In fairness to the remark which partially prompted my response, I described or
alluded to a position that the representatives of the several "states" and
"commonwealths" were not "members of Congress". In context, they were not
members of "the" Congress that resulted from the ratification of our
Constitution and forms our continuing "Congress" to this day -- and from which
we now wrestle with "their intentions". They were members of the Continental
Congress operating as a league under the Articles of Confederation wrestling
with forming an agreement that resulted in "the Congress", "the agreed upon law
of the land", and the "national unity". My intent of explanation being: the
point from which we wrestle with their "intent" begins after the ratification,
not before. Of course the "before" is a consideration but upon ratification it
has become "background" subservient to codification. Me thinks I grind the point
much too fine and I may be relying too heavily on my grade school recollections.
For my own ease of mind, I quote from Sol Bloom, page 44: "The conventions of
several States consented to ratify the Constitution only after they became
satisfied the Bill of Rights would be made a part of it." - Hence, in
determining civil law where the "preponderance of the evidence" determines the
outcome not "beyond a reasonable doubt" it would appear to me that an agreement
had been reached and that agreement was that the Bill of Rights were a part of
the "original" Constitution -- a most glorious, miracle in the "American
Experiment". Clearly, the first documented attempt to shield the individual from
the power and control of government (the popular) and not to shield the
"popular" from the individual. In this "experiment" it is well to remember that
the majority (the polls) does not rule, the law rules. Hence the struggle to
shape our courts: and to worry and fret over the terms, "strict interpretation"
and "living" constitution.

Just for fun: "If "we" were truly an intelligent people, well grounded and in
accord in and with what our Founders "intended", we would limit the federal
bureaucracy to minting coin and maintaining a navy; and do so from a place so
far removed in Kansas that even Dorothy couldn't find her way home to "Antee
Emm"!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Kukla" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 11:09 AM
Subject: Bill of Rights - grade school got it right


> I fully appreciate that the codification of the Constitution was a
> torturous,
> twisted, and "dicey" trail and tale. But I am of the opinion that its
> ratification would never have been achieved without the inclusion of the
> Bill of
> Rights -- the compromise that made our Constitution our guiding governing
> instrument.
> Anyway that what I learned in grade school.>

Good grade school. Yup its a big and complex story. In a nutshell: In
Delaware and other early-to-ratify states, the Constituion was adopted
promptly. From the Mass ratifying convention onward, however, the
pro-Constitution guys recognized that the people were demanding a bill of
rights. The nose-counts of pro- and anti- votes in convention were so
close that they came up with ratify-to-secure-the-Union and THEN
amend-as-needed argument.
   It worked in Mass, and after three weeks of debate in June 1788, by the
time Virginia's convention was ready for a final vote, the question
turned only on whether to insist upon amendments as a condition of
ratification or to ratify and then amend. Edmund Randolph, who had
refused to sign the document in Philadelphia, makes exactly this
argument in his first speech.
   Once the convention chose the latter, the anti-Federalists reigned
supreme in the General Assembly, and they sent two of their own to the
Senate - R H Lee and Wm Grayson - pointedly NOT James Madison. In fact,
Madison squeaked into the new House of Representatives only by
promising that he would push a bill of rights through Congress - a
promise on which he made good, but for which political pressure from
Henry, Mason, Grayson, Monroe and all Virginia's other anti-Federalists
was essential.



Dr. Jon Kukla, Executive Vice-President
Red Hill - The Patrick Henry National Memorial
1250 Red Hill Road
Brookneal, Virginia 24528
www.redhill.org

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


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/194 - Release Date: 12/7/2005



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/194 - Release Date: 12/7/2005

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