The first 10 amendments to the u. S. Constitution where ratified in 1791. More than four years after the constitution was drafted in philadelphia. Next, scholar linda monk discusses the ratification debate over the new constitution and the states demand for a bill of rights. The North Carolina museum of history hosted this event. This is about an hour. Good afternoon. I serve as the state archivist for North Carolina. On behalf of the sponsors for the program today, i want to welcome you cured tomorrow is the 225th ratification of the bill of rights. We thought there was no better way to celebrate the importance of the document than having the original copy out for a rare public display. The bill of rights is perhaps the guest treasure in the collections of the state archives, not just for what it represents, but because after eight 140 year absence, the document was returned to North Carolina things to the hard work of many federal and state Law Enforcement officers and lawyers, some of us some of whom may be in the audience today. I would like to recognize deputy general blum. Before introduce our speaker today, i would like to expend my deepest thanks to the museum of history for the continued partnership. Dont forget, immediately following the program today, the speaker will have her book available for sale in the gift hop and you can have your copy signed. Now it is my distinct honor to introduce todays speaker. Linda monk is an awardwinning author, journalist and constitutional scholar. A graduate of harvard law school, she has twice won the silver gavel award, the highest honor for Public Education about the law. She has been a visiting scholar at the National Constitution enter in philadelphia. She speaks frequently on legal and historical topics for groups such as the smithsonian, National Archives and the pentagon. Her book, the words we live by, was selected by the chief of staff for the air force for his reading list for all personnel. You can find her on he internet. To hear how North Carolina saved our constitution, please join me in welcoming linda onk. Ms. Monk it is such a pleasure to be here in such an honor on this auspicious occasion. I would like to start my presentation by dedicating it to my North Carolina ancestors. On my mothers side, richard trevelyan. He got married in salisbury. He served in the revolutionary war and ended up in spanish territory in mississippi, which is where my main family comes rom. On my fathers side, john monk. He was from what would become wake county. Im here with my proud lineage and ready to talk to you about a topic i have devoted my entire life two, our constitution and will of rights. When i first talked to sarah about this occasion probably almost two years ago, that is the kind of lead time you have to work with, she wasnt sure if we can get the copy of the ill of rights out in time. The North Carolina copy has been through a hard life. She will tell you more about that. When i was at the National Constitution center, i was following along with the mystery of how they were going to get it back, what the Constitution Center could do to help retain it. When i got here earlier, i went over to that copy that you will get to see in a bit, and spent some personal time with the bill of rights. You dont get to do this in d. C. The copy they have is in a vault, at a distance. When you see this one, it is up lose and personal. It does something for my heart, and i know you as fellow north carolinians are proud. Since i come from the southern storytelling tradition and we know this means we tell the truth, we always tell the truth, just maybe the big truth. The little truths, we will catch up on those. Some people, particularly those from other states, are going to say, what do you mean how North Carolina saved the constitution . They will take exception. Im going to lay out my argument to you in a little bit, just the summary, and then im going to go point by point. I hope the end you will agree with me. If you dont, come see he bill of rights copy anyway. North carolina was the only state that when the constitution was drafted, you know it goes to the states to be ratified or approved, and at that time there were 13 states in the union. North carolina is the only one that has a Ratification Convention, those were specially elected, it has the Ratification Convention and turns the constitution down. They say no. They were the state that said no. How does that mean that they saved the constitution . My premise that i will support with other kinds of documents is that if North Carolina had not said no, we would not have gotten the whole bill of rights added to the constitution that helped everybody say yes. My thesis is, whenever you have a naysayer in the group, listen first. They may help you with a solution to your problem. Here s my thesis. You know that hen the constitution was drafted in philadelphia in 1787, it took four months, hot, sweaty summer full of black flies, they kept the windows closed, wool suits, no airconditioning, a long, hot ummer. So you say, how, the framers forgot the bill of rights . Well, there are lots of reasons for that i will get to later, but the reality was that that becomes the biggest stumbling block. The question of the Ratification Convention becomes, here are the states trying to approve it, and they are saying, we want this bill of rights