text:
John Marshall - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development Volume 16 Issue 2 Volume 16, Spring/Summer 2002, Issue 2 Article 3 March 2002 John Marshall: The F...
JOHN MARSHALL - CUA Law Scholarship Repository
john v. baker - Duke Law Scholarship Repository
Stopping Stalkers - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Introduction - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Mar 1, 2012 - securities regulation is part of St. John's University School of ... they were necessary to combat pervasi
Fraudulent Conveyance - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
May 8, 2013 - Fraudulent Conveyance--Unclean Hands Held. Inapplicable Where There Has Been a. Reconveyance (Seagirt Real
Negotiable Instruments - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
CPLR 603 - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Intentional Torts - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Aug 22, 2012 - August 2012. Intentional Torts. St. John's Law Review. Follow this and additional works at: http://schola
Media Crises - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Oct 9, 2017 - department at WISN-TV, the CBS affiliate in Milwaukee. ** The author has been the attorney for the Diocese
Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development Volume 16 Issue 2 Volume 16, Spring/Summer 2002, Issue 2
John Marshall: The Formation of a Jurist Charles Hobson
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred Recommended Citation Hobson, Charles (2002) "John Marshall: The Formation of a Jurist," Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development: Vol. 16: Iss. 2, Article 3. Available at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred/vol16/iss2/3
This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development by an authorized administrator of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]
JOHN MARSHALL: THE FORMATION OF A JURIST CHARLES HOBSON* INTRODUCTION Two hundred years ago, on February 4, 1801, John Marshall of Virginia took the oath of office as the fourth Chief Justice of the United States. He held this office until his death in July 1835, when he was nearing eighty. Marshall presided over the Supreme Court longer than any other Chief Justice. Under his leadership, the Court began to acquire the power and play the role in our constitutional system of government that we take for granted today. We recognize the judiciary as one of three coequal branches of the government, along with the legislative and executive. Yet, the notion of a balanced government of three coequal branches did not spring full-blown from the mind of the framers of the Constitution in 1787. The framers expected the federal judiciary, which they called "the least dangerous branch," to be a distant third behind Congress and the Presidency in terms of power, importance, and prestige.I It is not inconceivable that the Supreme Court would have remained a minor appendage of our government, and our constitutional development taken a distinctly different course, but for the fact that John Marshall occupied the Chief Justice's chair during the first three decades of the nineteenth century. Adjunct Professor, College of William and Mary; Editor, Papers of John Marshall. 1 See THE FEDERALIST PAPERS, No. 78 HAMILTON 464 (Clinton Rossiter ed., 1961) (stating that "[it may truly be said [the judiciary] hafs] neither force nor win but merely judgment; and most ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."); see also Forrest G. Alogna, Double Jeopardy, Acquittal Appeals, and the Law-Fact Distinction, 86 CORNELL L. REV. 1131, 1164 (2001) (discussing Alexander Hamilton's quotation). See generally DAVID LOTH, CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN MARSHALL AND THE GROw'rH OF THE REPUBLIC 162 (Vail-Ballou Press Inc. 1949) (stating
that separate building for Supreme Court did not exist and they had to conduct their business in basement of Capital).
ST JOHN'SJOURNAL OFLEGAL COMMENTARY
[Vol. 16:315
Marshall made the Supreme Court into a major player by hitching its destiny to the Constitution itself. He appropriated the Constitution as the judiciary's special preserve. He acted on the assumption that the Constitution, besides being a framework of our government, is also a law that judges must take into account when deciding cases. He staked out and ultimately established the judiciary's claim to expound and apply the law of the Constitution in the same way that courts interpret common law and statutes in their accustomed role of adjudicating legal disputes. 2 On this disarming premise that the Constitution operates in our courts just like any ordinary law, Marshall laid the foundation for the judiciary's unanticipated rise to coordinate status with the other branches of government. He asserted this claim first and most famously in Marbury v. Madison,3 where he stated that the Constitution was "a rule for the government of courts, as well as of the legislature."4 As he framed the issue, judges could not ignore the Constitution but were duty bound to enforce it by disallowing laws repugnant to it.5 Chief Justice Marshall understood that the judiciary, possessing neither power nor patronage, would always be the weakest branch and that its effectiveness depended on gaining the acquiescence of the legislative, executive, and ultimately, of the people. Whatever power the Supreme Court enjoyed would be a moral force based on its ability to persuade. In building up the institutional strength of the judiciary, Marshall shrewdly tapped the American people's undoubted reverence for the 2
See ROBERT KENNETH FAULKNER, THE JURISPRUDENCE OF JOHN MARSHALL 195-96
(Princeton Univ. Press 1968) (explaining idea of constitution as fundamental law when written that is analyzed according to common law principles); see also Charles W. Collier, HistoricalPerspectives on ContemporaryHermeneutcs: Law as Interpretation,76 CHI.KENT L. REV. 779, 807-09 (2000) (explaining Marshall's view of role of court in interpreting Constitution). See generallyFRANCIS N. STITES, JOHN MARSHALL DEFENDER OF THE CONSTITUTION 77-96 (Oscar Handlin ed., Little, Brown & Company 1981) (explaining evolution of independent judiciary). 3 5 U.S. 137 (1803). 4 Id. at 180. 5 See FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 202 (quoting Marshall at Virginia Ratifying Convention:"[i]f [the government of the United States] were to make a law not warranted by any of the powers enumerated, it would be considered by the judges as an infringement of the Constitution which they are to guard. They would not consider such a law as coming under their jurisdiction. They would declare it void."); see also CHARLES F. HOBSON, THE GREAT CHIEF JUSTICE: JOHN MARSHALL AND THE RULE OF LAW 5 (Univ. of
Kan. Press 1996) (suggesting Marshall thought judges should be guardians of the Constitution); STITES, supra note 2, at 92 (citing Marshall's statement at Virginia
Ratifying Convention).
JOINMARSHALL: THE FORMATION OFA JURIST
Constitution. He carefully nurtured and strengthened the Court's claim to be the peculiar guardian of the Constitution, giving voice and effect to the people's permanent will. He strove to preserve and enhance the judiciary's image as a tribunal that impartially pronounced "law" and kept out of "politics."6 By the
end of his tenure, the Supreme Court's mystique was essentially in place. The justices were revered as Olympian sages, as jealous protectors of the Constitution who are elevated above the turbulent waters of politics. This mystique remains the basis of the Court's extraordinary power and largely explains why an institution composed of unelected judges with lifetime appointments can credibly claim to serve the ends of democratic government. 7 I. CAREER TO
So, who was John Marshall and what were the political principles and beliefs that informed his jurisprudence? First, let me rapidly summarize his career to 1801.8
Before his judicial
appointment, Marshall led a varied career as a soldier, state legislator, lawyer, diplomat, member of Congress, and Secretary of State.9 Born in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains of 6 See FAULKNER, supranote 2, at 201 (noting "[q]uestions in their nature political, or which are, by the constitution and law, submitted to the political department, can never be made in this court."); HOBSON, supra note 5, at 52 (finding that "the judiciary refused to take jurisdiction over 'questions, in their nature political' and confined itself to deciding upon legal rights of individuals" (citing Marbury v. Madison)). 7 See JAMES BRADLEY THAYER, OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, AND FELIX FRANKFURTER, JOHN MARSHALL AND THE JUDICIAL FUNCTION 137 (The Univ. of Chic. Press 1967) (finding that "Marshall's ideas, diffused in all sorts of ways, especially through the influence of the legal profession, have become the presuppositions of our political institutions."); see also W. MELVILLE JONES, CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN MARSHALL: A REAPPRAISAL 94 (W. Melville Jones ed., Cornell Univ. Press 1956) (stating Marshall is standard against whom all other Chief Justices are compared). See generally ROBERT B. TURNSTALL, THE MARSHALL READER: THE LIFE AND CONTRIBUTIONS OF CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN MARSHALL 218-35 (Erwin C. Surrency ed., Oceana Publ'ng 1955) (discussing how Marshall's contribution to fundamental judicial principle had lasting effect on development of American government). 8 See generally JOHN R. CUNEO, JOHN MARSHALL: JUDICIAL STATESMAN 4-5 (McGraw-Hill Book Co. 1975) (summarizing events in Marshall's life before Revolutionary war); HOBSON, supra note 5, at 5 (discussing Marshall's professional life from 1789 until his judicial appointment twelve years later); AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL 4 (John Stokes Adams ed., The Univ. of Mich. Press 1937) (recounting Marshall's early years). 9 See CUNEO, supra note 8 (cataloguing Marshall's early career accomplishments); HOBSON, supra note 5, at 5 (discussing Marshall's career from 1782 until his appointment to U.S. Supreme Court); AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL, supra note 8, at 4 (reviewing Marshall's early career).
Virginia in 1755, he was the eldest of fifteen children of Thomas Marshall, a planter and county leader, and Mary Randolph Keith, a clergyman's daughter descended from one of Virginia's first families. His early education took place at home under his father's supervision. At age fourteen Marshall spent a year at an academy in a neighboring county, which was followed by a year of study at home with the local parish priest. These two years of formal schooling provided him the rudiments of a classical education. Equally invaluable was the youth's exposure to the informal "curriculum" of the colonial Virginia gentry, an unexcelled practical school for future American statesmen. 10 Although fated for a career in law, at the onset of the War of Independence in 1775 Marshall put aside his reading of Blackstone's Commentaries and took up arms. He eventually obtained a commission as an officer in the Continental army, rising to the rank of captain. He saw action at Brandywine Creek, Germantown, Monmouth, and Stony Point and survived the winter's encampment at Valley Forge in 1777-1778. On temporary leave from the army, Marshall in 1780 attended a course of law lectures by George Wythe at the College of William and Mary. Wythe's lectures constituted the future Chief Justice's only formal law study and supplemented his self-education, which began before and certainly continued after his brief college sojourn.11 Marshall commenced his law career in earnest after moving permanently to Richmond in 1784. He rapidly ascended the professional ladder, distinguishing himself among the small fraternity of lawyers who practiced in the state superior courts. During the 1780s and 1790s he served periodically in the state legislature. He was a delegate to the state ratifying convention of June 1788, where he made a notable speech defending the judiciary article of the Constitution. After the new government began operation in 1789, Marshall repeatedly declined offers to 10 See CUNEO, supranote 8, at 5 (stating that at age 14 Marshall was sent 100 miles from home to study at boarding school run by Scotch clergymen); HOBSON, supra note 5, at 2 (delineating Marshall's education); AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL, supra note 8, at 4 (reviewing Marshall's early education). II See CUNEO, supra note 8, at 16 (stating Marshall attended lectures at William and Mary College from George Wythe); HOBSON, supra note 5, at 3 (noting that "the term at William and Mary constituted Marshall's only formal study of law."); AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL, supra note 8, at 5-6 (stating that he attended these lectures).
JOHNMARSHALL: THEFORMATIONOFA JURIST
run for Congress or to accept a federal appointment, not yet ready to give up a lucrative law practice that had now expanded to include the federal circuit court. 12 As divisions over financial and foreign policy gave birth to an opposition party led by Thomas Jefferson, Marshall, who continued to serve in the state legislature, emerged as the leading defender of the Washington administration. In effect, he became the unofficial leader of the Federalist Party in Virginia, gaining national attention for his public role in defending the Eventually, in 1797, President John government's policies. Adams prevailed upon Marshall to accept an appointment to a diplomatic commission to France. The mission failed, but the publication of his dispatches reporting the commissioner's refusal to compromise American sovereignty and independence won him national acclaim. Back home, Marshall was elected to Congress, where he distinguished himself as a formidable spokesman for the Adams administration. In May 1800, Adams brought the Virginian into his cabinet as Secretary of State, the post he held 13 when nominated Chief Justice eight months later. Marshall was a happy choice to fill the highest judicial office in the land. First, he was a technically sound lawyer, having practiced for nearly twenty years in the higher courts of Virginia and in the federal court. Second, he was a statesman of broad experience. The knowledge and understanding gained through participation in government were no less essential than lawyerly skills as preparation for his role on the Supreme Court. Marshall came to the bench thoroughly versed in the political processes and workings of the federal and state governments, and he understood as well as anyone the nature and boundaries of legislative, executive, and judicial power. Intermittent, though it was prior to 1801, Marshall's participation in public life occurred at times and places that in retrospect appear to have been nicely 12 See CUNEO, supra note 8, at 49 (stating that monetary considerations precluded Marshall from accepting public office); HOBSON, supranote 5, at 5 (stating that "[h]e could not yet afford to give up his lucrative law practice."); AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL, supra note 8, at 20-21 (explaining choice of private practice over public service). 13 See CUNEO, supra note 8, at 50-56, 67-76 (providing detailed description of Marshall's trip to France and what happened to him there); HOBSON, supra note 5, at 7 (providing concise explanation of events leading up to Marshall's nomination as Chief Justice); AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL, supra note 8, at 21-30 (providing autobiographical account of these events).
ST JOttN'SJOURNAL OFLEGAL COA 4ENTARY
calculated to prepare him for his high judicial station. For example, he gained invaluable experience in constitutional dialectics by participating in the debates at the Virginia ratifying convention of 1788, by defending the Jay Treaty as a member of the Virginia legislature in 1795, by arguing the celebrated British debts case of Ware v. Hylton 4 in the Supreme Court in 1796, and, lastly, by his masterly defense of the Adams administration's extradition of Jonathan Robbins in 1800. Indeed, it was for this great forensic effort that Adams rewarded Marshall with a place in his cabinet. In appointing Marshall to be Chief Justice, Adams knew he had found the right man for the job, but perhaps in 1801 he did not know just how excellent his choice was. In 1825, shortly before his death, he wrote that it was "the pride of my life that I have given to this nation a Chief Justice equal to Coke or Hale, Holt or Mansfield."'15 II. MARSHALL AS REPUBLICAN Marshall was forty-five when he took his seat on the Supreme Court. During the preceding two decades he had formulated the views on politics and government that he was to hold essentially unchanged for the rest of his life. As a child of the American Revolution, he embraced classical republicanism as modified by its accommodation to the "modern" world of the eighteenth century.16 He was a votary of "republican" or "popular" government, that is, government that was elective and representative and in which the right to vote belonged to white male landowners. 17 Such a government depended on "virtue," 14 3 U.S. 199, 199(1796). 15 10 THE PAPERS OF JOHN MARSHALL, JOHN ADAMS TO JOHN MARSHALL, AUG. 17, 1825 197 (Charles F. Hobson et al. eds., 2000); see also ALLAN B. MAcGRUDER, AMERICAN STATESMAN: JOHN MARSHALL 163 (John T. Morse, Jr. ed., Houghton, Mifflin and Co. 1897) (1885) (stating Adams decision was based on "an instinctive perception of a peculiar fitness for the place" ); STITES, supra note 2, at 79 (stating that 25 years later, Adams considered Marshall's appointment as "gift" to American people and proudest moment of his life). 16
See generally CHARLES A. BEARD, AN ECONOMIC
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES 64-71
(Transaction Publishers 1998)
OF THE (1913)
(explaining freehold requirements established in each of 13 colonies); FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 117-24 (explaining freehold requirement in terms of Lockean political theory); HOBSON, supra note 5, at 16-25 (explaining Marshall's understanding of Republicanism). 17 See FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 122-23 (associating republican principles with representation based on property rights); HOBSON, supranote 5, at 16-17 (explaining that "[plopular government was elective and representative government, in which the right to vote belonged to white male 'freeholders,' defined in his own state of Virginia as those
JOHNMARSHALL. THE FORMATION OFA JURIST
now recently redefined to accord more with the realities of human nature and better adapted to the rise of commerce and the market.18 It recognized and to some extent gave free play to man's passions and interests.19 Like others of his generation, Marshall was able to reconcile republicanism with the spirit of commerce, a belief in the philosophy of individual rights, and a recognition of self-interest as a legitimate motive in human affairs. 20 Still, he remained firmly wedded to classical republican values. 21 The idea that society was nothing more than a collection of completely self-absorbed individuals and groups and that politics was an arena of scrambling selfish interests was abhorrent to Marshall, 22 as it was to the founders generally. 23 He was typically republican in his distaste for party politics, which, he said, tended "to abolish all distinction between virtue and vice; 24 and to prostrate those barriers which the wise and good have erected for the protection of morals, and which are defended solely by opinion."25 Federalist spokesman though he was in the owning a one-quarter-acre town lot or twenty-five acres and a dwelling house in the country, or fifty acres of unimproved land."). See generally BEARD, supra note 16, at 69 (explaining Virginia qualifications for voting). 18 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 18; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 37-39 (discussing Marshall's respect for industry and how he followed Montesquieu's view of commercial republicanism). 19 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 18; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 117 (discussing Marshall and Madison's definition of republic as "administered.. .according to the public will..."). 20 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 18-19; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 37 (emphasizing Marshall's praise of industry, wealth, power and dedication leading to peace and improvement of man). 21 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 19; see also LEONARD BAKER, JOHN MARSHALL - A LIFE IN LAW 38 (Macmillan Publ'g 1974) (defining Marshall's idea of republic as responsive to those it represents and based on fair set of laws). 22 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 19; see also BAKER, supra note 21, at 92 (quoting Marshall, who questioned whether some powerful men had objectives other than America retaining its independence); DAVID ROBARGE, A CHIEF JUSTICE'S PROGRESS - JOHN MIARSHALL FROM REVOLUTIONARY VIRGINIA TO THE SuPREME COURT 99 (Greenwood Press 2000) (explaining Marshall's fears of violent dissentions in state, as well as politicians who promote their own private dishonesty, harming prospect of free America). 23 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 17; see also BAKER, supranote 21, at 111 (discussing Washington's view that United States' success depended on unity among Americans "which will induce them to forget their local prejudices and politics"); ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 209 (describing founding fathers as enlightened and virtuous). 24 HOBSON, supra note 5, at 17; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 203 (explaining Marshall's disgust for partisan politics); JEAN EDWARD SMITH, JOHN MARSHALL DEFINER OF A NATION 6 (Henry Holt and Co. 1996) (defiming Marshall as man driven by patriotism, not partisanship). 25 JOHN MARSHALL, THE LIFE OF GEORGE WASHINGTON 2: 349 (2d ed. 1838); see also SMITH, supra note 24, at 7-8 (describing how Marshall deplored vindictiveness of campaigning).
[Vol. 16:3 15
1790's, Marshall never regarded himself as a "party" man, but as a defender of the Constitution, and established government against unjustified attacks by partisan factions bent on some selfish or sinister aim. 26 Marshall clung to the classical republican conception that enlightened statesmen could identify and pursue a single public interest even as he recognized that competing and clashing interests were inevitable concomitants of free and popular governments. 27 He continued to hold onto a concept of virtue that in some measure required disinterestedness, if not by the whole citizenry, then at least by the leadership of the republic. 2 8 He believed that virtue, fortified by proper constitutional arrangements, could continue to be the animating principle of the American republic. 29 His attachment to the Constitution was based in no small part on the hope that it would preserve and strengthen the career of republican virtue in a society that was becoming increasingly less homogeneous, more factious, and more driven by the imperatives of the market. Revolutionary republicanism shaped Marshall's political creed and his constitutional jurisprudence. 30 From his experiences as a Continental soldier and postwar Virginia legislator 3 1 sprang a conviction that the Constitution of 1787 marked a decisive turning point away from a union of confederated states toward a
See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 17; see also DAVID LOTH, CHIEF JUSTICE - JOHN
MARSHALL AND THE GROWTH OF THE REPUBLIC 335 (W.W. Norton & Co. 1949) (stating
that Marshall's aloofness toward slavery was but one example of his "general abstention from politics); SMITH, supranote 24, at 6-7 (describing Marshall's bond to patriotism, not particular political party). 27 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 17; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 125-26 (stating that Marshall believed ideal statesmen possessed such virtues as discipline and sense of justice). 28 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 19, 24; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 117 (describing Marshall's view that only through virtue can nation be republican); ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 41 (describing Marshall's insistence on virtuous men running government). 29 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 22; see also BAKER, supra note 21, at 94 (explaining how Marshall's desire for strong central government developed in his years as a soldier); LOTH, supra note 26, at 43 (describing how great deal of Marshall's future politics was developed during his combat experience). 30 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 101 (describing how members of Constitutional Convention wanted to enlarge powers of federal government); SMITH, supra note 24, at 111 (citing invitation Marshall received to Constitutional Convention to make central government stronger by revising Articles of Confederation). 31 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20; see also BAKER, supra note 21, at 106 (describing how Articles of Confederation rested on voluntarism that was impossible to enforce).
JOHN MARSHALL: THE FORMATION OFA JURIST
"nation of states" based on the principle of national supremacy. 3 2 Any attempt to construe the Constitution into a compact resembling the discarded Articles of Confederation was an interpretative heresy that must be combated with all the weapons at his command. 33 Nationalism arose naturally from resistance to Great Britain; and his association in the Continental army "with brave men from different states who were risking life and everything valuable in a common cause" confirmed him "in the habit of considering America as my country, and congress as my government." 34 Marshall's partiality to union and nationalism hardened into an unwavering conviction during the 1780's, as the return of peace exposed the dangerous weaknesses of a Confederation government that lacked the power to tax or to impose a uniform commercial policy. 3 5 He was never an advocate of national power for its own sake, however, but only as a means to preserve and consolidate the newly won independence of the United States and to promote the commercial prosperity of the American people.3 6 The impotent Confederation portended political and commercial anarchy, disunion, and eventual loss of independence, as the individual American states would inevitably become subservient 37 to European powers.
At the core of Marshall's nationalist outlook was a deep-rooted anxiety about the perilous position of the United States in a hostile world. That American security, independence, and 32
AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL, supra note 8, at 9-10.
33 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20; see also LOTH, supra note 26, at 96 (describing how, even in emergency, states were not likely to obey tax put on them by national government); ROBARGE, supranote 22, at 98 (describing how Confederation had no power to raise revenue, regulate commerce or defend nation from invaders). 34 HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 38 (describing how Marshall's war experience led him to believe that strong national government was crucial for continued independence); SMITH, supra note 24, at 12 (describing Marshall's view that strong national government was key to survival of nation). 35 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20; see also LOTH, supra note 26, at 79 (describing how commerce was suffering from rivalries between states); SMITH, supra note 24, at 8 (describing how Marshall was one of supporters of Constitution as guard against what was becoming anarchy in states). 36 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20; see also LOTH, supra note 26, at 98-99 (stating that Federalists believed that absence of strong central government would allow Spanish, British and Indians to stop union's manifest destiny). Cf SMITH, supra note 24, at 118 (quoting Washington, stating that "[A] weak state with Indians on it's back and Spaniards on it's flank [must] see the necessity of a General Government. .. "). 37 See HOBSON, supranote 5, at 20; see also SMITH, supranote 24, at 115 (describing Marshall's belief that national unity was crucial to survival of United States and continued independence).
ST JOHN'S JOURNAL OF LEGAL COMMENTARY
ultimately, American liberty, required a strong and energetic general government was an axiom Marshall never doubted, and he operated on the assumption that the Constitution conferred the requisite powers to accomplish these objects. 38 Throughout his life, Marshall viewed the federal government as chronically vulnerable to the aggressive encroachments of the state governments. 39 These internal pressures that undermined the authority of the central government and loosened the bonds of union in turn exposed the United States to external threatsinviting intervention, even invasion, by foreign powers. 40 In the American federal system as he understood it, centrifugal force was much stronger than centripetal. 4 1 If the republic was to perish, it would not be "by the overwhelming power of the National Government, but by the resisting and counteracting power of the State sovereignties."42 The Constitution, he believed, was designed to establish equilibrium between the federal and state governments, an equilibrium that was in constant danger of breaking down in the direction of the states. 43 Marshall's nationalism might properly be described as defensive or negative-resisting the superior force of state sovereignty rather than augmenting federal power. As a state legislator in the 1780's, where he followed the lead of James Madison, Marshall came to see that the objects of an invigorated national government went beyond enhancing 38 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20; see also LOTH, supra note 26, at 79 (describing how whole country was at mercy of bickering states in area of commerce); SMITH, supra note 24, at 17 (quoting Marshall, describing his fear Jefferson would try to strengthen state rights at expense of federal government). 39 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 20-21; see also LOTH, supra note 26, at 98 (describing how nation was vulnerable to foreign invasion); SMITH, supra note 24, at 103 (describing Marshall's fear that, if US did not repay its debts to England, they were likely to be attacked). 40 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 21; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 101 (stating that nationalists were in favor of enlarging power of federal government). 41 Joseph Story, A Discourse upon the Life, Character,and Services of the Honorable John Marshall, in JOHN MARSHALL: LIFE, CHARACTER, AND JUDICIAL SERVICES 3:368 (John F. Dillon ed., 1903) 42 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 21; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 105 (describing Marshall's fear that states would grow in power and conflicts between states would get worse); ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 98 (stating how Virginia and other states were gaining more power and harming federal government by passing paper money and hurting individual property rights). 43 HOBSON, supra note 5, at 21; see also BAKER, supra note 21, at 111 (describing Washington's idea that stronger federal government was crucial to survival of United States); LOTH, supra note 26, at 79 (describing attempts to reform commerce to alleviate rivalries between states).
security and promoting greater commercial prosperity, important as these were.4 4 Such a government would also promote internal tranquility within the states, where the danger to liberty was perhaps more immediately threatening than that posed by external forces. 4 5 The source of this danger was the American people themselves, a circumstance that cast grave doubts on the long-term prospects for their novel experiment in republican self-government. 46 Madison, indeed, concluded on the eve of the Federal Convention that the fundamental crisis facing America was the apparent failure of republican government as practiced in the states. 47 Laws enacted by state legislatures far too frequently reflected the selfish interests of popular majorities and trampled upon the private rights of individuals and minorities. 48 Marshall, too, directly witnessed the declining influence of the "wise and virtuous," whose efforts to observe public faith and honor were increasingly challenged by the schemes of self-interested majorities. Debtors and land speculators, for example, formed the core of an increasingly numerous faction that was gaining ascendancy in the legislature, where under the guise of public law they could mitigate the 49 consequences of private folly.
Without question, the turbulent and corrupt politics of the postwar years, the disorderly tumults that portended civil anarchy and social chaos made an indelible impression upon the
44 See HOBSON, supranote 5, at 21; see also BAKER, supranote 21, at 111 (describing Washington's idea that stronger federal government was crucial to survival of United States); LOTH, supra note 26, at 79 (describing attempts to reform commerce to alleviate rivalries between states). 45 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 21; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 99 (stating Marshall's fear that uprisings such as Shay's Rebellion, and inability of national government to combat them, was major problem for Confederation). 46 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 21; see also LOTH, supranote 26, at 34 (stating that way Continental Congress governed was chaotic); ROBARGE, supranote 22, at 101 (stating Marshall's idea that relaxation of laws by states needed to be stopped). 47 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 21; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 77 (describing how, even later in his life, Marshall, being private citizen experienced .opposition from selfish individuals"); SMITH, supra note 24, at 93 (quoting Marshall, stating that pettiness of self-interests distract Counsel members from their real tasks). 48 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 22; see also SMITH, supra note 24, at 111, 115 (discussing Marshall's concern that state legislatures were catering to needs of debtors). 49 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 23; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 100 (stating Marshall's fear that uprisings in Massachusetts would spread throughout New England and south); SMITH, supra note 24, at 110 (describing Marshall's disdain at turbulence done in name of people).
mind of the future chief justice.50 Marshall embraced a chastened and sober republicanism that favored a "well regulated Democracy" as embodied in the Constitution, that is, popular government in which there would be "a strict observance of justice and public faith, and a steady adherence to virtue."51 Marshall believed that republican government could still work tolerably well, so long as it operated within a system of checks and balances that reinforced the natural moderating effects of self-interest 52 and produced leaders of excellent character, distinguished for sound and discriminating judgment and disinterested attachment to the public interest. 53 In revising his thinking about republican government, Marshall, like Madison and others, called into question the heretofore superior role enjoyed by legislatures, where much of the obnoxious behavior from which he recoiled in disgust was occurring. 54 His own direct experience with the mischievous, selfish politics of the 1780's left him deeply skeptical of popular assemblies and led him to reflect on the potential role of the judiciary in maintaining a "well regulated Democracy." 55 With the decline of the legislatures into arenas of licentiousness, courts and judges became increasingly looked upon as repositories of virtue and wisdom, where reason, reflection, judgment, and disinterestedness continued to hold sway. 56
50 See John Marshall,Speech in the Virginia Ratiying Convention, June 10, 1788 in THE PAPERS OF JOHN MARSHALL, VOL. 1 256 (Herbert A. Johnson, et al. eds., 1974). 51 HOBSON, supra note 5, at 24; see also BAKER, supra note 21, at 113 (describing Marshall's view that balancing of power is essential for Constitution to work); SMITH, supra note 24, at 132 (quoting Marshall's speech before Virginia Constitutional Convention, which detailed virtues of separation of powers). 52 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 24; see also BAKER, supra note 21, at 107-08 (quoting Marshall, describing how government must be run "by men exempt from passions incident to human nature"); LOTH, supra note 26, at 104 (describing Marshall's hope that judiciary would be run by able and honest men). 53 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 24; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 101 (noting Marshall was able to discern "imbecility of the nation" and danger young states face if not held together by cement); SMITH, supra note 24, at 115 (stating that in light of excessive power of state legislature, Marshall highly valued article in Constitution which imposed restrictions on states). 54 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 24; see also BAKER, supra note 21, at 364 (asserting that from moment Marshall became Chief Justice, he aimed to strengthen role of Supreme Court, using law to solve political problems); SMITH, supra note 24, at 116 (explaining Marshall's view that strong judiciary was essential to individual liberties). 55 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 24; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 200 (revealing Marshall's belief that "the judiciary's role was first in dignity and authority, and it was to determine the principles to be guarded"). 56 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 24; see also FAULKNER, supra note 2, at 106-107
JOHN MARSHALL: THEFORMATION OFA JURIST
From this period, as well, dates Marshall's lifelong distrust of the state governments and his belief that one of the chief advantages of a reformed and strengthened national government was its capacity to act as a steadying counterweight to those smaller republics. 57 The "general tendency of state politics" had convinced him that "a more efficient and better organized general government" provided the only "safe anchorage ground."58 In his opinion the most valuable provision of the new Constitution was the restrictions placed upon the states, particularly the restriction prohibiting the states from enacting laws "impairing the Obligation of Contracts." 5 9 Marshall's later expositions of the Constitution's contract clause were infused with perceptions formed during the post-Revolutionary era. 60 Time and again he recited the evils arising from the state politics of the 1780's, whose vicious and alarming tendency was "not only to impair commercial intercourse, and threaten the existence of credit, but to sap the morals of the people and destroy the sanctity of private faith."61 To remedy these mischiefs was a paramount goal of "all the truly wise, as well as the virtuous" and "one of the important benefits expected from a reform of the government."62 In the hands of Chief Justice Marshall and his "wise and virtuous" brethren, the contract clause emerged as a potent constitutional remedy for preserving the health of the American republic.
(assessing Marshall's characterization of state's power was phrased in the negative).
See AN AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY JOHN MARSHALL, supranote 8, at 10.
58 HOBSON, supranote 5, at 24; see alsoBAKER, supra note 21, at 119 (revealing that part of Constitution, which imposed restrictions on states most appeals to Madison); SMTrH, supra note 24, at 110 (suggesting in Marshall's opinion that one of nation's largest problems was "lax notions" states had toward contract obligations). 59 See HOBSON, supra note 5, at 24; see also ROBARGE, supra note 22, at 77 (describing Marshall's concern for those who opposed movement to compel strict compliance with contracts); SMITH, supra note 24, at 116 (demonstrating that Marshall according to holding of many cases was firmly on side of contract compliance). 60 See HOBSON, supranote 5, at 24-25. 61 Ogden v. Saunders, 25 U.S. 213, 355 (1827). 62 Gordon S. Wood, The Origins of JudicialReview Revisited, or How the Marshall Court Made More out of Less, 56 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 787, 792-93 (1999); see also Brannon P. Denning, Book Review: Marbury v. Madison: The Origins and Legacy of Judicial Review. By William E. Nelson, 93 LAw LIBR. J. 345, 345 (2001) (describing author's assessment of judicial review as "tentative in appearance" on American Stage prior to Marbury); Robert E. Riggs, Substantive Due Process in 1791, 1990 WiS. L. REV. 941, 978 (1990) (stating that idea of judicial review gained force from 1780s onward); Suzanna Sherry, The Founders' Unwritten Constitution, 54 U. CHu. L. REV. 1127, 1129 (1987) (commenting how new states translated "English opposition rhetoric" into action with early instances of judicial intervention of legislative acts).
STJOHN'SJOURNAL OFLEGAL COMMENTARY
III. JUDICIAL POWER
I want to devote my remaining time to examining the ideas about judicial power and the role of the judiciary in the American system of government that Marshall was exposed to in the years preceding his appointment. Although his first years in office were marked by conflict with the Jefferson administration, the larger truth is that Marshall arrived at the chief justiceship at an auspicious moment for the institution of the judiciary. The last two decades of the eighteenth century witnessed what historian Gordon Wood has called "a massive rethinking that eventually transformed the position of the judiciary in American life," and "a remarkable transformation," all the more so because it took place in a relatively brief time and "flew in the face of much conventional eighteenth-century popular wisdom." Most Americans in 1776 lacked a concept of an independent judiciary. Even though they divided government into legislative, executive, and judicial branches, separation of powers really meant separation of legislative and executive power. The administration of justice was still regarded as part of the executive or magisterial power. Indeed, during the colonial period, judges had been an extension of royal authority, completely identified with the royal governors. Judges were viewed with mistrust not only because of their connection with the governors, but also because they exercised broad discretionary power in interpreting the multiple and confusing sources of colonial law.6 3 So, against this background of mistrust,
how did the judicial power carve out a separate identity as one of the three constitutional powers of government; how did judges acquire a role in republican government as the paramount interpreters of the laws and as guardians of the rights of individuals; and how did unelected judges with life tenure ultimately presume to disallow laws enacted by popularly elected legislatures? We now have a clearer understanding that the enhanced status 63 See Wood, supra note 62, at 792-93; see also Denning, supra note 62, at 345 (describing author's assessment of judicial review as "tentative in appearance" on American Stage prior to Marbury); Riggs, supra note 62, at 978 (stating that idea of judicial review gained force from 1780s onward); Sherry, supra note 62, at 1129 (commenting how new states translated "English opposition rhetoric" into action with early instances of judicial intervention of legislative acts).
JOHNMARSHALL: THE FORMATION OFA JURIST
of judicial power was a trans-Atlantic phenomenon, a reaction to the tremendous upsurge in legislation issued forth from representative assemblies in Great Britain and, after the onset of the Revolution, in America. 64 No longer simply checks on an aggrandizing executive, representative assemblies had become institutions whose chief activity was the enactment of positive legislation to meet the demands of a modernizing society. In England, the swelling parliamentary statute book produced a sustained critique of legislation riddled with gross defects and inconsistencies and brought about a corresponding new respect for judicial interpretation as a means of rationalizing and reconciling legislation to accord with the principles of common law and equity. 6 5 Even in Great Britain, whose constitutional system recognized the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, there was plenty of room for a robust conception of judicial power, as evidenced by the career of Lord Mansfield, the great Chief Judge of the Court of Kings' Bench. 64 See Jack N. Rakove, The Critical Use ofHistory: The Origins ofJudicialReview: A Plea for New Contexts, 49 STAN. L. REV. 1031, 1054-56 (1997) (stating that there is general agreement that 181h Century brought dramatic upsurge in impulse to legislate). See generallySteven Calabresi & Joan L. Larsen, One Person, One Office: Separation of Powers or Separation of Personnel?, 79 CORNELL L. REV. 1045, 1128 (1994) (noting that between Revolution and drafting Federal Constitution, several state courts had made tentative moves toward asserting power of judicial review over legislation); William N. Eskridge, Jr., All About Words: Early Understandings of the "JudicialPower" in StatutoryInterpretation,1776-1806, 101 COLUM. L. REV. 990, 993 (2001) (addressing how distrust of legislative bodies caused receptive opinions towards judicial review and equitable construction of statutes to protect liberty); Rodolphe J.A. de Seife, The King is Dead! The Court-CreatedAmerican Concept of Immunity: The Negation ofEquality and Accountability underLaw,24 HOFSTRA L. REV. 981, 1067 n.18 (1996) (discussing birth of American concept of judicial review when attempt was made to rule act of Parliament unconstitutional). 65 Cf Peter Raven-Hansen & William C. Banks, Pulling the Purse Strings of the Commander in Chief, 80 VA. L. REV. 833, 896 (1994) (noting English precedent as relevant because with comparatively less power than Congress, English Commonshad successfully deployed power of purse as device to curb dictatorial tendencies of their monarchs); Joshua Sarnoff, CooperativeFederalism, the Delegation ofFederalPower,and the Constitution, 39 ARIZ. L. REV. 205, 281 n.100 (1997) (stating that United States rejected English concept of Parliamentary sovereignty thus creating American legislative sovereignty in way more closely analogous to corporate charters and subjecting it to concept that government was "bounded by terms of delegation" of power derived from consent of governed). See generally DAVID LIEBERMAN, THE PROVINCE OF LEGISLATION DETERMINED: LEGAL THEORY IN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY BRITAIN 124 (Cambridge Univ. Press 1989) (stating that this conception of common law appears also to have informed Chief Justice often critical attitude to Parliament Legislation); Nestor M. Davidson, ConstitutionalMass Torts: Sovereign Immunity and the Human Radiation Experiments, 96 COLUM. L. REV. 1203, 1251 n.72 (1996) (fmdint that "the Constitution reflected a conscious decision to reject English conception of sovereignty as King-in-Parliament, and was instead modeled on the corporate examples of the early colonial compacts and state constitutions.").
The same forces were at work in post-Revolutionary America, when many came to perceive the advantages of a knowledgeable and professionally-trained judiciary in bringing order and stability to the republican experiment in government that at times threatened to careen out of control. Madison, for example, recognized more quickly than anyone else that the turbulent, faction-ridden, interested politics that characterized the state legislatures was ill-suited to the task of making good laws. Although he never conceived of and never fully endorsed the concept of judicial review, Madison did envision an enlarged role for the judiciary in helping to ensure that popular government would also be stable and just. He preferred to have wise and good laws framed at the outset by associating the judiciary with the executive as a "council of revision" over pending legislation. In this way the judiciary would give the legislature "valuable in preserving a consistency, conciseness, assistance... perspicuity [and] technical propriety in the laws" and would provide "an additional check" against "unwise [and] unjust legislation." 66 Even without judicial review, it is clear that American judges, like their English counterparts, would play a significant role in controlling legislative excesses and abuses simply by exercising their ordinary adjudicative power or possibly by having a role in the legislative process itself. to assimilated discretion was In America, judicial republicanism, contrary to what Thomas Jefferson, the great republican revolutionary and lawgiver, had in mind in Jefferson, who formulating his reform plans for Virginia. detested Lord Mansfield to the same degree that Marshall admired him, believed that it was possible to maintain a system of laws founded in reason and equity without resorting to judicial discretion. He proposed a comprehensive reform that aimed not only to purge the laws of all monarchical features but also to He reduce much of common law and equity to statute. envisioned a code of laws "adopted to our republican form of government . . . with a single eye to reason, and the good of those for whose government it was framed." This republican code would be rational, clearly understood, and easily applied. Deeply 66 2 THE RECORDS OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787 74 (Max Farrand ed., Yale Univ. Press 1966) (1918) (quoting James Madison's Speech at Federal Convention (July 21, 1787)).
JOHNMARSHALL THEFORMATIONOFA JURIST
distrustful of discretionary judicial power, Jefferson frankly admitted that his goal was to confine judges to the strict letter of the law. "Let mercy be the character of the law-giver," he wrote in 1776, "but let the judge be a mere machine. The mercies of the law will be dispensed equally and impartially to every description of men; those of the judge, or of the executive power will be the eccentric impulses of whimsical, capricious designing man."
But the Virginia legislature, as Madison and Marshall soon discovered, confounded Jefferson's hopes. His vision of a republican political order with a system of laws founded on precise legislative enactment, to be mechanically applied by judges bound by the strict letter of the law, never materialized. Because of confusing, contradictory, and most disturbingly, a growing number of unjust laws enacted by the legislature, judicial discretion became even more necessary than it had been under the colonial regime. To the traditional task of applying English common law and equity was added that of construing the positive laws of the commonwealth. Each year brought a harvest of new laws requiring ever increasing adjudications. Virginians got used to the idea that their courts were necessary to prevent or ameliorate mischiefs arising from the laws. The emerging distinction between "legislative will" and "justice," the growing perception that statutory law was not necessarily reasonable and just, became the foundation of a conception of judicial independence and discretion that was consistent with the republican belief in popular sovereignty. Virginians came to accept the notion, which their judges consciously fostered, that judicial discretion in the interpretation of laws was not the exercise of the arbitrary and capricious will of the judge, but in the deepest sense, giving effect to the will of the law. With the disparagement of legislative power, a consequence of the volatile politics of the 1780's, the assemblies lost their status as the sole repositories of the people's will. At the same time there was a corresponding enhancement of both executive and judicial power. In brief, there was a redefinition of the separation of powers, in which executives and judges, even though unelected, gained a 67 1 THE PAPERS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON 505 (Julian P. Boyd ed., Princeton Univ. Press 1950) (quoting letter from Thomas Jefferson to Edmund Pendleton (Aug. 26, 1776)).
kind of equivalent standing with legislators as representatives or agents of the sovereign people. As a lawyer in post-Revolutionary Virginia, Marshall was directly exposed to this transformation of the judiciary, to this renewed flourishing of judicial discretion, which was increasingly accepted not only as compatible with republican government but as necessary to its preservation.6 8 As a practitioner in the courts of Edmund Pendleton, president of the Court of Appeals, and of George Wythe, chancellor of the High Court of Chancery, Marshall was enrolled in the best of schools for judges. The most important lesson these eminent jurists imparted to the future chief justice was that judges in the ordinary course of deciding cases had broad discretion to determine what the law was, compelled as they were to choose from a variety of sources: English common law, Parliamentary statutes, acts of colonial and state legislatures, and a growing body of state common law emerging from adjudicated cases in the state courts. The opinions and decrees of Pendleton and Wythe breathed a spirit of vigorous independence, even in the most mundane cases, and furnished lawyer Marshall with countless practical lessons in judging. The routine function of applying the common law frequently involved the exercise of discretion in cases that called for adjusting the law to fit Virginia circumstances, in cases that depended on the construction of a testator's will, and in cases that hinged on the explication of a statute. No judge better epitomized the independent-minded jurist than did Chancellor Wythe. Whether upholding the rights of British creditors or interpreting the will of a Quaker to give the broadest possible scope to the testator's intention of manumitting his slaves, Wythe was fearless in the performance of his duty of meting out discretionary justice. 69 68 See generally HOBSON, supra note 5, at 39-46; Calabresi & Larsen, supra note 64, at 1128 (stating that between Revolution and drafting of Federal Constitution, several state courts had made tentative moves toward assertion of power of judicial review over legislation); Martin S. Flaherty, History "Lite"ii n Modern American Constitutionaism,95 COLUM. L. REV. 523, 571 (1995) (noting judicial review, too, would safeguard deliberation by protecting considered judgments of populace, embodied in constitutional law, against transitory, ill-considered actions of public officials); John C. Yoo, The Continuation of Politicsby Other Means: The Original Understandingof War Powers, 84 CALIF. L. REV. 167, 195 (quoting Marshall's dictum, stated years later, whereby he asserted, "It is, emphatically, the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."). 69 See generally Paul D. Carrington, Butterfly Effects: The Possibilities of Law Teaching in a Democracy, 1991 DUKE L.J. 741, 768 (1992) (keeping with Revolutionary
JOHN MARSHALL: THE FORMA TION OFA JURIST
But the instruction of Pendleton and Wythe extended further to embrace the role of law and courts in the larger scheme of republican government. In Virginia, the concept of an independent judiciary took root quickly and flourished in congenial soil. As early as 1782, the Virginia Court of Appeals heard a case involving a seeming conflict between the state constitution and a statute concerning treason. Although in this instance the judges were able to reconcile law and constitution, the occasion brought forth an eloquent statement from Chancellor Wythe on the duty of a judge "to point to the constitution" and say to an overreaching legislature, "Here is the limit of your authority; and hither, shall you go, but no further."70 Wythe's dicta revealed how fully he had moved beyond a narrow conception of judicial duty to embrace the idea of the judiciary as an impartial umpire between government and citizen and between different departments of government. 7 1 In 1788, the Court of Appeals publicly protested against an act that would have required them to ride circuit, claiming that it assigned new duties without a commensurate increase in pay and thus undermined the principle of judicial independence.7 2 Again, a crisis was averted because the legislature repealed the offending law. This episode was a clear indication that Virginia judges regarded judicial independence as a constitutional principle that legislatures in drafting legislation affecting the judiciary were bound to respect. A few years later the legislature enacted a law giving common law district judges the power to issue injunctions and hear suits by injunction. This time the judges actually generation's thoughts of emancipating slaves, Wythe freed his slaves in 1782 when it became permissible in Virginia); Paul D. Carrington, Law and Chivalry: An Exhortation from the Spirit of the Hon. Hugh Henry Brackenridge of Pittsburgh (1748-1816), 53 U. PiTT. L. REV. 705, 737-38 (1992) (stating that according to Wythe and other law teachers of his generation, political studies ought to be great object with general youth of republic, not for sake of place or profit, but for sake of judging right and preserving constitution inviolate); A. Leon Higginbotham et al., DeJuree Housing Segregation in the United States and South Africa, 1990 U. ILL. L. REV. 763, 877 n.585 (1990) (noting that although Virginia Supreme Court held otherwise, Chancellor George Wythe declared in lower court decision in pre-Civil War case of Hudgins v. Wrights, 11 Va. 134 (1806) that when one person claimed to hold another in slavery, burden of proof always lay on claimant). 70 Commonwealth v. Caton, 8 Va. 5, 8 (1782). 71 See id. at 17 (describing government divided into three branches with each assigned its proper power and directing each to be kept separate and distinct). 72 See Case of the Judges of Court of Appeals, 1788 Va. LEXIS 3, 8 (1788) (contending that it was contrary to Constitution to impose new duties to be preformed out of courts to which judges respectively belonged).
ST JOHN'SJOURNVAL OFLEGAL COMMENTARY
disallowed the law on the ground that it unconstitutionally conferred chancery jurisdiction on common law judges. This case, Kamper v. Hawkins,7 3 has some interesting parallels with the case of Marbury v. Madison74 decided years later. In both cases the laws brought under constitutional scrutiny were judiciary acts, and on both occasions the judges denied the additional jurisdiction conferred upon them by the legislature. Without question, this transformation of the judiciary in postRevolutionary America, the consequence of a largely successful campaign to persuade the American people that judicial discretion was an essential means of ensuring that republican 75 government would be "a government of laws, and not of men," was an indispensable prerequisite for the emergence of the doctrine that courts in deciding cases were empowered to void laws that infringed constitutions, what we today call "judicial review." 76 This is a large topic that I have deliberately avoided My and haven intention of entering into on this occasion. concluding point is simply this: We cannot begin to understand what judicial review meant to Marshall or to the framers generally without reference to this broader, and somewhat unexpected, development in which the judicial power became in fact, as well as theory, one of the three constituent powers of government.
3 Va. 20, 45 (Sup. Ct. 1788). 5 U.S. 137 (1803). Id.at 163. See id.
Police Problems - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Condemnation Proceedings - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Anticipatory Repudiation - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
CPLR 2201 - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Magna Carta - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Unfair Competition - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Common Carriers - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Implied Condition - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Thurgood Marshall - Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW
Canadian Abortion Law - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Religion, Morality, and Law - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository
Notary Law and Practice - The John Marshall Institutional Repository
The Lives of John Marshall - William & Mary Law School Scholarship
Parody in Trademark Law - The John Marshall Institutional Repository
Rethinking Miranda - The John Marshall Institutional Repository
Big Media - The John Marshall Institutional Repository
Space Entrepreneurs - The John Marshall Institutional Repository
Jurisprudence - The John Marshall Institutional Repository
FECA Matter - The John Marshall Institutional Repository
Secession - Duke Law Scholarship Repository
Report John Marshall - St. John's Law Scholarship Repository


