Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 5 P6 docx

chairman of the COMMITTEE on appropriations,
and he established himself as an expert on the
budget. He also focused his attention on
legislation related to Reconstruction policies in
the South, protective
TARIFF issues, and the
maintenance of a sound currency. When Blaine
was elected to the Senate in 1876, Garfield
became the House minority leader—a position
he held for the remainder of his congressional
service.
Garfield held his House office for eighteen
years, for the most part easily winning the
nomination of his party and the vote of the
electorate as each term concluded. Only once
during his time in the House was his reelection
in question. In the early 1870s the Republican
party was discredited by allegations of scandal in
the administration of President Ulysses S.
Grant—including the Cr|Aaedit Mobilier scan-
dal. Crédit Mob ilier of America was a construc-
tion company established to build the Union
Pacific Railroad. It became known that Garfield
was among a group of congressmen who had
accepted stock in Crédit Mobilier, in exchange
for legislative consideration. Gar field ultimately
refused the stock, but it took him two years to
do so. His critics maintained that he decided
not to take the stock only because the issue had
placed him in political hot water.
During the same period, Garfiel d accepted a

RETAINER for legal services from a Washington,
D.C., company seeking to supply paving
materials in the nation’s capital. He argued that
because he had no direct connection to city
government, there was no
CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
Not everyone shared his opinion.
Though many public servants of the day
conducted personal business while in office,
Garfield found it increasingly difficult to
distinguish clients who wanted his legal advice
from those who wanted his political influence.
Garfield was reelected in 1874, despite the
controversy, but to avoid future problems, he
ceased taking outside legal clients. The incident
also fueled Garfield’s desire to eliminate politi-
cal
PATRONAGE in the CIVIL SERVICE system.
Garfield took an active role in the 1876
presidential election of
RUTHERFORD B. HAYES.
When Senator
JOHN SHERMAN, of Ohio, was
named to the Hayes
CABINET, Garfield expressed
an interest in filling his vacant Senate seat.
Needing Garfield in the House, Hayes discour-
aged him from pursuing the matter. Near the
close of Hayes’s term, there was talk that
Sherman would seek to regain his Senate seat,

but he chose instead to seek his party’s
James A. Garfield.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
James Abram Garfield 1831–1881
▼▼
▼▼
18251825
19001900
18751875
18501850
❖
1831 Born,
Cuyahoga
County, Ohio
❖
◆
◆
◆
1833
Garfield's
father died
1846–48
Mexican War
1856 Graduated
from Williams
College
1861–65
U.S. Civil War
1861–63 Served in the Union army, including
battles at Shiloh and Chickamauga

◆
◆
1863–80
Represented
Ohio in the U.S.
House
1876 Became
House minority
leader
1883 Pendleton Act passed,
reformed federal civil service
1881 Wounded in assassination attempt by Charles
Guiteau; died in Washington, D.C., 11 weeks later
1880 Became Republican presidential candidate on
35th ballot at convention; went on to win election
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
38 GARFIELD, JAMES ABRAM
nomination for the presidency. It was widely
presumed that Sherman supported Garfield’s
election to the Senate in exchange for Garfield’s
support at the Republican convention, but no
such deal was struck.
In due course the Ohio legislature elected
Garfield to the U.S. Senate for a six-year term
to begin in 1881, and he attended the 1880
Republican National Convention in Chicago as
head of the Ohio
DELEGATION. Because of home
state support for Sherman, Garfield reluctantly
agreed to act as Sherman’s floor manager and

to canvass for delegates on his behalf—even
though Senator Blaine, Garfield’soldfriend
and colleague, was also seeking the party’s
nomination.
Garfield was a formidable and well-known
figure at the convention. His persuasive skill on
the floor did not go unnoticed. He kept
Sherman’s chances alive by fighting for the
delegates’ freedom to vote their choice, and by
opposing a unit rule that forced delegations to
cast all their votes for the candidate holding the
majority of votes within a state delegation.
Former president Grant, who was also running
for nomination, and his supporters, called the
Stalwarts, supported the unit rule because Grant
held the majority in many delegations.
Garfield managed to block the nominations
of Blaine and Grant, but he could not secure
a majority for Sherma n. With the convention
deadlocked, twenty Wisconsin delegates made a
bold move on the thirty-fifth ballot and, in
protest, cast twenty votes for Garfield.
On the next ballot, Garfield found himself
the unanimous choice of the convention and
the unwitting
BENEFICIARY of his own floor
maneuvering.
CHESTER A. ARTHUR was named his
running mate. Blaine followers supported the
ticket, and most Sherman followers were willing

