|
 Connecticut Supreme Court History
Volume I (2006)
EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION
Michael
Besso
Editor
Welcome to
the first issue of Connecticut Supreme Court History. The
Board of Editors expects that this new journal will present
to Society members and other interested persons fascinating
and informative scholarship. As a subject of study, much of
the history of the Connecticut Supreme Court still remains
to be revealed. The launch of this journal inaugurates a
sustained effort to uncover and present this history.
The
material published in each issue will range from outstanding
scholarly articles (in an “Articles” section), to other
interesting, informative presentations (in an “Essays,
Reports, and Miscellanea” section). Each issue will also
begin with the editor’s introduction.
For this
first issue, in lieu of an Articles section, the Board of
Editors presents several essays that commemorate the
Society’s 2005 creation. In addition to the welcome provided
by Society President Wesley Horton, there are contributions
from Melvin Urofsky and Ellen Ash Peters. Professor Urofsky
serves as the editor of The Journal of Supreme Court
History—concerning the United States Supreme Court—and he
offers comments for our Society on the importance of
historical organizations dedicated to the study of courts.
Judge Peters, Connecticut’s Chief Justice before her
retirement from that post in 1996, publishes here her
remarks for the Society, which she presented at the first
public meeting in October of last year. To complement these
essays, this first section also provides information
regarding the Society’s official incorporation.
In “Essays,
Reports, and Miscellanea,” readers will find several more
essays, which bring us back into Connecticut Supreme Court
history during the early statehood period. The first, by
former State Historian and Professor (Emeritus) Christopher
Collier, is as welcome for this issue as are the
contributions by Wesley Horton, Professor Urofsky, and Judge
Peters. Christopher Collier has spent a career contributing
not only to Connecticut history in general, but to the
state’s constitutional, judicial, and legal history as well.
Here, he shares with the Society a brief overview of the
Litchfield Law School—the nation’s first—founded by a former
Connecticut Supreme Court jurist, Tapping Reeve.
Connecticut, Collier notes, depended on a “locally developed
common law,” to an extent “more than any other state.”
Because of the development of a strong and genuinely local
common law, “[i]t is no coincidence that Connecticut
jurists, of all those in the original United States,
produced the first treatise on American law, the first
printed reports of cases, and the first law school in the
United States.” In his essay, Collier recounts the story of
Chief Justice Reeve, the Litchfield Law School, and the
legacy of each in the context of this common law heritage.
Following
Collier’s essay, the Board of Editors presents two
additional works, in formats that will regularly appear in
future issues. Brief historical reports on important cases
should provide a basis to develop our understanding about
the court and prompt additional research and analysis. To
that end, the Board publishes a report on Symsbury Case
(1785), which is among the first reported cases in the
country to record the apparent exercise of judicial review.
The case involved a seemingly mundane land dispute. Because
the land and the dispute regarding its ownership depended on
the authority and application of various grants and acts
over time by the General Assembly, however, resolution of
the matter required that the court decide to what extent it
would recognize any or all of the legislature’s prior
actions. The court concluded that one key act “could not
operate,” and in so doing set the stage for future debates
about the decision’s significance in the broader story of
judicial review. As this essay makes clear, the historical
meaning and treatment of Symsbury Case remain open for
further study and debate. It does confirm, though, that any
story of the Connecticut Supreme Court must include a
discussion of this case.
The Board
also publishes a report on 1806 legislation that reorganized
the Connecticut Supreme Court. As Wesley Horton notes in his
welcoming essay, this legislation supports an argument that,
this year, the Supreme Court is really 200 years old. In
1806, specifically, the General Assembly altered the Supreme
Court’s membership. It removed from the Court the elected
governor, lieutenant governor, and assistants (members of
the General Assembly’s “Council”) and replaced them with a
full panel of non-elected judges. For the first time since
its creation in 1784, the state’s highest court consisted of
persons who were judges only rather than sitting legislative
and executive officials. Because of this, in 1806 the
Supreme Court achieved a level of judicial independence
which was not possible during the two preceding decades of
its existence. To this extent, then, 1806 surpasses 1784 as
a moment of import in Connecticut Supreme Court history.
Although it would not be until 1818 that the Supreme Court
would sit atop a constitutionally independent branch of the
government, by then the 1806 legislation had already
recognized the importance of independent judges.
Finally,
the “Essays, Reports, and Miscellanea” section includes
another regular feature: reports from recent Society
meetings. These include, this year, a description of Yale
Law School Professor Akhil Amar’s talk at the Society’s
annual meeting in May.
Before
concluding, I must thank the members of the Board of Editors
who have contributed enthusiasm, energy, and effort to bring
this journal into existence. The Board members (who are
listed on page iii) include persons who are specially
trained in history, law, and political science, and who hold
professional positions ranging from university and law
faculties to the judiciary to legal practice as attorneys.
This truly has been a collaborative enterprise and would not
have reached fulfillment without the contributions of these
members.
Again,
welcome to this first issue. We hope that you enjoy reading
the journal and that it sparks and fuels an ongoing interest
in Connecticut Supreme Court history.
Connecticut Supreme Court
History, Vol. I |
Publications |
