LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND
RATIFICATION
OF THE ORIGINAL 13th AMENDMENT TO
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
March 12, 1819
Definitions:
RATIFY
Ratified, Ratifying
esp: to adopt or affirm (as the prior act or contract of an agent) by
express or implied consent with the effect of original authorization --
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law (c)1996
ratify \Rat"i*fy\, v. t. [imp. & p.
p. Ratified; p. pr. & vb. n. Ratifying.] [F. ratifier, fr. L. ratus
fixed by calculation, firm, valid + -ficare (in comp.) to make. ... To
approve and sanction; to make valid; to establish; to settle;
especially, to give sanction to, as something done by an agent or
servant; as, to ratify an agreement, treaty, or contract; to ratify a
nomination.
It is impossible for the divine power to set a seal
to a lie by ratifying an imposture with such a miracle. South. --
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, (c) 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
RATIFICATION
Confirmation and acceptance of a previous act,
thereby making the act valid from the moment it was done. -- Black's Law
Dictionary. 7th Edition (c) 1999
n : making something valid by formally ratifying or
confirming it; "the ratification of the treaty";
"confirmation of the appointment" [syn: confirmation] --
WordNet (r) 1.6, (c) 1997. Princeton University
Between April 26th and May 1st, 1810, both houses of
the Congress of the United States deliberated and discussed final
wording of the Titles of Nobility Amendment, the original 13th amendment
to our Constitution of the United States. Here below, from original
source material, is an extract reporting congressional actions on this
amendment.
Journal of the Senate; Thursday,
April 26th, 1810 (Pages
503-504)
The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion
made on the 18th of January, for an amendment to the constitution of the
United States, respecting titles of nobility, together with the
amendments proposed thereto.
On motion,
That the further consideration thereof be postponed
to the first Monday in December next.
| It was determined in the negative, |
{ |
Yeas . . . . . . . . . . 8.
Nays . . . . . . . . . 20. |
On motion,
The yeas and nays having been required by one-fifth
of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are,
Messrs. Condit, Gilman, Gregg, Leib, Mathewson, Meigs, Tait, and
Whiteside.
Those who voted in the negative are,
Messrs. Anderson, Brent, Champlin, Clay, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard,
German, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Horsey, Lambert, Lloyd, Pickering, Pope,
Reed, Smith, of Maryland, Smith of New York, Sumter, and Turner.
On motion,
To amend the last report of the select committee, so
as to read as follows:
"If any citizen of the United States shall
accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility, or honour, or
shall, without the consent of Congress, accept any present, pension,
office, or emolument, of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king,
prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of
the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of
trust or profit under them, or either of them:"
| It was determined in the affirmative, |
{ |
Yeas . . . . . . . . . . 26.
Nays . . . . . . . . . . . 1. |
On motion,
The yeas and nays having been required by one-fifth
of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are,
Messrs. Anderson, Brent, Champlin, Clay, Condit, Crawford, Franklin,
Gaillard, German, Gilman, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Horsey, Lambert, Leib,
Lloyd, Mathewson, Meigs, Pickering, Pope, Reed, Smith, of Maryland,
Sumter, Tait, Turner, and Whiteside.
Mr. Smith, of New York, voted in the negative.
On motion, by Mr. Pope,
To add to the resolution the following words:
"And be subject to such other penalties and disabilities as may be
provided by law:"
| It was determined in the negative, |
{ |
Yeas . . . . . . . . . . 12.
Nays . . . . . . . . . . 14. |
On motion,
The yeas and nays having been required by one-fifth
of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are,
Messrs. Anderson, Brent, Clay, Gregg, Leib, Lloyd, Pickering, Pope,
Reed, Sumter, Tait, and Turner.
Those who voted in the negative are,
Messrs. Champlin, Condit, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard, German,
Gilman, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Lambert, Mathewson, Smith, of Maryland,
Smith, of New York, and Whiteside.
And the resolution having been
further amended by inserting the words "and retain," after the
words "accept," in the second instance, the President reported
it to the house accordingly.
On the question, Shall this resolution be
engrossed and read a third time as amended?
It was determined in the affirmative.
Journal of the Senate; Friday, April
27th, 1810 (Page
506)
Mr. Gilman, from the committee,
also reported the resolution for an amendment to the constitution,
respecting titles of nobility, correctly engrossed, and the resolution
was read the third time as amended.
On the question, Shall this resolution pass as
amended?
| It was determined in the affirmative, |
{ |
Yeas . . . . . . . . . . 19.
Nays . . . . . . . . . . . 5. |
On motion,
The yeas and nays having been required by one-fifth
of the Senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are,
Messrs. Anderson, Champlin, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard, Goodrich,
Gregg, Hillhouse, Lambert, Leib, Lloyd, Mathewson, Meigs, Pickering,
Reed, Smith, of Maryland, Sumter, Tait, and Turner.