to overlook the manner in which the nomina-
tion had been secured, but Grant’s forces never
forgave Garfield for his opposition.
Garfield pacified unhappy Sherman suppor-
ters by surrendering his new Senate seat,
enabling Sherman to return to his old post.
Throughout the summer of 1880, Garfield
attempted to meet with the national committee
and with Grant supporters, but he was never
given an audience. In November Garfield
returned to his farm in Mentor, Ohio, to wait
them out.
Finally, on the eve of the election, Grant was
persuaded to recognize Garfield as the party’s
choice. Grant and his followers were invited to
the Garfield farm for a historic meeting, often
called the Mentor Summit. What was said at the
meeting—and what was promised—has been
the subject of much debate. Grant thought he
had extracted a personal promise from Garfield
that, in exchange for Grant’s support, the
Stalwarts would be named to influential posts
in the new administration.
With the help of Grant’s supporte rs, Gar-
field won the election by a narrow margin over
Democrat Winfield Scott Hancock. Between the
election and the inauguration, Garfield busied
himself with the selection of his cabinet. All
factions of the party called on the president-
elect to lobby for their preferred nominees, but

Grant Stalwarts remained assured that Garfield
would bow to their influence. Garfield’s first
known appointment, making Blaine
SECRETARY
OF STATE
, caused an uproar among the Grant
faction and was viewed as a breach of the
promises made at Mentor. Garfield nevertheless
remained committed to building a conciliation
cabinet that would balance everyone’s interests
and eliminate political patrona ge jobs—and
kept the rest of his choices well guarded until
inauguration day, March 4, 1881.
The first months of his term continued to be
plagued with appo intment and confirmation
battles. Grant supporters continued to believe
that he should have been the party’s presidential
nominee and that in an election deal Garfield
had agreed to consult Grant about appoint-
ments. Those in the Senate who supported
Grant rallied to systematically reject undesirable
appointments, but Garfield was equally stub-
born. Of the Stalwarts’ attemp t to derail his
nomination for collector of customs for the port
of New York City, Garfield said, “They may take
him out of the Senate head first or feet first, but
I will never withdraw him.”
Though confirmation battles consumed a
majority of Garfield’s time, he also carried out
other presidential duties and commitments.

On July 2, 1881, he was en route to a speaking
engagement at his alma mater Williams
College, when lawyer Charles J. Guiteau shot
him at a Washington, D.C., railroad station.
Described as an erratic character, Guiteau
shoutedtoacrowdattherailroadstationthat
he was a Stalwart.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
GARFIELD, JAMES ABRAM 39
Garfield lingered for eleven weeks. Daily
reports from physicians showed that he was
unable to carry out his responsibilities. By
August the question of Garfield’s succession
was being discussed in the press and debated by
CONSTITUTIONAL scholars. It was agreed that the
VICE PRESIDENT was constitutionally allowed to
assume the president’s powers and duties, but it
was not clear whether he should serve as acting
president until Garfield recovered, or assume
the office itself and displace Garfield altogether.
The pertinent provision of the Constitution—
Article II, Section 1, Clause 6—was ambiguous,
and expert opinion was still divided over the
precedent set by
JOHN TYLER, who had taken
the oath of office in 1841 after the death of
President
WILLIAM H. HARRISON, rather than
merely assuming Harrison’s duties until the
next election.

Because Congress was not in session, the
issue could not be debated there, but it was
addressed by Garfield’s cabinet members on
September 2, 1881. They agreed that it was time
for the vice president to assume Garfield’s
duties, but they too were divided as to the
permanence of the vice president’s role. The
problem was never resolved because Garfield
died September 19, 1881, before any action was
taken by the cabinet or the vice president.
Following the precedent set by Tyler, Arthur
took the oath of office and assumed the
presidency, following Garfield ’s death.
Garfield’s unexpected nomination, bitter
election, and tragic death often overshadow
his previous accomplishments and his presiden-
tial agenda. His efforts to build a conciliation
cabinet and to purge administrative agencies of
old patronage jobs made him a strong advocate
of civil service reforms. Ironically, the appoint-
ment battles preceding his murder probably
caused Congress to pass civil service reforms in
1883 that were far broader in reach and scope
than anything Garfield had envisioned.
FURTHER READINGS
Ackerman, Kenneth D. 2004. Dark Horse: The Surprise
Election and Political Murder of James A. Garfield.
Saddle Brook, NJ: Avalon.
Peskin, Allan. 2004. Garfield: A Biography. Jefferson City,
MO: Easton.

