DOCSLIB.ORG

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" in Our Constitutional Jurisprudence: an Exercise in Legal History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 20 (2011-2012) Issue 2 Article 4 December 2011 Restoring "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" in Our Constitutional Jurisprudence: An Exercise in Legal History Patrick J. Charles Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Legal History Commons Repository Citation Patrick J. Charles, Restoring "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" in Our Constitutional Jurisprudence: An Exercise in Legal History, 20 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 457 (2011), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol20/iss2/4 Copyright c 2011 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj RESTORING “LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS” IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE: AN EXERCISE IN LEGAL HISTORY Patrick J. Charles* INTRODUCTION .................................................458 I. PLACING THE DECLARATION IN LEGAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT .....461 II. A BRIEF HISTORIOGRAPHY OF “LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS” AS A MATTER OF LEGAL THOUGHT, WITH A FOCUS ON “HAPPINESS” ...............................................470 III. PLACING THE INTERRELATIONSHIP OF “LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS” IN THE CONTEXT OF AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONALISM ...477 A. Restoring the True Meaning of the Preservation of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” in Constitutional Thought .............481 B. “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” and the Embodiment of the Representative Government ..............................490 C. Eighteenth-Century Legal Thought and the Constitutional Theory Behind Preservation of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” ......502 IV. APPLYING THE PRESERVATION OF “LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS” TO MODERN CONSTITUTIONALISM .....................517 CONCLUSION—OUR HAPPY CONSTITUTION ...........................523 * Patrick J. Charles is the author of numerous books and articles on the Constitution and legal history. Mr. Charles is the recipient of the 2008 Judge John R. Brown Award, received his J.D. from Cleveland-Marshall School of Law, and his B.A. in History and International Affairs from the George Washington University. He is currently an independent legal consultant on historical, immigration, and constitutional matters, and is a historian for the United States Air Force 352nd Special Operations Group stationed at Mildenhall, UK. The contents of this Article do not represent the opinions of the United States Air Force nor the Department of Defense, and are solely the author’s. The author would like to thank William Pencak (Penn State University), Darrin McMahon (Florida State University), and David Armitage (Harvard University) for their helpful comments and advice. Also, the author is appreciative to William & Mary and the Bill of Rights Journal for its hard work on making this Article the finished product that it is. This includes two William & Mary students in particular. First, a thank you to Julie Silverbrook for recognizing the importance of the Article and asking the author to submit it to the journal. Second, to Kristen R. Brown for providing the necessary support and friendship during the writing of this and many prior articles. The author will never forget the inspiration and hope she provided him during his young writing career. Lastly, the author would like thank the brave Air Commandos of the 352nd Special Operations Group for bringing daily perspective on life, accepting him as family, and allowing him to have served his country one more time alongside them. This Article is dedicated to the author’s mother, Constance J. Charles-Wheeler, who gave him a passion for history, and taught him the virtues of unconditional love, trust, honor, and commitment. In the end, we are all just seeking to pursue our own happiness. 