research to new horizons, broadening our outreach at home and around the world, and offering new levels of service to the many who depend on us.
  • 1961-1962 Undergraduate Catalogue

    1961-1962 Undergraduate Catalogue

    FOUNDED 1791 • BURLINGTON, VERMONT Bulletin of THE UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT THE CATALOGUE • 1961-1962 ANNOUNCEMENTS • 1 96 2 - 1 96 5 DEDICATION During the 1961-62 academic year, 70 members of the American Association of Land Grant Colleges and State Uni­ versities are commemorating the centen­ nial of the Morrill Act. Signed by Presi­ dent Lincoln on July 2, 1862, this Federal Law established a nationwide system of colleges and universities dedi­ cated to providing opportunities for liberal and practical higher education for all qualified residents of the United States. Founded more than 70 years before the passage of the Land Grant Act, the Uni­ versity of Vermont became the Land Grant institution of Vermont in 1865 when the Vermont Legislature estab­ lished the Vermont Agricultural College and joined it with the parent University at Burlington. It is to Senator Justin Smith Morrill, a native of Strafford, Vermont, himself denied an opportunity for college edu­ cation, whose visionary image of a sys­ tem of colleges to provide education op­ portunities for all who qualified, virtu­ ally revolutionized higher education, that this catalogue is dedicated. CORRESPONDENCE Admissions Requests for a catalogue, or information concerning admission poli­ cies and procedures, rooms, tuition, and scholarships Undergraduate Colleges Director of Admissions College of Medicine Dean of the College of Medicine Graduate College Dean of the Graduate College Evening Division Director of Evening Division Summer Session Director of the Summer Session Conferences
  • The Shape of the Electoral College

    The Shape of the Electoral College

    No. 20-366 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL., Appellants, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, ET AL., Appellees. On Appeal From the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE MICHAEL L. ROSIN IN SUPPORT OF APPELLEES PETER K. STRIS MICHAEL N. DONOFRIO Counsel of Record BRIDGET C. ASAY ELIZABETH R. BRANNEN STRIS & MAHER LLP 777 S. Figueroa St., Ste. 3850 Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 995-6800 [email protected] Counsel for Amicus Curiae TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................... i INTEREST OF AMICUS .................................................. 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .......................................... 2 ARGUMENT ....................................................................... 4 I. Congress Intended The Apportionment Basis To Include All Persons In Each State, Including Undocumented Persons. ..................... 4 A. The Historical Context: Congress Began to Grapple with Post-Abolition Apportionment. ............................................... 5 B. The Thirty-Ninth Congress Considered—And Rejected—Language That Would Have Limited The Basis of Apportionment To Voters or Citizens. ......... 9 1. Competing Approaches Emerged Early In The Thirty-Ninth Congress. .................................................. 9 2. The Joint Committee On Reconstruction Proposed A Penalty-Based Approach. ..................... 12 3. The House Approved The Joint Committee’s Penalty-Based
  • The Pulitzer Prizes 2020 Winne

    The Pulitzer Prizes 2020 Winne

    WINNERS AND FINALISTS 1917 TO PRESENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Excerpts from the Plan of Award ..............................................................2 PULITZER PRIZES IN JOURNALISM Public Service ...........................................................................................6 Reporting ...............................................................................................24 Local Reporting .....................................................................................27 Local Reporting, Edition Time ..............................................................32 Local General or Spot News Reporting ..................................................33 General News Reporting ........................................................................36 Spot News Reporting ............................................................................38 Breaking News Reporting .....................................................................39 Local Reporting, No Edition Time .......................................................45 Local Investigative or Specialized Reporting .........................................47 Investigative Reporting ..........................................................................50 Explanatory Journalism .........................................................................61 Explanatory Reporting ...........................................................................64 Specialized Reporting .............................................................................70
  • Construction of the Massachusetts Constitution

    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.
  • Republican National Economic Plan—1861/63

