THE SUPREME COURTHISTORICAL SOCIETY

(^xmviexh^VOLUME XI NUMBER 1,1990

Session Commemorates Bicentennial of Supreme Court

In a simple, dignified ceremony on January 16,1990, a specialsession of the Supreme Court honored the Bicentennial of thefirst session of the Supreme Court of the United States. Thecommemorative session opened as all official sessions of theCourt are opened, with the Marshal of the Court gaveling theroom to silence and announcing the arrival of the Justices: "TheHonorable, the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of theSupreme Court of the United States." The program consisted offour speeches from representatives of the Supreme Court, theSupreme Court Bar and the Department of Justice.

The first speech was given by Retired Chief Justice WarrenE. Burger, Chairman of the Commission on the Bicentennial ofthe U.S. Constitution. Chief Justice Burger discussed the originsof the Supreme Court, outlining the circumstances that surrounded the first session of the Supreme Court in February,1790. He noted that on the day appointed for this first session,"only three of the six Justices who had been confirmed werepresent. There being no quorum they met the following daywhen the fourth Justice arrived. The fifth did not make it at alland the sixth. Justice Harrison, declined the appointment partlyon the grounds of health and probably influenced by the realitythat riding circuit... was a burden that onlya Justice in robusthealth could undertake." In discussing this historic occasion.Burger described the humble surroundings in which the sessionwas held: "This first session was held in a small room on thesecond floor of a commercial building in New York City acrossthe street from the Fulton Fish Market near the waterfront."

Chief Justice Burger explained that there was no actualbusiness before the Court for its first session, so "it undertookhousekeeping matters; it appointed a 'cryer,' adopted a seal forthe Court and later appointed a clerk. At its second session itadmitted some lawyers, and over the next two years it mainlywaited for the pipeline to bring some cases from the lowercourts." Burger pointed out thatwhile thecaseload was light inthe early years ofthe Court's history, some significant opinionswere rendered. He noted particularly the decision in Ware v.Hvlton. saying that it "canbe read asforeshadowing the holding

ll V

Society founding member William S. Sessions, Director of the Federal Bureauof Investigation, and Retired Chief Justice Warren Burger were among thoseattending a reception that immediately followed the bicentennial session.

in Marburv v. Madison nine years later."Chief Justice Burger then commented on the difficulties of

the early Court in establishing itself as a truly co-equal branch ofthe government. In conclusion, he commented that the free-

-continued onpagesix

Annual Meeting: UpdateThe date for the Society's Fifteenth Annual Meeting has

been set for Monday, May 14, 1990. As in past years, theactivities will include: the annual lecture, to be given in theSupreme CourtChamberby RetiredJusticeLewis F. Powell,Jr.; an open house; a special guided tour of the SupremeCourt; the annual membershipmeeting; and the black-tiereception and dinner. Invitations were mailed to Societymembers on April second.

Letter from the President

Society President Justin A. Stanley

We are closing in on our interim goal of $1.5 million in handor in pledges to the endowment campaign by the time of our May14, 1990 Aimual Meeting. We now have one million, fourhundred and thirty-five thousand dollars, thanks to $25,000 contributions from: S. Howard Goldman; Southwestern Bell Foundation; Altheimer & Gray; Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro; Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan; and Skadden Arps, Slate, Meagher &Flom since I last reported to you.

Our membership campaign, headed by Frank Jones, is alsoproceeding well, with the Society's membership rolls now ex

The U.S. Army Strolling Strings are scheduled to perform at the AnnualDinner on May 14, and will be followed by the ninety-five-man AlexandriaHamionizers barbershop-style chorus.

ceeding 3,300 members. Frank hopes to reach 3,500 by May14th. If he does, it will be the result of a great deal of hard workby Frank and the vigorous efforts of state membership chairpersons like Charles Renfrew, who singlehandedly has signed upover 130 new members this year.

As you probably noticed, the front page of this issue includesa notice about the Fifteenth Annual Meeting which will be heldon May 14, 1990. Although much of this year's program willfollow the successful traditions of prior meetings, the Society'sincreased activities have happily necessitated some expansion ofour agenda. Two noteworthy additions to this year's programwill be a presentation of awards for state membership chairmenwho have met their annual membership goals and awards for$25,000 endowment donors. Similar presentations were madelast Fall to some of the initial endowment fund donors, and statemembership chairmen who got their recruiting drives off to afast start—meeting their year-end goals within a mere six months.

A third ceremony will also be held to present cash prizes tothe authors of the two best original works published in the 1989Yearbook. This is particularly exciting, because these are thefirst awards of this kind in the Society's history.

Society Trustee Charles B. Renfrew was photographed with Mrs. Rehnquist atthe Fourteenth Annual Dinner. Mr. Renfrew, one of two California nienil>er-ship chairmen, has recruited more than 130 new members.

THE SUPREME COURT HISTORICAL SOCIETY

(^xmxisxhgPublished four times yearly by the Supreme Court HistoricalSociety, 111Second Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002.Tel.(202) 543-0400.Distributed to members of the Society, law libraries, interested individuals and professional associations.Editor Alice L. O'Donnell

Managing Editor Kathleen ShurtleffAssistant Editor Barbara R. Lentz

Consulting Editors Kenneth S. GellerE. Barrett Prettyman, Jr.

Retired Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr., chats with Society members at a reception preceding an earlierannual dinner. Justice Powell will deliver the Annual Lecture May 14, in the Supreme Court Chamber.

Patricia Evans. While each individual'scontribution greatly enhanced the production quality of the 1989 Yearbook.this issue also benefitted from a strongfield of editorial submissions—in part dueto the establishment of the cash prizes toencourage original scholarship on the history of the Supreme Court.