Rutkow, Ira. 2006. James A. Garfield: The American
Presidents Series: The 20th President, 1881. New York:
Times.
v
GARLAND, AUGUSTUS HILL
Augustus Hill Garland served as attorney
general of the United States from 1885 to
1889 under President Grover Cleveland.
Garland was born June 11, 1832, in Tipton
County, Tennessee. His parents, Rufus K.
Garland and Barbara Hill Garland, settled in
Hempstead County, Arkansas, when he was an
infant. Garland was educated at local schools in
Hempstead County, and at St. Joseph’s College,
in Bardstown, Kentucky. He graduated from
St. Joseph’s in 1851 and was admitted to the bar
in 1853. Garland’s first practice was established
in Washington, Arkansas. He eventually moved
to Little Rock, Arkansas, where he earned a
reputation as one of the best lawyers in the
South. He married Sarah Virginia Sanders in
Little Rock. She died early in their
MARRIAGE, and
Garland’s mother ran his household for most of
his life.
At the outbreak of the Civil War, Garland
opposed the secession of Arkansas, but he
eventually supported his state when the
Augustus Hill Garland 1832–1899
▼▼

▼▼
18251825
19001900
18751875
18501850
❖
❖
1832 Born, Tipton
County, Tenn.
1853 Admitted to
Arkansas bar
◆
◆◆
1861–65
U.S. Civil War
1861–65 Served in Confederate Congress
1866 U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Ex parte
Garland that loyalty oath law for former
Confederate lawyers was unconstitutional
1874–77
Served as
governor of
Arkansas
1877–85
Served in
U.S. Senate
1885–89
Served as
U.S. attorney
general

◆
1898 Experience in the Supreme
Court of the United States and
Federal Practice published
1899 Died,
Washington, D.C.
1867 Elected to U.S. Senate by
Arkansas legislature; Congress
denied him seat until Arkansas
was "sufficiently rehabilitated"
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
40 GARLAND, AUGUSTUS HILL
ordinance of secession was passed. He was
elected to the Confederate provisional congress,
in Montgomery, Alabama, and to the first and
second Confederate congresses, in Richmond.
In an effort to unify the North and South
after the war, President
ANDREW JOHNSON granted
a full pardon to Garland (and others) for
wartime service to the
CONFEDERACY. The pre-
sident’s actions were not widely supported;
Congress enacted a number of laws that
continued to punish the pardo ned Southerners
for their wartime allegiances by restrictin g their
ability to participate in their former businesses
or professions. Two restrictions, enacted in
1865, required attorneys to swear a test (loyalty)
oath affirming that they had not participated in

the rebellion, as a condition for appearing
before the U.S. Supreme Court, the district
and circuit courts, and the
COURT OF CLAIMS (13
Stat. 424). Attorneys who could not take the
oath were denied the right to appear before the
high courts—and thereby prevented from
practicing law.
Garland challenged the law in 1867. He
argued that the law was unconstitutional, and
that even if the law were
CONSTITUTIONAL,he
would be released from compl iance with its
provisions by his presidential pardon. The
Supreme Court found the law to be unconsti-
tutional because it violated the president’s
power to pardon. “When a pardon is full,” the
majority opinion said, “it releases the punish-
ment, and blots out of existence the guilt” (Ex
parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333, 18 L. Ed.
366 [1866]). The case restored Garland’s right to
practice law before the nation’s high courts and
established him as a nationally recognized
constitutional lawyer. It also reestablished him
as a political force in the South.
In 1867 Garland was ele cted to the U.S.
Senate by the legislature of Arkansas, only to be
denied a seat because Con gress found that his
state had not been sufficiently rehabilitated.
For the next few years, he used his abilities to

return his state to favor. By 1874 he was
elected governor of the state; his administra-
tion is credited with bringing order out of the
chaos that pe rmeated Arkansas during the
Reconstruction era. In 1877 Garland was
finally allowed to take his seat in the U.S.
Senate. He was reelected in 1883 and became a
ranking member of the Senate’s
JUDICIARY
Committee.
Garland resigned his Senate seat on March 4,
1885, to accept the position of
ATTORNEY general
in President Cleveland’s
CABINET.Asattorney
general, he was frequently consulted on issues of
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. He was known as an
advocate who insisted on the enforcement of
constitutional freedoms for all citizens.
He also worked to earn the trust of those
who condemned him for his Confederate
service. As a U.S. senator and cabinet officer,
Garland was wary of both individuals and
institutions who sought to influence his opi-
nions and actions. It is said that he steadfastly
avoided society events and that he refused to
read daily newspapers. Even so, he was once
called back from a holiday by an angry
President Cleveland to explain his ownership
of stock in a company that would have been

helped by a
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT lawsuit. (The
lawsuit was eventually withdrawn.)
In 1889 Garland returned to the
PRACTICE OF
LAW
, and he maintained an active caseload until
the end of his life. He also began to record his
life’s work for publication. His Experience in the
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES and Federal
Practice were published in 1898.
Having fought so hard to retain his right
to appear before the nation’s high courts,
Garland’s final hour was fitting: he died while
arguing a case before the Supreme Court of the
United States on January 26, 1899.
FURTHER READINGS
Watkins, Beverly Nettles. 1985. Augustus Hill Garland,
1832–1899: Arkansas Lawyer to United States Attorney-
General. Ph.D. diss. Auburn Univ.
GARNISHEE
An individual who holds money or property that
belongs to a debtor subje ct to an attachment
proceeding by a creditor.
For example, when an individual owes
money but has for a source of income on ly a
salary, a creditor might initiate
GARNISHMENT
proceedings. If the creditor is successful, a
certain portion of the debtor’s salary will be

automatically sent to the creditor from each
paycheck. In such case, the debtor’s employer is
the
GARNISHEE.
GARNISHMENT
A legal procedure by which a creditor can collect
what a debtor owes by reaching the debtor’s
WE, AS ATTORNEYS,
GET LITERALLY
WRAPPED UP IN OUR
CLIENT
’S CAUSE
AND SEE NOTHING
BUT HIS SIDE OF THE
CASE
AND
DECLARE THAT THE
COURT CAN DECIDE IT
ONLY OUR WAY
.
—AUGUSTUS
GARLAND
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
GARNISHMENT 41
property when it is in the hands of someone other
than the debtor.
GARNISHMENT is a drastic measure for collect-
ing a debt. A court order of garnishment allows
a creditor to take the property of a debtor when
the debtor does not possess the property. A

garnishment action is taken against the debtor
as
DEFENDANT and the property holder as
GARNISHEE. Garnishment is regulated by statutes,
and is usually reserved for the creditor who has
obtained a judgment, or court order, against the
debtor.
A debtor’s property may be garnished before
it ever reaches the debtor. For example, if a
debtor’s work earnings are garni shed, a portion
of the wages owed by the employer go directly
to the
JUDGMENT CREDITOR and is never seen by
the debtor.
Some property is exempt from garnishment.
Exemptions are created by statutes to avoid
leaving a debtor with no means of support. For
example, only a certain amount of work income
may be garnished. Under 15 U.S.C.A. § 1673, a
garnishment sought in
FEDERAL court may not
exceed 25 percent of the debtor’s DISPOSABLE
EARNINGS
each week, or the amount by which the
debtor’s disposable earnings for the week exceed
thirty times the federal minimum hourly wage
in effect at the time the earnings are payable. In
Alaska, exemptions include a burial plot; health
aids necessary for work or health; benefits paid
or payable for medical, surgical, or hospital

care; awards to victims of violent crime; and
assets received from a retirement plan (Alaska
Stat. § 09.38.015, .017).
Because garnishment involves the taking of
property, the procedure is subject to due
process requirements. In Sniadatch v. Family
Finance Corp. of Bay View, 395 U.S. 337, 89 S.
Ct. 1820, 23 L. Ed. 2d 349 (1969), the U.S.
Supreme Court struck down a Wisconsin
statute that allowed pretrial garnishment of
wages without an opportunity to be heard or to
submit a
DEFENSE. According to the Court,
garnishment without prior notice and a prior
HEARING violated fundamental principles of due
process.
Garnishment may be used as a provisional
remedy. This means that property may be
garnished before a judgment against the debtor
is entered. This serves to protect the creditor’s
interest in the debtor’s property. Prejudgment
garnishment is usually ordered by a court only
when the creditor can show that the debtor is
likely to lose or dispose of the property before
the case is resolved. Property that is garnished
before any judgment is rendered is held by the
THIRD PARTY, and is not given to the creditor
until the creditor prevails in the suit against the
debtor.
Garnishment is similar to

LIEN and to
ATTACHMENT. Liens and attachments are court
orders that give a creditor an interest in the
property of the debtor. Garnishment is a
continuing lien against nonexempt property of
the debtor. Garnishment is not, however, an
attachment. Attachment is the process of seizing
property of the debtor that is in the debtor’s
possession, whereas garnishment is the process
of seizing property of the debtor that is in the
possession of a third party.
FURTHER READINGS
Fair Debt Collection.com Web site. 2009. Available online at
/>laws.html; website home page: r-debt-
collection.com (accessed September 3, 2009).
Lee, Randy. 1994. “Twenty-Five Years after Goldberg v.
Kelly: Traveling from the Right Spot on the Wrong Road
to the Wrong Place.” Capital Univ. Law Review 23.
“Wage Garnishment” 2003. Rules and Regulations. Federal
Register 68.
v
GARRISON, WILLIAM LLOYD
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON, publisher of the anti-
slavery newspaper The Liberator and founder of
the American Anti-Slavery Society, was one
of the most fiery and outspoken abolitionists of
the Civil War period.
Garrison was born in Newburyport, Massa-
chusetts, on December 10, 1805. In 1808
Garrison’s father abandoned his family, leaving