but you are telling s we need to go ahead in approve this constitution anyway without a bill of rights, and we should trust congress to do it first thing when they get there . There were a lot of naysayers who did not believe it, but North Carolina said no. Finally, when the bill of rights is completed, passed by congress, two thirds vote and goes to the states for ratification again, then North Carolina ratifies both at the same time. A promise kept, it sealed the deal. That was on november 21. Let us look back a little bit. How did North Carolina get to the estate where no was accountable thing to say . We have a long tradition, dont we . We have a long tradition of people who may be started out in virginia and felt they would have problems with the virginia authorities. We have a long tradition of what some people would call rabblerousers purity rabblerousers. I live in new bern right now, o i have been a witness to some of these things that got these early naysayers riled up, which was tryons palace. People were saying, these easterners are in cresting increasing our taxes to build hese sumptuous residences. That led to the Regulator Movement, with six people are heading hanged in hillsboro. Rumor this, when North Carolina has the convention to ratify the constitution the first time, where is it held . Hillsboro. Can you imagine, here might be some people, maybe relatives of the people who had been hanged just 17 years before, or who knew about the troubles . Remember that when we are getting to the ratification. Ne of the people involved in the Regulator Movement was a an named mr. Martin. Mr. Martin, he was beaten. He becomes a delicate to the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Lets look at some or these naysayers. My favorite, the eating 10 edenton tea party. This was a cartoon making fun f them. These welltodo adies had money at their disposal, in england this cartoon appears and you can see hat happened to the children when the women got politically ctive. There was a lechery going on. These are politically active women. One english wag says the only security on our site is the probability that there are but a few places in america which possess so much female artillery. You see someone from edenton, tell them you appreciate their emale artillery. And you have the first officially designated resolution to encourage ndependence. The first day to declare ndependence is virginia. North carolina gave them a little shove and virginia did not want to be behind North Carolina. They declared independence in june, and philadelphia is when the United Colonies declare independence. Lets look at what our constitution was before our current constitution, during this revolutionary time. People tend to forget that the constitution we live under today was our second constitution. That means when the framers talk about a more perfect union, they are talking about one that in many peoples minds had already failed. It is important to remember that. One of the things we say about the constitution when we talk about a more perfect union, we are saying up front that we failed. We are country that says, all right, failed, now what do we o . A lot of people at the time and not think it was a failure. It was under the form of government that these 13 United States defeated the most powerful military in the face of the planet. Lets look at some of their strengths. They defeated britain. The passed ordinances on how states would be governed. At that time, no slavery. Congress constitution had some major achievements. There was the league of friendship, nobody was really giving up much of anything. I like to think of them like a big family here it is virginia says, i want to have a big navy. Want to receive the first mbassador, no, i want to eceive the first ambassador. One of the main things, remember you have the army that is not getting paid essentially. The government has no power to tax, they can make a request to the states, please will you help pay for our army . The states are kind of like states today, there was a lot to contribute. When you leave your soldiers unpaid for too long, what happens . They will rebel. For those of you familiar with shays rebellion, it was in western massachusetts right before the Constitutional Convention. These soldiers have been unpaid for years, and in fact what happened was that their script, the ious were being sold on a speculative market that they might get a penny on a dollar right now for something that Congress Might pay who knows when. One of my good friends has discovered that Abigail Adams was speculating in those romissory notes. She did not wanted to get out, but there was a whole market where these veterans were not being paid and their farms were being foreclosed on. Who was foreclosing on the farms . The merchants and bankers. If it sounds like im antibanker, i am antiveterans being unpaid. The people in boston who didnt who tended to have these notes, it was kind of like North Carolina with there was a division between the eastern part of the state in the western part of the state. People in the frontier portion ere more poor. The people in the cities had more money. When the veterans go unpaid, they would lose their farms. The veterans seized the courthouse in western massachusetts and said, wait a minute, were not going to have given our lives and fortunes and honor for