text:
Astronaut John Young, flew twice to the moon, dead at 87
January 6, 2018 - by admin - Leave a Comment
Legendary American Astronaut, John Young was the ninth person to walk on the moon has died. In addition, Young also commandeered the first Space Shuttle Mission in April 1981. On Saturday afternoon, NASA confirmed the death in the twitter account. The cause, time, and place of his death are not clear.
We're saddened by the loss of astronaut John Young, who was 87. Young flew twice to the Moon, walked on its surface & flew the first Space Shuttle mission. He went to space six times in the Gemini, Apollo & Space Shuttle programs. pic.twitter.com/l4nSwUCMIq
— NASA (@NASA) January 6, 2018
In his 42 years career at NASA, he flew to space six times and became the first person to ever do so in 1983. In the mid-1960 's, Young flew twice for the Gemini mission. Once in 1965, He was aboard the first manned Gemini mission. And again in 1969, he orbited the moon on Apollo 10 mission. Later in 1972, Young walked on the lunar surface during the Apollo 16 mission became the ninth of 12 people to walk on the lunar surface. Young was appointed as Chief of the Space Shuttle Branch in 1973. In 1981, Young became the commander of STS-1, the maiden orbital flight of the Space Shuttle Program. Young was also in 1983 space mission which carried the first Spacelab.
Young retired from NASA in 2004. Young became the only person to fly on Gemini missions, Apollo and Space Shuttle programs. Young was born in 1930 in San Francisco and later joined the Navy in 1952. NASA selected John Young for the Gemini Program in 1962.
Featured Image: NASA
TaggedApolloAstronautGeminiMoonSpaceTrump
Zomato Originals, food centric shows joins the streaming age
Toys R Us reportedly closing all US and UK stores
Previous Article Sherlock is getting a female-led reboot set in modern-day Tokyo
Next Article Golden Globes 2018: The Complete Winners List

