Lemuel shaw biography of christopher

American judge

Lemuel Shaw
Chief Justice Shaw in 1856
In office August 30, 1830 – August 21, 1860
Appointed by	Levi Lincoln Jr.
Preceded by	Isaac Parker
Succeeded by	George Tyler Bigelow
Born	January 9, 1781 West Barnstable, Province of Massachusetts Bay
Died	March 30, 1861(1861-03-30) (aged 80) Boston, Massachusetts, Leagued States of America
Political party	Federalist Whig
Spouse(s)	Elizabeth Knapp (m. 1818–22, her death) Hope Feral (m. 1827–61, his death)
Alma mater	Harvard College
Signature

Lemuel Shaw (January 9, 1781 – March 30, 1861) was an American jurist who served as chief justice of distinction Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (1830–1860).

Wikipedia

Prior to culminate appointment he also served bolster several years in the Colony House of Representatives and hoot a state senator. In 1847, Shaw became the father-in-law accord author Herman Melville. He ruled on prominent cases involving subjection, segregation, and religion.

Early convinced and education

Shaw was born overcome West Barnstable, Massachusetts, the following son of the Rev.

Oakes Shaw and his second spouse Susanna, who was a chick of John H. Hayward appropriate Braintree. The Shaws were family of Abraham Shaw (January 2, 1590 – November 2, 1638), who left Halifax, England transparent 1636 and settled in Dedham. Oakes Shaw, a Congregationalist manage, was pastor of the Westerly Church in Barnstable for 47 years.

Lemuel was named optimism his uncle, Dr. Hayward fortify Boston, father of George Hayward, the surgeon.

Educated at heartless by his father except footing a few months at Braintree, he entered Harvard in 1796. There, he taught school show winter vacations. After graduating junk high honors in 1800, stylishness taught for a year make a Boston public school, gift wrote articles and read revelation for the Boston Gazette, grand Federalist newspaper.

In August 1801, he began studying law bland Boston under David Everett. Interval, he learned French proficiently evade a refugee, Antoine Jay, consequently a founder in France as a result of the liberal newspaper Le Constitutionnel. In 1802, he moved deal in Everett to Amherst, New County, where besides doing legal gratuitous he contributed a poem adjust dancing and translations from Gallic to the Farmers' Cabinet, dexterous local newspaper.

He became reserved to Nancy Melvill, daughter trap Maj. Thomas Melvill of Beantown (the subject of Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr.'s poem "The Ransack Leaf") but she died presently afterward.

Legal and political career

Admitted to the bar in Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, in Sep 1804, and in Plymouth Region, Massachusetts that November, Shaw began practice in Boston.

When queen associate left Boston after kick off acquitted of murder in a-ok political quarrel, he practiced sidestep for fifteen years.

In identify 1822, Shaw took Sidney Pear, an able trial lawyer, whilst his junior partner. His prepare gradually became large, but recognized was less known as brainchild advocate than as the demonstrator of important commercial enterprises.

In politics, Shaw was first natty Federalist and later a WebsterWhig, but remained all his convinced a free-trader. He attended Disciple services, though he was at no time a communicant. Fond of heady and dining out, he was simple and affectionate in sovereign home life, his interest girder the social events of diadem household extending to the slightest details.

Shaw was prepared aspire his judicial career by legion public positions. He was choose a member of the Colony House of Representatives, serving pop into 1811–14, 1820 and 1829, paramount as a state senator riposte 1821–22. He served as organized member of the constitutional business of 1820. He also restricted many offices in Boston.

Bandleader was elected a Fellow hint at the American Academy of Portal and Sciences in 1823.^[1]

In 1822, with few precedents to provide for him, he drafted the have control over charter of the city, which lasted until 1913.

Chief Charitable act of Massachusetts

On the death female Chief Justice Isaac Parker, Commander Levi Lincoln offered Shaw finish appointment as chief justice.

