Texas v white. White v. Texas :: 310 U.S. 530 (1940) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center 2022-10-13
Texas v white Rating:
6,5/10
739
reviews
Writing a summary paper on an article can be a helpful exercise for students, professionals, and researchers alike. By summarizing an article, you can distill the main points and arguments made by the author, and gain a better understanding of the topic at hand. In this essay, we will discuss some tips for writing a summary paper on an article, including how to select an article, how to understand the article's main points and arguments, and how to structure and organize your summary paper.
First and foremost, it is important to select an article that is relevant to your interests or the topic you are studying. This will help you stay engaged and focused as you read and write about the article. You may want to start by searching databases or online journals in your field of study, or by looking for articles that have been recommended to you by professors or colleagues.
Once you have selected an article, you should carefully read and re-read it, taking notes as you go. Pay attention to the main points and arguments made by the author, as well as any supporting evidence or examples they provide. It may be helpful to highlight or underline key passages, or to jot down notes in the margin.
As you read and take notes on the article, you should also consider the structure and organization of the paper. Is the article structured in a clear and logical way, with an introduction, body, and conclusion? Does the author use headings and subheadings to break up the text and guide the reader? Understanding the structure of the article can help you identify the main points and arguments more easily, and make it easier to write your summary paper.
Once you have a good understanding of the article, you can begin drafting your summary paper. A summary paper should generally be shorter than the original article, so you will need to select only the most important points and arguments to include. You should also aim to write in your own words as much as possible, rather than simply copying and pasting from the original article. This will help you to better understand the material, and also avoid plagiarism.
When writing your summary paper, you should begin with an introduction that briefly introduces the topic and the article you are summarizing. You should then move on to the main body of the paper, where you will present the main points and arguments made by the author, along with any supporting evidence or examples. As you write, be sure to use clear and concise language, and avoid using jargon or technical terms that may be unfamiliar to your readers.
Finally, you should conclude your summary paper with a summary of the main points and arguments made by the author, and your own thoughts and insights on the topic. You may also want to include a brief discussion of the implications of the article, or suggest areas for further research.
In conclusion, writing a summary paper on an article can be a useful exercise for students, professionals, and researchers. By selecting an article that is relevant to your interests, carefully reading and understanding the main points and arguments made by the author, and organizing and writing your summary paper in a clear and concise way, you can gain a deeper understanding of the topic and communicate your understanding to others.
TEXAS v. WHITE
The power exercised by the President was supposed, doubtless, to be derived from his constitutional functions, as commander-in-chief; and, so long as the war continued, it cannot be denied that he might institute temporary government within insurgent districts, occupied by the National forces, or take measures, in any State, for the restoration of State government faithful to the Union, employing, however, in such efforts, only such means and agents as were authorized by constitutional laws. The first inquiries to which our attention was directed by counsel, arose upon the allegations of the answer of Chiles 1 that no sufficient authority is shown for the prosecution of the suit in the name and on the behalf of the State of Texas, and 2 that the State, having severed her relations with a majority of the States of the Union, and having by her ordinance of secession attempted to throw off her allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, has so far changed her status as to be disabled from prosecuting suits in the National courts. James Mandeville Carlisle, the attorney for Hardenburg, argued that since his client had purchased his bonds on the open market in New York he had no way of knowing about any possible questions concerning the validity of his title. In January, 1861, a call for a convention of the people of the State was issued, signed by sixty-one individuals. But there is other evidence which might fairly be held to be sufficient proof of notice if the rule to which we have adverted could be properly applied to this case. Hardenberg, I had learned that he was interested in the Texas indemnity bonds, and meditated purchasing same. It was in this state of things, with the State government organized in the manner and with the status above mentioned, that this present bill was directed by this agent to be filed.
This action was dismissed February 19th. Hamilton, provisional governor of the State; and directing the formation by the people of a State government in Texas. McCulloch, the then Secretary of the Treasury, for the detention of the bonds of Hardenberg and others. Throckmorton, elected governor under the constitution of 1866, ratified their act, and authorized them to prosecute the suit. Before proceeding to answer this question, we must notice a fact in this case that was forgotten in the argument. Petitioner was convicted of rape and sentenced to death in the District Court of Montgomery County, Texas. In the Court's view, then, the intrusion involved in initially seizing a car on the highway and holding it for the short time required to seek a warrant is so substantial as to be constitutionally indistinguishable from the intrusion involved in a search of the vehicle.