To preserve objectivity, the Publications Committee established a policy thatsitting and retired Justices, members ofthe Publications Committee and mem

bers of the Yearbook's Board of Editors

would be ineligible for consideration forthese prizes. Even with these restrictions,the Board of Editors is having a difficulttime choosing from among several deserving papers, which, in itself, is a creditto the Yearbook's growing prominence.Nevertheless, the first two recipients willbe selected in time to receive prizes of$1,500 and $500respectivelyon May14th.

The Societyhas been fine-tuning its development and production of the Yearbook for several years and the book isgradually evolving into a nationally recognized annual. Professor Michael Cardozo has assumed the role of Editor. Clare

Cushman, a member of our staff, is doing a very able job asManaging Editor. We have also been fortunate to securethe valuable editorial assistance of James J. Kilpatrick and theresearch assistance of Supreme Court Assistant Librarian, Dr.

I hope that as many ofyou as possible willplan to attend theFifteenth Annual Meeting. However, I remind you that, as inyears past, the Annual Reception and Dinner are verypopularand reservations will be accepted in the order in which they arereceived. The membership is growing, but the Great Hall is not;if you wish to attend, please respond promptly when you receiveyour invitation. All members with reservations that are acceptedwill be notified by mail as soon as is possible.

Endowment Fund Donors of $25,000 asIndividuals:

Mr. S. Howard Goldman

Mr. William T. Gossett

Mr. David Lloyd KreegerMr. Jeremiah Marsh

Mr. Dwight OppermanMr. Bernard G. SegalMr. Justin A. Stanley

Law Firms:

Altheimer & GrayArnold & Porter

Breed, Abbott & MorganCleary, Gottlieb, Steen & HamiltonCravath, Swaine & MooreDavis, Polk & WardwellFried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & JacobsonHogan & HartsonJones, Day, Reavis & PogueKing& SpaldingMayer, Brown & PlattMilbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloyO'Melveny & MyersOppenheimer, Wolff &DonnellyOpperman, Heins & Paquin

of April 6,1990Patterson, Belknap, Webb & TylerPhelan, Pope & JohnPillsbury, Madison & SutroReasoner, Davis & FoxShearman & SterlingSidley & AustinSkadden Arps, Slate, Meagher & FlomSutherland, Asbill & BrennanSullivan & Cromwell

Vorys, Sater, Seymour & PeaseWachtell, Lipton, Rosen & KatzWeil, Gotshal & MangesWilliams & ConnollyWilmer, Cutler & Pickering

Foundations:

Clark-Winchcole Foundation

Charles E. Culpeper FoundationMinnesota, Mining and Manufacturing FoundationRobert Wood Johnson Foundation

Southwestern Bell Foundation

Corporations:Potomac Electric Power Company (PEPCO)West Publishing Company

Commemorative Stamp Issued for Bicentennial of Federal JudiciaryArticle III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States

provides that "[t]he judicial power of the United States, shall bevested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Comts as theCongress may from time to time ordain and establish." TheJudicial Branch of the federal government was created in accordance with this provision, by the authority of the Judiciary Act ofSeptember 24,1789. On February2,1790, the Supreme Court ofthe United States met for the first time.

Two hundred years later, a ceremony was held in the Supreme Court building to unveil the commemorative stamp designed to honor the Bicentennial of the Judicial Branch.

The stamp, part of the Constitution series, was designed byHoward Koslow of East Norwich, New York. The commemorative stamp created for the Judicial Branch features ChiefJusticeJohn Marshall. As the fourth Chief Justice, Marshall did morethan any other Justice to establish the Supreme Court and thefederal judiciary as an equal branch of the government. Amonghis greatest contributions is his written opinion in Marburv v.Madison (1803), inwhichhe held that the Supreme Court has thepower to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional.

The unveiling and dedication of the stamp was celebrated ina ceremony held in the lower Great Hall of the Supreme Court,at the foot of the large John Marshall statue. Mr. Joseph Harris,the Postmaster of Washington, D.C., presided over the ceremony. After welcoming the honored guests, including the ChiefJustice, Mr. Harris introduced an a capella sextet to sing theNational Anthem. Next, Rabbi Harold S. White, from Georgetown University, delivered the invocation. Esther J. Richards,the General Manager/ Postmaster of the Southern MarylandDivision of the Postal Service, introduced many of the honoredguests to the large crowd attending the event.

Mr. Harris resumed the podium to introduce Chief JusticeRehnquist, who represented the Court. The remarks of theChief Justice follow:

'T am happy to participate in this ceremony honoring theJudicial Branch of the United States Government with a stampdepicting my great predecessor. Chief Justice John Marshall. Iam both an amateur stamp collector and an American historybuff, and I must say that at least in the past, there seems to havebeen a certain amount of politics involved in deciding whichAmerican historical figures were chosen to have their picturesgrace a stamp.

"Take, for example, the three most prominent members ofAbraham Lincoln's cabinet. William H. Seward was his Secretary of State, and continued to serve as Secretary of State underAndrew Johnson.

"Lincoln's Secretary of the Treasury was Salmon P. Chase,who had served as both Governor ofOhio and Senator from thatstate. In 1864, Lincoln named him Chief Justice of the UnitedStates,andheservedinthat position fornineyearsuntilhisdeathin 1873.

"The third member was Edward M. Stanton whom Lincolnappointed Secretary ofWar. Stantonwas a political chameleon.He had voted for Buchanan in 1856, and served briefly inBuchanan's cabinet just before Lincoln came to power. HebecameLincoln'sSecretaryofWar in 1862, and carriedover into

the administration ofAndrew Johnsonjust as Seward had. Whilein Buchanan's administration he had surreptitiously confidedthe deliberations of the Cabinet to the incoming Republicans.While Johnson's Secretary of War he had surreptitiously con- ^fided the dehberations of the Cabinet to the radical Republicanson Capitol Hill. Grant appointed him to the Supreme Court in1869, but he died before he could take his seat.

