Liberty Books

The grandfather of our very own American constitution, "The Constitution of England" is one of the most vital political treatises to come out of Enlightenment Era England, and the subject of "The Constitution of England", important book on political liberty. Although originally written in French (and published in Amsterdam) by Jean Louis De Lolme, it has been edited and enhanced with an introduction by David Lieberman in this new edition for modern American history. Sure to be fuel for many, many debates and discussion, "The Constitution of England" is enthusiastically recommended to politics and American history library shelves, and any non-specialist general interest reader who simply wants a greater understanding of our own constitution.

When the Constitution was finished at convention in 1787, for some reason there was no Bill of Rights. According to Professor C. Herman Pritchett of U.C. Santa Barbara, no one is quite sure why. Some thought it unnecessary, the powers of the federal government having been circumscribed to only those ennumerated in the Constitution. However, it became apparent as the Constitution worked its way through the ratification process that individual rights and liberties were of primary concern. James Madison in the first Congress crafted ten amendments - these became collectively known as the Bill of Rights upon ratification. Most of what we think of today as Constitutionally guaranteed rights and civil liberties derive from these amendments, with a few other amendments over time added in.

Pritchett's book explores the issues of civil rights and liberties. The first two chapters examine the theoretical and philosophical ideas of liberties, and the methodology the Supreme Court has developed over time to guide interpretation. There is then a sequence of chapters that examines the four primary freedoms of the First Amendment - freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and association, and freedom of religion. Issues of libel and obscentity, involving both speech and press issues, are dealt with in a further chapter.

Further chapters explore other civil liberties issues primary deriving from the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, especially due process and equal protections clauses. The chapters develop the idea of equal protections deriving first from a protection on corporations to later becoming a fundamental individual rights support, and the idea of substantive due process being a concept that waxes and wanes throughout the history of judicial process. Near the conclusion of the book, Pritchett deals with the right to vote (franchise), that which he calls 'a basic instrument for the protection of civil liberties and constitutional rights.'

Pritchett develops the text with both essay and case law. He uses case summaries and rulings in their own words to a great degree. Pritchett is not shy at saying which rulings and trends he considers good or bad reasoning, and good or bad effects. He quotes Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, who wrote, 'The life of the law has not been logic, it has been experience.' Sometimes the Courts have not been 'reasonable', and Pritchett exposes alternative thinking (sometimes in dissenting opinions, and sometimes in his own writing) frequently.

Pritchett traces the development of the ideas and codification of rights as well as the development of constitutional legalism through to the present day in modern cases and situations. This is a good companion book for those with an interest in developing this particular aspect of Constitutional Law - Pritchett suggests in his preface that this volume works best in conjunction with a more general text on American Constitutional Law (he suggests his own, but for my class we used a different text to good effect).

A bit dated, but still valuable.

I used this text with introductory Constitutional Law students. Most found it one of the best texts they have ever used. They were particularly pleased with the author's approach. Pohlman gives a good sense of the historical setting. The students found the briefs very helpful to their understanding of legal thinking. Most of the cases are well edited.

My "review" is short, and to the point. Simply put, this set, or at least volume one of it, OUGHT to be required reading in every high school in the land prior to graduation! Why? Because MOST Americans do not know anything about the nature of our ORIGINAL American form of government; and the history of its adoption by the American States. Due to this ignorance, they fail to understand the larger part of our history; especially the so called Civil War! Stephens' book is simplistic, and thus easy to read. NO one who is interested in this topic could fail to enjoy and profit from reading this book; and Sprinkle does a great job with their bindings. Thank you, Larry L. Burton

Kersch challenges the conventional wisdom and offers a compelling rejoinder to what he terms "the Whiggish New Deal narrative" (p. 5). Such Whiggish accounts, he maintains, treat history as a morality play and "import a particular set of unifying myths into the study of constitutional development concerning civil rights and civil liberties" (p. 11). Instead of the flawed tale of a triumphant concern for civil rights and civil liberties overcoming the judicial solicitude for economic rights that characterized pre-1937 constitutionalism, Kersch presents a more complex and equivocal story. Important claims of right often conflicted, and some traditional liberties were rejected in order to advance newer understanding of which rights deserved protection. As Kersch explains, to picture this messy process involving difficult choices as a seamless march of progress, scholars have ignored inconvenient facts and made "extensive historical erasures" (p. 17). Indeed, he points out that progressives and liberals have not been consistent champions of personal rights and have frequently shifted from one cause to another while couching their essentially political choices in moralistic terms. Progressives and liberals often privileged group rights--on behalf first of organized labor and thereafter of blacks, for example--over individuals' rights claims.