457 458 WILLIAM & MARY BILL OF RIGHTS JOURNAL [Vol. 20:457 INTRODUCTION On July 6, 1776, John Hancock sent letters to each of the colonial assemblies announcing the adoption of the Declaration of Independence.1 In these letters, Hancock stated that the Declaration had two significant legal effects. The first was that “all connection between Great Britain and the American Colonies” had been dissolved, so as to “declare them free and independent States,” and that each colony should proclaim this “in the way [it] shall think most proper.”2 The second effect was a structural alteration to the colonial governments, for each colony’s charter was expressly tied to England’s system of government. Therefore, Hancock requested that “the people . be universally informed” of this change, and that the Declaration be “considered as the ground and foundation of a future Government,” both at the State and national level.3 Hancock’s instructions are significant because they illustrate that the very essence of American government was the guarantees embodied in the Declaration of Independence. However, as insightful as Hancock’s instructions are, they do not end the historical inquiry. As to the constitutional importance of the Declaration, they leave many questions unanswered. Did the founding generation agree with Hancock’s assessment? Did the newly independent State governments have to em- body the principles in the Declaration, or was this merely an exercise in political rhetoric?4 What effect, if any, did the subsequent Articles of Confederation and super- seding Constitution have on the guarantees and grievances within the Declaration? As a matter of history, answering these questions has proven difficult, with the Declaration gaining acceptance as part of our social and international identity. Never- theless, working through these questions is essential if the United States Supreme Court is ever to truly acknowledge the Declaration’s preservation of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in the pantheon of our constitutional jurisprudence.5 Perhaps providing the answer to these questions is difficult because the Declaration 1 See Letter from John Hancock, President of Congress, to the New York Convention (July 6, 1776), in 1 AMERICAN ARCHIVES: A DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 5th ser., 33 (Peter Force ed., 1846) [hereinafter 1 AMERICAN ARCHIVES, 5th ser.]. 2 Id. at 1398. 3 Id. (emphasis added). 4 See Robert J. Reinstein, Completing the Constitution: The Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights and Fourteenth Amendment, 66 TEMP. L. REV. 361, 361 (1993) (stating some scholars’ view that the Declaration is a purely symbolic document that “has nothing to do with constitutional law”). 5 During the last term, the Supreme Court cited to the Declaration of Independence twice to answer constitutional questions. See Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011) (citing to the Declaration’s grievance that the King “made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries”); Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri, 131 S. Ct. 2488 (2011) (citing to the Declaration in support of the right to petition). To date, the Supreme Court has yet to incorporate the Declaration’s preamble into our constitutional jurisprudence. 2011] RESTORING “LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS” 459 is often mistaken as embodying actionable natural rights or some form of judicial presumption of liberty.6 For instance, many associate the Declaration’s reference to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as the embodiment of a libertarian ideal.7 They view the phrase as embodying protections for economic liberties8 and support- ing the political belief of limited governmental intrusion. At the same time, many people view “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as protecting broad natural rights in addition to the enumerated rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Take, for example, an interview in which I took part, which predicted the outcome of the land- mark Second Amendment case of McDonald v. City of Chicago.9 In response to my historical analysis, it was asserted that I was wrong because I did not understand the Declaration’s guarantee of natural rights; an ideal, no doubt, many Americans identify with the sacred text.10 It should not be surprising that the use of the Declaration as a vehicle to assert con- stitutional rights is not a modern invention.11 During the ratification of the Constitution, the Declaration’s grievance related to the colonists’ deprivation of “the benefit of the Trial by Jury” was used by at least one anonymous editorial to assert the need for a 6 For some examples, see generally SCOTT DOUGLAS GERBER, TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS: THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION (1995); John P. Kaminski, Restoring the Declaration of Independence: Natural Rights and the Ninth Amendment, in THE BILL OF RIGHTS: A LIVELY HERITAGE 141 (Jon Kukla ed., 1987); Eric R. Claeys, Essay, Euclid Lives? The Uneasy Legacy of Progressivism in Zoning, 73 FORDHAM L. REV. 731, 738–39 (2004); Michael Anthony Lawrence, Government as Liberty’s Servant: The “Reasonable Time, Place, and Manner” Standard of Review for All Government Restrictions on Liberty Interests, 68 LA. L. REV. 1, 35–37 (2007). 