"In what order do you suppose these three worthies wouldappear on United States postage stamps? One factor to bear inmind,ofcourse, is the policy against putting anyliving personona stamp.

"The first to make it onto a stamp was none other than EdwinM. Stanton, who first made his appearance on the seven-centvermillion stamp of the National Bank Note issue of 1870-71.

"Seward, although he died only a fewyears after Stanton, wasnot so fortunate. He did not make it onto a postage stamp until1909, when his picture appeared on the two-cent carmine denomination of theAlaska-Yukon-Padfic Exposition issue. (Sewardhad been the movingforce behind the acquisitionof Alaska forthe United States, and this exposition commemorated the fiftieth anniversary of that acquisition.)

"Andhow aboutSalmon P. Chase? Notwithstanding thefactthat he was a Senator from Ohio, the Governor of Ohio,Secretary of the Treasury under Lincoln, and Chief Justice of theUnited States for nine years,he has never appeared on a stamp!

"This is but one example of the fact that United Statespostage stamps have not been particularly generous in theirdepiction of members of the Supreme Court. John Marshall,whoappearson today'sstamp,wasthe firstto break thejudicialbarrier in the postoffice department [Tjhis isthe fourth timethat Marshall has appeared on a UnitedStates postage stamp.

"William Howard Taft, the only American to have servedboth as President and Chief Justice of the United States, wasdepicted on the special four-cent brown denomination issued intheyearofhisdeath,1930. He isalsodepicted a second timeonthe fifty-cent light violet denomination of the Presidential issueof 1938.

"When we come to members of the Court who were not JohnMarshall, and whowere not also President of the United States,thepickings areslim. In 1948, two years after his death, a three-centbrightviolet stampwasissuedto honorHarlan FiskeStone,Associate Justice andthenChiefJustice. In1957, thefifteen-centrose lake denomination depicts John Jay, the first Chief Justiceofthis Court. And in1962, onthe one-hundredth anniversary ofhis birth, acommemorative four-cent stamp was issued tohonorChief Justice Charles Evans Hughes."

Two Associate Justices have beendepicted onstamps: OliverWendell Holmes, Jr. on the fifteen-cent maroon denominationofthe ProminentAmericansissueof 1968; andAssociate JusticeHugo L. Black in 1986. The Court building, on the other hand,hasbeen depicted three separate times.

"There may be some who will feel that John Marshall hasalready had more than his share of stamps depicting him ascompared with other distinguished membersof thisCourt.Butthis new issue isdesigned to represent theJudicial Branch oftheUnited States Government, and surely there can be no doubtthatifone person isto beselected toembody thatbranch, itmust

be the man who is referred to by all simply as 'The Great ChiefJustice.' He served as Chief Justice of this Coiut for thirty-fouryears, from 1801 until 1835. He came to a Court that was weakand insignificant, so much so that those planning the move of theCapitol from Philadelphia to Washington in the fall of 1800totally forgot to provide anyspace inwhich the Court could meet.When Marshall left the Court more than a third of a centurylater, it was a vigorous and co-equal branch of the government,with its power of judicial review firmly established. No otherperson in the history of the Court even comes close to matchinghis stature."

Anthony M. Frank, the Postmaster General of the UnitedStates, wasthe next to speak. He began bystating that dedicatingthe commemorative stamp was "the highest honor we, at thepostal service,can giveto recognize the two-hundredth anniversary of the Judicial Branch and the convening of the highest courtin the land.

"Several years ago, the Postal Service received thousands ofrequests to create a series of stamps celebrating the Bicentennialof the U.S. Constitution. And, we were happy to complywiththose requests, because this series gives us the opportunity notonly to commemorate the eventssurrounding the early days ofthe writingand implementation of the Constitution,but also toteach the American public about the continuing importance ofthis document in our daily lives.

"The Constitution seriesconsists of more than twenty philatelic issues that pay tribute to our country's early years. Eachstamp and postal card highlights a major event in the development of our federal system... from conveningof the ConstitutionConvention, to ratification of the document by the thirteenoriginal states, to the draftingof the bill of rights.

"This Judicial Branch stamp is the last of four commemora-tives intheConstitution Series specifically recognizing thethreeseparate branches of our federal government. Last year, weissued two stamps honoring the Legislative Branch-one for theHouse of Representatives and the other for the Senate-and astamp recognizing the Executive Branch. The Judicial Branchstamp completes the group.

"I think it isfitting thattheSupreme Court stamp isthefinalone issued in this group offour... fitting, because, Congress canpass a law, and the President can sign it into power, but theSupremeCourt, representingthe Judicial Branch, has final authority over that law.

"The fourth Chief Justice, John Marshall, whose strikingimageappears on this stamp, and whosestatue we stand beforetoday, was instrumental in establishing the Supreme Court'sfinal authority. His decision in the case Marburv v. Madisondefined, irrefutably, the Court's ability to declare a lawunconstitutional, bydemonstrating that the Courtwas obliged to refuseenforcement of any statute that it found to be contrary to theConstitution. For the last 200 years, the Supreme Court hascontinued toseethat the Constitution remains theguiding forcein shaping our nation.

"Ourstamp designs must convey complex ideas inonly afewseconds, much like the lawyer who has only a few minutes topresent his case before the Supreme Court. Both the stamp

' design and the court case are researched extensively. Months,even years, ofintense preparation arecarefully condensed into

the essence of the issue."In the case of the Supreme Court stamp, several design

elements were researched and considered. It was suggested thatthe scales of justice would be an appropriate illustration, or theSupreme Court building itself. Or even the first Chief Justice,John Jay. But it was decided that John Marshall, the man who didthe mostto shape the destinyof the Court, wouldbest representthe Supreme Court on this commemorative stamp.

"The stamp designer, Howard Koslow, who also created theLegislative and Executive Branch commemoratives, molded animage ofJohn Marshall and blended it with colors and typefacesto match the previous issues,givinga beautiful continuityto thisset of four. After all of this intense preparation comes themomentof truth.We have only one chance to catch the recipient's attention with our stamp design.. . just as the lawyer hasonly one chsmce to convince the nine Supreme Court Justiceswith his argument.

"But extensive research and careful presentation are not theonly parallels between the Postal Service and the SupremeCourt. We also are two entities that touch the lives of everyAmerican on a daily basis.

"It has occured to me that the Supreme Court issues hundreds of legal decisions, while the Postal Service makes decisionson hundreds of possible subjectsfor future stamp issues. Thesedecisions and issues are eagerly anticipated by the Americanpublic.

"I am glad that the anticipation over the Judicial Branchstamp is finally over. Starting today in Washington, D.C., andtomorrow nationwide, millions of these stamps will appear onenvelopes speeding across the country, and around the world,telling of our pride in the Judicial Branch of government andcelebrating twohundredyearsofpreserving, protectingandpromoting the Constitution of the United States."

The Postmaster General, accompanied by the Chief Justice,unveiled the commemorative stampto heartyapplause from theaudience. Postmaster General Frank then dedicated the stamp.

Mr. Frank presented souvenir albums to the distinguishedguests. The first, by tradition, was delivered to the President of

the United States. As Presi-

J

dent Bush was unable to

attend, his album was delivered to the White House.

The next album was presented to Chief Justice

Rehnquist, followed bypresentations to Chief Justice Burger and the Postmaster ofWashington, D.C.These presentations concluded the commemorative

ceremony.

The commemorative stamp,shown left, was designed by Mr.Howard Koslow and features an

image of Chief Justice JohnMarshall that was drawn from

numerous sculptures, paintings,statues and engravings.

Bicentennial Session (continued from page one)

doms "people all over the world are demanding" were the kindsof freedom "this Court has been foremost in protectingfor twohundredyears. Our historyistheir hope, andour hopefor themmust be that whatever systems they set up . . . will include ajudiciarywith authority and independence to enforce the basicguarantees of freedom, as this Court has done for these twohundred years."

The next speaker was Rex E. Lee, President of BrighamYoung University and former Solicitor General of the UnitedStates. Mr. Lee, speakingas a representativeof the membersoftheSupreme CourtBar,briefly touched upon thehistory ofthatBar, explaining that the first rules of the Court, adopted onFebruary 5,1790, drew a distinction between"counsellors andattornies." The rule provided that "counsellors shallnot practice as attornies nor attornies as counsellors in this court." Thisrule perpetuated the tradition of Great Britain whereby theduties and roles ofbarristers and solicitors are distinct from oneanother. In the newly created American system, attorneys"couldfilemotionsand doother paperwork,but onlycounselorscould'plead a casebeforethe Court.'" Mr.Lee pointedout thatthis system was modified in 1801 by a change in rules whichallowed that "Counsellors may be admitted as Attornies in thisCourt, on taking the usual oath."

Mr. Lee noted several of the distinguished nineteenthcentury advocates before the Supreme Court. He pointed outthat during the early years of the Court there were no timelimitations on oral argument and frequently each side wasrepresented by two or more attorneys. As an example, he notedthat the oral argument in McCulloch v. Marvland included sbcattorneys and lasted nine days. "Those were the dayswhentherewere no questions; both the commentators and the advocatesthemselves referred to their arguments as speeches, which theywouldrehearse for days. CharlesWarren relates that 'the socialseason of Washington began with the opening of the SupremeCourt term.' "

After discussingseveral of the most notable advocatesof the

RexE. Lee, President of Brigham Young University, represented the membersof the Supreme Court Bar. Mr. Lee is shown above, left, with Justice and Mrs.Scalia at the reception that followed the bicentennial session.

nineteenth century, Mr. Leesaid "it isaheady clear thatduringthe Court's second hundred years, advocates to match thestatureofPinkney, Wirt, andWebster have stood atthis podium.Comparisons are difficult because of changes in circumstancesand rules, butquite clearly theCourt's jurisprudence during thiscentury hasbeeninfluenced by people such as John W. Davis,Robert Jackson, Thurgood Marshall, andErwin Griswold, justas it was during earlier times byPinkney, Wirt, andWebster."

In conclusion, Mr. Lee said, "we the members of the bar ofthis Court are proud of the institution whose two hundrethbirthdaywe celebrate, proud ofwhat ithas meant and what ithasdone for ourcountry and itspeople, and proud ofthe contribution that the members of the bar have made to the Court and its

accomplishments over its two-hundred-year history We arepleased to offer ourcontinuing services as we enter theCourt'sthird century."

The third speaker wasKenneth W.Starr, SolicitorGeneral ofthe UnitedStates. Solicitor GeneralStarr spoke of those earlymembersof the Court whowere included amongthe FoundingFathers andofthesignificant contributions they made toshapingthe new country. He noted that as earlyas 1792 in Havburn'sCase it became evident that "ourconstitutional democracy, byvirtue of the status of the Constitution as supreme law, wouldinclude thepower ofjudicial review "

He said many of the first decisions of the Court helped todefine thescope and powers ofthefederal government. One ofthefirst principles which itaddressed was the"legitimacy aswellasthelimits ofjudicial power." Thesecond was thatappropriatenational interests could andshould supercede those ofindividualstates or regions.

In conclusion, he said that the Court had played its role inbringing "to life in 1789 and 1790 what the Framers had envi-sioned-a balanced government, destined to stand the test oftime," and it is that "moral vision ofequal justice under the ruleoflaw" that the Court and the entire Justice system even nowendeavor to promote.

