Slike strani
PDF
ePub

ARTICLES IN ADDITION TO, AND AMENDMENT OF, THE CONSTITUTION

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PROPOSED BY CONGRESS, AND RATIFIED BY THE LEGISLATURES OF THE SEVERAL STATES, PURSUANT TO THE FIFTH ARTICLE OF THE ORIGINAL, CONSTITUTION.

[ARTICLE I.] * Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Terret et al. 2". Taylor et al., 9 Cr., 43; Vidal et al. v. Girard et al., 2 How., 127; Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall., 333; United States v. Cruikshank et al., 92 U. S., 542; Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S., 145; Spies v'. Illinois, 123 U. S., 131; Davis v. Beason, 133 Ú. S., 333; Eilenbecker 2'. Plymouth County, 134 U. S., 31; Mormon Church v. United States, 136 U. S., 1; In re Rapier, 143 U. S., 110; Horner v. United States, 143 U. S., 207; Bradfield v. Roberts, 175 U. S., 291; Turner 1. Williams, 194 U. S., 279; Jack v. Kansas, 199 U. S., 372; Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 U. S., 50; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S., 78.

[ARTICLE II.]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Presser 7'. Illinois, 116 U. S., 252; Spies v'. Illinois, 123 U. S., 131; Eilenbecker 2. Plymouth County, 134 U. S., 31; Jack v. Kansas, 199 L'. S., 372; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. Š., 78.

* The first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States were proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the First Congress, on the 25th of September, 1789. They were ratified by the following States, and the notifications of ratification by the governors thereof were successively communicated by the President to Congress: New Jersey, November 20, 1789; Maryland, December 19, 1789; North Carolina, December 22, 1789; South Carolina, January 19, 1790; New Hampshire, January 25, 1790; Delaware, January 28, 1790; Pennsylvania, March 10, 1790; New York, March 27, 1790; Rhode Island, June 15, 1790; Vermont, November 3, 1791, and Virginia, December 15, 1791. There is no evidence on the journals of Congress that the legislatures of Connecticut, Georgia, and Massachusetts ratified them.

[ARTICLE III.] No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Spies v. Illinois, 123 U. S., 131; Eilenbecker v. Plymouth County, 134 U. S., 31; Jack v. Ransas, 199 U. S., 372; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S., 78.

[ARTICLE IV.] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Smith v. State of Maryland, 18 How., 71; Murray's Lessee et al. v. Hoboken Land and Improvement Company, 18 How., 272; Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall., 2; Boyd v. United States, 116 Ú. S., 616; Spies v. Illinois, 123 U. S., 131; Eilenbecker v. Plymouth County, 134 U. S. 31; Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U. S., 698; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson, 154 U. S., 447; In re Chapman, :66 U. S., 661; Adams v. New York, 192 U. S., 585; Morris v. Hitchcock, 194 U. S., 384; Public Clearing House v. Coyne, 194 U. S., 497; Interstate Commerce Commission v'. Baird, 194 U. S., 25; Jack v. Kansas, 199 U. S., 372; Hale v. Henkel, 201 U. S., 43; Consolidated Rendering Co. 1'. Vermont, 207 L. S., 541; American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister, 207 U. S., 284; Consolidating Rendering Co. v. Vermont, 207 U'. S., 541; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S., 78; Hammond Packing Co. v. Arkansas, 212 U. S., 322; Bagley v. General Fire Extinguishing Co., 212 U. S., 477; Smithsonian Institution v. St. John, 214 U. S., 19; Rhodus v. Manning, 217 U.S., 597.