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Iron ore pellets, blast furnace grade, 63-65% fe, origin india and iran, qty 50, 000 - 150, 000 mt on a monthly basis.
iron pellet plant equipments supplier in india. iron ore pellet equipment manufacturers in uk . Iron Ore Pellet Plant, . MIDREX has been the leading innovator and technology supplier of iron ore . Get Price And Support Online; Skill Development Programme on Iron Ore Pellet .
NEW PROCESS FOR SINTERING CHROMITE CONCENTRATE WITH CONTINUOUS-STRAND . iron ore pellet equipment manufacturers in uk. sintered ball iron ore - Deze pagina vertalen. sintering and pelletizing of iron ore . Find 671 sintering of iron ore manufacturers, sintering of iron ore suppliers, sintering of iron ore producers.
· Used Iron Ore Pellet Plant Equipment In India Iron ore pelletizing Iron ore fines are agglomerated into . Pelletizing, Manufacturer, India – ballmill.co.in Pelletizer is a machine producing pellets of different raw materials.
Iron Ore Pellet Equipment Manufacturer In UK. It manufacturers iron ore pellets for iron It manufacturers iron ore pellets MIG was formed on demerger from the, equipment list for iron ore pellet plants in . Live Chat; iron ore mining equipment manufacturers in india.
iron ore pelletizing equipment manufacturers in canada, ... iron ore pelletizing equipment manufacturers in canada,- iron ore pellet equipment manufacturers in uk,Home»Applications»iron ore pelletizing equipment . Read More; second hand equipment for iron ore pelletizing.
This report focuses on the Iron Ore in global market, especially in North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East and Africa.


