john adams wrote the preamble of the declaration of independence.
john adams wrote the preamble of the declaration of independence.
who wrote the preamble of the declaration of independence?
john adams
as was the custom, congress appointed a committee to draft a preamble to explain the purpose of the resolution. john adams wrote the preamble, which stated that because king george had rejected reconciliation and was hiring foreign mercenaries to use against the colonies, "it is necessary that the exercise of every kind of authority under the said crown should be totally suppressed". adams's preamble was meant to encourage the overthrow of the governments of pennsylvania and maryland, which were still under proprietary governance. congress passed the preamble on may 15 after several days of debate, but four of the middle colonies voted against it, and the maryland delegation walked out in protest. adams regarded his may 15 preamble effectively as an american declaration of independence, although a formal declaration would still have to be made.
united states declaration of independence
one problem identified was that the independence of provincial judges was not protected as extensively as the federal judges were under sections 96 to 100 of the constitution act, 1867. the majority read section 11(d) as only protecting independence in the exercise of jurisdiction in relation to offence (i.e., it would protect judges concerned with criminal law, but not civil law). however, section 11(d) is not a broad or exhaustive code. instead, the court looked to constitutional norms and found that judicial independence was one such norm implied by the preamble to the constitution. although lamer recognized case law such as the patriation reference which noted the preamble technically has no binding effect in itself, he also found the preamble reveals the "basic principles which are the very source of the substantive provisions of the constitution act, 1867" and "invites the use of those organizing principles to fill out gaps in the express terms of the constitutional scheme". the implication of the importance of judicial independence came from the preamble's statement that canada's constitution should be similar to the united kingdom's, and the uk has a tradition of judicial independence. the act of settlement of 1701 was particularly important for independence. the supreme court had previously reached this conclusion in "beauregard v. canada" (1986). however, the court now claimed that since courts are more important today, judicial independence has become a fundamental issue that should not just be reserved for the superior courts, as dictated by the act of settlement. the constitution could adapt to changing circumstances in this regard. (this interpretation of the british constitution has inspired criticism. the british form of judicial independence was more limited in 1867, neither extending to inferior courts nor limiting government power to lower the judges' remuneration. at any rate, no act of parliament can be declared "ultra vires" by a court in british law. this is why academic jeffrey goldsworthy attacked the decision as "a self-contradiction, a vague reference to 'evolution' combined with a plainly false analogy, and an evasion".)
provincial judges reference