them close to destitute. At age 13, after working
at a number of jobs, Garrison became an
APPRENTICE to Ephraim Allen, editor of the
Newburyport Herald.
Garrison later moved to Boston where he
became editor of the National Philanthropist in
1828. At that time, Garrison became acquainted
with the prominent Quaker Benjamin Lundy,
editor of the Baltimore-based antislavery news-
paper, the Genius of Universal
EMANCIPATION. In
1829 Garrison became co-editor of Lundy’s
publication and began his vigorous advocacy for
abolishing
SLAVERY. Shortly thereafter, Garrison
was sued by a merchant engaged in the slave
trade. He was convicted of libel and spent seven
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
42 GARRISON, WILLIAM LLOYD
weeks in prison, an experience that strength-
ened his CONVICTION that all slaves should be
set free.
After his release from
JAIL in 1830, Garrison
returned to Boston where he joined the
American Colonization Society, an organization
that promoted the idea that free blacks should
emigrate to Africa. When it became clear that
most members of the group did not support
freeing slaves, but just wanted to reduce the

number of free blacks in the United States,
Garrison withdrew from membership.
In January 1831 Garrison founded The
Liberator, which he published for 35 years and
which became the most famous antislavery
newspaper of its era. Although he was a pacifist,
Garrison struck a formidable stance in the very
first issue in which he proclaimed, “Ido
not wish to think, or speak, or write, with
moderation I will not retreat a single inch—
AND I WILL BE HEARD.” The Liberator, which
never had a paid circulation greater than three
thousand became one of the most widely
disseminated, consistent, and dominating voices
of the
ABOLITION movement.
Antislavery advocates of the day, or aboli-
tionists, were widely divergent in their views of
how and when slavery should be ended and
what should happen to freed slaves after
emancipation. Garrison was part of a group
that believed that abolition of slavery must
happen as quickly as possible. Those who
sought “immediatism,” however were divided
on how to achieve this goal. Garrison, though
searing in his language and unyielding in his
beliefs, believed only in
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, and
opposed any method of active resistance.
In 1832 Garrison founded the country’s

first immediatist organization, the New Eng-
land Anti-Slavery Socie ty. T he following year,
in 1833, he helped organize the American
Anti-Slavery Society. He wrote the society’s
constitution and became its first corresponding
secretary. He befriended fellow abolitionist
and writer
FREDERICK DOUGLASS,andmade
him an agen t of the Anti-Slavery Society.
Over the next several years Garrison came to
reject the teachings of established churches
and the government of the United States,
William Lloyd
Garrison.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
William Lloyd Garrison 1805–1879
▼▼
▼▼
18001800
18751875
18501850
18251825
❖
◆
◆
◆
1805 Born,
Newburyport, Mass.
◆◆
◆

❖
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
1820 Missouri Compromise
enacted, limiting slavery
1828 Editor,
Boston newspaper
1829 Jailed for libel
1831 Founded The Liberator anti-slavery newspaper
1832 Founded New England
Anti-Slavery Society
1854 Burned copy of
Constitution at political rally
1865 Published last
issue of The Liberator
1879 Died,
New York City
1854 Kansas-Nebraska
Act passed
1877
Reconstruction
ends
1865 Thirteenth
Amendment

abolished slavery
1863 Lincoln issues
Emancipation Proclamation
1861–65 U.S. Civil War
1857 Supreme Court issues Dred Scott decision;
Missouri Compromise unconstitutional
1859 John Brown leads attack on Harpers Ferry
1861 Southern states secede from Union
I DO NOT WISH TO
THINK
, OR SPEAK,
OR WRITE, WITH
MODERATION
.
I
AM IN EARNEST—
I
WILL NOT
EQUIVOCATE
—I WILL
NOT EXCUSE
—I WILL
NOT RETREAT A
SINGLE INCH
—AND
I WILL BE HEARD.
—WILLIAM LLOYD
GARRISON
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
GARRISON, WILLIAM LLOYD 43

which he viewed as supporting slavery.
Increasingly hewing to a philosophy of m oral
absolutism, Garrison embraced not only the
cause of nonviolent resistance, but temperance,
women’s rights, and Christian perfectionism.
In 1840 Garrison’s views precipitated a
split in the Anti-Slavery Society between the
minority who supported his radical beliefs and
the majority who disapproved of his views
regarding
RELIGION, government, and the par-
ticipation of women in the struggle for
emancipation. When Garrison’ssupporters
voted to admit women, a group seceded from
the society and formed the rival American and
Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. Another group,
interested in continuing to seek reform
through political activity, later left to start the
Liberty party.
Over the next two decades, Garrison’s
influence declined as his radicalism became
more pronounced. In the 1850s The Liberator
hailed John Brown ’sraidonHarpers
FERRY
while denouncing the COMPROMISE OF 1850, t he
KANSAS-NEBRASKA ACT, and the U.S. Supreme
Court’s decision in
DRED SCOTT V. SANDFOR D.He
continued to support secession of the anti-
slavery states and publicly burned a copy of

