Talk:Andrew Inglis Clark

message: I have rated the importance of this article as HIGH as Clark was one of the committee of four which drafted the bill for the Australian Constitution, and given his earlier personal completion of a draft constitution for the federation conventions and his American background was possibly the major driver for much of the final wording.  Frankly, I'm quite surprised much more hasn't been written about the man. —Moondyne 14:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Importance

message: Folks, If any body can help by expanding parts of this...
Here are my rough notes:
* Clark learns about the American Constitution via the American Club
* American Unitarian connections - Moncure Conway and Oliver Wendell Holmes - When did Clark start corresponding with Holmes? Why is his son named Wendell? Wendell from Holmes's grandmother
* The 1890 trip to London - decision to travel back via Boston - writes draft constitution (before or after Boston?) - meetings with Holmes - the term 'Commonwealth' appears
* Correspondence with Holmes about draft Constitution
* Attends 1890 convention in Melbourne and 1891 convention in Sydney.  Member of the Constitutional Committee and the Judicary Committee.  Circulates draft in long-hand form (how many copies??)
* Easter 1891 - 'Lucinda' - Clark not present due to ill-health - Griffith converts Clarks draft (badly) to outline of final form - loses most guarentees - screws separation of powers
* 1890's depression - convention system pauses
* 1897 Convention (Adel/Mel/Syd) - Clark does not attend - Correspondence - separation of powers restored - withholds approval of final document (why?)
Clark, amazingly for a sucessful barister and politician, apparantly was shy and a poor public speaker.  How did this affect his choice of not directly pushing his view (Clark was undoubtably the pre-eminent constitutional theorist and jsurist - and this was known by others)?  Instead Clark chose to work indirectly, letting others make the running.  Sam Griffiths ran off with Clarks lunch. Papafox (talk) 14:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think stripping out parchment guarantees of rights and strict separation of powers was a very good thing, and the history of the US vs Australia proves it. Parchment guarantees mean nothing. Responsible government is the only thing that can give you rights. 110.175.158.36 (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarks' development of the Constitution 

message: Spent Thursday at LaTrobe Uni library reading .  An amazingly well researched book.  Like Clark, Neasy was a Justice of the Supreme Court of Tasmania.  He has written what is clearly the definitive biography and, like most biographies, it took ages to write - Neasy spent over a quarter of a century gathering information.  He passed away before it was finished, and it was completed by his son.
Its full of amazing information.  For instance as late as 1897, 6 years after it became clear that US Constitutional legal prededents were critical to drafting a workable document, especially the parts surrounding the construction and powers of the High Court - Barton, Deakin and Griffiths had not fully read and understood the US Constitutional text, let alone studied important cases such as Marbury v. Madison.  Completely amazing.
While Clark attended Hobart High School, this institution has no connection with the modern state school of the same name.  The Hobart High School in the 1850-60's was funded by 'private subscription'
Clark did not attend the critical 'Lucinda' meeting because he was sick with the flu and stuck in Sydney.
More later. Papafox (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neasy's Biography