Time: Thu Aug 07 18:30:33 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA26159; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 18:30:51 -0700 (MST) by usr10.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA07179; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 18:29:51 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 18:28:48 -0700 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: Who "signed" the Constitution? Dear Beverly, Thank you for this important historical note. I have taken the liberty of forwarding this entire message to all clients of the Supreme Law School. We all appreciate your important contribution here. Many tanks, once again!! /s/ Paul Mitchell http://www.supremelaw.com <snip> > >From: Beverly Kennedy <beverly@flash.net> >Subject: Re: SLS: Who "signed" the Constitution? > >At 05:39 PM 8/6/97 -0700, you wrote: >>The states, under the Articles of Confederation, >>"signed" the U.S. Constitution, and they had >>standing to do so, under the Declaration of >>Independence. > > But it was NOT the state legislatures that ratified the current >U.S. Constitution. The delegates to the Federal Convention of 1787, >who debated the pros and cons of every article and came up with the >various provisions and compromises, knew that the only way it would >have the support necessary for its implementation was to get >ratification directly by the people - the people had to support it, >or it would have no force. They set up a procedure for special >ratifying conventions in each state for this purpose - separate from >the state legislatures. > > The records from this convention are available on the internet, at >Yale University - the "Avalon Project." > http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm > Go to 18th Century - and find "Madison's notes on..." >I have my own copy of those records, but was thrilled when Madison's >notes from the convention was put up for all. Now everyone can find >out the truth - it's well worth the reading, shows what the various >competing interests were, how they came to the compromises that could >be lived with, etc. > > Beverly > >>They are the Real Parties of >>Interest to that compact. See Article VII, >>and the record of state ratifications. Don't >>forget, there was a Congress under the Articles, >>and the states were fully functioning sovereign >>governments; that was the legal effect, in >>international law, of severing their political >>relationship to the King of England. The language >>which Thomas Jefferson used in that Declaration >>was legally sufficient to render the several >>states as Sovereign, Free, Independent nations -- >>able thereby "to do all other Acts and Things >>which Independent States may of right do." >> >>"And for the support of this Declaration, >>with a firm reliance on the protection of >>Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each >>other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred >>Honor." >> >>Amen. >> >>/s/ Paul Mitchell >>http://www.supremelaw.com >> >> >> >>At 07:20 PM 8/6/97 -0600, you wrote: >>> >>>-> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List >>> >>>>-> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List >>>> >>>>Evan Soule wrote: >>>>> >>>>> -> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List >>>>> >>>>> >The Constitution was 'ordained' to last for millennium. Its concepts >>>>> > provided for all future changes which could be made by man, inas- >>>>> > much as the concepts were taken from God's Own plans for the well- >>>>> > being for humankind. Too many believe, and this is the source of >>>>> > trouble for this nation (and world), that because the founding >>>>> > fathers established and ordained the Constitution for the people >>>>> > (themselves) that it was wrong because it failed to provide a perm- >>>>> > anent welfare system which would sustain half of the population for >>>>> > the mere 'privilege' of existing; whose existence would be extract- >>>>> > ed from the purses of those who did the planning and execution of >>>>> > the tasks necessary to build a new world. >>>>> > >>>>> >It is true that those who formed and signed that document were landown- >>>>> > ers and shrewd businessmen, but from what other group of people >>>>> > can possibly be drawn a platform for success? >>>>> > >>>>> > Ray Earnest >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> Dear Ray: >>>>> >>>>> No one "signed" the Constitution. It was a "committee" document. >>>>> >>>>> Recommended interesting reading: >>>>> >>>>> "NO TREASON: The Constitution of No Authority" by Lydander Spooner. >>>>> >>>>> Evan Soule' >>>>> >>>>> -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com >>>>> -> Posted by: josephnewman@earthlink.net (Evan Soule) >>>> >>>>Dear Evan, please look up the word 'sign', 'signed', etc. and then get >>>> back to me if you so please. What you mean is that noone 'inked' >>>> the Constitution. A nod of the head would 'sign' (approve) some- >>>> thing. While not perfect, I majored in English in college, and my >>>> errors stem from haste, not lack of knowledge. >>>> >>>> Ray Earnest >>>> >>> >>>Dear Ray, >>> >>>Since there has been a discussion of the distinctions between the >>>Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, it is within such a >>>context that the word "signed" has significance. Obviously, the names >>>affixed to the former document were signed by those who "pledged their >>>lives, fortunes, sacred honor..." while the latter committee document >>>contains the names of those whose attendance (and presumed agreement) was >>>recorded by the secretary. >>> >>>I certainly have great respect and admiration for someone like John Hancock >>>who signed (inked) his name large enough to be clearly read -- these men >>>were proud to physically sign (ink) their personal names (signatures) upon >>>that masterful document and they knew the risk they were taking. [That >>>same level of risk was not the case with those whose names were affixed to >>>the bottom of the Constitution by the recording secretary.] I have nothing >>>but total respect for the Declaration of Independence -- in large measure >>>the product of one man's mind. I'm afraid that (but for the Bill of >>>Rights) I don't have the same level of respect for the Constitution. >>> >>>Best regards, >>> >>>Evan Soule' >>> >>> >>> >>>-> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com >>>-> Posted by: josephnewman@earthlink.net (Evan Soule) >>> >>> >>> >> >>======================================================================== >>Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness >>B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine >> >>tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night >>email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU >>website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now >>ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best >> Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone >> Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this >> >>As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall >>not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. >>======================================================================== >>[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] >> >> > ________________________ > "Though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly >does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion >on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision >of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being >supplied." > ---- John Stuart Mill from his treatise 'On Liberty' > ________________________ > > > > > > ======================================================================== Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. ======================================================================== [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail