Here's a quick summary of the Philips case (from my Patrick Henry: Champion
of Liberty p 331). -- which became the subject of confusion and inaccurate
memories etc early in June 1788 at the Virginia Convention.
[During the Revolutionary War], with initial encouragement from Governor
Dunmore, Josiah Philips of Princess Anne County, near Norfolk, had led a
band of “insurgents” and “evil-disposed persons” in a series of thefts,
murders, and “atrocious actions” that terrorized the southeastern corner of
Virginia during the early years of the revolutionary war.  Governor Henry
and his council offered a $250 reward in 1777 for the capture of Philips
and two lieutenants and later doubled the reward.  Early in 1778 the
assembly targeted Philips with a bill of attainder – a legislative act
inflicting punishment upon a person without a judicial trial. Prepared by
Thomas Jefferson, the bill of attainder declared Josiah Philips guilty of
“high treason,” sentenced him to “suffer the pains of death,” and declared
him an outlaw subject to being lawfully captured or killed by any person.
Once Philips was taken into custody, however, Henry, Jefferson, and
Attorney General Edmund Randolph consigned the prisoner to the General
Court, where Philips was convicted in a jury trial and then executed at the
gallows near Williamsburg on November 23, 1778.  In short, Josiah Philips
was hanged in accord with a judicial verdict not a legislative act of
attainder."

Back in 1776 both Mason's draft and the committee draft of the Virginia
Declaration of Rights had a clause proscribing in general terms certain
kinds of legislation - i.e,. it described without using the terms
themselves both ex post facto laws and bills of attainder.  Henry objected
(as I describe at p 231) and the clause was deleted from the final text of
the Virginia Declaration of Rights.   So strictly speaking, the 1778
decision to enact a bill of attainder did NOT contradict the Declaration of
Rights.

-- 
Jon Kukla
________________


On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 1:37 PM John RAGOSTA <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Both Kevin and Brent mention the bill of attainder case. This came up when
> Randolph used it as an excuse to attack Henry, but both Henry and Jefferson
> thought that this was not a particularly compelling case of a rights
> violation. I would be surprised if this was motivating Madison, but
> possible....
>
> Historian, Robert H. Smith International Center for Jefferson Studies at
> MonticelloFellow,Virginia Humanities
>
>
> > On February 19, 2019 at 12:12 PM "Tarter, Brent" <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The General Assembly's attempt to pass a bill of attainder against Josiah
> > Philips during the Revolutionary War came up in the Virginia Ratification
> > Convention in June 1788. More than a few people regarded it as
> > unconstitutional. Some of the debates, if memory serves me correctly,
> gave
> > inaccurate accounts of that episode.
> >
> > Brent Tarter
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:39 AM John RAGOSTA <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Among the things that Madison was referring to was the effort in
> 1784-85
> > > to adopt a General Assessment to support religion. While this was not
> > > finally adopted, a resolution was approved in the House of Delegates,
> and
> > > it was only defeated through extraordinary efforts by Madison,
> religious
> > > dissenters, and others. Madison would also likely have listed the
> > > incorporation of the Episcopal Church in the same period, but as I have
> > > discussed elsewhere, this was more complicated.
> > >
> > > John Ragosta
> > >
> > > Historian, Robert H. Smith International Center for Jefferson Studies
> at
> > > Monticello
> > > Fellow,Virginia Humanities
> > >
> > >
> > > > On February 19, 2019 at 10:38 AM Leslie Katz <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I've discovered that James Madison wrote in 1788 that the VA
> Declaration
> > > > of Rights had been "violated in every instance where it has been
> opposed
> > > > to a popular current." I've tried to find a discussion of the
> particular
> > > > instances that Madison had in mind when he made that statement, but
> > > > haven't been successful.
> > > >
> > > > I'd be grateful for any information as to such a discussion.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Leslie Katz
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Leslie Katz
> > > >
> > > > email: lesliek [at] mymts [dot] net
> > > >
> > > > Please visit http://ssrn.com/author=1164057 to find hyperlinks
> > > >
> > > > to papers that I’ve written on literary and legal topics
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________
> > > > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
> instructions
> > > at
> > > > http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
> > > >
> > > > This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of
> Museum
> > > and Library Services (IMLS).
> > >
> > > ______________________________________
> > > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
> instructions at
> > > http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
> > >
> > > This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum
> > > and Library Services (IMLS).
> > >
> >
> > ______________________________________
> > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
> at
> > http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
> >
> > This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum
> and Library Services (IMLS).
>
> ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
> This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum
> and Library Services (IMLS).
>

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).