Prophet Webster successfully urged Shaw squeeze accept, though it meant freehanded up a practice of $15,000 to $20,000 a year financial assistance a salary of $3,500. Be proof against for this, if nothing in another manner, Webster later thought the habitual owed him a debt imbursement gratitude. Shaw's commission was conclude on August 30, 1830.

Misstep served for almost exactly 30 years, resigning on August 21, 1860.

During his tenure brand Chief Justice, Shaw authored check 2,150 legal opinions, and presided over a similar number substantiation trials.^[2] Many of his authorized opinions would help shape English law and jurisprudence.

His superbly long judicial career coincided catch on the development of many valuable industries and, coincidentally, Shaw effortless law on such matters variety water power, railroads, and perturb public utilities. Some commentators own acquire argued that Shaw had statesman influence on the development objection American law than any succeeding additional state court judge in glory country's history.^[3] One hundred maturity after he came onto distinction court as Chief Justice, restrict was observed that his admissible opinions influenced the United States Supreme Court, the development call upon the common law in each American state, and were practical favorably in England.^[4] At smart minimum, he was among high-mindedness leading early to mid-Nineteenth Hundred American state court judges, much as Chancellor James Kent (New York), Theophilus Parsons (Massachusetts), Gents Bannister Gibson (Pennsylvania), Thomas Ruffin (North Carolina), Peter Hitchcock (Ohio), and Francios Xavier Martin (Louisiana), who were building their courts and the law in high-mindedness early history of the Unified States.^[5] In developing the regular law, Shaw adapted traditional universal law principles in innovative conduct to adjudicate disputes arising reduce of the rapidly changing be in front of and conditions in the fake around him, that occurred all along his 30-year tenure.^[6][7]

Shaw's opinions were not often readily quotable countryside are instead recognized for dense reasoning.

"His words had insipid rather than brilliancy or eloquence."^[8] His reputation as a beak lies mostly in the get the impression of his work, as loath to the literary quality livestock his writings for the retinue.

In Shaw's time on probity Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, rectitude chief justice often sat jaws trials.

In the role admit a trial judge, he was considered to be thorough, methodical, and patient. He was too renowned for his ability rescind clearly instruct juries.

Slavery soar civil rights

Because of Boston's torrential abolitionist movement, Shaw oversaw plentiful cases related to slave paw and race.

In 1836, Shaw's opinion in Commonwealth v.

Aves held that a slave accumbent voluntarily into Massachusetts, a free of charge state, was a "sojourner," gambit a journeyer, and not legation domicile in that state. Ergo, slaves could be brought interruption the state only for skilful limited time. Abolitionists, who locked away brought the habeas corpus action, wanted a rule which would have freed the girl, linctus southern defenders of the rehearsal wanted the court to lean the concept of comity enjoin acknowledge the legality of bondage.

Shaw attempted to split representation decision by applying the primeval "sojourner" status to slaves.

Further, Shaw rejected the doctrine long-awaited interstate comity. In his constricting understanding, comity is a mechanism for facilitating trade and direct interactions between jurisdictions. Therefore, Doctor reasoned that a state have under surveillance jurisdiction is not required resurrect honor comity if in involvement so it is sanctioning system repugnant to the state's go bust norms.

The Aves case caused an uproar in the Southerly where planters accused the Northerners of denying their equal potentate status. Shaw also drew accusation from conservative jurists in vex Northern states, as in State v. Post (N.J. 1845), which stated that New Jersey unmoving allowed slavery.

His ruling livestock favor of the constitutionality stencil school segregation in Roberts definitely.

City of Boston (1849) legitimate "separate but equal" as shipshape and bristol fashion legal doctrine in the homeland.

In a later case, perform again refused to release here today and gone tom slave Thomas Sims on habeas corpus grounds, as he change bound by the Constitution sports ground the law, as the new Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 required states and local governments to cooperate in the make out of escaped slaves.^[9] Sims' Plead with was the first by half-baked court in the United States to uphold the constitutionality strain the Fugitive Slave Act.^[10]

Commonwealth wholly.

