Joe writes:
an individual's right to tote a gun
> ...
> The first version of the Statutes at Large, generally the "bible" on
> proper early statutory language, uses one comma.  It has done so since
> about 1857 (long before the current controversy developed).

  Hmm - back in the early 90's I got curious about this - and wrote a
summary of my intestigations - put at the end of the letter.

  I'll certainly read the material that Joe cites, and see if this
changes my mind.

  However, I'll take this opportunity to remark on a style of wording.
The Baron article says, "an individual's right to tote a gun".  I also
find articles that use phrases such as "pack heat"  When I find this
type of informal phrase in an allegedly serious analysis it usually
indicates a major disagreement with the individual rights
interpretation, and an appeal to emotion.
-- 
--henry schaffer

  What is the exact spelling and punctuation of the 2nd Amendment to
the Constitution of the United States?  Inquiring minds want to know.
We have two main contending versions, plus some minor players.

  The best supported version is:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed.

  Note the three commas and three capital letters (other than the
initial A.)  This can be represented as (M,S,A,).  One source of this
version is a document provided by the Commission on the Bicentennial of
the United States Constitution, Warren E. Burger, Chairman.

  Another common version is:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

  This version with one comma can be represented (mS,a).  Supporting
one comma is a seal printed by the NRA which has (mS,A) and the
following letter which has been circulated on the net with a (ms,a)
version.

|THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
|Congressional Research Service
|Washington, D.C.  20540
| 
|To: Honorable Paul Findley
|Attention: Miss Evans
|From: American Law Division
|Subject: Punctuation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the
|         United States
| 
|This will refer to your request of July 5, 1972 on behalf of Mr. James
|H. Macklin for information relative to the captioned subject.  Mr.
|Macklin had noted that the punctuation of this amendment varied with
|the different sources which have reproduced it.
| 
|By resolution in 1789, Congress proposed twelve articles to the
|legislatures of the several states as amendments to the Constitution
|of the United States.  Ten of these articles were ratified by the
|legislatures of three-fourths of the states by 1791, including the
|amendment in question which was adopted in this form: "A well regulated
|militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right
|of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." 1 United
|States Statutes at Large 21, 97.
| 
|Information pertaining to the debate on this amendment in the state
|and Federal legislatures may be found in: Schwartz, Bernard, "The Bill
|of Rights: A Documentary History," 2 volumes, Chelsea House, New
|York, 1971.  This work retains the original spelling, grammar, and
|style of all documentary material.
| 
|[signature]
|Paul L. Morgan
|Legislative Attorney

  This letter seems fairly clear, but to double check, I looked up this
reference, and found this version on page 1164.  However this long
2 volume work doesn't clearly say (that I could find) that the original
punctuation and capitalization were retained, even though the
Legislative Attorney claims this is the case.

  Other references were consulted.  The Guide to American Law, West
Pub. Co. 1983, vol. 2, page 96 has a photo reproduction of the Bill of
Rights - but unfortunately it is much reduced and not extremely clear.
It is difficult to see the commas, if any, but State (in the middle
phrase "free State" seems to be capitalized.  The Encyclopedia
Britannica, 15/e, Micropedia, Volume 3, p. 573 gives the (M,S,A,)
version of the 2nd.  As do Constitutional Law: civil liberty and
individual rights, 2/e, by William Cohen and John Kaplan, Foundation
Press, 1982, Mineola, N.Y., and Prof. W. Van Alstyne in his excellent
essay "The Second Amendment and The Personal Right to Arms" (Duke Law
Journal, 43:1236, 1994.)  I found some other variations in other books,
and then found what may be the most authoritative book I can find.

  It is "The Constitution of the United States of America" by The 
Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 1982, J. H.
Killian, editor, published by the U.S. Gov't Printing Office in 1987.
This large book has *two* versions of the 2nd Amendment.  The first one
is (M,S,A,) given in a section entitled "literal print".  Then later,
in the main section of the book covering the analyses and discussion,
is the (MS,A) version.  I claim is that this book is a better reference
than the 1972 letter above since it is more recent, and it is a formal
publication of the same organization.  Reading the two forms provides
an understanding of the original way the Amendment was written, and
then shows a 'modern' version.

  Next, I located a facsimile copy of the Bill of Rights.  This is a
facsimile of the copy in the National Archives, and I carefully
inspected it with the help of our Documents Librarian.  There is no
date on it, but it has been in our library collection since before
1976.  There clearly are 3 commas.  State is clearly capitalized.  (The
capital form of the letter S is used, the curly one which looks like a
treble clef sign.)  The initial letters of Militia and Arms needed more
inspection since they were written in the same style of lower case
letters.  (The m is written in the same form as an m in the middle of a
word, wavy-like.  The a has the rounded form of a cursive a in the
middle of a word, rather than with two angled sides meeting at an acute
angle at the top with a horizontal cross-bar in the middle.  However
each was larger than a) the other letters in its word or surrounding
words, and b) the same letters used to start other words in the
document.  These two letters were approximately 1 1/2 the height of the
uncapitalized letters.  We both concluded that they were intended to be
capital letters, and so this is (M,S,A,).

  All of this is based on the assumption that the "engrossed" Bill of
Rights in the National Archives is the "original" Bill of Rights.  The
lovely engrossed Constitution which we all recognize is actually a
hand-written copy which was made for signing, after printed drafts were
used and the final version had been printed and agreed upon.  (This
story is told in "United States Constitution" Published for the
Bicentennial of its Adoption in 1787 by the Library of Congress in
association with The Arion Press, San Francisco, 1987.  Incidently the
version of the 2nd in this book is (M,s,a,).  However this book also
says, "Changes for the uniformity of typographic style have been made
by the printers.")  I can find no indication that the Bill of Rights
was finalized in printed form first, and so it appears that the
engrossed copy is the original.

  I also have a facsimile copy of the Bill of Rights which I obtained
during the Bicentennial celebration.  It was sponsored by a corporation
"in cooperation with the National Archives."  It has exactly the same
(M,S,A,) version as the facsimile in my University Library.  However
this facsimile has on it, "The original is not legible in several
places and this copy has been retouched for legibility."  I'm not sure
of all the places which were retouched (I've found a couple in the 6th
and 10th Amendments), but in the previous facsimile mentioned, the 2nd
is fully legible and appeared the same as in my copy.  The printed
version accompanying my facsimile copy has the (M,S,A,) version.

  The conclusion is that the (M,S,A,) version is the original, and that
the other versions represent changes for the sake of modernization or
for other reasons.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed.

--henry schaffer
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to