    Republican National Economic Plan—1861/63

    Republican National Economic Plan—1861/63 The Morrill Tariff Act of 1861 Overview: It was a high protective tariff that increased duties 5%-10%. The increases were designed to raise additional revenue and provide more protection for the prosperous manufacturers. Impact: In its first year of operation, the Morrill Tariff increased the effective rate collected on dutiable imports by approximately 70%. In 1860 American tariff rates were among the lowest in the world and also at historical lows by 19th century standards, the average rate for 1857 through 1860 being around 17% overall (ad valorem], or 21% on dutiable items only. The Morrill Tariff immediately raised these averages to about 26% overall or 36% on dutiable items, and further increases by 1865 left the comparable rates at 38% and 48%. Although higher than in the immediate antebellum period, these rates were still significantly lower than between 1825 and 1830, when rates had sometimes been over 50%. The United States needed much more revenue to support the immense armies and fleets raised to fight the Civil War - over $400 million just in 1862. The chief source of Federal revenue was the tariff revenues. Therefore Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase, though a long-time free-trader, worked with Morrill to pass a second tariff bill in summer 1861, raising rates another 10 points in order to generate more revenues.[6] These subsequent bills were primarily revenue driven to meet the war's needs, though they enjoyed the support of protectionists such as Carey, who again assisted Morrill in the bill's drafting.
  • Virginia Historical Society the CENTER for VIRGINIA HISTORY

    Virginia Historical Society the CENTER for VIRGINIA HISTORY

    Virginia Historical Society THE CENTER FOR VIRGINIA HISTORY ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2004 ANNUAL MEETING, 23 APRIL 2005 Annual Report for 2004 Introduction Charles F. Bryan, Jr. President and Chief Executive Officer he most notable public event of 2004 for the Virginia Historical Society was undoubtedly the groundbreaking ceremony on the first of TJuly for our building expansion. On that festive afternoon, we ushered in the latest chapter of growth and development for the VHS. By turning over a few shovelsful of earth, we began a construction project that will add much-needed programming, exhibition, and storage space to our Richmond headquarters. It was a grand occasion and a delight to see such a large crowd of friends and members come out to participate. The representative individuals who donned hard hats and wielded silver shovels for the formal ritual of begin- ning construction stood in for so many others who made the event possible. Indeed, if the groundbreaking was the most important public event of the year, it represented the culmination of a vast investment behind the scenes in forward thinking, planning, and financial commitment by members, staff, trustees, and friends. That effort will bear fruit in 2006 in a magnifi- cent new facility. To make it all happen, we directed much of our energy in 2004 to the 175th Anniversary Campaign–Home for History in order to reach the ambitious goal of $55 million. That effort is on track—and for that we can be grateful—but much work remains to be done. Moreover, we also need to continue to devote resources and talent to sustain the ongoing programs and activities of the VHS.
  • George Edmunds of Vermont: Republican Half-Breed

    George Edmunds of Vermont: Republican Half-Breed

    As much as any U. S. Senator of the post-Civil War genera­ tion, George F. Edmunds represents the character, ideas, and influence of a particular wing of the Republican Party.... George Edmunds of Vermont: Republican Half-Breed By RICHARD E. WELCH, JR. AMONG the major New England politicians of the post-Civil War J-\. generation, one of the more elusive is George F. Edmunds of Vermont. A United States senator torm 1866 to 1891, he was recognized by leaders of both parties as one of the hardest workers iri the senate and perhaps its ablest constitutional lawyer. After his retirement from politics, he was a highly successful corporation lawyer, a prominent spokesman for the Anti-Imperialist movement of 1898-1900, and a family monarch until his death in 1919 at the age of ninety-one. His was a full and an active life, but it has received little attention from historians. There exists no biography of Edmunds, nor even a biographi­ cal notice later than the publication of the Dictionary of American Biography in 1931. He has faded into the shadow-land reserved for the footnote figures of American history. One reason for this is the absence of a collection of "Edmunds Papers." There is a strong correlation between the size of a man's documentary legacy and the fascination he holds for historians. Ed­ munds left orders that all his personal papers be burned upon his death, and they were. There are, of course, other possible reasons for Edmunds' neglect by the historical profession. The biographer who seeks a colorful subject would not find Edmunds attractive.
  • John Adams, Political Moderation, and the 1820 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention: a Reappraisal.”