theU.S.Constitutionatanabolitionistrally
in 1854.
After the Civil War began, Garrison put
aside his pacifism to support President
ABRAHAM
LINCOLN
and the Unio n Army. He welcomed the
EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION and the passing of
the
THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT, which outlawed
slavery. In 1865 Garrison published the last
issue of The Liberator, although he continued to
advocate for women’s rights, temperance, and
pacifism. Garrison died on May 24, 1879, in
New York City.
FURTHER READINGS
Cain, William E., ed. 1995. William Lloyd Garrison and the
Fight Against Slavery: Selections from the Liberator. New
York: St. Martin’s.
Hagedorn, Ann. 2002. Beyond the River: The Untold Story of
the Heroes of the Underground Railroad. New York:
Simon & Schuster.
Mayer, Henry. 2008. All on Fire: William Lloyd Garrison and
the Abolition of Slavery. New York: Norton.
“William Lloyd Garrison Papers, 1833–1882” Massachusetts
Historical Society. Available online at http://www.
masshist.org/findingaids/doc.cfm?fa=fa0278; website
home page: (accessed Septem-
ber 3, 2009).
CROSS REFERENCES

Brown, John; Temperance Movement.
v
GARVEY, MARCUS MOZIAH
MARCUS GARVEY was a charismatic leader who
preached black pride and economic self-suffi-
ciency. He is internationally recognized as the
organizer of the first significant movement of
black nationalism in the United States.
MARCUS MOZIAH GARVEY was born on August
17, 1887, in St. Ann’sBay,Jamaica,toMarcus
Moziah Garvey, a stonemason, and Sarah Jane
Richards, a
DOMESTIC and farmer. He and his
sister Indiana were the only two of the eleven
Garvey offspring to reach adulthood. As a child,
he used his father’s extensive library to educate
himself. When Garvey was 14, he went to work
as a printer’s
APPRENTICE. In 1908 he participated
in the country’s first Printers Union strike; when
the strike failed, the union disbanded. Because he
had been one of the strike leaders, Garvey found
himself blacklisted. He began working at the
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE and briefly published
his own small journal, Garvey’s Watchman.
Garvey then traveled through Central America
and lived in London from 1912 to 1914, where
Marcus Garvey 1887–1940
▼▼
▼▼

18751875
19501950
19251925
19001900
❖
◆
◆
1887 Born,
St. Ann's Bay, Jamaica
◆
◆
❖
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
◆
1877
Reconstruction
ends
1883 Supreme Court
strikes down Civil
Rights Act of 1875
1898 Spanish-American War
1896 Supreme Court endorses
"separate but equal" in Plessy case
1908 Participates in

printer union strike
1912–14
Traveled to
Central
America
and Great
Britain
1914
Established
Universal
Negro
Improvement
Association
(UNIA)
1921 Congress passes Quota
Act, limiting immigration
1933 President
Franklin Roosevelt
announces New
Deal programs
1940 Died,
London, England
1927 Sentence
commuted; deported
to Jamaica
1925 Incarcerated in federal prison
1922 Convicted of mail fraud
1882 Congress enacts
Chinese Exclusion Act
1939–45

World War II
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
44 GARVEY, MARCUS MOZIAH
he attended Birkbeck College. During this period
he was exposed to the problems engendered by
racial
DISCRIMINATION and first began to think
about ways to help black persons become
economically self-sufficient.
Garvey returned to Jamaica in 1914 and
established the Universal Negro Improvement
Association (UNIA). He cofounded the UNIA
with Amy Ashwood, who was the association’s
first secretary, and who would later become
Garvey’s first wife. At the time, most of Africa’s
countries were colonies under the domination
of European nations. The purpose of the UNIA,
whose motto was “One God, One Aim, One
Destiny,” was to promote black nationalism
throughout the world by establishing an African
country where blacks would run their own
government.
In 1916 Garvey moved to the United States
and toured the country, espousing the Back-to-
Africa movement. In 1917 he started a chapter
of UNIA in New York City, setting up
headquarters in Harlem. To build economic
self-reliance, the UNIA started several busi-
nesses including the Negro Factories Corpora-
tion (NFC) and a steamship company called the

Black Star Line. Garvey also began publishing
the Negro World, in 1918, a journal that
advocated his ideas for African nationalism
and served as the voice of the UNIA.
Around this same time, the UNIA achieved
one of its most ambitious goals—it reached an
agreement with the African nation of Liberia to
make land available for black people who would
come to that country from the United States
and the Caribbean, as well as from countries in
Central and South America. In Garvey’s view,
Liberia would be a beacon of hope drawing new
groups of settlers who would create their own
culture and civilization.
In 1920 the UNIA held its first international
convention at Madison Square Garden in New
York City, during which Garvey laid out his
plans for an African nation-state. The association
adopted a constitution, a Declaration of Rights of
the Negro Peoples of the World, as well as a
national
FLAG. The UNIA also elected officials for
its provisional government, with Garvey serving
as Provisional President of Africa.
By the early 1920s, the UNIA developed an
ardent following, with 700 branches in 38 states
and more than 2 million members. The associa-
tion drew adherents not only from the United
States, but also from Canada, Caribbean coun-
tries, and throughout the African continent. A