Chief Justice Rehnquist was the concluding speaker. Hethanked the other speakers for their remarks and spoke of aceremony held inthe Court fifty years ago tocommemorate theone hundred and fiftieth anniversary ofthe first session oftheSupreme Court. He quoted from then Attorney General RobertH. Jackson, who had spoken on that occasion:

this age is one offounding fathers to those who follow. Ofcourse, they will reexamine the work ofthis day, andsome willbe rejected. Timewillno doubt disclose that sometimeswhenourgeneration thinks it iscorrecting a mistake ofthe past, it isreally only substituting one ofits own. ... I see noreason todoubt that the problems ofthe next half-century will test thewisdom and courage of this Court as severely as any half-century of its existence.

The Chief Justice noted the catastrophic changes that tookplace around the world shortly after Jackson's speech andexpressed his belief that the coming fifty years would also bringgreat changes of far-reaching magnitude. He noted that "we,too, must realize that ourwork has nomore claim toinfallibilitythan that of our prededecessors. Daniel Webster said that'Justice is the great end of man on earth'. . . and the motto

inscribed on the front of this building— 'Equal Justice UnderLaw'—describes a quest, not a destination."

Continuing his remarks, the Chief Justice commented thatfifty years ago the Court had been "virtually the only constitutional court. .. sitting anywhere in the world." He noted that inthe years following the Second World War, many countries havedrafted written constitutions. While they differ widely from oneanother, many include provisions for a court system which has"authority to enforce the provisions of a written constitution."After further commentary, he concluded, "I do not think that Ioverstate the case when I say that the idea of a constitutionalcourt such as this one is the most important single Americancontribution to the art of government."

Thespecial session of the Courtwas followed bya receptionsponsored in part by the SupremeCourt Historical Society.

In contrast to this simple program, it is interesting to considerthe Centennial Anniversary of the Supreme Court. PresidentBenjamin Harrison suggested the appropriateness of a centennial celebration in his inaugural address delivered on March 4,1889, and the New York State Bar Association determined tohost such a celebration. A Committee was duly appointed andthe President of the New York State Bar, William H. Arnoux,was elected its Chairman. The Committee put together agathering oflarge proportions, somuchso that the MetropolitanOpera House in New York was reserved for the occasion.

By the time of the commemoration, the New York BarAssociation had beenjoined by the American BarAssociation inhosting the event, and the original Committee had been expanded to 100 members to symbolize the ICQ years of the Court'sexistence. The Committee determined to have four speakersrepresenting the New England, Middle, Southern and Westernstates and Ex-President Grover Cleveland was chosen to preside over the occasion. The Symphony Orchestra of the Metropolitan Opera House volunteered to provide music for theoccasion as did the German Liederkranz Society, a choral groupof one hundred voices.

As described in The Supreme Court of the United States. ItsHistorv and Heritage, by Hampton L. Carson, the Opera Housewas "superbly and appropriately decorated. Streamers of theNational colors were suspended from the dome and trained backto the upper gallery. The galleries themselves were profuselydraped with large silken flags, and in the spaces between theCoats-of-Arms of the States and Territories of the Union weredisplayed. The stagewassurmounted bya vastarch draped withflags and to the centre a facsimile of the Seal of the SupremeCourt of the United States was attached. Upon the right and leftofthe stage the portraits in oilof the ChiefJustices of the Courtstoodupon Easels, adding to the interest and significance of thescene. At the appointed hour the members of the Court andspecial guests, amid a burst of great and spontaneous applause,entered the Opera House—" Thus began the ceremony for theCentennial Celebration. The ceremony must have been lengthyfor the speeches as recordedare longandmusical numbers wereinterspersed in the program. The record shows that a selectionfrom Verdi's "Aida" wasplayedat the closeofone longaddress,while a brief intermission was taken following another. Afterspeeches by various members ofthe New York Barand the fourregional representatives of the Bar, the ChiefJusticemadebriefremarks and introduced Justice Stephen Field as the final

speaker. AfterField concluded his

' " remarks, the or-chestra played. ThePresident had been

scheduled to speak

^ time, but nei-^ ther the President^ nor his Cabinet^ were present that

day, as they werein mourning for the

r family the Sec-retary the Navy.Secretary Tracy'sfamilyenced a tragedyreason ac-

cording to the rec-Kenneth W. Starr, Solicitor General of the United ord, with severalStates, represented the Department of Justice. deaths resultingTo close the commemoration, the German Liederkranz Societysang an "Ave Maria" and the audience stood and joined them insinging'Our Country 'Tis of Thee'. After singing the Doxology,a benediction was pronounced and the guests dispersed whilethe orchestra played.

But the New York BarAssociation was not content to let theday end with only that ceremony. That evening a banquet washeld at Lenox Lyceum on Madison Avenue to which the members of the Supreme Court and other distinguished guests wereinvited. The record is not complete on the activities of this event,but it does record a response to a toast by the first Justice Harlan.

The enthusiasm of the centennial celebration may seem a bitexaggerated to us now that we stand at the two hundred yearmark. But both commemorations were dedicated to the same

institution and underlying precepts of liberty. This "quest forliberty" as Chief Justice Rehnquist termed it, is the underlyingcause of both celebrations. Mr. Arnoux, Chairman of the Centennial Commemorative Committee summarized his generation's feelings in words that are still meaningful today:

The institution of a Judicial body so comprehensive and far-reaching, so implicitly tnisted and obeyed, so republican infonn andfinal ineffect was, to theabsolutism ofEurope, a boldinnovation, a stupendous experiment. It was unparalleled inthe world's history. Now it is no longeran experiment, withcavilormisgiving but a monumental androundedfact. The Executive, with a million soldiers at his command, the Confess ofthe United States, with itspower, forty States, sovereign in theirsphere, andsixty-fivemillions ofpeople occupying a continent,aproud and liberty-lovingpeople, jealous oftheir rights, bow tothe decree ofa Tribunal ofnine Civilians that has not a singlesword to enforce its judgments. . . .We meet, not to discuss or critcise the Court. ... But we meet,on the broadest grounds of patriotism and gratitude, to acknowledge and celebrate its worth and its beneficent results, torecognize the great debt which we as a nation owe it, so that inthe records ofHistory there may be proof anew that Republicsare not always indifferent or ungrateful.