Kersch assesses the accuracy of the Whiggish narrative by examining the evolution of privacy rights, criminal justice procedures, labor law, civil rights, and educational policy from the late nineteenth century to the present. He finds a substantial disconnect between an imagined past, conjured up by progressives and liberals, and the historical record. He concludes that "progressives and civil libertarians were just as likely to be opponents of individualistic freedom as its champions" (p. 28). Indeed, he emphasizes that progressives and liberals in the early twentieth century were in fact preoccupied with strengthening governmental power, not defending individual rights. They tended to regard claims of rights as barriers to their state-building project....

Quibbles aside, Kersch has written a fascinating book that offers a fresh look at constitutional history and demolishes the Whiggish narrative as an exercise in historical whimsy calculated to serve political ends. This work, which covers many subjects well, should set the stage for a far-ranging debate over the meaning and direction of our constitutional past. It deserves a wide audience.

Edwin M. Borchard was a Professor of Law at Yale University. He has long urged that innocent people who were wrongly convicted of crimes should be compensated for their wrongs and injuries ('Preface'). Federal and state governments did not do so (in 1932). Some believed that it is a "physical impossibility" to convict an innocent man. So 65 cases were selected from a much larger number to refute this supposition. Most of these cases were taken from the twentieth century. Fifty of these cases are more important, fifteen are presented concisely. Innocence was established by: the appearance of the alleged murder victim, the conviction of the real culprit, or the discovery of new evidence. This does not include cases of pardon without an admission of erroneous conviction. These cases are mostly due to: mistaken identification, circumstantial evidence (where erroneous inferences are drawn), perjury, or a combination of these errors. There is no index to the people involved.

Each of the fifty cases take up about six pages each, the fifteen supplementary cases each have about three pages. The 'Conclusion' summarizes the mistakes in these cases. The major source of these errors was the identification of the accused by the victim of a crime of violence. Besides the emotions of the victim, other factors enter (desire for revenge, support an identification made by others). In many of these cases there was a little resemblance between the wrongfully accused and the actually guilty criminal. Little scientific study has been done on the effects of suggestion or defective powers of observation. There are enough wrongful convictions on circumstantial evidence to be disturbing. Circumstantial evidence coming from different sources is less likely to be false. But evidence can be manufactured or suppressed (p.369). Presenting evidence of a prior conviction can prejudice a jury against a defendant (p.370). The use of the "third degree" to produce confessions is a public disgrace (p.371). Such "confessions" are a factor in wrongful convictions. Public opinion can be blamed when passions are aroused and demand a sacrificial victim. How many wrongfully convicted have been executed is impossible to say (p.373). There are problems in the unreliability of "expert" evidence. An alibi or collateral testimony which is false will be extremely prejudicial to the defendant, even if innocent. A defendant who is poor and can't hire a competent attorney will be convicted (p.374). Borchard recommends an independent investigating committee to consider certain cases (p.375). An appeals court should review cases on the facts as well as on the law in felony or at least capital cases. A review on the facts could set aside an unjust verdict, and correct errors in the administration of justice (p.376). Borchard recommends the NY law that allows an appeal court to order a new trial if the verdict was against the weight of evidence or against law, even if no exception was taken in court.

Borchard thinks highly of English law (pp.377-378) and its laws on paper. But that didn't save an innocent from the gallows ("10 Rillington Place") and the abolishment of capital punishment around 1962. Borchard urges the adoption of legislation to indemnify the wrongfully convicted. Any amounts should be adjusted for the devalued currency (or "inflation").

Few books offer so succinct or specific a set of insights connecting property rights to democratic principles as in Property Rights in 21st Century America, a survey of property rights as linked to issues of freedom and personal identity. Here are ideas for legal changes to the existing system which would enhance owner rights and individual liberties: here also are historical and political as well as social considerations of property rights issues as they relate to the constitution and society. College-level collections will find this essential.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

I enjoyed this book because it combines science and religion. Too many environmental science books are secular and miss the point of taking care of the planet--we are God's stewards to manage his "property." This would make a nice supplemntary text in a religious college where God has not been kicked out. It wouldn't fly in a state school, but it gives a believing instructor some "flavoring" which could be worked into current environmental issues. Science needs to be taught objectively--given that God is above objectivity as the first and still sustaining cause.

Most people have heard of Lenin, Stalin, Nicholas II, etc, yet few have heard the name of Alexander Kerensky. A pity. Kerensky, Russia's first democratic leader, who tried in vain to turn a tsarist empire into a modern democratic society was often ignored in history classes.
Kerensky is by his own admission, an idealist. He loathed the abuses of human rights-whether under a Tsar, a Hitler or a Lenin.
Would that he had stayed in power in Russia.
"He who does not defend liberty everywhere, defends it not at all." Truer words have never been spoken.

Central to the debate on encryption is the universality of policy, and this report clearly shows that the United States' restrictions on the technology are irrelevent to the proliferation of this technology. The report surveys over 100 countries and explains in detail their policies on encryption.

This report is vital to anyone concerned about their rights in this arena.