Date of Award

5-1-2023

Language

English

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

College/School/Department

Department of History

Content Description

1 online resource (iv, 274 pages)

Dissertation/Thesis Chair

Richard F Hamm

Committee Members

Christopher Pastore, Lauren Kozakiewicz

Keywords

State Judiciary Nineteenth century, Justice, Administration of, Courts, Constitutional history

Subject Categories

History

Abstract

Abstract From its first constitution adopted in 1777 in the midst of the Revolutionary War to the constitution adopted in 1846, New York State’s elected officials argued about the structure and role of the judiciary in state government and its application of the rule of law. Two constitutional conventions held in 1821 and in 1846 each produced a constitution that substantially reorganized the state judiciary. The delegates to these conventions debated what roles of the courts, the judges, and the legal profession and the rules of law that they applied would be appropriate to a republican form of government. These debates provide windows into the prevailing concerns and the changing attitudes toward the role of the judiciary and its appropriate political structure. The convention debates demonstrate that the arguments over fundamental principles, such as democratic control over the judiciary, the right of the majority to control each branch of government, and appropriate access of men of all social classes to the legal profession continued in New York State until the middle of the nineteenth century. The debates provide evidence that while some American political principles, such as separation of powers, were quickly adopted, the tension between the republican ideology that prevailed at the time of the first 1777 constitution and the more modern political theory, embodied the United States Constitution ratified in 1788 to 1789, of checks and balances, an independent judiciary, and limitations on the right of the majority to decide all aspects of public policy continued through the middle of the nineteenth century. Historians who contend that these debates were resolved in the 1780s or even the early nineteenth century underestimate the continuing nature of the struggles regarding the judiciary and the continued perceived need by the representatives of the public to assert the iii rights of the majority in response to a perceived “aristocracy” that attempted to control the judiciary and thus substantial government actions. The debates also show the growth of the legal profession and its increasing professionalization and solidarity, which moderated attempts to make the court system and legal rules simpler and more readily accessible to the general public. Forms and process were simplified in response to this pressure. However, major changes were defeated. The application of the common law was preserved and the courts and the legal profession retained control over admission to the practice of law and the available methods to resolve disputes. New York State, in 1846, implemented a system in which most judges were elected. This responded to and satisfied the demand that judges be held responsible to the voters. This completed efforts to make the judicial system more democratic, and an elected Court of Appeals, the highest court in New York, survived until the latter half of the twentieth century, when Court of Appeals judges were made appointive. It also allowed the courts to apply both the common law and the rules of equity in unified proceedings and blended the former court of chancery into the existing common law courts, creating a more stream-lined system. The elimination of the court of chancery removed one of the few remaining institutions that had operated during New York’s colonial period. The only judicial institution inherited from the British judicial system that was retained was the system of justices of the peace, which still are part of the New York judiciary.

Download

Included in

History Commons

Share

COinS