Product Description

This book shows the trends in jurisprudence which guided the United States in its first hundred years.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #154004 in eBooks
• Published on: 2006-07-06
• Format: Kindle Book
• Number of items: 1

About the Author
The author, his wife and grown son live in Berkshire County, Massachusetts. The author has his own legal research and tax preparation. He also has been involved with vocational aspects for developmentally disabled adults for the past ten years.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION

This book is an attempt to guide the reader through the course of United States history in the nineteenth century by exhibiting certain Supreme Court decisions which, at the time, contributed to conclusions which would never have been the same without such.

From a basic understanding of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, to Plessy v. Ferguson, these selected rulings were chosen not only for their above-mentioned far-reaching effects * but also for the timing in which they were issued. American societal order and fundamental character is displayed throughout the gamut of basic rights, often thought to be "inherent;" Marbury v. Madison's involvement in reference to relations between the Federalist party's Supreme court and the Republicans' Congress and Executive branches of government, to Plessy v. Ferguson's "separate but equal" decision against black and white intermingling.

PREFACE TO MARBURY V. MADISON

Within a year of the adoption of the Bill of Rights in December of 1791, political parties emerged. This was largely due to the differences of Alexander Hamilton's policies of securing for the federal government the active support of the powerful merchants and bankers, plus other members of the creditor classes that formed the Federalist party. As Secretary of the Treasury, Hamilton published his Reports on the Public Credit that called for the assumption of state debts, the passage of exise taxes (which included a whiskey tax that, being harmless to the commercial tidewater areas, incurred the ire of the agrarian, or frontier, areas which grew the grain that was to be converted into whiskey. ) His Bank of the United States provided profits for the "rich and well born " . Even as his Reports were being passed into law, Congress was becoming divided between his followers and those of Thomas Jefferson (whose Republican party stood for the predominantly agricultural interests of the nation). Jefferson 's strict interpretation of the Constitution, being philosophically of limited government, clashed with Hamilton 's broad view of the document (as can be seen in Hamilton's Bank Bill), defined by the Federalists' control of the federal government giving them broad, or loose, powers to carry out sweeping laws for their own self-interests. The Bank Bill established the First Bank of the United States in Philadelphia (branch banks were soon established in many port cities) since Hamilton said that Congress had the right to regulate currency and the "implied power "to establish a bank to issue that currency. Within ten years of the establishment of the First Bank of the United States, the agrarian West and urban poor were to elect Jefferson as President. Their defeat in the election of 1800 was the death knell for the Federalists - never again would they win national power.

One branch of the government, however, the federal judiciary, proved to be a limiting effect upon the Republicans by the Federalists.

In the last weeks before Jefferson's inauguration, Adams and his "lame duck" presidency had "packed" the courts with conservative judges in the hope that, by doing so, it would check the Republicans. This is where John Adams' appointments came into play.

Secretary of State John Marshall was appointed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Until 1835, Marshall's Court established judicial precedents that determined the course of our young nation.

The bitterness between the President and the Chief Justice, both Virginians by the way, was to characterize Constitutional, as well as American, history.

The doctrine of judicial review was established by Marshall in the famous Marbury v. Madison case. The right was not specifically granted to the Supreme Court in the Constitution. Until this case, the power of declaring state and federal laws unconstitutional was not accepted as a basic government principle.

One of Adams' "midnight appointments" was William Marbury, of course a Federalist, who was appointed to a lower court. But, then Secretary of State Marshall had forgotten to give Marbury his appointment before the Federalists left office. The new Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver Marbury's appointment. Marbury appealed to the Supreme Court, now headed by Marshall, ordering Madison to surrender the commission under a writ of mandamus. Mandamus being an extraordinary writ from a court to an official demanding adherence to a ministerial act that is recognized by the law as an absolute duty. It is used only when all other judicial remedies are either inadequate or have failed. This writ was to be issued in conjunction with the Judiciary Act of 1789.

The Judiciary Act, by the way, was one of the first laws passed by Congress under the Constitution. It organized the Supreme Court and established lower courts.

In 1803, Chief Justice Marshall issued his decision, in which, although admitting that Marbury's petition was righteous and legal in his entitlement to the commission, the Court could not issue such writs of mandamus. The section of the Judiciary Act granting that power to the Court was found to be unconstitutional and therefore void.

This occurred because the Constitution did not specifically grant the power to the Supreme Court to review and rule re national laws as it could make declarations against state laws. The Court would not nullify an act of Congress until the Dred Scott case (which will be dealt with later in this book.)

The following is an excerpt from Chief Justice Marshall's decision. By following the wording of this, and subsequent, decisions in this book, any semanticists and/or linguists might be surprised and enlightened by the changes in "Americanized" English over the past two hundred years.

Customer Reviews

Disappointed
This book is very interesting, but its format is odd, making it difficult to read the book and absorb its important content.