text:
Home » Yoho introduces bill targeting foreign sugar subsidies
Yoho introduces bill targeting foreign sugar subsidies
03/03/15 2:06 PM By Agri-Pulse staff
WASHINGTON, March 3, 2015- Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla., reintroduced a bill Friday that encourages the administration to target foreign sugar subsidies. Under the "Zero-for-Zero" plan, U.S. sugar policy would also be rolled back in exchange for the elimination of foreign programs, which Yoho says are distorting world prices and inhibiting a free market.
Members of the American Sugar Alliance (ASA) praised Yoho and the eight original co-sponsors of H.Con.Res. 20. ASA chairwoman Carolyn Cheney said Yoho's proposal is an alternative to other proposals in Congress to change the U.S. sugar program by eliminating the U.S. tariff-rate quotas that limit sugar imports.
"Weakening U.S. policy in a vacuum punishes efficient U.S. producers, jeopardizes U.S. jobs, and doesn't build a freer market," she said. "That approach only makes market conditions more volatile by rewarding the world's worst subsidizers, but Yoho's approach gets all countries at the table and all policies on the table so that real market reforms can be made simultaneously."
Moran introduces bill to stop animal testing for cosmetics
Senate deflects farm bill amendments targeting renewable energy
Sen. Reid re-introduces previous Senate farm bill
[Do you find the information on Agri-Pulse helpful? See even more ag and rural policy news when you sign up for a four-week FREE trial Agri-Pulse subscription.]
The resolution specifically mentions subsidies in Brazil, Thailand, India, and Mexico. Increased subsidization by those countries since 2013 – including new export subsidies and debt forgiveness in India and bailouts for Brazil's sugarcane ethanol industry – have sent global prices well below world average production costs, according to ASA.
Co-sponsors of the Zero-for-Zero policy include Reps. Lois Frankel, D-Fla.; Alcee Hastings, D-Fla.; Richard Hudson, R-N.C.; Ted Poe, R-Texas; Tom Rooney, R-Fla.; Kurt Schrader, D-Ore.; Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, and Frederica Wilson, D-Fla.
For more news, go to www.agri-pulse.com