Arthur Goldberg: A Man of Advocacyby Kathleen Shmtlejf

Arthur Joseph Golberg was a man of many careers. Duringhis lifetime he worked as an attorney specializing in labor law,served as an advisor to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, andbecame Secretary ofLabor in Kennedy's Cabinet, an AssociateJustice of the Supreme Court of the United States, and UnitedStates Ambassador to the United Nations during the Vietnamconflict. Goldberg also made a bid for elective office when heran for governor of New York in 1970.

Goldberg's origins were very humble and his is the classicstory of a poor child of immigrants making his fame and fortunein America. Goldberg was bom August 8, 1908, one of eightchildren of Joseph and Rebecca Goldberg. Both of his parentswere Russian immigrants who settled in Chicago. Goldberg'sfather, who died when Arthur was eight, sold produce to hotelsfrom a wagon pulled by a bhnd horse. Despite the financialhardships of his childhood, Goldberg completed high school atthe age of 15. He then began attending Crane Junior College byday and De Paul University by night. He subsequently enteredNorthwestern University Law School, where he graduated first

fi

l^-Ur ;

in his class in 1929 and took his doctorate, summa cum laude, thefollowing year.

After clerkingfor a Chicagolaw firm, Goldberg opened hisown practice, which became increasingly devoted to labor law.One ofhis first major labor clients was the American NewspaperGuild, which was embroiled in a strike againt the Chicago Hearstnewspaper. In 1931, Goldberg married Dorthy Kurgans. Theyhad two children, Barbara and Robert.

In the late 1930's he began representing a group which wouldbecome the United Steelworkers union and the Chicago andIllinois state branches of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). Because of his work with these and other clients,Goldberg played an important part in the historic merger in 1955of the American Federation of Labor and the Congress ofIndustrial Organizations, and, indeed, authored the constitutionof the new AFL-CIO. In 1959 he represented the steelworkersin a strike that lasted more than 100 days and ended in what wasseen by many as a significant victory for labor.

During the 1950s when he cooperated with congressional

Li)

m

Representaiives of both sides of the steel talks are shown leaving the tVhite House after the June 8,1952 bargaining session. No progress had been made towardresolving the critical week-long steel strike. Left to Right: Arthur J. Goldberg, General Counsel, United Steel Workers (USW);Philip Murray, President, USW;John Stephens, VicePresident U.S.Steel; Ben Morrell, Jones &Laughlin; DavidJ. McDonald,Secretary -Treas., USW;Charles White, President, RepublicSteeL

committees and their investigations of corruption in organizedlabor, Goldberg became acquainted with Robert F. Kennedy,who was the chief counsel of the Senate Select Committee on

Improper Activities in the Labor Management Field. His rela-•tionship with the Kennedys was strengthened in 1958 whenGoldberg supported labor reform legislation that Senator JohnF. Kennedy had proposed. Goldberg was instrumental in obtaining the support of organized labor groups for Kennedy's presidential campaign. It was not a surprise, therefore, when Kennedy nominated Goldberg for the post of Secretary of Labor inhis Cabinet. The choice proved to be popular, and he was confirmed unanimously by the Senate and praised by Senator BarryGoldwater as "the most outstanding choice" in the new Cabinet.

Twenty-fourhours after Goldberg wassworn in as Secretary,he travelled to New York to help mediate a tugboat strike.During his service in the Cabinet, Goldberg called upon hiswideexperience in labor law to arbitrate a number of disputes. Themost significant of these involvedUnited States Steel Corporation. President Kennedy was committed to holding the cost ofU.S. steel down to its current prices, and Goldberg worked toresolve the dispute between labor and management withoutincreasing wages, thereby raising the price of steel. He succeeded in arbitrating such an agreement, but three days laterU.S. Steel executives announced a price increase. PresidentKennedywas angered by this action, and Goldberg went back toU.S. Steel to demand a change in pricing. After significantpressure was brought against the U.S. Steel Corporation, then-executives did comply. Goldbergwas also involved in creatingproceduresto reducestrikesat missile construction sites. Biographers note that Goldberg's advice to President Kennedywent•beyond those issues related to the Labor Department to includesuchareas as federal aid to the arts, socialsecuritybenefits andforeign policy.

ButGoldbergwasnot to servelongasSecretaryofLabor.OnAugust 28, 1962, Felix Frankfurter retired from the SupremeCourt. On September 28, Goldberg was nominated to fillFrankfurter's seat. He was confirmed and took his seat in time for theOctober Term. In a speech before the American Bar Association in 1963 Goldberg spoke about the differences he experienced when he left the Cabinet to become part of the Court:

One is "elevated" to the Court and consequently, in sociallyconscious Washington, eats higher on the hog, but the Secretary, though outrankedat the table, is driven to the dinner in agovernment Cadillac, whereas theJustice steers andparks hisown car. Who gains by the exchange depends on a valuejudgment....The Secretary's phone never stopsringing; theJustice'sphoneneverrings—even his bestfriends won't call him.TheSecretarycontinually worriesabout what thePresident andan unpredictable Congress will do to his carefullyformulatedlegislative proposals; thePresident, the Congress and the Secretary wonder whattheJustice will do to theirs....The Secretary numbers amonghisseveral thousand employeesdoorkeepers toguard hisprivacy; thenewestJustice is, himself,thedoorkeeper toprotect the Court's

^^he last sentence, of course, refers to the procedure used by theJusticesduringConference. Whenthe Justicesmeet on Fridays

^ -

II I I

mi

Justice and Mrs. Goldberg pictured at their Virginia farm in 198d.

to vote on cases, it is in complete privacy; no Court employeesare allowedinside the room during their conference. The newestmember of the Court, therefore, becomes the doorkeeper whogives and receives messages to and from the Court employeesoutside the Conference Room.