    John Adams, Political Moderation, and the 1820 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention: a Reappraisal.”

    The Historical Journal of Massachusetts “John Adams, Political Moderation, and the 1820 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention: A Reappraisal.” Author: Arthur Scherr Source: Historical Journal of Massachusetts, Volume 46, No. 1, Winter 2018, pp. 114-159. Published by: Institute for Massachusetts Studies and Westfield State University You may use content in this archive for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the Historical Journal of Massachusetts regarding any further use of this work: [email protected] Funding for digitization of issues was provided through a generous grant from MassHumanities. Some digitized versions of the articles have been reformatted from their original, published appearance. When citing, please give the original print source (volume/number/date) but add "retrieved from HJM's online archive at http://www.westfield.ma.edu/historical-journal/. 114 Historical Journal of Massachusetts • Winter 2018 John Adams Portrait by Gilbert Stuart, c. 1815 115 John Adams, Political Moderation, and the 1820 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention: A Reappraisal ARTHUR SCHERR Editor's Introduction: The history of religious freedom in Massachusetts is long and contentious. In 1833, Massachusetts was the last state in the nation to “disestablish” taxation and state support for churches.1 What, if any, impact did John Adams have on this process of liberalization? What were Adams’ views on religious freedom and how did they change over time? In this intriguing article Dr. Arthur Scherr traces the evolution, or lack thereof, in Adams’ views on religious freedom from the writing of the original 1780 Massachusetts Constitution to its revision in 1820. He carefully examines contradictory primary and secondary sources and seeks to set the record straight, arguing that there are many unsupported myths and misconceptions about Adams’ role at the 1820 convention.
  • The Federal Constitution and Massachusetts Ratification : A

    The Federal Constitution and Massachusetts Ratification : A

    , 11l""t,... \e ,--.· ', Ir \" ,:> � c.'�. ,., Go'.l[f"r•r•r-,,y 'i!i • h,. I. ,...,,"'P�r"'T'" ""J> \S'o ·� � C ..., ,' l v'I THE FEDERAL CONSTlTUTlON \\j\'\ .. '-1',. ANV /JASSACHUSETTS RATlFlCATlON \\r,-,\\5v -------------------------------------- . > .i . JUN 9 � 1988 V) \'\..J•, ''"'•• . ,-· �. J ,,.._..)i.�v\,\ ·::- (;J)''J -�·. '-,;I\ . � '" - V'-'� -- - V) A TEACHING KIT PREPAREV BY � -r THE COIJMOMVEALTH M,(SEUM ANV THE /JASSACHUSETTS ARCHIVES AT COLUM.BIA POINf ]') � ' I � Re6outee Matetial6 6ot Edueatot6 and {I · -f\ 066ieial& 6ot the Bieentennial 06 the v-1 U.S. Con&titution, with an empha6i& on Ma&&aehu&ett6 Rati6ieation, eontaining: -- *Ma66aehu6ett& Timeline *Atehival Voeument6 on Ma&&aehu&ett& Rati6ieation Convention 1. Govetnot Haneoek'6 Me&6age. �����4Y:t4���� 2. Genetal Coutt Re6olve& te C.U-- · .....1. *. Choo6ing Velegate& 6ot I\) Rati6ieation Convention. 0- 0) 3. Town6 &end Velegate Name&. 0) C 4. Li6t 06 Velegate& by County. CJ) 0 CJ> c.u-- l> S. Haneoek Eleeted Pte6ident. --..J s:: 6. Lettet 6tom Elbtidge Getty. � _:r 7. Chatge6 06 Velegate Btibety. --..J C/)::0 . ' & & • o- 8 Hane oe k Pt op o 6e d Amen dme nt CX) - -j � 9. Final Vote on Con&titution --- and Ptopo6ed Amenwnent6. Published by the --..J-=--- * *Clue6 to Loeal Hi&toty Officeof the Massachusetts Secretary of State *Teaehing Matetial6 Michaelj, Connolly, Secretary 9/17/87 < COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS !f1Rl!j OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE CONSTITUTtON Michael J. Connolly, Secretary The Commonwealth Museum and the Massachusetts Columbia Point RATIFICATION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION MASSACHUSETTS TIME LINE 1778 Constitution establishing the "State of �assachusetts Bay" is overwhelmingly rejected by the voters, in part because it lacks a bill of rights.
  • President's Page