Those who voted in the negative are,
Messrs. German, Gilman, Robinson, Smith, of New York, and Whiteside.
So it was
Resolved, That this resolution pass as amended.
Ordered, That the Secretary request the concurrence of the
House of Representatives in this resolution.
Journal of the House; Friday, April
27th, 1810 (Page
404)
Another message was received from
the Senate, by Mr. Otis, their Secretary :
Mr. Speaker : The Senate
have ... also passed a resolution providing an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States ; to which amendments, bills, and
resolution, they desire the concurrence of this House.
Journal of the House; Saturday,
April 28th, 1810 (Page
404)
The House proceeded to consider
the resolution sent from the Senate, proposing an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States ; and the same being twice read at the
Clerk's table, was ordered to be referred to the Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union.
Journal of the House; Tuesday, May
1st, 1810 (Page
423)
The House resolved itself into a
Committee of the Whole on the resolution from the Senate proposing an
amendment to the Constitution of the United States : and after some time
spent therein, Mr. Speaker resumed the chair, and Mr. Cutts reported
that the committee had, according to order, had the said resolution
under consideration, and made no amendment thereto.
Thus, on May 1, 1810, during this evening sitting of
the 11th Congress, 2nd sess., the Committee of the Whole (House of
Representatives) considered the Titles of Nobility Resolution jointly
agreed to by the Senate. The resolution was read a third time, voted
upon and affirmatively approved by 87
yeas, with 3 dissenting nays. The
Clerk of the House was then ordered to inform the Senate of its
concurrence.
Journal of the Senate; Tuesday, May
1st, 1810 (Pages
511-512)
A message from the House of
Representatives, by Mr. Magruder, their Clerk:
Mr. President: the House
of Representatives concur in the resolution for an amendment to the
constitution of the United States respecting titles of nobility.
. . . Mr. Whiteside, from the committee,
reported that they had examined and found duly enrolled the
"Resolution for an amendment to the constitution of the United
States, respecting titles of nobility;" . . .
Mr. President:
the
Speaker of the House of Representatives having signed an enrolled
resolution, and also three enrolled bills, I am directed to bring them
to the Senate for the Signature of their President,. And he withdrew.
The President signed the enrolled
resolution, and also the three enrolled bills, last reported to have
been examined, and they were delivered to the committee, to be laid
before the President of the United States.
The final formal Resolution text
is as follows:
"Resolved, by the Senate
and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, That the
following section be submitted to the Legislatures of the several
States, which, when ratified by three-fourths of the States,
shall be valid and binding as a part of the Constitution of the United
States : [emphasis added]
"If any citizen of the
United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of
nobility, or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept
and retain, any present, pension, office, or emolument, of any kind
whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such
person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be
incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or
either of them."
The Constitution limits consideration of
constitutional amendments to states already in the union and Congress
provided no qualification in this or any other resolution
proposing a
constitutional amendment. Thus, even if a territory reached statehood
before culmination of the ratification process, there was no standing
for that state to participate in the process. If Congress meant for that
legislative option to be available, it would have had to so stipulate.
Between May 1 of 1810, when the Titles of Nobility
Resolution to amend the Constitution of the United States went out from
Congress, and September 15 of 1814, the Resolution was approved by
twelve state legislatures and rejected by three. All official
federal
government references to the history of this proposed amendment posit
that with ratification by 13 state legislatures it would
become a valid amendment to the Constitution.
Between February 2, 1811, and February 14, 1811,
Virginia's two legislative houses (General Assembly) considered the
Titles of Nobility amendment. Senate and House of Delegates' journal
entries record that on February 14, 1811, the following took place in
Virginia's Senate:
"on the question being put thereupon, the said resolution was
disagreed to1
by the House.2".
There is no known record of Virginia's General
Assembly further considering the amendment until early 1817, nor can any
reference about a reason for such a long delay be found in official
Virginia records.
On February 15th of 1817, both Houses authorized an
act to completely revise the State's laws. Five of Virginia's most
respected lawyers, legal scholars and House of Delegates members, Judge
William Brockenbrough, Supreme Court of Appeals Justices John Coalter
and Spencer Roane, attorney and legislator, Benjamin Watkins Leigh, and
Judge Robert White were appointed to a Revisal Committee.
Benjamin Watkins Leigh was enjoined with the
superintendency of this project. Fellow House of Delegates members
William Munford (Clerk of the House of Delegates) and William Waller
Hening (author of the Virginia Statutes at Large) joined the Revisal
Committee in the next legislative session.