text:
Ramilyn
Ramilyn considers herself a pure mixture. Usually described as pretty, flexible and stubborn, she's the kind of person who accepts mistakes and tries to learn from them, who admits "I don't know" but says "I want to know". She thinks she doesn't know much about many things in life but is willing and interested to know and learn them. She has an open-minded curiosity, a character that she would like to get fully filled.
She is a Filipina, married to an Indian and living in and around the Himalayas since 2011.
She describes herself as a simple girl who feels most happy and free among meadows and streams, who can live without the city lights but not without the lights of stars, for whom the trees and the birds and their very flowers and feathers are like her own home and family. She is a lover of nature, its protector and appreciator.
The words atheist, vegan, and childfree pretty much sum up who she really is.
Some of her interests include Nature & Wildlife; Photography; Scrabble; Movies; Music; Trekking; Blogging. She has recently launched a writing community website along with another writer where she had written a few flash fiction/short stories and poems. She aspires to become a published author one day.
Considering she calls herself a pure mixture, she writes just about anything, whatever comes into her mind. Monotony equals boring to her so she needs variations.
She recommends Hubpages to everyone who wishes to showcase their writing skills and share ideas that the world needs.
Vegan Tofu, Mushroom, and Broccoli Fried Rice
By Ramilyn Nov 19, 2022 11:08 AM EST
Vegan Mango Ice Cream (With Homemade Coconut Cream)
By Ramilyn Dec 2, 2022 3:34 PM EST