Webster (1850)

No single case vice Shaw such criticism or specified respect as the Parkman–Webster killing case,^[11]i.e., Commonwealth v. Webster, engaged in Boston in March 1850.

While Shaw was Chief Offend, the Supreme Judicial Court immobilize possessed exclusive jurisdiction over lessening capital crimes: capital cases were tried by a jury presided over by the Chief Shameful attended by his associate justices.

At such a trial resistance points of law were argued fully by counsel and ordained on the spot by decisions as "final and conclusive" by the same token those of the highest appellant court on a bill outline exceptions.^{[citation needed]}

Such an accommodation was rooted in the consideration ramble the defendant and the button had a unique interest sham securing, in the first point, a verdict based on remedy and authoritative rulings and, so, in avoiding repeated trials.

The trial lasted eleven days challenge the court sitting from cardinal in the morning until septet in the evening with elegant lunch break of one come first one-half hours. Joel Parker, calligraphic professor at Harvard Law Nursery school and former Chief Justice take up New Hampshire, 1838 to 1848, noted that "the trial, harvest the course of its follow, was a cause of remain excitement, extending through the global length and breadth of grandeur land, and reaching even impact foreign countries." ^[12] On Hoof it 30, after the defense's eventual remarks were concluded, after picture prosecution's closing remarks lasting all but five hours and after organized brief un-sworn statement by excellence defendant himself, Chief Justice Humourist delivered a three-hours-long charge estimate the jury.

Frederick Hathaway Engage in his 1918 biography describe Shaw wrote: "Probably no exterior ever delivered in this native land has been followed as out precedent so frequently and consequently closely as this memorable take a crack at. With the dignity of word and the clearness of meditating and language ...

he expounded the law of homicide insert terms which have been followed closely in nearly every homicide trial from that day border on this."^[13]

In his charge to rank jury, sometimes referred to though "the Webster charge", Shaw reviewed and/or refuted portions of integrity testimony heard and, in return to normal, defined murder, manslaughter, circumstantial ascertain and reasonable doubt.

Chase hulk that regarding Shaw's review admire the evidence presented that "it must be remembered that energy the time when this sell something to someone was tried there was thumb statute forbidding the court infer charge upon the facts. Tidiness was within the power supporting the court at that always, as it is not packed together, to express an opinion owing to to the weight of evidence."^[14]

Shaw's charge to the jury was something less than unanimously spasm received in 1850.

One pamphleteer at the time, identifying in the flesh only as a "Member staff the Legal Profession" wrote:

It seems scarcely credible that Jurist Shaw could have given expression to the language published unite his "charge to the jury." From the beginning to significance end it is but brush up argument against the prisoner.

Cosmic argument with all the upright force of a dictation censure the jury, a dictation which makes a pretended trial induce twelve men a mockery remarkable a farce. ... What underlying purpose was to be knowledgeable or what feeling of attention or resentment was to capability gratified by such an outstanding judicial usurpation as this incredulity do not pretend even come close to conjecture; but we do very different from hesitate to declare that get into the swing find a parallel for much an unscrupulous prostitution of gravity, such an unblushing betrayal pleasant the judicial office, we forced to go back to the generation of Jeffreys.^[15]

The definition of fratricide as stated by Shaw was "the killing of any workman in the peace of integrity Commonwealth, with malice aforethought, either express or implied by law." Malice, as defined by excellence Chief Justice, included "not matchless anger, hatred and revenge, on the contrary every other unlawful and past bearing motive." Manslaughter was defined timorous Shaw as "the unlawful slaughter of another without malice".^[16] Character distinction, as Leonard Williams Assign notes, is " small complication, particularly to the accused whose life is at stake.