On December 2nd of 1817, in the next legislative
session, the Revisal Committee issued a report which clearly
demonstrated the members' belief that a complete and careful review and
revisal of Virginia's body of laws could be accomplished within one
session - but had learned otherwise. On January 28, 1818, a second
Revisal Committee report referred to a number of areas of concern
needing attention. The Committee offered several recommendations, and
two of the more important were:
"... that they should be required to cause two
sets of their books, with marginal notes and references, to be
preserved, the one for the use of the House of Delegates, the other
for the Senate ; and that they should be allowed time to perform the
work with care and deliberation."
Little more is reported about progress of the Revisal
Committee's work until March of 1819. Matters then proceed swiftly
and the concluding issues are resolved within a matter of days. Then on
March 12, 1819, the two Houses communicate several times that same day,
reaching agreement on "An act, "providing for the
re-publication of the laws of this Commonwealth."". The
Act is found to be properly enrolled, after which the Speaker of
Virginia's Senate signed Act 280 into law. The book which was published
subsequent to and in compliance with this Act contains:
 | The Laws of Virginia |
| The Constitution of the United States |
| The Declaration of Rights, and |
| The Constiution of Virginia |
Legislative references in Virginian journals of both
legislatives houses demonstrate that the members were completely
informed as to the contents of the Revised Codes of the Laws of
Virginia book; i.e., the Constitution of the United States and
amendments, including a new 13th amendment concerning Titles of
Nobility. Also to be noted is that Thomas Ritchie, Printer to the
Commonwealth was bonded and received payment from Virginia's Treasury to
produce this book. All in all, the entire Revisal Committee
project was carried out with great care and attention to detail. Any
assumption or conclusion that the Virginia General Assembly was ignorant
or unaware of a proposed but yet to be ratified amendment (and thus its
unauthorized inclusion) is not supported by the facts. The existence of
this book with its careful side margin cross references at both Art. 1,
§ 9, cl. 2 in the body of the Constitution and the 13th amendment
itself clearly indicate awareness of the Titles of Nobility amendment
and thus acceptance and acknowledgement of its presence and status. And
the language of Act 280 itself further establishes ratification.
1. BE it enacted by the General Assembly, That
there shall be published an edition of the laws of this Commonwealth,
in which shall be contained the following matters, that is to say : The
constitution of the United States, and the amendments thereto.
As only one more affirmative state vote was needed,
General Assembly enactment as stated here is a correct legal statement
and position in regard to the Titles of Nobility amendment. If to that
point the amendment had received no more than 11 affirmative state
legislature votes, it would still be a proposed amendment and no
statement of enactment could change that fact. With the enactment by
the Virginia General Assembly completing the ratification process, the
amendment became a ratified article of the Constitution and the law of
the nation.
The following year, on February 24th, 1820,
Virginia's General Assembly passed an act3
requiring the governor to transmit four copies of several different
editions of Virginia's laws, for the year 1792 and specific later years,
including the session laws for both 1818 and 1819; i.e., the two volume
set of Virginia's 1819 Revised Code to the U.S. State Department. At
least one of these two volume sets sent to the State Department, and
notated as received 29 August 1821, is still in the possession of the
Library of Congress. [VA1819
Images] Thus, the Federal Government received formal
notification from Virginia that it had ratified the Titles of Nobility
Amendment. The only remaining mystery which we cannot fully explain
is how and why John Quincy Adams and other officials of the Federal
Government failed to recognize the constitutional importance of this
book and body of laws.
Footnotes:
(1) "...disagreed to," means not
accepted, as opposed to rejected. According to house rules, the matter
could not be raised again in the same session, but no rejection was ever
reported, and the amendment could be, and obviously was, raised again,
to be passed, in a later session.
(2) "House," in this case, refers to
the upper house, i.e., the Senate, not the lower house, the House of
Delegates.
(3) From the Session Acts of the VA General
Assembly [Chapter
XVIII Image]
Chapter XVIII, --- An act requiring the
Governor of this commonwealth to transmit to the Secretary of State of
the United States, copies of certain laws therein mentioned. --- [passed
February 24th, 1820.]
1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly,
That it shall be the duty of the governor of this Commonwealth, and he
is hereby required to procure and transmit, at the expense of the state,
to the secretary of state of the United States, four copies of the
Statutes at Large, four copies of the revisal of seventeen hundred and
ninety-two, and of each and every revisal subsequent to that period (if
to be had,) four copies of the session acts of eighteen hundred and
eighteen and eighteen hundred and nineteen, and annually thereafter,
four copies of the acts of each session of assembly ; one copy whereof
shall be for the use of each of the two houses of Congress, one for the
president of the United States, and one for the library of Congress.
2. This act shall be in force from the passing thereof.
Respectfully submitted to the People of the United
States
for their information and consideration.
Suzanne A. Nevling
TONA Committee of Correspondence
|