Farmer deaths in Yavatmal, Akola, Amarwati and Nagpur brought the issue of pesticide management to the fore for a short while, but the unsafe use of pesticides continues unabated.
Yavatmal (Maharashtra): Almost two years after witnessing more than 40 deaths caused by hazardous pesticide spray, farmers of Yavatmal in Maharashtra still live under the constant threat of exposure to toxicity.
Neither do they have any clue of safety guidelines, nor do they have protective gear to protect themselves from the deadly chemicals. Moreover, they are wholly dependent on shopkeepers and retailers for aid and advice while purchasing the pesticide for their crops. Despite this, both the Congress and the ruling BJP, while making lofty promises to improve the condition of farmers, have failed to pass a legislation in Parliament which could have made the farmers' life a little easier.
"In 2017, when 40 farmers died and more than a thousand fell sick due to pesticide spray (in the Vidarbha region), it was a wakeup call for all of us," says 51-year-old Mohan Jadhav, a farmer from Shioni in Yavatmal.
According to him, most of the small farmers used to spray the pesticide in their fields themselves for years, but it's for the first time they saw the "deadly effect" of the chemical spray on such a large scale. "Now most of the farmers employ poor labourers to this 'risky job'. Anyone who can afford to pay someone else, doesn't spray the pesticide himself. Who would like to risk his or her life," Jadhav told News18.
Bandu Sonule, an agriculture labourer in Manoli village of Yavatmal, was one of the victims of the 2017 pesticide poisoning. He was the sole bread-winner for his family. Bandu's wife Geeta has gone back to her parents for support where she is waiting for her children to grow up and stand on their feet.
Bandu Chandra Bhan Sonule of Yavatmal died due to hazardous exposure to pesticide spray. His family is struggling to survive now.
Incidents of death and illness in Yavatmal, Akola, Amarwati and Nagpur brought the issue of pesticide management to the fore for a short while, but the unsafe use of pesticides has been killing farmers for years across the country.
Besides the lack of awareness, "gross negligence" in pesticide management in the country is also a problem. "Every year, there are about 10,000 reported cases of pesticide poisoning in India," says Chandra Bhushan, deputy director general, CSE.
"The Ministry of Agriculture at the Centre and agricultural departments of the states are solely responsible for the unsafe use of pesticides in the country. Deaths and illnesses due to pesticides can be avoided if we can urgently fix some of the crucial gaps in our regulations and improve its enforcement," he says.
Experts say a strong law could have plugged the loopholes of registration, market authorisation, distribution, surveillance, prohibition and monitoring of pesticide residue in the crop, but India is still governed by a more than 50-year-old law, the Insecticides Act 1968, which is rather weak and outdated, and does not address these issues effectively.
A fresh bill was conceived in 2008 during UPA-I. This new bill was supposed to replace the 1968 Act, but it was not even introduced in Parliament and lapsed later. Another effort was made in 2017, but the bill was just introduced in Lok Sabha and couldn't go beyond that. This bill was criticised by several quarters as it does not address the intricate linkage between farming, environment and human health.
"We have been asking, and continue to demand for a statute that can regulate pesticides rigorously, given the various harmful effects from synthetic pesticides. Such a statute should also empower state governments to take prohibitory decisions at their own level, in addition to being embedded in latest post-modern science of pest management," says Kavitha Kuruganti, who is associated with Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA), a nation-wide alliance of organisations working to improve farm livelihoods.
At a time when leaders from all political parties are covering the length and breadth of the nation, promising farmers all kind of relief, the nexus between marketing agents of pesticide companies and retailers remains a big problem which needs to be addressed immediately and effectively.
"Farmers are helpless as they do not have any choice. Often the shopkeepers sell any pesticide just to clear the pending stock with them. Poor farmers can't refuse because they purchase it on credit," says 49-year-old farmer Moreshwar Watile who lives in Manoli village, in the Ghatanji Tehsil of Yavatmal.
This is one of the biggest problems where the shopkeeper or retailer becomes the advisor of the farmer. This is an obvious conflict of interest as well.
"Farmers are heavily influenced by the last man in contact. Often, the agriculture extension machinery fails to reach to that level to advise the farmer or effectively address the issue of what kind of pesticides should be used and how it should be used to avoid toxic exposure to the farmer as well as minimise chronic effects to the consumer," says Amit Khurana, programme director for food safety and toxins at CSE.
"Due to this gap created, the dealers or company representatives get the chance to influence the actual usage of pesticides by the farmers. This is not appropriate and should not be allowed to happen," he adds.
One of the foremost concerns remains the fact that extremely dangerous Class-1 pesticides like Monochrotophousand OxydemetonMethyl are still in use in India, although they have been banned by several countries. For instance, Monochrotophous is banned by more than 60 countries across the world, including Sri Lanka for more than 10 years now. Class-1 pesticides are declared extremely hazardous by the World Health Organisation (WHO).
"Not much has changed. Farmers were exposed to this danger even 30 years ago. No government provided them any protection from such toxic exposure. Several farmers have now shifted the threat to poor labourers to spray toxic pesticides without any protection. The hope lies only if we shift to a model of less pesticide or no pesticide farming and to do that our political class will have to show a resolve," says Devinder Sharma, agriculture policy expert who has been working on the farm issues for three decades now.