consummate showman, Garvey loved to put on
parades and street celebrations in Harlem where
he and other members of the UNIA “nobility”
appeared in elaborate military uniforms, along
with banners and vividly decorated automobiles.
From the outset, however, Garvey ran into
opposition from both whites who were fright-
ened at the idea of black solidarity and blacks
who viewed
INTEGRATION into the American
mainstream as the key to progress.
Before the UNIA could move forward with
its resettlement plans, problems began to
mount. The Liberian government withdrew its
approval for repatriating the new settlers. In
1922 Garvey was convicted for
MAIL FRAUD
concerning the Black Star Line, and in 1925
he was jailed in Atlanta, Georgia. In 1927
President
CALVIN COOLIDGE commuted Garvey’s
five-year sentence. Garvey was labeled an
undesirable alien and deported to Jamaica.
In 1929 Garvey toured Canada and Europe
giving lectures. In 1930 he ran in the general
election for a seat in Jamaica’s legislature, but
was defeated. Further attempts to launch a
newspaper and a magazine met with failure as
did his creation of an organization that was
supposed to provide job opportunities for the

poverty-stricken rural inhabitants of Jamaica.
In 1935 Garvey moved to England. He
continued to hold UNIA conventions and to
make speeches to dwindling numbers of people.
Garvey died in London on June 10, 1940.
Although Garvey was mostly ignored toward the
end of his life, his dedication to black pride and
self-sufficiency made him a national hero in
Jamaica. Garvey and his movement were
celebrated in the music of such reggae stars as
Bob Marley and Burning Spear. Adherents of
the
BLACK POWER MOVEMENT of the 1960s
acknowledged their debt to Garvey’s nationalist
crusade as did blacks fighting for
INDEPENDENCE
from colonial rule in Africa. As of 2009, the
UNIA still functions. Garvey’s son, Marcus
Garvey Jr., served as president until 2004.
FURTHER READINGS
Cronon, Edmund, and John Hope Franklin. 1969. Black
Moses: The Story of Marcus Garvey and the Universal
Negro Improvement Association. 2d ed. Madison: Univ.
of Wisconsin Press.
Jacques-Garvey, Amy, ed. 1992. Philosophy and Opinions of
Marcus Garvey. New York: Atheneum.
DAY BY DAY WE
HEAR THE CRY OF
AFRICA FOR THE
AFRICANS. T

HIS
CRY HAS BECOME
A POSITIVE
,
DETERMINED ONE.
I
T IS A CRY THAT
IS RAISED
SIMULTANEOUSLY
THE WORLD OVER
BECAUSE OF THE
UNIVERSAL
OPPRESSION THAT
AFFECTS THE
NEGRO.
—MARCUS GARVEY
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
GARVEY, MARCUS MOZIAH 45
GAS
Various legal issues arise concerning the use and
distribution of gas.
Supply
A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION does not have the duty
to supply gas to its population. In the event that a
city assumes the performance of such function,
it is acting merely as a business corporation.
The
CHARTER of a gas company is a FRANCHISE
granted by the state. The manufacture of
distribution of gas for light, fuel, or power is a

business of a public character, and, therefore,
a gas company is ordinarily considered to be a
public or quasi-public corporation or a
BUSINESS
AFFECTED WITH A PUBLIC INTEREST
. A state may
regulate gas companies for the protection of
the public and may
DELEGATE its regulatory
powers to municipal corporations in which gas
companies operate. In a number of states, gas
companies are subject to a public service
commission or other such agency. The
JURISDIC-
TION
of the commission ordinarily includes the
power to establish rates and to set forth rules
and regulations affecting the service, operation,
management, and conduct of the business.
Consumer Supply
Upon obtaining a franchise to supply gas to a
particular geographic area, a gas company is
bound to fulfill its obligation; it cannot
withdraw its service from an area merely
because it is dissatisfied with the rates permitted
there. Once the franchise of a company has
expired, it may withdraw the service. A court
may, in certain instances, enjoin the
DISCONTINU-
ANCE

of service for a reasonable period—to
circumvent undue hardship and inconvenience
to the residents of the area.
A gas company has the duty to serve all those
who are within the franchise area who desire
service and subscribe to the reasonable rules that
it may set forth. A municipality or corporation
supplying gas may make reasonable rules and
regulations to secure the payment of bills, such as
eliminating service to the consumer. If there is a
genuine controversy about the amount owed, a
company is not permitted to discontinue service.
A gas company may not require the owner or
occupant of a building to pay overdue and
unpaid bills by a former owner or occupant
before it continues service to the building. Some
statutes require that gas companies install a
meter on the premises, in order to register the
consumption of gas by each customer; and
where a customer tampers with the meter and
uses a significant amount of unmetered gas, the
company can discontinue service and refuse to
restore it until the customer pays the amount
duefortheunmeteredgastaken.
A gas company that wrongfully refuses to
supply a customer with gas is liable for
DAMAGES.
There are also statutory penalties in some states
for such wrongful refusal.
Injuries