7 See Thomas B. McAffee, Restoring the Lost World of Classical Legal Thought: The Presumption in Favor of Liberty Over Law and the Court Over the Constitution, 75 U. CIN. L. REV. 1499, 1501–02 (2007) (“As is often stated, America’s Declaration of Independence articulates the Lockean doctrine that the purpose of government is to secure rights. There is little question that the founding generation as a whole shared this general view.” (citations omitted)); William Michael Treanor, Taking Text Too Seriously: Modern Textualism, Original Meaning, and the Case of Amar’s Bill of Rights, 106 MICH. L. REV. 487, 512 (2007) (“The right to pursue happiness, in short, is the individual’s right to pursue personal happiness.”); id. at 513 (stating the New York Constitutional Convention’s recommendation of “‘the enjoy- ment of Life . and the Pursuit of Happiness’ . was seeking protection of individual rights”). 8 See David N. Mayer, Substantive Due Process Rediscovered: The Rise and Fall of Liberty of Contract, 60 MERCER L.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Popular Sovereignty, Slavery in the Territories, and the South, 1785-1860
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2010 Popular sovereignty, slavery in the territories, and the South, 1785-1860 Robert Christopher Childers Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Childers, Robert Christopher, "Popular sovereignty, slavery in the territories, and the South, 1785-1860" (2010). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 1135. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/1135 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY, SLAVERY IN THE TERRITORIES, AND THE SOUTH, 1785-1860 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of History by Robert Christopher Childers B.S., B.S.E., Emporia State University, 2002 M.A., Emporia State University, 2004 May 2010 For my wife ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Writing history might seem a solitary task, but in truth it is a collaborative effort. Throughout my experience working on this project, I have engaged with fellow scholars whose help has made my work possible. Numerous archivists aided me in the search for sources. Working in the Southern Historical Collection at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill gave me access to the letters and writings of southern leaders and common people alike.
    [Show full text]
  • 1835. EXECUTIVE. *L POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
    1835. EXECUTIVE. *l POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT. Persons employed in the General Post Office, with the annual compensation of each. Where Compen­ Names. Offices. Born. sation. Dol. cts. Amos Kendall..., Postmaster General.... Mass. 6000 00 Charles K. Gardner Ass't P. M. Gen. 1st Div. N. Jersey250 0 00 SelahR. Hobbie.. Ass't P. M. Gen. 2d Div. N. York. 2500 00 P. S. Loughborough Chief Clerk Kentucky 1700 00 Robert Johnson. ., Accountant, 3d Division Penn 1400 00 CLERKS. Thomas B. Dyer... Principal Book Keeper Maryland 1400 00 Joseph W. Hand... Solicitor Conn 1400 00 John Suter Principal Pay Clerk. Maryland 1400 00 John McLeod Register's Office Scotland. 1200 00 William G. Eliot.. .Chie f Examiner Mass 1200 00 Michael T. Simpson Sup't Dead Letter OfficePen n 1200 00 David Saunders Chief Register Virginia.. 1200 00 Arthur Nelson Principal Clerk, N. Div.Marylan d 1200 00 Richard Dement Second Book Keeper.. do.. 1200 00 Josiah F.Caldwell.. Register's Office N. Jersey 1200 00 George L. Douglass Principal Clerk, S. Div.Kentucky -1200 00 Nicholas Tastet Bank Accountant Spain. 1200 00 Thomas Arbuckle.. Register's Office Ireland 1100 00 Samuel Fitzhugh.., do Maryland 1000 00 Wm. C,Lipscomb. do : for) Virginia. 1000 00 Thos. B. Addison. f Record Clerk con-> Maryland 1000 00 < routes and v....) Matthias Ross f. tracts, N. Div, N. Jersey1000 00 David Koones Dead Letter Office Maryland 1000 00 Presley Simpson... Examiner's Office Virginia- 1000 00 Grafton D. Hanson. Solicitor's Office.. Maryland 1000 00 Walter D. Addison. Recorder, Div. of Acc'ts do..