text:
Lithuania Appeals to EU as China Feud Expands to Trade Dispute
Milda Seputyte
8:47 PM IST, 03 Dec 2021 7:28 AM IST, 06 Dec 2021 8:47 PM IST, 03 Dec 2021 7:28 AM IST, 06 Dec 2021
(Bloomberg) -- Lithuania's dispute with China escalated after local media reported that goods from some of its companies were barred from entering Chinese ports.
Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis described the move as "unannounced sanctions" on Friday and said Lithuania will seek assistance from the European Commission next week to solve the issue. It's "unprecedented when one EU member state is being partially sanctioned," he said.
Local media reported that some of the Baltic nation's forestry and furniture goods are being held up at ports after Lithuania was deleted from China's electronic customs declarations system from Dec. 1. Lithuania hasn't received any official comment on the matter from China.
The European Commission said it's in contact with Lithuania and the EU's delegation in Beijing to verify the information.
"We've been informed that Lithuanian shipments are not being cleared through Chinese customs and import applications are being rejected," said Nabila Massrali, a Commission spokesperson.
Less than 1% of Lithuania's exports go to China and the decision should have "no fundamental impact" on its economy, Finance Minister Gintare Skaiste said.
Tensions between China and Lithuania have been escalating since Taiwan opened a representative office in the Baltic nation's capital last month, something Beijing deems disrespectful to Chinese sovereignty.
China recalled its ambassador and downgraded ties with Lithuania to the level of charge d'affaires. Lithuania says it respects the "one-China" principle.
Follow All The Political News In India On BloombergQuint


[ANN] Rails 4.2.1.rc2 and 4.1.10.rc2 have been released!
I am happy to announce that Rails 4.2.1.rc2 and 4.1.10.rc2 have been released.
If no regressions are found expect the final release this Monday, on March 2, 2015. If you find one, please open an issue on GitHub and mention me (@rafaelfranca) on it, so that we can fix it before the final release.
If you'd like to verify that your gem is the same as the one I've uploaded, please use these SHA-1 hashes.


text:
Economic Development: March 2013
Christy Simo,
High-Tech Jobs: General Motors is opening a 228,000-square-foot IT Innovation Center in Roswell, hiring 1,000 high-tech employees over the next three to five years such as software de-velopers, database experts and business analysts. This is the third such facility for the company in the U.S.
Growing Tall: A new study by Georgia Tech and the Georgia Forestry Commission reports that economic activity generated by the forestry industry topped $25 billion in 2011 and provided 118,459 jobs.
More Auto: Mando Corp. is adding a new 317,000-square-foot casting facility in Meriwether County. The $80-million facility, which will support the manufacture and assembly of the company's new line of energy-efficient automotive parts, will create an anticipated 660 jobs by 2020.
Consolidation: As part of corporate restructuring, Palo Alto, Calif.-based Hewlett-Packard Co. is adding 200 jobs to its Alpharetta campus, which currently employs more than 850. The company is consolidating its customer support staff from various global locations to Alpha-retta. The new jobs will be added by the end of Octob-er 2013.
ICU Improvements: Piedmont Healthcare is investing in its Buckhead hospital's intensive care unit. The $9-million project will include renovation of existing space and the addition of 11,000 square feet, along with 18 private rooms and 50 new nursing jobs.
Assisted Living: Wood-stock is getting a new 28,000-square-foot Alz-heimer's and memory care assisted living center. The $10-million project, called Autumn Leaves of Towne Lake, will employ 45. It is scheduled to open by the end of the year.
Closure: Conifer Health Solutions has announced it is closing its Alpharetta call center this spring, laying off nearly 90 people. The move is part of a corporate consolidation by the Frisco, Texas-based healthcare billing outsourcing company.
Biotech Growth: Ken-nesaw-based MiMedx Group is expanding its manufacturing capacity, adding more than 100 jobs. The biotech company develops and man-ufactures regenerative biomaterials and bioimplants for use in areas such as wound care and burn healing.
Power Plant: Dublin-based Green Power Solu-tions is constructing a power plant in Laurens County, employing 35 and supporting an additional 200 jobs in the forest industry. The biomass-fueled plant, which should come online in 2015, represents an initial capital investment of $95 million and is the result of a collaboration between Beasley Forestry Products and Land Care Services.
Categories: Economic Development Around The State, Economic Development Features


Light On Light Through: More Darkside of Digg: Is There A Digg Blacklist?
More Darkside of Digg: Is There A Digg Blacklist?
My colleague iPhonematters columnist Tanner Godarzi has posted a disturbing piece over on Tech Blot, inquiring if Digg has a "Secret, Highly Aggressive and Fatal Content Filter Machine".
Maybe not coincidentally: I noticed the post on Digg this morning. I read it, found it plausible, even likely. And now, back after an afternoon as Chair of the Department of Communication and Media Studies, I see that ... the post has been buried on Digg already. Buried, even though it has over 70 Diggs!
Which makes me think Godarzi's hypothesis is even more likely true.
I've already written about the Digg bury brigades, who seem to get their kicks by making sure as many stories as they can get to don't make it to Popularity on Digg. I've certainly seen many stories about Ron Paul - including a few (but not all) of my own - suffer this fate. They get 20, 30, 40, 50 Diggs in a short period of time, only to be Buried.
Until now, I thought this was result of hyperactive buriers - anti-Ron Paul and other people who don't like open, democratic flows of information.
But Godarzi is suggesting something much more sinister and destructive. He believes Digg may have a blacklist of urls which are given very short leashes - just a few hours (unlike the 24 hours or more for other stories), after which they are automatically Buried, unless they have achieved Popularity.
I hope Digg will shed some light on this blacklist.


text:
Q: Can't read char from keyboard I'm having trouble reading a char from my user.
The program I am trying to develop is a bank manager simulator where the user has multiple actions he can perform.
Problem is, after first reading from the user, the program seems to "skip" the fgets() line.
Here is the code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include "myBank.h"

int main(void){
  printf("Welcome to our bank!\n");
  char action[1];
  while (1)
  {

    //action = ' ';
    printf("\nHere is a list of actions you can preform:\n");
    printf("O\t Open a new account\n");
    printf("B\t Check balance\n");
    printf("D\t Make a deposit\n");
    printf("W\t Make a withdrawl\n");
    printf("C\t Close your account\n");
    printf("I\t Add interest to all accounts\n");
    printf("P\t Get info of all accounts\n");
    printf("E\t Close all accounts and end this program\n");

    fgets(action, 2, stdin);

    switch (action[0]) {
           case 'O':
               openAccount(); break;
           case 'B':
               checkBalance(); break;
           case 'D':
               deposit(); break;
           case 'W':
               withdraw(); break;
           case 'C':
               closeAccount(); break;
           case 'I':
               interest(); break;
           case 'P':
               print(); break;
           case 'E':
               end();
           default:
               printf("Invalid action was entered\n"); break;
    }
  }
  return 0;
}

Originally I used scanf() instead but it caused the same issue.
Here is my input and output:
Welcome to our bank!

Here is a list of actions you can preform:
O    Open a new account
B    Check balance
D    Make a deposit
W    Make a withdrawl
C    Close your account
I    Add interest to all accounts
P    Get info of all accounts
E    Close all accounts and end this program
O
How much would you like to deposit?
f
Wrong input!