A gas company is under the obligation to
EXERCISE ordinary care in the construction of its
works and the conduct of its business in order
to protect life and property.
Gas has a highly dangerous and volatile
character and tends to
ESCAPE. A gas company
must, therefore, exercise care to avoid harm to
U.S. Production, Import, and Consumption of Natural Gas, 1960 to 2007
Trillion cubic feet
Year
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2007
15.09
11.97
23.79
21.14
21.87
19.88
21.52
19.16
24.15
24.54
23.46
23.05
0.14
0.75
0.94
1.45
3.54
3.79

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual
E
ner
gy
Review 2007.
0
5
10
15
20
25
U.S. production
U.S. consumption
Net imports
a
a
Net imports equals imports minus exports.
ILLUSTRATION BY GGS
CREATIVE RESOURCES.
REPRODUCED BY
PERMISSION OF GALE,
A PART OF CENGAGE
LEARNING.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3
RD E DITION
46 GAS
others and is liable for its negligence that results
in INJURY to others by reason of the escape or
explosion of gas. It must exercise reasonable
care in the

INSPECTION of its pipes to ensure that
leaks may be discovered promptly; and if leaks
or defects in the pipes of the company occur
due to faulty construction or maintenance, the
company is liable for resulting injuries, even
though it did not know about the leak.
In the event that the company has taken due
care in the inspection of its pipes and a
DEFECT
or a break occurs through natural causes or by
the act of a third person, the gas company must
be given notice of the defect and reasonable
time to repair it before liability accrues. A gas
company subject to notice that gas is escaping is
under an obligation to shut off the gas supply
until the necessary repairs have been made.
A gas company has a
PROPERTY RIGHT in the
mains and pipes and other appliances, and
where there is unauthorized
INTERFERENCE with,
or damage to, this property, the company is
entitled to recover damages and an
INJUNCTION if
the circumstances so warrant.
Rates
A gas company has a legal obligation to charge
reasonable rates. One of the main purposes
of the regulation o f gas compan ies is to
prescribe fair and reasonable rates for the

selling of gas to the public. Rate increases are
permitted only following an
IMPARTIAL and
complete in vestig ation—with the object of
doing justice to the gas company as well as
the public. Relief can be sought in the courts if
gas rates are unreasonable—to determine
whether the rate making body acted beyond
the scope of its power or against the weight of
the
EVIDENCE.Thecourts,however,cannot
decide what rates are reasonable, nor can they
put those rates into effect.
CROSS REFERENCE
Public Utilities.
GAULT, IN RE
Originally, juvenile court was a place for the
informal resolution of a broad range of matters
concerning children. The hearings were not
adversarial. Instead, they focused on the juve-
nile’s best interests. A juvenile was brought to
the juvenile court, the prosecution presented
EVIDENCE, the juvenile and other witnesses gave
testimony, and the juvenile court judge made a
decision based on the perceived best interests of
the juvenile.
In the same spirit of informality, juvenile
courts provided fewer procedural protections
than did adult courts. Juveniles did not have the
right to a court-appointed

ATTORNEY or to notice
of charges of criminal behavior. They did not
have the right to confront accusers and cross-
examine witnesses. They did not have the right
to a written record of the proceedings or to
APPEAL the juvenile court judgment.
The problem with this lack of procedural
protections was that a juvenile risked losing his or
her liberty for several years. The best interests of
the child usually involved placement in a secure
reformatory or some other secure facility until
the age of eighteen or, in some states, twenty-one.
This amounted to a deprivation of liberty similar
to that resulting from a prison sentence.
In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a
decision that would change dramatically the
character of juvenile courts. In
IN RE Gault, 387
U.S. 1, 87 S. Ct. 1428, 18 L. Ed. 2d 527, fifteen-
year-old Gerald Gault was committed to a
reform school until age twenty-one for allegedly
making an obscene phone call to a neighbor.
Gault had been found delinquent without
receiving notice of the charges or the assistance
of an attorney. In addition, Gault had been
interviewed by a probation officer without
having an attorney present, and the statements
made in this interview were submitted as proof
that Gault had made the obscene phone call.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Gault’s

commitment to the reformatory constituted a
deprivation of liberty. This meant that Gault
should have been provided with most of the
procedural protections afforded to adults in
criminal prosecutions. According to the Court
in Gault, “[U]nbridled discretion, however
benevolently motivated, is frequently a poor
substitute for principle and procedu re. ”
The purpose of the Gault decision was to
make juvenile proceedings more fair to the
juvenile. The decision accomplished this, but it
also made juvenile proceedings more adversarial.
With the increased procedural protections,
juveniles became more capable of resisting
commitment to secure
REFORMATORIES,andit
became more difficult for the juvenile courts
summarily to obtain control over juveniles.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
GAULT, IN RE 47