    [Show full text]
  • Politics, the Judiciary Act of 1789, and the Invention of the Federal Courts
    Duke Law Journal VOLUME 1989 DECEMBER NUMBER 6 "TO ESTABLISH JUSTICE": POLITICS, THE JUDICIARY ACT OF 1789, AND THE INVENTION OF THE FEDERAL COURTS WYTHE HOLT* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Why Do We Have the National Judiciary We Have? . 1422 A. Unnoticed National JudiciaryPuzzles .................. 1422 * University Research Professor of Law, University of Alabama School of Law. B.A., 1963, Amherst College; J.D., 1966, Ph.D., 1979, University of Virginia. This essay is copyrighted by the author, who reserves all rights thereto. The author is grateful to Dean Nathaniel Hansford and the University of Alabama School of Law for their generous support of several years of research that forms the basis of this essay, and for a sabbatical leave that also in part supported the research for this essay. The author is most grateful to Charlene Bickford, Kenneth Bowling, Helen Veit, and their colleagues at the Documentary His- tory of the First Congress project at George Washington University, who graciously made available their magnificent collection of materials and have been kind enough to advise, assist, and cheer the author on many occasions. The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Jim Buchanan, Christine Jordan, Maeva Marcus, Jim Perry, Steven Tull, and their associates at the Documentary History of the United States Supreme Court, 1789-1800 project, for generously giving time, advice, and expertise, and allowing the author to supplement his research for this essay with their fine collection. William Casto, Eugene Genovese, L.H. La Rue, and Sandra Van Burkleo commented generously, helpfully, and often persuasively upon earlier drafts. Finally, the author gratefully ac- knowledges the expert aid, pleasantness, and unfailing good cheer extended to the author by the many librarians and research aides at the numerous repositories cited in this essay.
    [Show full text]
  • The Book of St. Louisans D
    THE BOOK OF ST. LOUISANS 145 Oliver ChilkMl Plow Works, for wliich triivclod' DALE, Alfred Nicholson, railway official; throe years; since October, 1902, nianayer !St. 1860-1911 ; see Vol. 1906. Louis l)raiicli house. Member Implement, A'e- DALLMEYER, Herman, dry goods; born, hicle anil Hardware Association of Ht. Louis. Han()\('r, (icrnuiiiy, .Mar. 16, 1846; son of Democrat. Member of Christian (Disciples) Rudoljih and Pauline (llorst) Dallmeyer; edu- Church. Office: 2516-2522 N. Broadway. Resi- cated in pri\ate school in nati\e land; mar- dence: 5100 Raymond Ave. ried, St. Ijouis, 1867, Louise Prasse (ilied Charles Clarence, vinegar and GUSHING, 1898); 2d, St. Louis, Apr. 5, 1900, Mrs. Paul- cider; born, Xew York City, .hine 7, 1857; son ine Goetsch. Came to America, 1862; in em- of John and Mary Cushiug; removed to St. ploy of brother in general store at Cooperhill, Louis, ]S69; educated in St. Louis public Mo., for three months; removed to St. Louis, schools; married, St. Louis, Oct. 4, 1881, Lula March, 1863, and became connected with dry A. Shepherd; children: Fay Olive, Clarence C. goods firm of Nieman & Co., continuing until Began business career, 1S7;!, as shipping clerk 1868; then entered business on own account for James Cushing & Co., vinegar manufac- at 1301 Franklin Ave., three years later form- for turers, Dubuque, la.; established branch ing partnership under title of Dallmeyer & same firm at St. Louis, 1S9;5, as manager, and Koestring, which was subsequently dissolved; in 1897 purchased the business, which has since in business in own name. Republican. since conducted as C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Founders on the Founders : Word
    INTRODUCTION TO THE FOUNDERS ON THE FOUNDERS : WORD PORTRAITS FROM THE AMERICAN REVOLUTIONARY ERA BY JOHN P. KAMINSKI The Founders were extraordinary individuals--they were not cold statues. The fog of fame and time, however, has obscured them as flesh and blood human beings. Most of us think of them only as a group--the Founders--not as individuals with their own personalities, strengths and weaknesses. Those who do warrant individual attention have become caricatures. How many Americans know the real Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson; let alone Madison, Jay, and Hamilton? Occasionally we have been blessed or cursed with a public television documentary on the life of one or another of these Founders. Often they are filled with almost as many errors as facts. Before the Revolution most of the Founders pictured their ancestors--not themselves--as special individuals who braved the treacherous trans-Atlantic voyage and the subsequent travails of a hostile new, often unforgiving land. Once the Revolutionary movement was well underway, however, the Founders came to appreciate their own unique place in history. It was their “lot to live in perplexing and eventful times.” 1 John Adams wrote that “I am but an ordinary Man. The Times alone have destined me to Fame.” 2 Thomas Jefferson believed that “Nature intended me for the tranquil pursuits of science, by rendering them my supreme delight. But the enormities of the times in which I have lived, have forced me to take a part in resisting them, and to commit myself on the boisterous ocean of political passions.” 3 Speaking for his contemporaries, Adams wrote that “We of this Generation are destined to Act a painful and a dangerous Part, and We must make the best of our Lot.” 4 Adams denigrated the “Idea of the great Men .
