• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

James M. Redwine

  • Books
  • Columns
  • 1878 Lynchings/Pogrom
  • Events
  • About

Andrew Jackson

A Legal Revolution

November 13, 2020 by Peg Leave a Comment


Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) was a Frenchman who studied American society during a nine-month tour in 1831 when the United States were still simmering with vitriolic political animus from the 1824 and 1828 elections between John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson. Adams was elected by the House of Representatives in 1824 and Jackson won via the Electoral College in 1828. After neither election did the United States fall into chaos, even though Jackson won both the popular vote and a plurality, but not a majority, of the Electoral College vote yet Adams grabbed the presidency in 1824.

Four men ran for president in 1824, John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay and William Crawford. Because the Electoral College vote was split in such a way that none of the four received a majority, as required to be elected President, under the Twelfth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution a “contingent” election was held in the House of Representatives. Each state’s delegation was given one vote and Adams was elected. Jackson and his supporters alleged that Adams and Clay had entered into a “Corrupt Bargain” to shift Clay’s votes to Adams. Regardless, Adams was elected by the House and the country moved on until 1828 when Jackson ran against Adams again.

In his treatise on American democracy de Tocqueville defined America’s presidential election as “a revolution at law” and described it as follows:

“Every four years, long before the appointed (presidential election) day arrives, the election becomes the greatest, and one might say the only, affair occupying men’s minds…. As the election draws near intrigues grow more active and agitation is more lively and widespread. The citizens divide up into several camps.… The whole nation gets into a feverish state.”

De Tocqueville’s ultimate verdict on America’s democracy was encapsulated in his general verdict on how political controversies were ultimately resolved. His observation was that:

“In America there is hardly a political question which does not sooner or later turn into a judicial one.”

De Tocqueville’s opinion was that the American manner of resolving political issues without bloodshed worked because, unlike European monarchies, the United States citizens respected the law and they did so because they had the right to both create it and change it. Since we get to choose our legislators who write our election laws and because we can change the laws by changing whom we elect if we are unhappy, we accept the laws as written including who is ultimately declared the winner of a current election.

The laws we have the right to create and the right to change include filing for an elected office, running for that office, who counts the votes, how they are counted, as well as how and when someone can legally contest an election. That legal procedure applies to all facets of an election cycle. Each state’s legislature has the authority to establish its own procedures in this regard as long as they do not violate federal law.

As an Indiana Circuit Court Judge I was involved in a recount of a congressional race, a county clerk general election, a county council general election, a town council election and a county council primary election. The Indiana legislature had enacted and published a clear statutory procedure for each type of election contest, including what role each public official should play in any recount. The statutes demanded total openness and media access to ensure the public could have confidence that if all involved followed the law a clear winner would be fairly determined. There were time limits, controls and transparency. After a recount result was certified in each contest life moved on and the eventual losers and their supporters accepted the results because they had had their “day in court”; that is, democratically enacted law was followed not the arbitrary or partisan activity of individuals.

De Tocqueville compared America’s hotly contested democratic elections to a surging river that strains at its banks with raging waters then calms down and carries on peacefully once the results have been properly certified. From my own experience with several elections and after the recounts of some of them, I agree with de Tocqueville’s analogy.

That is not to say I am for or against any type of recount for any office. I absolutely have no position on whether any candidate for any office should concede or contest anything. My position is simply that as long as the law is properly followed our democracy can handle either circumstance.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp

Like this:

Like Loading...

Filed Under: America, Circuit Court, Democracy, Elections, Gavel Gamut, Indiana, Judicial, Law, Presidential Campaign Tagged With: Alexis de Tocqueville, Andrew Jackson, Corrupt Bargain, day in court, election recount, electoral college, Henry Clay, House of Representatives, Indiana Circuit Court Judge, James M. Redwine, Jim Redwine, John Quincy Adams, legal revolution, political controversies, presidential election, respect the law, United States, vitriolic political animus, William Crawford

Don’t Blame Me

August 9, 2019 by Peg 2 Comments

Andrew Jackson was a notoriously bad speller. His response to the critics of his errors was not an effort to learn to be a better speller but to blame his critics. Jackson proclaimed, “It’s a damned weak mind that can only think of one way to spell a word.”

Things have regressed from Jackson. According to communications expert, Carol Blymire, as reported via Twitter and broadcast by WIBC radio host Tony Katz on July 16, 2019 an attempt by an editor to correct a reporter’s spelling was just plain meanness according to the misspeller. Ms. Blymire related a reporter in her late 20’s had spelled the word hamster as ham(p)ster and her editor amended it. The reporter said she could spell it that way because that was the spelling she had learned. It did not need changing. When the editor insisted on the correct spelling the reporter broke into tears and texted her mother to seek punishment for the editor.

Now, as a writer of hundreds of articles and thousands of court rulings I can sympathize with the reporter. My wife, my sister, my court reporters and the reading public can attest to my unlikely winning of a spelling bee. However, I have managed to accept, sometimes begrudgingly, corrections of my versions of words. So far I have avoided tears and I have not asked my mother for spelling support since I escaped grade school.

However, this is not an article about spelling but about individual responsibility in our current culture of blaming everyone but the actors for the results of their bad behaviors. Take bankruptcy for example. There are sound reasons of public policy for allowing citizens to claw their way out of crippling debt so they can get on with their lives, pay taxes on new income and begin anew. Horrendous medical expenses incurred by patients with illnesses or birth conditions or from accidents can often never be paid even by hardworking families or even those with substantial means. In such cases society does itself a favor by allowing a fresh start. There are, of course, other situations where bankruptcy is not only justified but good public policy. But a simple avoidance of responsibility is not in anyone’s interest. The writing off of student loans after one voluntarily goes to college and accepts the benefits of an eduction is not fair to others and not in America’s best interest. After all, about two thirds of the costs of college degrees are not paid by the graduates anyway but are provided by public funds. Once again it is simply the avoidance of responsibility. As one who benefitted from student loans, which were repaid, and as one who received the G.I. Bill, after serving in the military, I am supportive of student aid but not student failure to earn or pay for the assistance.

