Assignment #6

". . . . . Great complaint has been made, that Congress [under the Articles] has been too liberal in their grants of salaries to individuals, and I think not without just cause. For if I am rightly informed, there have been men whose salaries have been fifteen hundred dollars per year, and some of them did not do business at any rate, that the sum they negotiated would amount to their yearly salary. And some men [are] now in office, at twenty five hundred dollars per year, who I think would have been glad to have set down at one hundred pounds a year before the war, and would have done as much or more business. The truth is, when you carry a man’s salary beyond what decency requires, he immediately becomes a man of consequence, and does little or no business at all. Let us cast our eyes around us, in the other departments-the judges of the superior court have but about one hundred pounds salary a year. The judges of the courts of common pleas, on an average, not more than sixty dollars per year. The ministers of the gospel-a very valuable set of men, who have done honor to themselves, and rendered great service to their country, in completing the revolution-have salaries but from sixty to an hundred pounds a year in general. The contrast is striking. I heartily wish that all ranks of men among us, ministers of the gospel as well as others, would turn their attention toward the Constitution they may be more concerned in the event than they at present think of"".

This particular piece of writing is trying to say that Congress has been giving way too much money out. The author feels that congress is paying some people way more than they are actually worth. This is because the author says that certain people who are getting an inflated salary annually are people who do no business at all and subsequently do not deserve it. While on the other hand there are those who's salary is small and contribute greatly to society. So this person thinks that the constitution in this aspect needs to fixed or light needs to be shed on it. I picked this article because I understand the authors concerns in regards to salaries. An issue like this could cause major problems because money is unfairly being paid to people who rightfully did not earn it. If They would have worked hard for the huge salary that would have been okay, but to pay someone less who is actually of value to society while you are paying a who is of less value is morally wrong.

Assignment #5
Madison
 The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man, and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation and practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to cooperate for their common good (pp. 92-93).

 Hamilton A Constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents (p. 121).

 What Madison was trying to say with this statement is that it is in human nature for people to divide themselves up into special groups. These groups are generally based upon similar interests or in his case by political beliefs. He feels that when this is done, when people divide themselves into special groups and form parties they will begin to follow and grow attached to a leader. He feels that hatred for other groups stems from this division and that groups will begin to dislike one another solely based upon the small differences they share.They would rather fight over petty things instead of making sacrifices for the greater good by just joining forces. I chose this statement because of the relevance it holds true to this day. We have two main political parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, who choose not to cooperate. Their dislike for one another goes so deep that they would rather reject something the opposition proposes, that will be beneficial for the country as a whole, just to spite and see the other fail and squirm. When in actuality they were elected to their respective seats to make sure that the American people are represented and have a voice, but by not compromising the people remain voiceless and are ultimately made to suffer.

 Hamilton's statement regarding the Constitution was saying that it is the basis of all law. That being said it is the job of the judges to place meaning to each part of it. It's their duty to know the Constitution and come up with a logical meaning for each part. They do this in order to prepare for cases that will test their knowledge of it. These cases may call upon their knowledge of it and from that they have to decide whether or not a crime was committed. This is done differently for each case because as like snowflakes no two cases are the same. I picked this statement because of how true it is. The Constitution is nothing more than just the ground work for law. It sets up the U.S legal system and it is the purpose of the judge to make sense of it. Since most amendments to it are rather old it is the place of the judge to decipher them and from their understanding of it place judgement in cases.

Assignment #4
Article IV
Section. 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
 A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

  Well what this part of the constitution is trying to say is that any person or persons who are charged with a crime in one state must be dealt with by the laws of the state they commit the crime in. So if a person shoots and kills someone in New York, they must be charged in New York for that crime. If they flee the state they commited the crime in and try to seek shelter in another state, it is the responsiblity of the law enforcement of the state he now resides to obtain him and return him to the state in which he commited his crimes. So that he can be tried for the crimes he commited. This same law also applies to a person who holds a job that is state required or mandated. He can not flee that state and go to another in order to be free of the job. He must be brought back to the state which he is employed. This would be toward military jobs or anything of that nature. Also this part of the constitution states all United States citizens are entitled to the benefits that every state offers. So this means that all of the same laws apply to you no matter what state you go to.
 I picked this part of the constitution because I think that it is very important for people of the US to realize that just because the laws of each state may differ they still apply to you. As long as you are in a state whate ever laws of the state you are in apply to you. So if you are in a state that has abortion legal then you can get an abortion, but if you decide to move to a state that outlaws it and you try it you are breaking the law. Since you are a US citizen the laws of what ever state you are in apply to you, it is basically relative to what ever state you are. Also, I chose this because I like that it makes very clear that you can not run from your crimes. If you commit a crime in a state you will face justice. By running to another state nothing is gained because you will be sought after by the law enforcement of the new state you inhabit and brought back to the state you commited the crimes in. So its the laws way of saying do not think you can run from your crimes.