    [Show full text]
  • Co R\). 595 HISTORY of CONGRESS
    \0 rtY\Y\o..\s o~ Co r\). 595 HISTORY OF CONGRESS. 596 597 H. OF R. Case 0/ .Tonathan Robbins. MARCH, 1800. ingston, Nathaniel Macon, Peter Muhlenberg, An­ Platt, John Randolph, Samuel Sewall, John Smilie, but he h thony New, John Nicholas, Joseph H. Nicholson, John John Smith, David Stone, Thomas Sumter, Benjamin not bee'n Randolph, John Smilie, John Smith, Samuel Smith, Taliaferro, George Thatcher, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, sive. FJ Richard Dobbs Spaight, Richard Stanford, David Stone, to shed Philip Van Cortlandt, Joseph B. Varnum, Peleg Wads­ tIlea~g-u Thomas Sumter, Benjamin Taliaferro, John Thomp. worth, and Robert Williams. son, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Philip Van Cortlandt, N..l.Ys-Theodorus Bailey, Jonathan Brace, SllIlluel been ass Joseph B. Varnum, and Robert Williams. J. Cabell, Gabriel Christie, William Craik, John Den­ men of 1 N..l.Ys-George Baer, Bailey Bartlett, James A. Bay­ nis, George Dent. Joseph Eggleston, Thomas Evans, not thin ard, Jonathan Brace, John Brown, Christopher G. Samuel Goode, William Gordon, Edwin Gray, An­ voted to Champlin, William Cooper, William Craik, John drew Gregg, William Barry Grove, John A. Hanna, taiued il Davenport, Franklin Davenport, John Dennis, George Archibald Henderson, William H. Hill, James Jones, those a( Dent, Joseph Dickson, William Edmond, Thomas Aaron Kitchell, Matthew I.yon, James Linn, Abra­ ing to d Evans, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster, Jonathan Free­ ham Nott, Harrison G. Otis, Robert Page, Josiah Par­ in supp maq.,Henry Glen, Cha cey Goodrich, Elizur Goodrich, ker, Thomas Pinckney, Leven Powell, John Reed, order in William Gordon, liam H.
    [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]
  • The National Society Sons of the American Revolution
    OFFICIAL BULLETIN OF 20 OFFICIAL BULLETIN WILLIE EARL WEEKS, New Orleans, La. (31697). Great-grandson of Thomas The National Society Weeks, Captain, Acting Paymaster, Mass. Militia. OF THE CHARLES LEWIS WElT, Port Huron, Mich. (31595) .. Supplementals. Great'. grandson of George Tuttle, Captain, Col. Stephen Evans's New Hampshire Regt.; great'·grandson of Jol"' Gile, First Lieutenant, Col. John \Valdron's Sons of the New Hampshire Regt. CHARLES YATES WILMARTH, Yokohama, Japan (N.Y. 31646). Great3·granct. American Revolution son of Daniel Wilmarth, Corporal, Col. John Daggett's Mass. Regt. CHARLES ADAMS WOOD, Boston, Mass. (31915). Great'-grandson of Abijah Organized April 30, 1889. Incorporated by Ac.t of Cona:ress, june 9, 1906 Wood, private, Col. Samuel Bullard's Mass. Regt. President General 3 RALPH JULIUS WOOD, Chicago, Ill. (31890). Great -grandson of Elisha 'Joker LOUIS ANNIN AMES, gg Fulton St., New York City private, Capt. Hubbard Burrows's Company Eighth Regt. Conn. Militia; grandson of Isaac Griswold, private, Cot. Isaac Wyman's New Hampshire Volume XIII MARCH, 1919 Number 4 JOliN MILL WRIGHT, Grand Rapids, Mich. (31978). Great3-grandson of M >s" Montague, Captain of Minute Men, Col. Ruggles Woodbridge's Mass. Regt. Published at the office of the Secretary General (William S . Parks, The Farragut). Wash­ PAUL EMERSON WRIGHT, Grand Rapids, Mich. (31979). Great•-grandson of ington, D. C., in June, October, December, and March. Moses ll1o11tagJte, Captain of Minute Men, Col. Ruggles \Voodbridge's Mass. Entered aa aecond-claaa matter. May 7, 1908, at the post-office at Washington. D. C .. Regt. under the Act of July 16, 1694.