Here is a list of actions you can preform:
O    Open a new account
B    Check balance
D    Make a deposit
W    Make a withdrawl
C    Close your account
I    Add interest to all accounts
P    Get info of all accounts
E    Close all accounts and end this program
Invalid action was entered

Here is a list of actions you can preform:
O    Open a new account
B    Check balance
D    Make a deposit
W    Make a withdrawl
C    Close your account
I    Add interest to all accounts
P    Get info of all accounts
E    Close all accounts and end this program
Invalid action was entered

Here is a list of actions you can perform:
O    Open a new account
B    Check balance
D    Make a deposit
W    Make a withdrawal
C    Close your account
I    Add interest to all accounts
P    Get info of all accounts
E    Close all accounts and end this program

What I did was open a new account and enter a wrong input (char instead of int).
openAccount took care of the wrong input and returned to main but instead of showing the menu one more time, it shows it three more times.
Any help?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
HomeBat Out of Hell – The Musical, Dominion Theatre, London 2018
Bat Out of Hell – The Musical, Dominion Theatre, London 2018
April 4, 2018 April 3, 2018 nicknicklambert Theatre review1970s, Bat Out Of Hell, Dominion, Jim Steinman, London, Meatloaf, music, musical, rock, show, theatre, Tourist London, west end
Bat Out Of Hell – The Musical is a full-on, no holds barred show. It is not afraid to take risks, it is prepared to appear ridiculous and one has to admire that bravery. Sometimes these bets pay off and there are moments of stupendous, over-the-top brilliance. Most of these come in the songs that are on the Bat out of Hell album, when the spectacle and choreography seem to step up a gear. The original LP was about forty minutes long and this show runs a little under three hours including the interval.
All the tracks from 1977 are done well, and some of Jim Steinman's other early songs fit in well. Surprisingly "It's all coming back to me now" made famous by Celine Dion is a real highlight. However some of the other songs are saccharine, subpar Disney, teenage angst repackaged for the late middle aged.
The storyline is poor, difficult to follow and uninventive. The characters are all two dimensional, composite caricatures. Despite this, some of the performances are outstanding. Andrew Polec has the perfect rock bearing as Strat. Christina Bennington, who plays Raven, has a lovely voice and can act well, a more traditional musical might suit her talents better, I'd love to see her sing Sondheim. Rob Fowler is outstanding as Falco; a camp, overblown baddie – who can really sing. Perhaps it's true that the devil has all the best tunes. Danielle Steers steals the show as Zahara, she has an amazing rock voice and rock attitude, she commands the stage whenever she sings.
The set is excellent, the huge stage at the Dominion allowing it to be up to four different areas, all at the same time. The special effects are among the best I have ever seen in a stage musical, although I suspect that those who sit in the front few rows miss parts of the show because of the amount of dry ice rolling off the front of the stage. The choreography is mostly wonderful, especially in the big set pieces and the songs that end each half ensure that you leave the auditorium on a high.
The audience adored it. The cheering began when the first backing singer arrived on stage, even before the start of the show and there was an instant standing ovation at the end. I can understand why it is such a hit wherever it goes, it is a big overblown, melodramatic rock opera and it does that wonderfully well. I think it could have been even better if it cut the emotionally manipulative ballads and ran maybe an hour shorter.
← Young Frankenstein, Garrick Theatre, London, 2018
Lady Windermere's Fan, Vaudeville Theatre, London 2018 →
5 thoughts on "Bat Out of Hell – The Musical, Dominion Theatre, London 2018"
I am glad you are back reviewing theatre, Nick. I have missed your scenic reviews. The balanced way you explore all aspects of this show, the theatre, the songs, the audience, the seating, make your opinion even more rewarding. Great review. One for the list.
nicknicklambert says:
Thank you for the kind words, Mr K!
hitandrun1964 says:
I want to see this SO bad!!! Maybe they will come to Chicago:) Sounds fabulous…all that energy.
I expect it will go to Chicago. It has been in Toronto, with the same cast, during the months it has been away from London. It finishes here again at the end of May. You are certainly right, it is full of energy!
The 10 Best Shows to book in London this December. | The London Lark! says:
[…] list is obviously based on personal taste too. People who love Bat Out Of Hell, seem to really adore it and return regularly, although I have to say that I found the new songs […]


As an Amazon Associate, I earn a small amount of commission when you click through one of the links on this page and make a purchase. This income is used to keep this blog running. See my disclosure for more information.
I don't know what it is, but these past few weeks I have procrastinated so badly, that when I looked at my calendar this morning, I couldn't believe Thursday was already Valentine's Day. Since I still haven't bought Michael anything, I decided to do my last-minute Valentine's Day shopping online and shipped free to my door with Amazon Prime.
Since Amazon Prime literally has everything anyway, I figure Michael will never know I waited until last minute to buy him his gift (sorry babe if you're reading this right now). If you're looking for a great last minute Valentine's Day gift for him, check out my favorite Amazon Prime finds below.
, just cancel before the 30-day trial ends and you won't be charged.
A Complete List of Apps That Give You Free Stuff Just for Signing Up!


All three Workforce Connectors (North Plainfield Connector, South Plainfield Connector, and Whitestown Connector) will not operate on Labor Day, Monday, September 4. Normal operations will resume on Tuesday, September 5. Questions can be directed to CIRTA's office (317-327-7433) during normal business hours.


Welcome back to this week's countdown! If you missed the previous songs, you can go back and check them out. We were off to a great start yesterday. So, let's Return to the week ending February 28, 1987, and see if it continues to be just as good.
Understandibly, this is Europe's signature song. This is the epitome of '80s rock, complete with keyboards, guitar, soaring vocals, and big hair. But, Europe is so much more than this song. They have several other great songs (just on this album alone).
This is the umpteenth version of this song. And I still haven't heard a version I didn't like. This is a slow ballad version.
Time for some pop funk!
Another smash hit from the legendary Invisible Touch album.
I totally forgot about this one! I remembered it as soon as I heard it. This sounds like a Prince song.
Very underrated song by Cyndi from her True Colors album.
Thank you Family Ties! This 1981 tune got renewed interest and became a smash hit thanks to Alex P. Keaton and Ellen Reed slow dancing and ripping the hearts out of '80s kids.
Often imitated, but never duplicated, Exposé took the freestyle world by storm in the late '80s. This was the 3rd single released from their classic debut album Exposure.
Outstanding dance version of the 1972 Bill Withers classic. Club Nouveau's version hit number 1 for two weeks, and won a Grammy award in 1987 for Bill Withers, as the writer, for Best R&B Song.
I still love this worldwide smash hit from Starship. It was featured in the movie Mannequin. Yesterday, in my opening segment, I mentioned having a girlfriend at this time. We went to see Mannequin in the theater. However, we were in the back of the theater making out most of the time, so I have no idea what happened. I'll have to go check out that movie again.
That wraps up today's list of songs. So far I'm loving it this week! How about you? Come back tomorrow as we continue the countdown.


There's no scatters or free spins in this Reel Talent mobile slot, and yet it's got five stars – bear with us, we have really really good reasons.
When you are a high variance slot machine, it's hard to walk a fine line between giving you features that create big wins out of nowhere but still keep things exciting the rest of the time.
Games like Novmatic's Book of Ra just accept that you are going to need a little patience.
But this Reel Talent slot, surprisingly, doesn't test your patience as much as higher volatility slots can, thanks to those magical symbol collections and re-spins.
This Just For The Win slot (JFTW) doesn't have traditional free spin bonus games.
What it does have is a collect symbol feature. On every win on a single payline, you collect that symbol on the left of the reel.
If you don't manage to collect 3 symbols in one spin (or 3 wins), you get a re-spin to give you another chance.
Why do you want that to happen? Because you then get a superspin where the reels spin with only the symbols you've collected.
So if you get 3 wins with the same symbol, you get a guaranteed 5 of a kind win on all 20 paylines. Who doesn't love that idea?
JFTW have, in the past, gone a little generic with themes; think the Amazing Aztecs online slot taking you to South America or Temple of Tut game welcoming you to an ancient Egyptian tomb. OK, but no standouts.
Their best game has a hint of creative uniqueness that we love. Sure it's an animal safari slot, but you've got singing lions, rocking wolves, fire-breathing crocodile and magical bunnies.
Think America's Got Talent but in the wild. It's fun, it's quirky and it connects nicely with the main Superspin feature.
This Reel Talent slot game can be a little frustrating sometimes; certainly. It might not test your patience, but it might have you grinding your teeth at times.
Yet, the thrill of watching those symbols collect on the size of the reels is wonderfully different and we hope to see more JFTW casino games like this in the future.
Wild: The "Wild" symbol is wild and will replace all other symbols in order to create a win on an active payline.
Symbol Storage: When you get a win with a symbol on one payline, that symbol will be stored on the left-hand side.
When you get 3 wins on 3 paylines, whether in one spin or on consecutive spins or re-spins, you are awarded one superspin.
Respin: If there are still empty positions in the symbols storage after a win, you get one re-spin to try and catch more symbols in the symbol storage.
Superspin: When you collect 3 symbols in the symbol storage you get a superspin.
Three different symbols in the storage will give you a showtime spin, two symbols of the same and any other one symbol will trigger a showtime spin, and three symbols of the same type will trigger the solo performance.
What's the difference between them? Honestly the graphics.
But for good reason: on each stage, you have a chance to win a little more.
Because these Reel Talent superspins only spin the symbol that has been stored. And if you have a solo performance, you only have one symbol, meaning you are guaranteed a win.
We suspect that not everyone will agree with our 5 star Reel Talent slot review.
Mostly because if you like to play slots with more bonus features than you can count... go play on Hanzo's Dojo slot or something.
Because this mobile casino machine is for those of us who enjoy the simplicity of one big feature that keeps you on your toes.
Think the conjoined reels of Twin Spin slot or even the extra spinning wild reels in JFTW's own Rainbrew game.
So the collect symbol here gives us a fresh twist to the re-spins and superspins, that doesn't make you miss the more traditional free spins.
Who needs traditional when you have singing lions and streetwise bunnies?
Reel Talent is a 5 reel 3 row 20 payline slot with a symbol collect feature where 3 consecutive wins will give you a superspin when you get one spin with just those 3 symbols on the reels.


Did you go out of habit or because you actually wanted to be there, because you wanted to praise and worship God?
You may have had a great time at church this morning, been blessed and maybe challenged on how you life your life. But now that you have left the church, are you still living your life to the same values/standards?
Those who don't go to church or don't believe in God, only see God by how we live our lives. So while it's great that you go to church, let your life outside of church reflect all you learn and hear while you're at church.