    President's Page

    SCHOLARS PROGRAM REPORT PRESIDENT’S PAGE A few of the Friends’ many accomplishments this year… To honor the vision and legacy of Justin Mor- rill, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and the College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural News and Information from Vermont’s First National Historic Landmark SPRING 2008 • VOL. 2 NO. 1 • Opened the New Education Center on June 30, 2007. After ten years of hard work, the year- POST OFFICE BOX 98 • STRAFFORD, VERMONT • 05072 “All the news that fits, we print.” Resources have developed a four-year program round heated facility provides space for education programs for learners of all ages and showcases for high ability undergraduate students who are Morrill’s library collection. Gov. Jim Douglas and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders attended the opening interested in interdisciplinary learning and activi- celebration. A MODERN-DAY ties, and to advance the public good through civic • Purchased computer projection equipment, tables and chairs for the Education Center. (Funds for MORRILL DESCENDANT responsibility, engagement and leadership. Here’s By James Morrill a report from the president of the student group, more chairs are needed.) Kathryn “Kat” Farris: • Received a Museum Assessment Program (MAP) Grant, administered by the American Associa- I am one of many who have benefitted greatly from tion of Museums and the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Participation in MAP dem- the foresight of Justin Smith Morrill. I received a “The vision of things to be onstrates the Friends’ commitment to excellence and dedication to responsible stewardship of the Masters Degree from the University of Kentucky done may come a long time be- Justin Morrill Vermont State Historic Site.
  • Honor, Secession, and Civil War”

    Honor, Secession, and Civil War”

    The 2004 JAMES PINCKNEY HARRISON LECTURES IN HISTORY Lyon Gardiner Tyler Department of History Monday, March 29, 2004, 4:30 PM Andrews Hall 101 “Honor, Secession, and Civil War” © Bertram Wyatt-Brown The great Virginia historian and biographer Douglas Southall Freeman may have venerated Robert E. Lee beyond all basis. Yet in 1937, he asked a still unresolved question. The Richmond Pulitzer-Prize winner wondered why a rational calculation of risks, as war clouds gathered, received so little notice in the under- populated, industrially ill-equipped South. The secessionists’ saber-rattling of 1859-61 might disclose,” Freeman is quoted to exclaim, “a clinically perfect case in the psychosis of war.”1 He was reflecting the pacifistic mood of the interwar period. The popular scholarship of the day attributed the crisis to a “blundering” antebellum “generation.” Americans fell into the mess of war, so the refrain went, because its leaders were incompetent, demagogic, and uncourageous. Freeman’s comment itself reflects that orientation by defining calls to arms as “psychotic.” Well, that idea died, and other explanations quickly filled the void. Nowadays the reasons for war come down to two antithetical theories. Neo- Confederates claim that a stout defense of southern “liberty” and constitutional state-rights drew thousands to initiate a war against Northern Aggression, as it is often phrased in such circles. Most academic historians, however, propose the fundamental issue of slavery, without which, they contend, the nation would never have resorted to a military coercions.2 A third possibility springs to mind. In a sense, it embraces both of these but alters their character, too.