Goldberg approached his work on the Court with his characteristic energy. Though he served only three terms on theCourt-from October 1962 through June 1965— he wrote a number of significant (pinions,and several separate opinions. Goldbergapproached his work on the Court with the philosophy that haddominated his earlier endeavors: that while there are problemsin the world, solutions can be found. In his work on the Court hewould prove himself a strong advocate of individual rights,writing such important opinions as Kennedvv. Mendoza-Marti-nez. which dealt with immigration law and draft evasion, andWatson V. Citv of Memphis, which concerned the pace at whichdesegregation proceeded. The most important decision hewrote was in the case of Escobedo v. Illiniohs. which concerned

due process for indigent defendants.In 1965, PresidentLyndon JohnsonaskedGoldbergto leave

the Court and take over the post of the U.S. Ambassador to theUnited Nations. Citing the difficulties of the Vietnam War andthe need to have a distinguished American replace Adlai Stevenson,Johnson persuaded Goldberg that his special talents wouldbe well utilized in the post. There is speculation that Johnson'sreal motivation in asking Goldberg to resign was his desire toappoint his friend, Abe Fortas, to the Supreme Court. Whetheror not this was his underlying motive, Johnson did, in fact,nominate Fortas to fill Goldberg's seat. When Goldberg accepted the appointment to the United Nations, he told Johnson,"I shall not, Mr. President, conceal the pain with which I leavethe Court after three years ofservice. It has been the richestandmostsatisfying periodofmy career—" He toldreportersinJuly1%5, the dayhe was named to the Ambassadorial post, "in allcandor, I would rather the President had not asked me toundertake thisduty. Butit appearsperhapsI canat thisstage ofour national life make a contribution, I hope, in this area offoreign affairs." .• j^ -continued on page ten

Justice Goldberg (continued from page nine)

Goldberg's tenxire as Ambassador to the United Nations wasmarked bymany disappointments and frustrations. Johnson hademphasized that his negotiating skills tmd reputation wouldenable him to play tm important role in seeking peace inVietnam. This was not to be the case, however. Goldberg didmake an important contribution regarding the Arab-Israeliwarof June 1967and a peace settlement in the Middle East, but thegoal of resolving the Vietnam problem eluded him. Goldbergand Johnson held disparate views on how the war in Vietnamshould be conducted, and relations between Goldberg andJohnson deteriorated over the years. By the end of his tenure atthe U.N., insidersreported that Johnson tookexception to Goldberg's frequent telephone calls and memoranda calUng for de-escdation of the war.

In June 1968, Goldberg returned to the practice of law, thistime in the Cityof New York. He made one bid for electiveofficein 1970when he ran against Nelson Rockefeller for Governor ofNewYork. It was not a successful experience, and Goldberg wasnot lured into the arena of elective politics again. In 1971,Goldbergreturned to Washington, where he practiced lawandtaughtpart-time. He was oftencalled intowork oninternationalarbitration cases, and from 1977-78he served as a United StatesAmbassador-at-Large. He frequently criticized the Easternbloc nations for their human rights policies and advocatedpeaceful solutions to problems through negotiation.

At the time of his death, Goldberg was still practicing law inWashington,D.C and pmsuing many of his extra-legalinterests.

a* ..

When ChiefJustice WilUamH. Rehnquist announced Golberg'sdeath, he observed that "thoughJustice Goldberg served on thisCourt for a comparatively brief period of time, he made important contributions to its jurisprudence." Perhaps a fitting epitaph can be found in the words of President Lyndon Johnson,who praised Goldberg inhis memoirs as"a skilled arbiter and afair-minded man."

•

Justice Goldberg (from left) joined Justices Scalia, O'Connor, and Stevensatthe unveiling ceremony of Retired Chief Justice Burger's portrait bust. Theceremony was held June 3,1988 in the Great Hall of the Supreme Court.

r t j,

hi--

•Vmm. X. ^

^ A

This photo ofPresident Johnson and Justice Goldberg was taken aboard Air Force One on July 19,1965, six days before Goldberg resigned from the Court.10

Membership UpdateThefollowing members have joined theSociety between December 16,1989 andMarch 9,1990.

Alabama

William D. Melton, EvergreenJerry L. Thornton, Hayneville

Arizona

John Edward Charland, PhoenixDavid J. Diamond, TucsonLarry A. Hammond, PhoenixPaul Marcus, TucsonMichael J. Meehan, Tucson

California

Charles A. Alders, Los AngelesRichard D. Aldrich, Westlake VillageGary H. Anderson, San FranciscoJames R. Bancroft, San FranciscoFrederick D. Baron, Palo AltoJohn B. Bates Jr., San FranciscoDaniel H. Bookin, San FranciscoRied Bridges, Los AngelesWilliam Brockett, San FranciscoWilliam K. Coblentz, San FranciscoDouglas J. Collodel, Los AngelesGrant B. Cooper, Studio CityThomas B. Cummings, Santa AnaAndre L. de Baubigny, San FranciscoA.B. Diepenbrock, San FranciscoJohn V. Diepenbrock, SacramentoPamela S. Duffy, San FranciscoTimothy H. Fine, San FranciscoPeter M. Folger, San FranciscoJames T. Fousekis, San FranciscoMaurice Fuller, AthertonJames C. Gaither, San FranciscoRobert B. Gex, San FranciscoMargaret G. Gill, San FranciscoDavid B. Gold, San FranciscoR.J. Guggenhime, San FranciscoMax Gutierrez Jr., San FranciscoHancock, Rothert, San FranciscoRichard Harrington, San FranciscoKirke M. Hasson, San FranciscoHerbert S. Hazeltine, Los AngelesMalcolm G. Heib, Manhattan BeachRobert C. Herr, San FranciscoEdwin E. Huddleson Jr., San FranciscoPhilip Hudner, San FranciscoClarence S. Hunt, Long BeachRobert F. Kane, Redwood CityJohn W. Keker, San FranciscoCliveJ. Kemp, Santa AnaRaoul Kennedy, Oakland