    [Show full text]
  • Calculated for the Use of the State of Massachusetts-Bay
    Mil Digitized by tine Internet Arcliive in 2009 witli funding from University of IVIassacliusetts, Boston Iittp://www.arcliive.org/details/pocketalmanackfo1807amer jB^''^^mfff^fi^i!!uiutiXj»f^;'^' ^^ ^p^i:^"P^^^ Bf^taSH THE J i MASSACHUSETTS i f AND United States Calendar; For the Year of our LORD 180 7, and the Thiity-firft oi American Indetendence, CONTAINING Civil, Ecde^ajlical, Judkial, and Military Lifts in MASSACHUSETTS ; AssaciATioNs, and Corporate Institutions, for littraiy, ag ncuUural, <ind cUariiablt Furpoitb, I Lijl of PoiT-TowNS in Majjachufdts^ with I'm 'I' Names of tkt Post-Masters. I ALSO, Catalogues of the Officers of the .1 GENERAL GOVERNMENT, With its feveral Deparanents and Eitablirhnicnts ; Time^ o^ the Siumgi. of the feveral Courts ; Goveinors in each State , PuDiic Duties, (&:c. USEFUL TABLES; And a Variety of oiher interefting Articles. 1> BOSTON : t Publilhcd by JOHN \\EsT, and MANNING & LORINO. Sold, wholcfale and retail, at their Book Stores, Cornhill. > fS^tpSfx^arSgSi^i^ci .^j^Ad^xasw^^^o* , — : ECLIPSES FOR 1807. THER£ will be four Eclipfcs this year; two of the Sun anJ iwc of the Mooo. as follows : I. The firft will he of the Moon, May 21ft, lih.^SiiN in the mornuig ; and of courfe invifible. II. 7 he fecond will be of the Sun, June 6th, oh. 40m. in the morning ; which will llkewift; be invi^ble in rhp wellern conrnieHt, bnt vifible and central in the fouthein p^ri s of the Eh(1 Indirs. ' HI. The third will be a vifible eclipfe of the Moon, November 15th ; and by calculation as follows ^.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Bookshelf D
    Journal of Supreme Court History SUPREME COURT HISTORICAL SOCIETY WARREN E. BURGER Chief Justice 1969-1986 Journal of Supreme Court History PUBLICA TIONS COMMITTEE E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr. Chairman Donald B. Ayer Louis R. Cohen Charles Cooper Kenneth S. Geller James J. Kilpatrick Melvin I. Urofsky BOARD OF EDITORS Melvin I. U rofsky, Chairman HennanBelz Craig Joyce David O'Brien David J. Bodenhamer Laura Kalman Michael Parrish Kermit Hall MaevaMarcus Philippa Strum MANAGING EDITOR Clare Cushman CONSULTING EDITORS Kathleen Shurtleff Patricia R. Evans James J. Kilpatrick Jennifer M. Lowe DavidT.Pride Supreme Court Historical Society Board of Trustees Honorary Chairman William H. Rehnquist Honorary Trustees Harry A. Blackmun Byron R. White Chairman President DwightD.Opperman Leon Silverman Vice Presidents Vincente. Burke,lr. Frank e. Jones Dorothy Tapper Goldman E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr. Secretary Treasurer Virginia Warren Daly Sheldon S. Cohen Trustees George R. Adams KennethS. Geller Stephen W. Nealon Victor Battaglia FrankB. Gilbert Gordon O. Pehrson Helman Belz John D. Gordan III Leon Polsky Barbara A. Black Geoffreye. Hazard, Jr. Charles B. Renfrew HugoL. Black,lr. Judith Ri chards Hope Wi II iamB radford Reynolds Vera Brown Ruth lnsel John R. Ri sher, Jr. Wade Burger WilliamE. Jackson Harvey Ri shikof Patricia Dwinnell Butler Robb M. Jones WilliamP. Rogers Benjamin R. Ci viletti JamesJ. Kilpatrick Jonathan e. Rose Andrew M. Coats Peter A. Knowles Jerold S. Solovy William T. Coleman, Jr. Philip Allen Lacovara Kenneth Starr F. Elwood Davis Ralph l. Lancaster, Jr. Cathleen Douglas Stone George Didden III JeromeB. Libin Agnes N. Williams Charlton Dietz Maureen E. Mahoney W.