[ARTICLE V.] No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

United States v. Perez, 9 Wh., 579; Barron v. The City of Baltimore, 7 Pet., 243; Fox v. Ohio, 5 How., 410; West River Bridge Company V. Dix et al., 6 How., 507; Mitchell v. Harmony, 13 How., 115; Moore, ex., v. The People of the State of Illinois, 14 How., 13; Murray's Lessee et al. v. Hoboken Land and Improvement Company, 18 How., 272; Dynes v. Hoover, 20 How., 65; Withers v. Buckley et al., 20 How., 84; Gilman v. The City of Sheboygan, 2 Black, 510; Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall., 2; Twitchell v. The Commonwealth, 7 Wall., 321; Hepburn v. Griswold, 8 Wall., 603; Miller v. United States, 11 Wall., 268; Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall., 457; Pumpelly v. Green Bay Company, 13 Wall., 166; Osborn v. Nicholson, 13 Wall., 654; Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall., 163; Kohl et al. v. United States, 91 U. S., 367; Sinking Fund Cases, 99 U. S., 700; Cole v'. La Grange, 113 U. S., 1; Ex parte Wilson, 114 U. S., 417; Brown v. Grant, 116 U S., 207; Boyd v. United States, 116 U. S., 616; Makin v. United States, 117 U.S., 348; Ex parte Bain, 121 U. S., 1; Parkinson 2. United States, 121 V. S., 281; Spies v., Illinois, 123 U. S., 131; Sands v. Manistee River Improvement Company, 123 U. S., 288; Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U. S., 623; Great Falls Manufacturing Company v. The Attorney-General, 124 U. S., 581; United States v. De Walt, 128 U. S., 393; Huling v. Kaw Valley Railway and Improvement Company, 130 U. S., 559; Freeland v. Williams, 131 U. S., 405; Cross i'. North Carolina, 132 U. S., 131; Manning v. French, 133 U. S., 186; Searle v. School Dist. No. 2, 133 U. S., 553; Palmer v'. McMahon, 133 L'. S., 660; Ellenbecker v. Plymouth County, 134 U. S., 31; Chic., Mil. & St. Paul Rwy. Co. V'. Minnesota, 134 U. S., 418; Wheeler v. Jackson, 137 U. S., 245; Holden v. Minnesota, 137 U. S., 245; Caldwell v. Texas, 137 U. S., 692; Cherokee Nation '. Kansas Ry. Co., 135 U. S., 641; Kaukauna Water Power Co.v. Miss. Canal Co., 142 U. S., 254; New Orleans v. N.O. Water W’ks, 142 U. S., 79; Counselman 2. Hitchcock, 142 U. S., 547; Simmonds v. U.S., 142 U. S., 148; Horn Silver Mining Co. v. N. Y., 143 U. S., 305; Hallinger v. Davis, 146 U. S., 314; Shoemaker v.U.S., 147 U. S., 282; Thorington 7'. Montgomery, 147 U. S., 490; Yesler 1'. Wash'n Harbor Line Coms’rs, 146 U. S., 646; Monongahela Nav. Co. 7'. U. S., 148 U. S., 312; Fong Yuen Ting v. U. S., 149 U. S., 698; In re Lennon, 150 U. S., 393; Pitts., C., C. & St. L. v. Backus, 154 U. S., 421; Interstate Com. Comsn. v. Brimson, 154 U. S., 447; Pearce 2. Texas, 155 U. S., 31; Linford v. Ellison, 155 U. S., 503; Andrews v. Swartz, 156 U. S., 272; Pittsburgh & Southern Coal Co. v. La., 156 U. S., 590; St. L. & S. F. Rwy. Co. v'. Gill, 156 U. S., 649; Johnson V. Sayre, 158 U. S., 109; Sweet v. Rechel, 159 U. S., 380; Brown v. Walker, 161 U. S., 591; Wong Wing v. U. S., 163 U. S., 228; Talton 7. Mayes, 163 U. S., 376; In re Chapman, 166 U. S., 661; Bauman 2'. Ross, 167 U. S., 548; Wilson v. Lambert, 168 U. S., 611; Green Bay &c. Canal Co. v'. Patten Paper Co., 172 U. S., 58; Henderson Bridge Co. 7'. Henderson City, 173 U. S., 592; Scranton v'. Wheeler, 179 U. S., 141; Wight v. Davidson, 181 U.S., 371; Capitol City Dairy Co. v. Ohio, 183 U. S., 238; Hanover Ntl. Bank v. Moyses, 186 U. S., 181; Dreyer v. Illinois, 187 U. S., 71; Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U. S., 553; United States v. Lynah, 188 U. S., 445; The Japanese Immigrant Case, 189 U. S., 86; Hawaii v. Mankichi, 190 U. S., 197; Bedford v. United States, 192 U. S., 217; Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S., 470; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Baird, 194 U. S., 25; Beavers v. Henkel, 194 U. S., 73; Turner v. Williams, 194 U. S., 279; Public Clearing House v. Coyne, 194 U. S., 497; McCray 2. United States, 195 U. S., 27; Schick v. United States, 195 U. S., 65; Kepner v. United States, 195 U. S., 100; Rassmussen v. United States, 197 U. S., 516; United States v. Ju Toy, 198 U. S., 253; Reduction Co. v. Sanitary Works, 199 U. S., 306; Gardner v. Michigan, 199 C. S., 325; Jack v. Kansas, 199 U. S., 372; South Carolina v. United States, 199 U. S., 437; Manigault v. Springs, 199 U. S., 473; Trono v. United States, 199 U. S., 521; Howard v. Kentucky, 200 U. S., 164; Southern Pacific R. R. Co. v. United States, 200 U. S., 341; C., B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. Drainage Commissioners, 200 U. S., 561; Hale v. Henkel, 201 U. S., 43; McAlister v. Henkel, 201 U. S., 90; Nelson v. U. S., 201 U. S., 92; Sawyer v. U. S., 202 U. S., 150; Millard v. Roberts, 202 U. S., 429; Matter of Moran, 203 U. S., 96; Union Bridge Co. v. U. S., 204 U. S., 364; Serra v. Mortiga, 204 U. S., 470; Martin v. District of Columbia, 205 U. S., 135; Barrington v. Missouri, 205 U. S., 483; Ellis v. U. S., 206 U. S., 246; Grafton v. U. S., 206 U. S., 333; United States v. Heinszen, 206 U. S., 370; Hunter v. Pittsburgh, 207 U. S., 161; Taylor v. U. S., 207 U. S., 120; Shoener v. Pennsylvania, 207 U. S.; 188; American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister, 207 U. S., 284; Consolidated Rendering Co. v. Vermont, 207 U. S., 549; Adair v. U. S., 208 U. S., 161; Bassing v. Cady, 208 U. S., 386; Bien v. Robinson, 208 U. S., 423; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S., 78; Garfield v. Goldsby, 211 U. S., 249; N. Y. Central R. R. v. U. S., 212 U. S., 481; Goon Shung v. U. S., 212 U.S., 566; Keerl v. Montana, 213 U. S., 135; United States v. Delaware & Hudson Co., 213 U.S., 366; District of Columbia v. Brooke, 214 U. S., 138; Oceanic Navigation Co. v. Stranahan, 214 U. S., 320; Sanchez v. United States; 216 U. S., 167; Monongahela Bridge Co. v. United States, 216 U.S., 177; Brantley v. Georgia, 217 U. S., 284; United States v. Welch, 217 U. S., 333; Rhodus v. Manning, 217 U. S., 597.