When America hears about the latest mass killings and listens to politicians and news media blame everything and everybody for the heinous acts, it may be an indication of how far we have traveled from facing the extremely difficult, long-term incremental solutions to our complicated cultural problems. To cast aspersions and ad hominems against third persons when someone commits an evil act seems to have become our go to response. It is somewhat akin to eliminating winners and losers from everything from little league sports to academic achievement. Affirmative Action is a necessity when it is used to ensure that people with superior qualifications are not discriminated against simply because of their gender, race, religious beliefs, sexual orientation or ethnicity. However, it is wrong to elevate one simply on that basis. It is like getting a participation trophy. Competition should be on a fair basis, but discouraging competition is an insult to those who might do better if their shortcomings are corrected. And America might do better with unacceptable behavior if we place responsibility on the actors actually involved.

If Republicans and the conservatives publicly allege that the policies and statements of the Democrats and the liberals are to blame for the mass shootings, and vice versa for the Democrats and the liberals, it is as if everyone is falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater. Solutions to mass shootings will not come from such shifting of responsibility. The hard work of addressing these complicated issues cannot be done by simply complaining to our mommies.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp

Like this:

Like Loading...

Filed Under: America, Gavel Gamut, News Media Tagged With: Andrew Jackson, avoidance of responsibility, bad speller, Carol Blymire, Democrats and liberals, individual responsibility, James M. Redwine, Jim Redwine, mass killings, news media, Republicans and conservatives, Tony Katz, WIBC

Feet of Clay

August 25, 2017 by Peg Leave a Comment

Picture by Peg Redwine

William Shakespeare had Marc Antony preach these words at Julius Caesar’s funeral:

“The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones.”

Act III, Scene 2

Antony went on to list Caesar’s accomplishments in addition to his being ambitious. There was some good, some bad. Perhaps the citizens of Rome should have erected a partial statue of Caesar honoring just the good parts.

This could be a solution to our current controversy over monuments to historic figures. A committee could be composed of people who admire the works of a now dead leader and those who find the figure’s behavior flawed. A few examples might be helpful.

George Washington survived Valley Forge, presided over the Constitutional Convention and refused the opportunity to be named an emperor. On the other hand he owned hundreds of slaves and helped enshrine slavery into our legal system. The Committee might consider cutting the Washington Monument in half.

Thomas Jefferson was responsible for the Bill of Rights that guaranteed individual liberty but only to twenty-one year old white males. He also owned slaves and had children by one of them. Today such an employer/subject relationship would result in severe censure. Perhaps the Committee might recommend the Jefferson Memorial be closed every other week.

As we search for unblemished heroes to honor we could consider Abraham Lincoln who issued the Emancipation Proclamation. However, he at first averred slavery would be preferable to the disintegration of the Union and the Proclamation did not free all slaves just those in the states of the Confederacy. The Committee could maybe have a disclaimer added as a placard around his statue’s neck.

Andrew Jackson committed adultery, captured Seminole Indians under a flag of truce and as president created The Trail of Tears. On the other hand, he was a courageous and victorious military leader. A short bronze bust could replace his heroic sized statue.

As for Mount Rushmore the Committee would have to remove at least 3 of the 4 figures. Of course, Teddy Roosevelt had a penchant for shooting animals which might upset the ASPCA; so all 4 might have to be erased.

Right here in Posey County, Indiana we have a dilemma about what to do with our most famous citizen. Alvin Peterson Hovey was once Posey Circuit Court Judge, a Civil War general for the Union and our only governor. Unfortunately, he also was instrumental in helping to cover up the murders of seven Black men in October 1878. One of those Black men was shot and stuffed into a hollow tree on a farm owned by Hovey. Will the Committee have to remove the glowing patina from Hovey’s bronze in the Indiana State House?

One might look to Jesus as the paragon of virtue but even he got angry and threw the moneychangers out of the temple. He, also, voiced his hope that the cup of his great travail might pass from him. On the other hand, apparently no one knows what Jesus looked like unless one believes the Shroud of Turin is a clue. I guess the Committee would not be able to find any statues of Jesus to modify.

It appears that history has not provided us with any perfect examples to honor. Maybe the Committee will have to suggest that all statues be modified by substituting feet of clay.

Picture by Peg Redwine

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp

Like this:

Like Loading...

Filed Under: America, Circuit Court, Democracy, Females/Pick on Peg, Gavel Gamut, Judicial, Law, Males, Posey County, Slavery, War Tagged With: Abraham Lincoln, abuse of women, Alvin Peterson Hovey, Andrew Jackson, ASPCA, Bill of Rights, Civil War general, Constitutional Convention, Emancipation Proclamation, emperor, feet of clay, flag of truce, George Washington, governor of Indiana, Indiana State House, James M. Redwine, Jefferson Memorial, Jesus, Jim Redwine, Julius Caesar, Marc Antony, moneychangers, monuments, Mount Rushmore, murders of seven Black men in October 1878, paragon of virtue, Posey Circuit Court Judge, Posey County Indiana, Rome, Seminole Indians, Shroud of Turin, slavery, statues, Teddy Roosevelt, the evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones, The Trail of Tears, Thomas Jefferson, Union, Valley Forge, Washington Monument, William Shakespeare

© 2025 James M. Redwine

 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d