Lane B. Carlisle, San FranciscoDavid O. Larson, OaklandAnne E. Libbin, San FranciscoGeorge H. Link, Los AngelesWilliam R. Mackcy, San FranciscoDonald J. McCubbin, San FranciscoT. Neal McNamara, San FranciscoWilliam C. Miller, San FranciscoRonald B. Moskovitz, San FranciscoG. Richard Murray, San FranciscoWilliam E. Mussman, San FranciscoMichael L. Ohleyer, San FranciscoWalter G. Olson, HillsboroughWilliam H. Orrick III, San FranciscoLuther Kent Orton, San FranciscoJames N. Penrod, San FrancsicoAlfred L. Pepin, San FranciscoDavid L. Perry, San FranciscoForrest Plant, SacramentoM. Laurence Popofsky, San FranciscoJay E. Powell, San FranciscoToni Rembe, San FranciscoPaul A. Renne, San FranciscoJoseph W. Rogers Jr., San FranciscoMorton Rosen, Santa MonicaRobert A. Rosenfeld, San FranciscoEdward W. Rosston, San FranciscoMichael Rubin, San FranciscoMarshall M. Schulman, Santa AnaRoland W. Selman, San FranciscoRichard J. Sideman, San FranciscoJohn E. Sparks, San FranciscoGraydon S. Staring, San FranciscoDavid T. Steffen, San FranciscoJohn K. Stewart, San FranciscoBrooks Stough, San FranciscoSteven L. Swig,San FranciscoHaskell Titchell, San FranciscoNancy P. Tosterin, MontereyCharles E. Townsend Jr., San FranciscoMr. & Mrs. Harold Williams, San DiegoRobert R. Wood, Menlo Park

Colorado

William D. Neighbors, BoulderPaul D. Renner, Denver

Connecticut

William H. Narwold, HartfordSamuel V. Schoonmaker 111, StamfordBeverly Wall, HartfordGayle B. Wilhelm, Stamford

District of Columbia

Lawrence H. Averill

Jerome B. Libin

Peter Van Lockwood

Andrew J. Pincus

William B. Schultz

Edwin D. Williamson

Georgia

Stanley F. Birch Jr., AtlantaLaurie Webb Daniel, AtlantaJefferson James Davis, DecaturSamuel H. Harrison, LawrencevilleHarold N. Hill Jr., AtlantaDonald W. Janney, AtlantaDorothy Y. Kirkley, AtlantaPaul Webb Jr., Atlanta

Hawaii

Clinton R. Ashford, HonoluluMari Matsuda, HonoluluLawrence S. Okinaga, Honolulu

Indiana

Stephen M. Coons, IndianapolisJ. Frederick Hoffman, LafayetteAllen Sharp, South BendThomas H. Singer, South BendWilliam A. Thorne, Elkhart

Kansas

Alvin D. Herrington, WichitaTopeka West High School, Topeka

Louisiana

Jack C. Caldwell, LafayetteCharles Richard Derby, Baton RougePaul M. Haygood, New OrleansClyde C. Holloway, AlexandriaCharles K. Reasonover, New OrleansRobert M. Talcott, Los AngelesCharles A. Verderame, Metarie

Maryland

J. Woodford Howard Jr., BaltimoreDaniel Long-Belknap, ColumbiaMary E. Pivec, Baltimore

-continued on next page

Membership Update (continuedfrompage eleven)

Missouri

Richard P. Bruening, Kansas CityPatrick C. Cena, Kansas CityR. T. Cox, ColumbiaGary M. Cupples, Kansas CityW. James Poland, Kansas CityDavid W. Hall Jr., SpringfieldKerry L. Myers, SpringfieldJames M. Neville, St. LouisJames W. Newbury, SpringfieldDavid Arthur Oliver, Columbia

Nebraska

Eugene P. Welch, Omaha

New Hampshire

James J. Troisi, Salem

New York

Daniel Abrams, New YorkJames D. Burchetta, CarmelPaul Cushman Jr., New YorkNat Hentoff, New YorkGloria C. Markuson, Scarsdale

Supreme Court Historical Society111 Second Street, NEWashington, D.C. 20002

Daniel R. Santola, AlbanyAlexander R. Sussman, New York

North Carolina

H. Grady Barnhill Jr., Winston-SalemGeorge L. Little Jr., Winston-Salem

Ohio

Philip A. Brown, ColumbusMichael W. Donaldson, ColumbusMary Ellen Fairfield, ColumbusRussell M. Gertmenian, ColumbusMichael G. Lond, ColumbusAlan T. Radnor, ColumbusSuzanne K. Richards, ColumbusThomas M. Taggart, ColumbusThomas M. Tarpy, Columbus

Oregon

Charles S. Crookham, Portland

Pennsylvania

John A. Brown, PhiladelphiaJohn M. Elliott, Philadelphia

Alexander Kerr, PhiladelphiaDavid L. Pennington, PhiladelphiaH. WoodruffTurner, Pittsburgh

South Carolina

William S. Rose Jr., Hilton Head Island

Tennessee

Foster D. Arnett, KnoxvilleJames I. Vance Berry, NashvilleThomas C. Binkley, NashvilleC. Arnold Cameron, Cookeville

Texas

Warren W. Harris, HoustonChristopher Meakin, Houston

Vermont

Sheldon Novick, Strafford

Washington

Michael Mines, Seattle

NON PROFIT ORG.

U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Permit No. 8232