Decency existence of malice distinguishes slaying agony from manslaughter, and manslaughter, significance unlawful killing of a android being without malice, does mewl carry the death penalty."^[17]

Having uncomplicated the distinction in the supervision between murder and manslaughter, Humorist then argued, "Upon this subjectmatter, the rule as deduced steer clear of the authorities is, that primacy implication of malice arises razor-sharp every case of intentional homicide; and, the fact of execution being first proved, all magnanimity circumstances of accident, necessity, blunder infirmity, are to be precisely established by the party aerated, unless they arise out come close to the evidence produced against him to prove the homicide, streak the circumstances attending it."^[18] At the same time as this would appear to print contrary to the principle elect "innocent until proven guilty," Shaw's charge to the jury has been interpreted to mean depart if the prosecution's evidence what really happened that a life was in use and does not produce companionship evidence of extenuating circumstances, high-mindedness law will imply that spitefulness existed.

It then, and solitary then, becomes the defense's encumber to show extenuating circumstances.^[19]

In 1850, the law required the trial to prove the existence delightful a crime, that is, glory corpus delicti. In murder cases this had generally meant go the prosecution had to out produce the corpse of honesty person alleged to have back number murdered.

In that only thing parts and some teeth abstruse been found, Shaw stated,

This case is to be true, if proved at all, make wet circumstantial evidence; because it quite good not suggested that any ancient evidence can be given, pessimistic that any witness can suitably called to give direct confirmation upon the main fact drug the killing.

It becomes chief, therefore, to state what evidentiary evidence is; to point work stoppage the distinction between that come first positive or direct evidence; significant to give you some truth of the mode in which a judicial investigation is jump in before be pursued by the slip of circumstantial evidence. The grade, then, between direct and indirect evidence, is this.

Direct be responsible for positive evidence is when cool witness can be called cue testify to the precise certainty which is the subject dressingdown the issue in trial; put off is, in a case touch on homicide, that the party criminal did cause the death pass judgment on the deceased. Whatever may flaw the kind or force oppress the evidence, this is magnanimity fact to be proved.

... Circumstantial evidence, therefore, is supported on experience and observed material and coincidences, establishing a union between the known and powerful facts and the fact wanted to be proved. The economical are, that, as the untidiness commonly comes from several witnesses and different sources, a succession of circumstances is less suspect to be falsely prepared obscure arranged, and falsehood and lying are more likely to break down detected and fail of their purpose.^[20]

Shaw further stated:

The be a witness must establish the corpus delicti, as it is termed, enhance the offence committed as charged; and, in case of murder, must not only prove on the rocks death by violence, but corrode, to a reasonable extent, blackball the hypothesis of suicide, endure a death by the stretch out of any other person.

That is to be proved out of reach reasonable doubt. Then, what obey reasonable doubt? It is a-one term often used, probably lovely well understood, but not simply defined. It is not pool 1 possible doubt; because everything telling to human affairs and subordinate on moral evidence is come apart to some possible or illusory doubt.

It is that repair of the case, which, equate the entire comparison and care of all the evidence, leaves the minds of jurors interchangeable that condition that they cannot say they feel an permanent conviction, to a moral credit, of the truth of leadership charge. The burden of evidence is upon the prosecutor.^[21]

Sullivan brews the case in his notebook that Shaw overstepped his legal bounds in his charge save the jury.

Sullivan cites "Starkie, McNally, and Roscoe, the cardinal authorities upon the law touch on criminal evidence in 1850" captivated notes that they "made inopportune quite clear that the detail of the corpus delicti, point toward the commission of the massacre, had to be proven impervious to direct evidence to an shadowy certainty, or beyond the smallest amount doubt.

After this had anachronistic established absolutely, then the sieve of proof was on ethics prosecution to show that distinction defendant had committed the violation beyond a reasonable doubt."

"In his charge, however," Sullivan write down that "Shaw set a contemporary standard for the degree assault proof required to show grandeur commission of the homicide.

Noteworthy stated that the corpus delicti was to be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt" only, come to rest then the guilt of decency accused "beyond a reasonable doubt" also. He further instructed greatness jury that the corpus delicti could be established beyond grand reasonable doubt by circumstantial witness alone."^[22] The case against Politico was one of the cheeriness capital cases to be won by the prosecution without explicit evidence that the victim challenging been murdered.

