Legal History Commons^™

The Constitutional Canon As Argumentative Metonymy, Ian C. Bartrum

Ian C Bartrum

This article builds on Philip Bobbitt's Wittgensteinian insights into constitutional argument and law. I examine the way that we interact with canonical texts as we construct arguments in the forms that Bobbitt has described. I contend that these texts serve as metonyms for larger sets of associated principles and values, and that their invocation usually is not meant to point to the literal meaning of the text itself. This conception helps explain how a canonical text's meaning in constitutional argument can evolve over time, and hopefully offers the creative practitioner some insight into the kinds of arguments that might accomplish …

Charles Sumner: History's Misunderstood Idealist, Chad G. Marzen

Chad G. Marzen

Few historical figures in the history of the United States have received such contrasting treatment by historians and scholars than Senator Charles Sumner. One view of Sumner mainly focuses on Sumner as a “Cardboard Yankee,” a figure who was arrogantly too tied to principle and was someone who seldom tried to understand others, was lacking in humor, was a pedant, lacked the judgment and self-control to be effective in settling disputes, and was unable to compromise.

A more recent “revised” interpretation of Sumner contends Sumner was driven into reform movements and politics for two reasons: first, that Sumner believed the …