    [Show full text]
  • Dilemma of the American Lawyer in the Post-Revolutionary Era, 35 Notre Dame L
    Notre Dame Law Review Volume 35 | Issue 1 Article 2 12-1-1959 Dilemma of the American Lawyer in the Post- Revolutionary Era Anton-Hermann Chroust Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Anton-Hermann Chroust, Dilemma of the American Lawyer in the Post-Revolutionary Era, 35 Notre Dame L. Rev. 48 (1959). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol35/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE DILEMMA OF THE AMERICAN LAWYER IN THE POST-REVOLUTIONARY ERA Anton-Hermann Chroust* On the eve of the Revolution the legal profession in the American colonies,' in the main, had achieved both distinction and recognition. It had come to enjoy the respect as well as the confidence of the people at large. This is borne out, for instance, by the fact that twenty-five of the fifty-six signers of the Declaration of Independence, and thirty-one of the fifty-five members of the Constitutional Convention were lawyers. Of the thirty-one lawyers who attended the Constitutional Convention, no less than five had studied law in England.2 The American Revolution itself, directly and indirectly, affected the legal profession in a variety of ways. First, the profession itself lost a considerable number of its most prominent members; secondly, a bitter antipathy against the lawyer as a class soon made itself felt throughout the country; thirdly, a strong dislike of everything English, including the English common law became wide- spread; and fourthly, the lack of a distinct body of American law as well as the absence of American law reports and law books for a while made the administra- tion of justice extremely difficult and haphazard.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate the Senate Met at 9:31 A.M
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 106 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 146 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2000 No. 106 Senate The Senate met at 9:31 a.m. and was PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE few words prior to the voice vote on his called to order by the President pro The Honorable CHUCK HAGEL, a Sen- amendment. But I think it would be tempore [Mr. THURMOND]. ator from the State of Nebraska, led appropriate that the Senate be advised the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows: that there likely will not be a recorded vote at 10 o’clock this morning, so Sen- PRAYER I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Repub- ators should be about their other busi- The Chaplain, Dr. Lloyd John lic for which it stands, one nation under God, ness. Ogilvie, offered the following prayer: indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. I also say to the acting leader, we hope those who are managing the var- Almighty God, Sovereign of this Na- f ious appropriations bills that have tion, as You guided our Founding Fa- RECOGNITION OF THE ACTING MAJORITY LEADER passed the Senate and have passed the thers to establish the separation of House would do whatever they can to church and state to protect the church The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. get the conference process underway. from the intrusion of government, VOINOVICH). The acting majority We have a tremendous amount of work rather than the intrusion of the church leader.
    [Show full text]