The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 150

[240] 327 U.S. 146 (1946).

[241] Ibid. 158. Justice Frankfurter, while concurring, apparently thought that the question of Congress's power in the premises was not involved. Ibid. 159-160. On this broader question, _see_ p. 269. (The Postal Clause).

[242] 333 U.S. 178 (1948); Public Clearing House _v._ Coyne, 194 U.S.

497 (1904).

[243] Here it is recited in part: "That if we, our justiciary, our bailiffs, or any of our officers, shall in any circ.u.mstances have failed in the performance of them toward any person, or shall have broken through any of these articles of peace and security, and the offence be notified to four barons chosen out of the five-and-twenty before mentioned, the said four barons shall repair to us, or our justiciary, if we are out of the realm, and laying open the grievance, shall pet.i.tion to have it redressed without delay."

[244] 12 Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 98 ff, "Pet.i.tion, Right of" (New York, 1934).

[245] United States _v._ Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 552 (1876) reflects this older view.

[246] De Jonge _v._ Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364, 365 (1937). _See also_ Herndon _v._ Lowry, 301 U.S. 242 (1937).

[247] For the details of Adams' famous fight on "The Gag Rule," _see_ Andrew C. McLaughlin, A Const.i.tutional History of the United States, pp.

478-481, Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., New York (1935).

[248] Rules and Manual United States House of Representatives (1949), Eighty-first Congress, by Lewis Deschler, Parliamentarian, United States Government Printing Office, Was.h.i.+ngton (1949), pp. 430-433.

[249] United States _v._ Baltzer, Report of the Attorney General, 1918, p. 48.

[250] 92 U.S. 542 (1876).

[251] 16 Stat. 141 (1870).

[252] 92 U.S. 542, 552-553 (1876). At a later point in its opinion the Court used the following language: "Every republican government is in duty bound to protect all its citizens in the enjoyment of an equality of right. That duty was originally a.s.sumed by the States; and it still remains there. The only obligation resting upon the United States is to see that the States do not deny the right. This the Amendment guarantees, but no more. The power of the national government is limited to the enforcement of this guaranty." Ibid. 555. These words have reference, quite clearly, to counts of the indictment alleging acts of the conspirators denying "equal protection of the laws" "to persons of color," Congress's power to protect which is derived from Amendment XIV and is confined as the Court says, to protection against State acts. The above quoted words have, however, caused confusion. _See_ pp. 1176-1177.

[253] Hague _v._ C.I.O., 307 U.S. 496 (1939).

[254] 49 Stat. 449 (1935).

[255] 307 U.S. 496, 515-516 (1939).

[256] Ibid. 525.

[257] "As to the American Civil Liberties Union, which is a corporation, it cannot be said to be deprived of the civil rights of freedom of speech and of a.s.sembly, for the liberty guaranteed by the due process clause is the liberty of natural, not artificial, persons. Northwestern Nat. L. Ins. Co. _v._ Riggs, 203 U.S. 243, 255; Western Turf a.s.so. _v._ Greenberg, 204 U.S. 359, 363;" 307 U.S. 496, 527 (1939). _See also_ ibid. 514.

[258] 167 U.S. 43 (1897). This case was treated above, at p. 784.

[259] 314 U.S. 252 (1941).

[260] 323 U.S. 516 (1945).

[261] Auto Workers _v._ Wis. Board, 336 U.S. 245 (1949).

[262] Collins _v._ Hardyman, 341 U.S. 651 (1951); 17 Stat. 13, 8 U.S.C.

-- 47 (3).

[263] 341 U.S. 651, 663 (1951).

[264] 2 U.S.C. ---- 261-270. _See also:_ General Interim Report of the House Select Committee on Lobbying Activities, Eighty-First Congress, Second Session, created pursuant to H. Res. 298, October 20, 1950, United States Government Printing Office, Was.h.i.+ngton (1950): _see also_ 9 Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 567, "Lobbying."

[265] National a.s.sociation of Manufacturers _v._ McGrath, 103 F. Supp.

510 (1952). Upon review, the Supreme Court vacated this judgment as moot.--334 U.S. 804, 807.

[266] Rumely _v._ United States, 197 F. 2d 166, 174-175 (1952).

AMENDMENT 2

BEARING ARMS

Amendment 2

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

The protection afforded by this amendment prevents infringement by Congress of the right to bear arms for a lawful purpose, but does not apply to such infringement by private citizens. For this reason an indictment under the Enforcement Act of 1870,[1] charging a conspiracy to prevent Negroes from bearing arms for lawful purposes was held defective.[2] A State statute which forbids bodies of men to a.s.sociate together as military organizations, or to drill or parade with arms in cities and towns unless authorized by law, does not abridge the right of the people to keep and bear arms.[3] In the absence of evidence tending to show that possession or use of a shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length has some reasonable relations.h.i.+p to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, the Court refused to hold invalid a provision in the National Firearms Act[4] against the transportation of unregistered shotguns in interstate commerce.[5]

Notes

[1] 16 Stat. 140 (1870).

[2] United States _v._ Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 553 (1876).

[3] Presser _v._ Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886).

[4] 48 Stat. 1236 (1934).

[5] United States _v._ Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939).

AMENDMENT 3

QUARTERING SOLDIERS

Amendment 3

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

"This amendment seems to have been thought necessary. It does not appear to have been the subject of judicial exposition; and it is so thoroughly in accord with all our ideas, that further comment is unnecessary."[1]