our country just to be repossessed and our families be thrown out. Eventually what happened is that the rebellion was put down, and i say rebellion just s a fact, not as a judgment. This is a time when the constitution, excuse me, the articles of confederation was being questioned. We have George Washington saying at the time, we have triumphed over our enemies to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves. Washington at the head of the army, at that time he is retired, but he was in mount vernon and he certainly understood more than anybody, england is not going to go away. They are just up in canada. They have the most powerful military. After the revolution, when George Washington laid down his commission, he did not just get to go off to disney world. He is aware that everything he worked for his contingent is contingent. We think about him as being our great leader, i think this is his greatest role. He puts down his military power and is involved in creating our constitution. Washington becomes the president. I told you what a miserable summer it was. We talk about what was at stake at the Constitutional Convention, this is what were talking about. Im hoping you all can read. We the people, do ordain phew. He first few words, we know, we the people of the united tates. The reason they did not list all of the states is because they did not knew who was going o ratify it. Richard burr kaiser believes that the United States, that was the true import of the constitution, but it goes from the people of the states to the people of a nation. As you can imagine, there were plenty of fights over that at the time. Patrick henry says, we the people, what do you mean . It should be we the states. James madison is saying, no, we have this National Federal government has a National Component in a state component. In the people who wind up being so supportive of this new National Government or the people who fought in the continental line and could not et paid. John marshall who becomes our great chief justice and upholds these national powers, he served with washington and he saw what it was like to try and keep an army together with congress refused to pay the soldiers. At the end of the Constitutional Convention, youve probably heard the story, how many of you of had a chance to go to what we call Independence Hall in philadelphia . This kind of looks familiar to you. Ou see the group there. That is George Washington, who was that . Who knows . It is supposed to be the North Carolina delegate. Here is the famous rising sun chair. Have you heard that story . Good, a lot of people have not. At the end of the convention, four months, everybody is hot, tired, they are already said there is not going to be a bill of rights unanimously. As the elegates are going to sign the document, according to James Madison, dr. Franklin, very old and did not really speak at the convention, he came his gave his speeches to james wilson to read. Dr. Franklin remarks how hard it was for artists to depict in their paintings whether a sun was rising or setting. He said often during the convention, i have looked and there is a sun on the back of George Washingtons chair, and i have wondered if it was rising or setting. As the document is being signed, he remarked, i know now at last it is indeed a rising and not a etting sun. Great story. And now what happens . What happens to the onstitution . Today, ok, we have colin powell, ex president s, they are meeting in secret, and they are upposed to be amending our current constitution, but we have heard maybe they are doing more than. Do you think when that four months is over and they come out , that the light is just ascending from heaven on them for the American Public . No, there is disagreement. The constitution goes back to the confederation congress. It is not like the constitution to suddenly went into effect. Congress had a decision to make. They couldve settled but they decided to send it to the states without any recommendations. Under the terms of the constitution, there were specially chosen conventions, not the state legislature. Member the state legislatures are not, like a constitution that limits their powers. There specially elected and they consider these constitutions. It sparks a Great National debate. But see what some of our people have to but see what some of our people have to say about it. Thomas jefferson is concerned. Where is jefferson when the constitution is being written . He is in france, good, you got that right. So many people are like, it was jefferson and adams no. Find the Founding Fathers is one of my favorite games. Jefferson is in france. Heres what he yes to say to what he has to say to James Madison. Remember, they are close friends, they are neighbors. Madison jefferson is trying to convince madison, he says a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, and what no just government should refuse or rest on inference. The federalists say you dont need a bill of rights and jefferson is saying you have to have a bill of rights. Madison is always practical. He will eventually dropped the bill of rights. 0 draft the bill of rights. He says repeated violations of these parchment barriers have been committed by overbearing majorities in every state. He has a ring seat to the tyranny against the baptists who are persecuting minorities in who are persecuted minority in virginia, and they prominent in Orange County where he lives. He gets to see how the baptists are oppressed. They were getting oppressed by the established church, the anglican which becomes the Episcopal Church come in they realized, we dont want to give government this power one way or the other. Madison is saying it is a paper tiger and will not make any difference. The federalists who want the constitution to go through the way it is, because oh my gosh, if we start changing anything, what is going to happen . Look how hard it was to get it in four months. Madison says, i have to confess, i am in love with jimmy madison. He is my boyfriend. I am one of the madisonettes. My heartbeats through for jimmy. There was a woman named Dolly Payne Todd who had good taste from North Carolina. What did madison say in the federalist papers . What is government itself of the greatest of all reflections on human nature . It means you are not going to get something perfect the people right. If men were angels, no government would be necessary. He is the practical person and a philosopher. He wants to make this work for real people who have real flaws, and is trying to create a mechanism that will ameliorate that is much as we can. I have to confess, too, i dont like Alexander Hamilton all that much. [laughter] ms. Monk he has the best of all musicians writing for him, everybody is going for him. He wanted to be an emperor, and if it hadnt been for people like madison, he might have got there. But i still would give him my money to invest for me. The argument hamilton makes is the constitution doesnt need a bill of rights. He says, weve created a structure of government, it will limit government and they will have power to limit our rights. This is my favorite. The antifederalist lee says that to say a bad government must be established for fear of anarchy is to say we need to kill ourselves for fear of dying. Another one of my favorites, mercy warren, she wrote the first history of the revolution. She wrote one of the pamphlets that was anonymous at the time and has been rediscovered that she was one of the authors. This is what shes saying, that the constitution ought to be thrown out with indignation, but some respectful names appear to support appeared john adams, George Washington, James Madison. She is taking them on. She is taken to the Ratification Convention. Theyre coming in line. Here comes the state that said no. The Hillsboro Convention is in a very important location in terms of the balance of government power. People who are not going to be synthetic to a centralized sympathetic to a centralized government. 21, the antifederalists are present at the Hillsboro Convention. Remember, new york and virginia have already ratified. We have the first 11, we are waiting on 12 and 13. Why does that really matter . North carolina, backwoods, im just saying what people said not that i agree. Why would they care . One, North Carolina is the third most populous state in 1790. There are a lot of people in North Carolina. It is strategically located. You have the upper, then you have North Carolina and South Carolina but then georgia. A lot of the leaders in georgia were regulators who were exiled from North Carolina and became leaders. Abraham baldwin, a center of the constitution from georgia, he was exiled after the regulators. The key thing is going to be their influence and the big switcheroo. This is the big, dark secret. It is a switcheroo. Using the antifederalists, theyre going to say we have to have a bill of rights, that is the most important thing. The antifederalists have a lot of objections. They dont like centralized government to start with. The federalists have figured out, they really want the whole thing. Who comes up with the proposal at the Hillsboro Convention . The federalists. They coop the convention. Then they get to write about it in great is strategy. Im not saying the bill of rights is not important, but i am saying it is fascinating how the things we hold most dear, we dont even know the history of how they got there. We could have a constitution that did not have a bill of rights may be but then we might not have a nation. The federalists figure that out. Even though they hadnt ratified the constitution, a sunday the send a representative and treat themselves, like a foreign nation. We James Madison does get the bill of rights, he cites North Carolina of his seven reasons. If little jimmy is saying North Carolina is the reason he did a bill of rights, i am taking him at his word. The bill of rights hits the states in 1789. The document is dated that. North carolina has the next convention in fayetteville. This time the tables have turned, the government is going along, and now here is that bill of rights they asked for. Being people of their word, they ratify the constitution with the bill of rights at the same time. Isnt little jimmy so handsome . He is so handsome beard he is the shortest president we ever had. The first one to get graduate degree from princeton. Again, because madison is credited, he is credited as the father of the constitution he was an architect for sure. The bill of rights, he was the one who got it started. Here is his argument go on, why did he change his mind . Today, he would be regarded as a flip flopper. I just think he was very practical and sensitive to the middle. So when there is no National Government to pay the soldiers, when there is state persecution going on for religious minorities, he cares. Sometimes i think, we can imagine that being 54, a big, tall virginia man was not an easy row to hoe. When he gave his reason for why he changed his mind, this is what he said in august of 1789. He said, and he is been taught logic from john witherspoon, scottish enlightenment, here are his reasons. Not bad per se. I never said there was anything wrong with the bill of rights, i just didnt think it was necessary. Second point, that many of the states, he says tacitly required it. The late pauline myer to these documents and you see the amendment but you dont see bill of rights. Theres been a great examination. This is 1789. He is saying there was a tacit understanding that if you did not create a bill of rights, there was not going to be a ratification. He was kind of saying, it was a gentlemans agreement. And then he said, i am an honest man and i feel bound by that. He said the only reason he is representing virginia in congress into the house, you know he wanted the senate, but he made really bad enemies over the ratification, and Patrick Henry was not an election be in the senate in virginia. He won in the house. He said i believe in the peoples judgments are supported. Here is where we get to the scheming behind it. He says, and by the way, were the federalists. We are supposed to be the front the friends of the constitution. We need to be magnanimous and give the people what they want. If we dont go ahead and get this done, guess who is going to put one in . The antifederalists. Essentially, we need to coopt the enemy. If we do this bill of rights, it will kill the opposition we can move forward on things we want to go forward like a stronger National Government. These last two i think is the most important arguments. Virginia and new york, the ink is barely dry on the ratification papers, and guess what they are saying . We need a second convention. We need a reading the redo. They say a little revolution now and then is good, but they wanted to stop the revolution of have a government. There is reason number seven, said the best for last, some amendments are necessary for North Carolina. Tada, North Carolina saves the constitution. It wasnt so easy for James Madison. He wants refer to it as a nauseous project. God bless him, he was a hypochondriac, he suffered from hemorrhoids, he just had surgery [laughter] ms. Monk this is true. He had just gone to philadelphia to have the operation they had in those days and he came back only bump the carriage all the way home. You have to have some respect. Sometimes i call him the Rodney Dangerfield of the Founding Fathers, he just doesnt get enough respect. His federalist friends in congress are saying, oh god, you have become the patron saint of amendments. And they are accusing him of not being intellectually honest. George mason of virginia saying we have to have a bill of rights because i have the virginia declaration of rights and i know we can do a good job. But does he helped madison . No, he criticizes them. It was the tub to the whale. When you were on whaling ships, you would throw a tub to distract the whale. The second conventions are coming in new york and virginia. When madison comes up with the amendments, is 22 provisions inserted in different places. They eventually become a 12 amendments at the end and only 10 ratified as a separate bill of rights. Now, remember my point earlier about the people who take good notes. That is the prejudice of history. It is whoever takes the time to write it down, that is what we will be studying. When the bill of rights was being passed, and im not arguing about whether you should believe in framers intent or not, that is up to you. But im telling you that when the bill of rights was concerned, this was framers intent. There was no physical recording. We dont have the congressional record. This was a private, what may have been newspaper reporters in another era, who took notes. The senate took no notes whatsoever. We dont know what they were thinking about the bill of rights. Here is what the notetaker for the house was thinking. Lets see. It looks like a cowboy, there is the date. That is a notetakers version of shorthand. We might be able to decode it, we might not. I think this is something that sarah will be able to talk to work. When we are putting together source records, you have to look at a lot of things, not just with the official record was. So this is our document that is 225 years old tomorrow. Virginia was the necessary state to ratify it to make it official, but i stand by my premise i hope you will agree with me, that if North Carolina have not been the only state to say no it kept its promise to ratify in november, that we would not have gotten our bill would not have gotten our bill of rights in the possibly would not have gotten a constitution that is survived for as many years as it has. Thank you very much. [applause] ms. Monk i have some time for questions. What is our time . All right. The floor is open for questions and this is my favorite part. They have people with mics. Oh dear i am not an expert on North Carolina history. I am an expert on the constitution and bill of rights. I am curious to know more about the inserting of amendments into the constitution and a separate document. Ms. Monk it was Roger Sherman who made the most on that instead of them being inserted in the constitution itself, mainly there would be in article one, because article one was congress. The framers intended the congress was going to be the dominant branch of government. There is no question about that. They would have been shocked that the president acquired as much power as the president has in our society. Im not saying that is good or bad, that is a historical fact. When we talk about the First Amendment, what does it say . Congress should make no law. Where would that go in the original constitution . Article one. It would go where congress is given powers, and they are Powers Congress cant have. It wouldve gone there. Itll said, why did madison do it that way, proposing that way . Maybe it is kind of like pride of authorship. You dont want to say to future generations, we forgot the bill of rights. We had a right to trial by jury, no religious test for public office, that was already in their, but it was Roger Sherman, a fellow federalist who made the proposal at the end, that whether it was a friendly amendment or not, it passed. Another example of, even if you are James Madison, you dont get it the way you want. When congress produces something, a ghost committee, there are votes, it goes to the senate. Finally 12 are sent to the state, and the first to do not get ratified by everybody except what becomes the 27th amendment, which a College Student in texas, his professor gave him a c on his paper but he thought the amendment could be resurrected and the archivists agreed with him when enough states ratified it. Another question . There have to be some naysayers. We are fortunate to be taped by cspan. What are the two amendments that were not agreed on . Ms. Monk one has to do with the apportionment of congress. Congress gets big as the nation gets big. It started out, i think it said 35,000, there should be a member of house for that many. That is not ratified. Today, each member of congress represents anywhere from 550600,000. The second one, that congress could not vote itself a pay raise until they had a go back to the people for approval or not. That is the one the College Student was able to resurrect. What would happened if North Carolina have decided to not ratify the constitution . Today when we have an amendment, it has to be ratified by two thirds of the state. Ms. Monk it has to be proposed two thirds of congress, and ratified by three fourths. What would happen back then . Would we have had a three quarters of them ratifying it . Ms. Monk all of them would not of had to, but instead of it being the nine that was true for the constitution, from on had vermont had been added to the union so it upped it to 10. Massachusetts didnt ratify the bill of rights until the 1930s. Mississippi just recently ratified the 13th amendment after the movie lincoln came out. Oh gosh, we forgot. [laughter] ms. Monk yes . What, if any, influenced to your coronation confederation documentation have on the development of ours . The articles of confederation. Ms. Monk that is a story that is often repeated. It comes from benjamin franklin. He said there was something called the iroquois confederacy. It has not been written down, and we become a big advocate of writing things down, and it doesnt really apply to our forms of government. What franklin said, and he intended it as a taunt. There was an albany plan of unions. Franklin was trying to get people to come together in be united, and i think he intended it as an insult. What he said was, if the nations of the iroquois, and i cant remember if he used the term savages or not, but the nations of the recording can come together, why cannot we . That story has transmogrified itself to that there was an iroquois confederacy that we were modeled on, and no offense to the recording, im not sure if they would like the fact that we were comparing to their government, which was work i was more by consensus. This is a delicate question. The Second Amendment. Do you think the context that that was brought forward was based on individual rights or a National Interest or states interest context . Ms. Monk that is a very important question, and i have done a lot of research on that. Let me lay forth the argument, im not advocating an argument, you decide what you believe, i will tell you my conclusion. The historical evidence is this. First of all, the whole debate about what we think of as the Second Amendment comes as response to a Standing Army. This new constitution says we are going to have an army and the state still like that. States dont like that. How has the Standing Army been used against them in the past . Also, george mason amongst others, said, the militia is the whole people. Those of you who are familiar, i dont have the language of the Second Amendment up, it has two parts. Those of you who are english teachers, it has what one might call a restrictive and nonrestrictive clause. Essentially saying that the militia is necessary for the security of a free state, then the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That was actually a right to have a religious exemption from serving. It was in the context of a Standing Army, that was how it was raised. It was a liberal scholar who brought this up. Those of you on various sizes argument need to