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 http://www.fair-debt-collection.com/state-garnishment- laws.html; website home page: http://www.fair-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: http://www.masshist.org (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 . United States, William Lloyd Garrison. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS William Lloyd Garrison 18 05 1879 ▼▼ ▼▼ 18001800 18 751 8 75 1 850 1 850 18 251 8 25 ❖ ◆ ◆ ◆ 18 05 Born, Newburyport, Mass. ◆◆ ◆ ❖ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ 1820. deported to Jamaica 19 25 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. 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: