To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 222

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Supreme Court of the United States
Map
38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
EstablishedMarch 4, 1789; 234 years ago (1789-03-04)
LocationWashington, D.C.
Coordinates38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
Composition methodPresidential nomination with Senate confirmation
Authorized byConstitution of the United States, Art. III, § 1
Judge term lengthlife tenure, subject to impeachment and removal
Number of positions9 (by statute)
Websitesupremecourt.gov

This is a list of cases reported in volume 222 of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1911 and 1912.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    4 544 021
    207 683
    403
    4 692 536
    3 759 605
  • Reconstruction and 1876: Crash Course US History #22
  • Atomic Radius - Basic Introduction - Periodic Table Trends, Chemistry
  • Oshawa's Automotive Community: 1945-2019 - Canadian Automotive Museum Talk
  • Introduction: Crash Course U.S. Government and Politics
  • Scariest CCTV Footage Ever Captured

Transcription

Episode 21: Reconstruction Hi, I’m John Green, this is Crash Course U.S. History and huzzah! The Civil War is over! The slaves are free! Huzzah! That one hit me in the head? It’s very dangerous, Crash Course. So when you say, “Don’t aim at a person,” that includes myself? The roller coaster only goes up from here, my friends. Huzzah! Mr. Green, Mr. Green, what about the epic failure of Reconstruction? Oh, right. Stupid Reconstruction always ruining everything intro So after the Civil War ended, the United States had to reintegrate both a formerly slave population and a formerly rebellious population back into the country, which is a challenge that we might’ve met, except Abraham Lincoln was assassinated and we were left with Andrew “I am the Third Worst President Ever” Johnson. I’m sorry, Abe, but you don’t get to be in the show anymore. So, Lincoln’s whole post-war idea was to facilitate reunion and reconciliation, and Andrew Johnson’s guiding Reconstruction principle was that the South never had a right to secede in the first place. Also, because he was himself a Southerner, he resented all the elites in the South who had snubbed him, AND he was also a racist who didn’t think that blacks should have any role in Reconstruction. TRIFECTA! So between 1865 and 1867, the so-called period of Presidential Reconstruction, Johnson appointed provisional governors and ordered them to call state conventions to establish new all-white governments. And in their 100% whiteness and oppression of former slaves, those new governments looked suspiciously like the old confederate governments they had replaced. And what was changing for the former slaves? Well, in some ways, a lot. Like, Fiske and Howard universities were established, as well as many primary and secondary schools, thanks in part to The Freedman’s Bureau, which only lasted until 1870, but had the power to divide up confiscated and abandoned confederate land for former slaves. And this was very important because to most slaves, land ownership was the key to freedom, and many felt like they’d been promised land by the Union Army. Like, General Sherman’s Field Order 15, promised to distribute land in 40 acre plots to former slaves. But that didn’t happen, either through the Freedman’s Bureau or anywhere else. Instead, President Johnson ordered all land returned to its former owners. So the South remained largely agricultural with the same people owning the same land, and in the end, we ended up with sharecropping. Let’s go to the Thought Bubble. The system of sharecropping replaced slavery in many places throughout the South. Landowners would provide housing to the sharecroppers--no, Thought Bubble, not quite that nice. There ya go--also tools and seed, and then the sharecroppers received, get this, a share of their crop--usually between a third and a half, with the price for that harvest often set by the landowner. Freed blacks got to control their work, and plantation owners got a steady workforce that couldn’t easily leave, because they had little opportunity to save money and make the big capital investments in, like, land or tools. By the late 1860s, poor white farmers were sharecropping as well--in fact, by the Great Depression, most sharecroppers were white. And while sharecropping certainly wasn’t slavery, it did result in a quasi-serfdom that tied workers to land they didn’t own--more or less the opposite of Jefferson’s ideal of the small, independent farmer. So, the Republicans in Congress weren’t happy that this reconstructed south looked so much like the pre-Civil War south, so they took the lead in reconstruction after 1867. Radical Republicans felt the war had been fought for equal rights and wanted to see the powers of the national government expanded. Few were as radical as Thaddeus “Tommy Lee Jones” Stephens who wanted to take away land from the Southern planters and give it to the former slaves, but rank-and-file Republicans were radical enough to pass the Civil Rights Bill, which defined persons born in the United States as citizens and established nationwide equality before the law regardless of race. Andrew Johnson immediately vetoed the law, claiming that trying to protect the rights of African Americans amounted to discrimination against white people, which so infuriated Republicans that Congress did something it had never done before in all of American history. They overrode the Presidential veto with a 2/3rds majority and the Civil Rights Act became law. So then Congress really had its dander up and decided to amend the Constitution with the 14th amendment, which defines citizenship, guarantees equal protection, and extends the rights in the Bill of Rights to all the states (sort of). The amendment had almost no Democratic support, but it also didn’t need any, because there were almost no Democrats in Congress on account of how Congress had refused to seat the representatives from the “new” all-white governments that Johnson supported. And that’s how we got the 14th amendment, arguably the most important in the whole Constitution. Thanks, Thought Bubble. Oh, straight to the mystery document today? Alright. The rules here are simple. I guess the author of the Mystery Document and try not to get shocked. Alright let’s see what we’ve got today. Sec. 1. Be it ordained by the police jury of the parish of St. Landry, That no negro shall be allowed to pass within the limits of said parish without special permit in writing from his employer. Sec. 4. . . . Every negro is required to be in the regular service of some white person, or former owner, who shall be held responsible for the conduct of said negro.. Sec. 6. . . . No negro shall be permitted to preach, exhort, or otherwise declaim to congregations of colored people, without a special permission in writing from the president of the police jury. . . . Gee, Stan, I wonder if the President of the Police Jury was white. I actually know this one. It is a Black Code, which was basically legal codes where they just replaced the word “slave” with the word “negro.” And this code shows just how unwilling white governments were to ensure the rights of new, free citizens. I would celebrate not getting shocked, but now I am depressed. So, okay, in 1867, again over Johnson’s veto, Congress passed the Reconstruction Act, which divided the south into 5 military districts and required each state to create a new government, one that included participation of black men. Those new governments had to ratify the 14th amendment if they wanted to get back into the union. Radical Reconstruction had begun. So, in 1868, Andrew Johnson was about as electable in the U.S. as Jefferson Davis, and sure enough he didn’t win. Instead, the 1868 election was won by Republican and former Union general Ulysses S. Grant. But Grant’s margin of victory was small enough that Republicans were like, “Man, we would sure win more elections if black people could vote.” Which is something you hear Republicans say all the time these days. So Congressional Republicans pushed the 15th Amendment, which prohibited states from denying men the right to vote based on race, but not based on gender or literacy or whether your grandfather could vote. So states ended up with a lot of leeway when it came to denying the franchise to African Americans, which of course they did. So here we have the federal government dictating who can vote, and who is and isn’t a citizen of a state, and establishing equality under the law--even local laws. And this is a really big deal in American history, because the national government became, rather than a threat to individual liberty, “the custodian of freedom,” as Radical Republican Charles Sumner put it. So but with this legal protection, former slaves began to exercise their rights. They participated in the political process by direct action, such as staging sit-ins to integrate street-cars, by voting in elections, and by holding office. Most African Americans were Republicans at the time, and because they could vote and were a large part of the population, the Republican party came to dominate politics in the South, just like today, except totally different. Now, Southern mythology about the age of radical Reconstruction is exemplified by Gone with the Wind, which of course tells the story of northern Republican dominance and corruption by southern Republicans. Fortune seeking northern carpetbaggers, seen here, as well as southern turncoat scalawags dominated politics and all of the African American elected leaders were either corrupt or puppets or both. Yeah, well, like the rest of Gone with the Wind, that’s a bit of an oversimplification. There were about 2,000 African Americans who held office during Reconstruction, and the vast majority of them were not corrupt. Consider for example the not-corrupt and amazingly-named Pinckney B.S. Pinchback, who from 1872 to 1873 served very briefly in Louisiana as America’s first black governor. And went on to be a senator and a member of the House of Representatives. By the way, America’s second African American governor, Douglas Wilder of Virginia was elected in 1989. Having African American officeholders was a huge step forward in term of ensuring the rights of African Americans because it meant that there would be black juries and less discrimination in state and local governments when it came to providing basic services. But in the end, Republican governments failed in the South. There were important achievements, especially a school system that, while segregated, did attempt to educate both black and white children. And even more importantly, they created a functioning government where both white and African American citizens could participate. According to one white South Carolina lawyer, “We have gone through one of the most remarkable changes in our relations to each other that has been known, perhaps, in the history of the world.” That’s a little hyperbolic, but we are America after all. (libertage) It’s true that corruption was widespread, but it was in the North, too. I mean, we’re talking about governments. And that’s not why Reconstruction really ended: It ended because 1. things like schools and road repair cost money, which meant taxes, which made Republican governments very unpopular because Americans hate taxes, and 2. White southerners could not accept African Americans exercising basic civil rights, holding office or voting. And for many, the best way to return things to the way they were before reconstruction was through violence. Especially after 1867, much of the violence directed toward African Americans in the South was politically motivated. The Ku Klux Klan was founded in 1866 and it quickly became a terrorist organization, targeting Republicans, both black and white, beating and murdering men and women in order to intimidate them and keep them from voting. The worst act of violence was probably the massacre at Colfax, Louisiana where hundreds of former slaves were murdered. And between intimidation and emerging discriminatory voting laws, fewer black men voted, which allowed white Democrats to take control of state governments in the south, and returned white Democratic congressional delegations to Washington. These white southern politicians called themselves “Redeemers” because they claimed to have redeemed the south from northern republican corruption and black rule. Now, it’s likely that the South would have fallen back into Democratic hands eventually, but the process was aided by Northern Republicans losing interest in Reconstruction. In 1873, the U.S. fell into yet another not-quite-Great economic depression and northerners lost the stomach to fight for the rights of black people in the south, which in addition to being hard was expensive. So by 1876 the supporters of reconstruction were in full retreat and the Democrats were resurgent, especially in the south. And this set up one of the most contentious elections in American history. The Democrats nominated New York Governor (and NYU Law School graduate) Samuel Tilden. The Republicans chose Ohio governor (and Kenyon College alumnus) Rutherford B. Hayes. One man who’d gone to Crash Course writer Raoul Meyer’s law school. And another who’d gone to my college, Kenyon. Now, if the election had been based on facial hair, as elections should be, there would’ve been no controversy, but sadly we have an electoral college here in the United States, and in 1876 there were disputed electoral votes in South Carolina, Louisiana, and, of course, Florida. Now you might remember that in these situations, there is a constitutional provision that says Congress should decide the winner, but Congress, shockingly, proved unable to accomplish something. So they appointed a 15 man Electoral Commission--a Super-Committee, if you will. And there were 8 Republicans on that committee and 7 Democrats, so you will never guess who won. Kenyon College’s own Rutherford B. Hayes. Go Lords and Ladies! And yes, that is our mascot. Shut up. Anyway in order to get the Presidency and win the support of the supercommittee, Hayes’ people agreed to cede control of the South to the Democrats and to stop meddling in Southern affairs and also to build a transcontinental railroad through Texas. This is called the Bargain of 1877 because historians are so good at naming things and it basically killed Reconstruction. Without any more federal troops in Southern states and with control of Southern legislatures firmly in the hands of white democrats the states were free to go back to restricting the freedom of black people, which they did. Legislatures passed Jim Crow laws that limited African American’s access to public accommodations and legal protections. States passed laws that took away black people’s right to vote and social and economic mobility among African Americans in the south declined precipitously. However, for a brief moment, the United States was more democratic than it had ever been before. And an entire segment of the population that had no impact on politics before was now allowed to participate. And for the freedmen who lived through it, that was a monumental change, and it would echo down to the Civil Rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s, sometimes called the second reconstruction. But we’re gonna end this episode on a downer, as we are wont to do here at Crash Course US History because I want to point out a lesser-known legacy of Reconstruction. The Reconstruction amendments and laws that were passed granted former slaves political freedom and rights, especially the vote, and that was critical. But to give them what they really wanted and needed, plots of land that would make them economically independent, would have required confiscation, and that violation of property rights was too much for all but the most radical Republicans. And that question of what it really means to be “free” in a system of free market capitalism has proven very complicated indeed. I’ll see you next week. Crash Course is produced and directed by Stan Muller. Our script supervisor is Meredith Danko. The associate producer is Danica Johnson. The show is written by my high school history teacher, Raoul Meyer, and myself. And our graphics team is Thought Café. Every week there’s a new caption for the libertage. You can suggest those in comments where you can also ask questions about today’s video that will be answered by our team of historians. Thank you for watching Crash Course. Don’t forget to subscribe. And as we say in my hometown, don’t forget to be awesome. reconstruction -

Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of volume 222 U.S.

The Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).[1] Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice).

When the cases in volume 222 were decided the Court comprised the following eight members (following the death of Justice John Marshall Harlan):

Portrait Justice Office Home State Succeeded Date confirmed by the Senate
(Vote)
Tenure on Supreme Court
Edward Douglass White Chief Justice Louisiana Melville Fuller December 12, 1910
(Acclamation)
December 19, 1910

May 19, 1921
(Died)
Joseph McKenna Associate Justice California Stephen Johnson Field January 21, 1898
(Acclamation)
January 26, 1898

January 5, 1925
(Retired)
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Associate Justice Massachusetts Horace Gray December 4, 1902
(Acclamation)
December 8, 1902

January 12, 1932
(Retired)
William R. Day Associate Justice Ohio George Shiras Jr. February 23, 1903
(Acclamation)
March 2, 1903

November 13, 1922
(Retired)
Horace Harmon Lurton Associate Justice Tennessee Rufus W. Peckham December 20, 1909
(Acclamation)
January 3, 1910

July 12, 1914
(Died)
Charles Evans Hughes Associate Justice New York David Josiah Brewer May 2, 1910
(Acclamation)
October 10, 1910

June 10, 1916
(Resigned)
Willis Van Devanter Associate Justice Wyoming Edward Douglass White (as Associate Justice) December 15, 1910
(Acclamation)
January 3, 1911

June 2, 1937
(Retired)
Joseph Rucker Lamar Associate Justice Georgia William Henry Moody December 15, 1910
(Acclamation)
January 3, 1911

January 2, 1916
(Died)

Citation style

Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.

The Judiciary Act of 1891 created the United States Courts of Appeals and reassigned the jurisdiction of most routine appeals from the district and circuit courts to these appellate courts. The Act created nine new courts that were originally known as the "United States Circuit Courts of Appeals." The new courts had jurisdiction over most appeals of lower court decisions. The Supreme Court could review either legal issues that a court of appeals certified or decisions of court of appeals by writ of certiorari.

On January 1, 1912, the effective date of the Judicial Code of 1911, the old Circuit Courts were abolished, with their remaining trial court jurisdiction transferred to the U.S. District Courts.

Bluebook citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.

List of cases in volume 222 U.S.

Case Name Page & year Opinion of the Court Concurring opinion(s) Dissenting opinion(s) Lower Court Disposition
Blinn v. Nelson 1 (1911) Holmes none none Mass. affirmed
United States v. Baltimore et al. R.R. Co. 8 (1911) McKenna none none S.D. Ohio affirmed
United States v. Plyler 15 (1911) Holmes none none W.D.N.C. reversed
Virginia v. West Virginia 17 (1911) Holmes none none original continued
Southern R.R. Co. v. United States 20 (1911) VanDevanter none none N.D. Ala. affirmed
Finley v. California 28 (1911) McKenna none none Cal. affirmed
Helm v. Zarecor 32 (1911) Hughes none none C.C.M.D. Tenn. reversed
Troy Bank v. G.A. Whitehead & Co. 39 (1911) VanDevanter none none C.C.W.D. Ky. reversed
ICC v. Diffenbaugh 42 (1911) Holmes none McKenna C.C.W.D. Mo. affirmed
Lenman v. Jones 51 (1911) Holmes none none D.C. Cir. affirmed
Kalem Co. v. Harper Bros. 55 (1911) Holmes none none 2d Cir. affirmed
Southern P. Co. v. Kentucky 63 (1911) Lurton none none Ky. affirmed
Curtin v. Benson 78 (1911) McKenna none none C.C.N.D. Cal. reversed
Hussey v. United States 88 (1911) McKenna none none Ct. Cl. affirmed
Richardson v. Harmon 96 (1911) Lurton none none N.D. Ohio reversed
Bryan v. Ker 107 (1911) VanDevanter none none 4th Cir. reversed
T. Weller & Co. v. Munsuri 114 (1911) White none none D.P.R. dismissed
Munsuri v. Fricker 121 (1911) White none none D.P.R. dismissed
Enriquez v. Enriquez I 123 (1911) White none none Phil. dismissed
Enriquez v. Enriquez II 127 (1911) White none none Phil. dismissed
United States v. Eckstein 130 (1911) White none none 2d Cir. affirmed
Glickstein v. United States 139 (1911) White none none 5th Cir. certification
Ripley v. United States 144 (1911) White none none Ct. Cl. remanded
Grigsby v. Russell 149 (1911) Holmes none none 6th Cir. reversed
United States v. Fidelity T. Co. 158 (1911) Holmes none none Ct. Cl. reversed
Sandoval v. Randolph 161 (1911) Lurton none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Ariz. affirmed
Anderson v. United R. Co. 164 (1911) Lurton none none Ohio affirmed
United States v. Stever 167 (1911) Lurton none none W.D. Ky. affirmed
United States v. Munday 175 (1911) Lurton none none C.C.W.D. Wash. reversed
Missouri et al. R.R. Co. v. City of Olathe I 185 (1911) Hughes none none Kan. dismissed
Missouri et al. R.R. Co. v. City of Olathe II 187 (1911) Hughes none none Kan. dismissed
Missouri et al. R.R. Co. v. City of Olathe III 191 (1911) Hughes none none Kan. dismissed
Martin v. West 191 (1911) VanDevanter none none Wash. affirmed
United States v. Congress C. Co. 199 (1911) VanDevanter none none C.C.N.D. Ill. affirmed
United States ex rel. Turner v. Fisher 204 (1911) Lamar none none D.C. Cir. affirmed
Banker Bros. Co. v. Pennsylvania 210 (1911) Lamar none none Pa. Super. Ct. affirmed
Union P.R.R. Co. v. Updike Grain Co. 215 (1911) Lamar none none 8th Cir. affirmed
Chicago J.R.R. Co. v. King 222 (1911) White none none 7th Cir. affirmed
Mutual L. Co. v. Martell 225 (1911) McKenna none none Mass. Super. Ct. affirmed
Union P.R.R. Co. v. Mason City et al. R.R. Co. 237 (1911) McKenna none none C.C.D. Neb. reversed
Aluminum Co. v. Ramsey 251 (1911) McKenna none none Ark. affirmed
United States v. Garbish 257 (1911) McKenna none none C.C.E.D. La. reversed
Consaul v. Cummings 262 (1911) Lamar none none D.C. Cir. affirmed
United States v. Morgan 274 (1911) Lamar none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. reversed
United States ex rel. Kinney v. United States F. & G. Co. 283 (1911) White none none 3d Cir. affirmed
Lewers & Cooke, Ltd. v. Atcherly 285 (1911) Holmes none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Haw. affirmed
Mayer v. American S. & T. Co. 295 (1911) Holmes none none D.C. Cir. affirmed
Acme H. Co. v. Beekman L. Co. 300 (1911) Day none none Mo. affirmed
City of Chicago v. Sturges 313 (1911) Lurton none none Ill. affirmed
Brown v. Alton W. Co. 325 (1912) White none none C.C.S.D. Ill. dismissed
Berryman v. Whitman Coll. 334 (1912) White none none C.C.E.D. Wash. reversed
Rock Island P. Co. v. Reardon 354 (1912) White none none 7th Cir. affirmed
Gring v. Ives 365 (1912) White none none N.C. dismissed
Northern P.R.R. Co. v. Washington ex rel. Atkinson 370 (1912) White none none Wash. reversed
Red "C" O. Mfg. Co. v. Board of Agric. 380 (1912) White none none C.C.E.D.N.C. affirmed
Aran v. Zurrinach 395 (1912) White none none D.P.R. dismissed
Title G. & S. Co. v. United States ex rel. GE 401 (1912) White none none 3d Cir. supersedeas vacated
Vogt v. Graff 404 (1912) McKenna none none D.C. Cir. affirmed
Williams v. Walsh 415 (1912) McKenna none none Kan. affirmed
Southern R.R. Co. v. Reid I 424 (1912) McKenna none none N.C. reversed
Southern R.R. Co. v. Reid II 444 (1912) McKenna none none N.C. reversed
Treat v. Grand Canyon R.R. Co. 448 (1912) Holmes none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Ariz. affirmed
Gandia v. Pettingill 452 (1912) Holmes none none D.P.R. reversed
United States v. McMullen 460 (1912) Holmes none none 9th Cir. reversed
Cuba R.R. Co. v. Crosby 473 (1912) Holmes none none 3d Cir. reversed
Porto Rico S. Co. v. Lorenzo 481 (1912) Holmes none none D.P.R. affirmed
Peters v. Broward 483 (1912) Lurton none none C.C.N.D. Fla. affirmed
Huse v. United States 496 (1912) Lurton none none Ct. Cl. affirmed
Robinson v. Baltimore & O.R.R. Co. 506 (1912) VanDevanter none none W. Va. affirmed
United States v. Barnes 513 (1912) VanDevanter none none W.D. Ky. reversed
Soliah v. Heskin 522 (1912) Lamar none none N.D. Dist. Ct. affirmed
Keeney v. New York 525 (1912) Lamar none none Kings Cnty. Sur. Ct. affirmed
Johnson v. Collier 538 (1912) Lamar none none Ala. affirmed
ICC v. Union P.R.R. Co. 541 (1912) Lamar none none C.C.D. Minn. reversed
Fitz Gerald v. Thompson 555 (1912) White none none Pa. dismissed
Herrera v. United States 558 (1912) McKenna none none Ct. Cl. affirmed
Diaz v. United States 574 (1912) McKenna none none Ct. Cl. affirmed
Omaha et al. Ry. Co. v. ICC 582 (1911) per curiam none none Comm. Ct. continued

Notes and references

  1. ^ "Supreme Court Research Guide". Georgetown Law Library. Retrieved April 7, 2021.

See also

External links

This page was last edited on 9 March 2023, at 23:58
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.