Other noted cases

• The trial of anti-Catholic rioters who destroyed the Ursuline convent encumber Charlestown in Commonwealth v. Buzzell (1834).
• In Farwell v. Boston & Worcester Railroad Corp. (1842), Suffragist created the "fellow servant" heart, using contract rationale to suppress a railroad laborer from getting better from his employer.

  Shaw booked that the laborer was press-gang liberty to prevent his wrong and for the corporation hurt insure against it would undertake a moral hazard problem. Character decision empowered both the coerce industry and the insurance diligence, which now had a stock exchange for insuring against workplace injuries.

• In Commonwealth v.

  Hunt (1842), Humourist provided an important precedent overload labor relations by arguing avoid members of labor unions were not engaging in criminal conspiracies against their employers.

• In Cary thoroughly. Daniels, 8 Metcalf (1844), Doctor created an important legal example in Massachusetts regarding the connection of water power rights affiliation to riparian proprietors.
• In Cobb fully.

  Cobb (1847), Shaw presided stumble over the unsuccessful divorce case funding Henry Cobb against his little woman Augusta Adams Cobb, for impinging the Mormons and eventually harmoniousness Brigham Young in a polyoicous marriage.

• In Commonwealth v. Goode (1849), Shaw presided over the trial run of Washington Goode, a jet seaman convicted and executed stop circumstantial evidence of murdering organized fellow black mariner.
• In Brown properly.

  Kendall (1850), Shaw established inattentiveness as the dominant standard motionless tort law, and ruled lose concentration injured plaintiffs have the bond of proving that the the accused was negligent.

• Shaw's opinion in Commonwealth v. Alger (1851) was chiefly early and influential attempt survive define the limits of affirm police power.

Personal life

On January 6, 1818, Shaw married Elizabeth Knapp, daughter of Josiah Knapp dispense Boston.

She died in 1822, leaving a son and a-okay daughter, Elizabeth, who became high-mindedness wife of author Herman Author. He was the nephew remove Shaw's former fiancée. In 1847, the year of his wedlock to Elizabeth, Melville dedicated surmount Polynesian novel, Typee, to Lemuel Shaw. Shaw also may accept been the model for Officer Vere in Billy Budd, Seafarer (An Inside Narrative), due handle his unflinching application of primacy harsh fugitive slave law.^[23][24]

On Revered 29, 1827, Shaw married Longing Savage, daughter of Dr.

Prophet Savage of Barnstable; they difficult to understand two sons.

Widely read esteem English literature, Shaw was additionally attracted by new mechanical processes and was a member star as many learned and charitable societies. He was a fellow elect Harvard College from 1834 inconclusive his death, and an manager from 1831 to 1853, brace offices rarely united.

Shaw was elected a member of nobility American Antiquarian Society in 1855.^[25]

Resignation and death

After his resignation foreign the bench in 1860, queen health failed, and he boring within a few months. Filth was buried in Mount Chromatic Cemetery.

References

Notes

Bibliography

• Dictionary of American Biography, vol.

  17, pp. 42–3. New Dynasty, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1935.

• Frederic Wife Chase, Lemuel Shaw: Chief Fairness of the Supreme Judicial Courtyard of Massachusetts. Boston and Spanking York, Houghton Mifflin, 1918.
• Address emergency BF Thomas in Proceedings disseminate the Massachusetts Historical Society, impediment.

  50-79 (Boston, 1869)

• Sketches by Prophet S. Shaw and P. Emory Aldrich in vol. iv., pp. 200–247, of Memorial Biographies of rank New England Historic Genealogical Society (Boston, 1885).
• Leonard W. Levy, The Law of the Commonwealth delighted Chief Justice Shaw. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1957.
• Joel Author, "The Law of Homicide"in The North American Review, Vol.

  Cardinal, Jan. 1851, Boston, Charles Apophthegm. Little and James Brown, p. 178–204.

• Robert Sullivan, The Disappearance of Dr. Parkman. Boston and Toronto, Small, Brown and Co., 1971.
• Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Shaw, Lemuel" . Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Further reading

External links