[ARTICLE VI.] In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have com

84281°—S. Doc. 846, 61-3---15

pulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

United States v. Cooledge, 1 Wh., 415; Ex parte Kearney, 7 Wh., 38; United States v. Mills, 7 Pet., 142; Baron v. City of Baltimore, 7 Pet., 243; Fox v. Ohio, 5 How., 410; Withers v. Buckley et al., 20 How., 84; Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall., 2; Twitchell v. The Commonwealth, 7 Wall., 321; Miller v. The United States, ni Wall., 268; United States v. Cook, 17 Wall., 168; United States v. Cruikshank et al., 92 U. S., 542; Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S., 145; Spies v. Illinois, 123 U. S., 131; Brooks v. Missouri, 124 U. S., 394; Callan v. Wilson, 127 U. S., 540; Eilenbecker v. Plymouth County, 134 U. S., 31; Jones v. United States, 137 U. S., 202; Cook v. United States, 138 U. S., 157; In re Shubuya Jugiro, 140 U. S., 291; In re Ross, 140 U. S., 453; Hallinger v. Davis, 146 U.S., 314; Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U. S., 698; Mattox v. United States, 156 U. Š., 237; Rosen v. United States, 161 U. S., 29; United States v. Zucker, 161 U. S., 475; Wong Wing v. United States, 163 U. S., 228; Creamer v. Washington, 168 U. S., 124; Thompson v. Utah, 170 U. S., 343; Maxwell V. Dow, 176 U. S., 581; Motes v. United States, 178 U.S., 458; Fidelity and Deposit Co. v. United S-ates, 187 U. S., 315; Hawaii v. Mankichi, 190 U. S., 197; West i'. Louisiana, 194 U. S., 258; Turner v. Williams, 194 U. S., 279; Lloyd v. Dollison, 194 U. S., 445; Schirk v. United States, 195 U. S., 65; Dorr v. United States, 195 U. S., 138; Rassmussen v. United States, 197 U. S., 516; Beavers v. Haubert, 198 U. S., 77; Marvin v. Trout, 199 U. S., 212; Jack v. Kansas, 199 U.S., 372; Howard v. Kentucky, 200 U. S., 164; Martin 7. Texas, 200 U. S., 316; Sawyer v. United States, 202 U. S., 150; Burton 7'. United States, 202 U. S., 344; Serra v. Mortiga, 204 U. S., 470; Tinsley 7. Treat, 205 U. S., 20; Ughbanks V. Armstrong, 208 U.S., 481; Armour Packing Co. v. U.S., 209 U. S. 56; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S., 78; Knoxville v. Knoxville Water Co.. 212 U. S., 1; Goon Shung v. United States, 212 U. S., 566; United States v. Stevenson, 215 U. S., 190; Haas v. Henkel, 216 U. S., 462.

[ARTICLE VII.]

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

United States v. La Vengeance, 3 Dall., 297; Bank of Columbia v. Oakley, 4 Wh., 235; Parsons 2. Bedford et al., 3 Pet., 433; Lessee of Livingston v. Moore et al., 7 Pet., 469; Webster v. Reid, u How., 437; State of Pennsylvania 2. The Wheeling, &c., Bridge Company et al., 13 How., 518; The Justices v'. Murray, 9 Wall., 274; Edwards v. Elliott et al., 21 Wall., 532; Pearson v. Yewdall, 95 U. S.,

« PrejšnjaNaprej »