know this. Sanford levinson, a liberal law professor in texas, he is the one who wrote the article, it did not create a new argument, but it said, for those who look at the right of the people in the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment in the ninth amendment, the people is the people. When we say a right belongs to the people, we dont say it belongs to the subset of the people like the militia, we say it belongs to everybody. That became a catalyst for what had previously been liberal scholarship that had kind of dismissed that argument. The Supreme Court starts a liberal said that they deathly he thought it predicted in it protected an individual right to bear arms. I think theres plenty of historical evidence for that. The other point is this, for those people who think the Second Amendment is the most important right in the bill of rights, remember that every right in the bill of rights has limits. Everyone. To think the second one has no limitations is not historically accurate. You can influence your legislators how you want to, but that is the evidence i have. I have concluded for myself as a scholar that yes, there is an individual right, but like every other individual right, it has limits, and that is our long history in defining how rights apply in our republic. One more question. How are you doing . Im really nervous. Trying to think of how i can frame this question. Im reading a book right now the talks about how Thomas Jefferson. One thing that sticks out in the book is about the judiciary act of 1789. Ms. Monk oh wow. This is good. Ok. Ms. Monk who is the author . Im not sure. Ms. Monk i think this will be our last question time wise. If we can condense and a little bit it is for everybodys benefit. It states in article three that congress can appoint smaller courts in the constitution, where is chief Justice Marshall said that the judiciary act of 1789 was actually unconstitutional, and when jefferson and madison actually heard about the ruling, they were livid. Madison being the constructor of the constitution said that was not the interpretation. I am curious, what was the basis that Justice Marshall had that it was unconstitutional given that it was ms. Monk it is an excellent question him and for those of you who are historians, you know essentially there is a second American Revolution in 1800. The judiciary act becomes a firestorm because the federalists dominate all three branches of government. Does that sound familiar . [laughter] ms. Monk when one party dominates all three branches of government, you better pay attention. That is what happened with the federalists. The judiciary act was passed by their legislature. They were federalists dominated, but they did not call themselves that of the time. John marshall becomes our most influential justice, he was a nationalist. He knows he is caught. Remember Alexander Hamilton says to judiciary is the least dangerous branch. It has the power of judgment. What has happened is that under the judiciary act, john adams has made his famous midnight appointments and is cramming to judiciary. One of the appointments that did not get made was justice of the peace to d. C. John marshall was responsible for that appointment. It is going to become a test of, will he have a judiciary that is just in politics like everybody else, will they try to steer a more independent course . He doesnt declare the entire act unconstitutional. That is the thing to member. It becomes a rule of judicial construction. Justices dont throw out the baby with the bathwater. They try to take the dirty diaper out. What happened with marshall with that case, the judiciary act had said that in cases with this, you can go directly to the Supreme Court. That is an act of congress. What does the constitution say . The jurisdiction of the court should be appellate and all of the cases except specific one between states in a foreign ambassador. So marshall is trying he knows he cannot make Thomas Jefferson and James Madison deliver that commission. He knows that through his scottish logic enlightenment tradition. He also knows that at some point this power of the court has to be asserted in a way that is going to make it relevant. That is where marbury versus madison comes in. They say congress, and by the way it is congress of my party, marshall is not calling himself a federalist but he is, i have to rule against my own party and something they did if i think it is wrong and it violates the constitution. We say today, it established the power of judicial review, which is true. He said it is the province of the court to decide the law. What made it influential and effective was he will against his own party, he helped establish a more independent role for the judiciary, which at that time it was a federalist dominated judiciary which actually, the sedition act which we regard as a total violation of the First Amendment didnt even go to the Supreme Court because people knew how they would rule. They were federalists, they were appellate. That. Y would uphold i can see people, i firehose you on that, but i hope it is a good ending. I want to thank you very much. Sarah has some more announcements. Thank you. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] washing American History tv. To join the conversation, like us on facebook cnspan history you are watching American History