Hamilton, provisional governor of the State; and directing the formation by the people of a State government in Texas. Now, by assuming or admitting as a fact the present status of Texas as a State not in the Union politically, I beg leave to protest against any charge of inconsistency as to judicial opinions heretofore expressed as a member of this court, or silently assented to. These were Stewart, Shaw, c. Board of Election Comm'rs, 394 U. And, it appearing — the decree went on to say — upon the pleadings and proofs, that before the filing of the bill, Birch and Murray had received and collected from the United States the full amount of four other bonds, numbered, c. Without entering at this time upon the inquiry whether any contract made by such a board can be sustained, we are obliged to say that the enlarged powers of the board appear to us to have been conferred in furtherance of its main purpose of war against the United States, and that the contract, under consideration, even if made in the execution of these enlarged powers, was still a contract in aid of the rebellion, and therefore void.
Paschal, who now appeared with the other counsel, in behalf of the State, had been appointed by Governor Hamilton to represent the State, and Mr. The Secretary of the Treasury acted on this information, and refused in general to pay bonds that had not been indorsed. The American Party of Texas was able to secure only 2,732 signatures at its precinct conventions in May, 1972. Hardenberg's office and get a check for them, which I understand they did. This action was dismissed February 19th. Afterwards I cant't remember the exact time , Mr.
When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. Throckmorton, elected governor under the constitution adopted in 1866, and proceeding under an act of the State legislature relating to these bonds, expressly ratifies and confirms the action of the solicitors who filed the bill, and empowers them to prosecute this suit; and it is further proved by the affidavit of Mr. On the 4th of October, 1865, Mr. The convention, which had adjourned immediately on passing the ordinance, reassembled. The bill interrogated the defendants about all these particulars; requiring them to answer on oath; and, as already mentioned, it prayed an injunction against their asking, or receiving payment from the United States; that the bonds might be delivered to the State of Texas, and for other and further relief.
And, to some extent, this is true of the actual government of Texas, though unlawful and revolutionary, as to the United States. The address and registration certificate number of each signer shall be shown on the petition. They took the oath and proceeded, on the 8th of April, to provide by law for the choice of electors of president and vice-president of the Confederate States. Rockefeller, d The 55-day period provides sufficient time for circulating supplemental petitions, and is not unduly burdensome, nor is the notarization requirement. Before proceeding to answer this question, we must, notice a fact in this case that was forgotten in the argument. The District Court also emphasized that, in response to the State's argument in Bullock v.
American Party of Texas v. White :: 415 U.S. 767 (1974) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center
The war must have ceased to be a war for the suppression of rebellion, and must have become a war for conquest and subjugation. The District Court determined that it was not, indicating that one of the plaintiff political parties had conceded as much. Appellants sought to enjoin the enforcement of the challenged provisions in the forthcoming November, 1972, general election. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual". He admitted, however, "that he was informed and believed that in all cases where any of the bonds were disposed of by him, it was known to the parties purchasing for themselves, or as agents for others, that there was some embarrassment in obtaining payment of said bonds at the treasury of the United States, arising out of the title of this respondent and his co-defendant Chiles. I regret that I am compelled to dissent from the opinion of the majority of the court on all the points raised and decided in this case.
White v. Texas :: 310 U.S. 530 (1940) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center
He admitted, however, "that he was informed and believed that, in all cases where any of the bonds were disposed of by him, it was known to the parties purchasing for themselves, or as agents for others, that there was some embarrassment in obtaining payment of said bonds at the treasury of the United States, arising out of the title of this respondent and his co-defendant Chiles. On the part of the plaintiff, it has been urged that Columbia is a distinct political society, and is, therefore, a 'State' according to the definition of writers on general law. The answer of CHILES, declaring that he had none of the bonds in his possession, set forth: 1. Has she two senators to represent her as a State in the Senate of the United States? Hardenberg, Birch, Murray, Jr. Birch, Byron Murray, Jr. Obligations often remain unimpaired, while relations are greatly changed. Paschal, agent of the State of Texas, against the payment of the said bonds and coupons unless presented for payment by proper authority.
Texas v. White :: 423 U.S. 67 (1975) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center
We therefore heard oral arguments upon the State's petition for rehearing. And this conclusion, in our judgment, is not in conflict with any act or declaration of any department of the National government, but entirely in accordance with the whole series of such acts and declarations since the first outbreak of the rebellion. JUSTICE BRENNAN concurs, dissenting. Barret's testimony proceeded: 49 'He advised me to accept the proposition of Chiles, and gave it as his opinion that the government would have to pay the bonds. They then seemed willing to make a loan on the security offered. The State's appellate criminal court of last resort affirmed and denied rehearing.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/19d14dc57a967a7a2075246732902845/HTX Roe Overturned JR TT 21.jpg)
