Talk:Thomas Johnson (judge)

message: Although the CRS report cited at http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL31112.pdf says he was appointed in August 1791, this report is incorrect. First, Oyez, at http://www.oyez.org/justices/thomas_johnson says Commissioned 11/6/91 and sworn in 8/5/92, with length of service listed as 5 months.
Second, Appointment of Johnson, 2 U.S. 402, 1792 WL 385 says "Supreme Court of the United States. Appointment of Johnson. August Term 1792. The court being met, a commission, appointing Thomas Johnson one of the Justices, bearing date the 7th of November, 1791, was read; and he was qualified according to law."
Therefore, the correct date of his service is from August, 1792 onwards.
----  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SocraticPrince (talk • contribs) 17:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The correct date is the date on the commission, not the date he was sworn. The Oyez article states that his term of service was five months, but further down it says that his term in office was 14 months. I have changed the date to reflect this, and added the date he was sworn. Richard75 (talk) 12:36, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates in Office 

message: In this article, it says John Rutledge resigned. In John Rutledge, it sounds like he was rejected over the chief justice nomination but remained as an associate justice (later resigned or retired). What's the whole story? -- Toytoy July 2, 2005 04:06 (UTC)
----
The Rutledge article could be a bit learer, but here is the expanded version...
*Rutledge resigned from the court in 1791 to take job as the chief justice of and in South Carolina
*Washington appointed Johnson to replace Rutledge as associate justice under John Jay
*In 1795 John Jay resigned to become Governor of New Yotk
*Washington appointed Rutledge (again) to the Supreme Court, this time as Chief Justice.
** This (2nd time) was the nomination that the senate rejected.
I hope that answers, if not e-mail me, and I'll adjust this summary... Lou I 18:24, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A very old question but the answer is that Johnson declined the appointment to the office of Chief Justice. "The South in the Building of the Nation" Volume XII (Volume 2 of Biography), by Walter Lynnwood Fleming, Richmond: The Southern Historical Publication Society, 1909, p. 4. Donner60 (talk) 10:18, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did John Rutledge resign? 

message: The Synopsis of this article reads like the introduction paragraph a third grader's History essay. The quote "~was an American jurist with a distinguished political career." is especially lazy and well below the caliber of anything that could be objectively considered encyclopedic content. Sleyece (talk) 00:19, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any objection to some adjustment of the language of the synopsis. I will wait 36 server hours before taking any action. Sleyece (talk) 21:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: As I previously indicated, I took bold action previously this month. Users are welcome to leave comments and provide criticism on this action. Sleyece (talk) 01:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *This is a section for the discussion on expanding a particular section of this article. If you can help, please do. Thank you! Sleyece (talk) 21:41, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  We Can Do Better Than This 

message: No mention of slave-owning. I feel that this category should be restricted to people whose slave-owning history was notable in itself. Valetude (talk) 12:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:American slave owners 

message: No prominent source can be found to justify labeling Johnson a Founding Father of the United States. His accolades are impressive - on that I agree - but the closest I could find to this was Founding Father of Maryland, and that wasn't offered by a particularly authoritative source. Unless multiple sources can be found to justify this label, it should be removed. Allreet (talk)
:The signers of the other three founding documents are accepted per sources and various talk page discussions as Founding Fathers, and since there is no dispute that the Continental Association is a founding document, site consistency applies. Besides the defining 2017 Werther article "Analyzing the Founders: A Closer Look at the Signers of Four Founding Documents" in the Journal of the American Revolution here are two other sources which, for consistency and per WP:COMMONSENSE, acknowledge that the Founders include the signers of the fourth: The Founder of the Day article "Signers of the Continental Association" clearly states "Below is a list of the Founders who signed the Continental Association" [emphasis mine], followed by the names of the 53 signers (Founder of the Day also names the Association as one of the four founding documents). The worldhistory.edu "Top 10 Founding Fathers of the United States of America" - section "List of Founding Fathers of the United States" asserts "Also, two broader groups of Founding Fathers capture the signers of Articles of Confederation (the initial version of the American Constitution which was adopted in 1777 and ratified in 1781) and the signers of the Continental Association (created on October 20, 1774)" [emphasis mine]. Please add these sources to the pages of the other Association signers you are intent of removing from Founding Father status, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:43, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I just finished tweaking and expanding a few details in the article. I probably should have checked this talk page before doing so, as I changed the templeted "Founding Father of the United States" to "patriot. I did that after coming across a secondary source that called Johnson a patriot. That said and done, I concur with Randy Kryn's argument in favor of calling Johnson a founding father in the article lead, and would support restoring the term. Delaplaine, I believe, calls Johnson a Founding Father in his 1927 book. Drdpw (talk) 00:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Drdpw, nice work and good points, and 'patriot' and Founding Father both fit and seem to comfortably and accurately compliment each other. Sources listed above align Johnson as a Founding Father, so likely should be used as cites. Do you have a quote from the book?, which was written only a decade after Warren Harding coined the term. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:57, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Drdpw and  My thanks, also. I have no problem whatsoever with adding reliable sources that can be found supporting the assertion that Thomas Johnson is considered a Founding Father. I added the dispute template in this case because the assertion was part of a sweeping claim that signing the Continental Association qualifies someone as a Founding Father. That's supported by many sources regarding signers of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution, not so with the Continental Association. Allreet (talk) 22:27, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Will get back to this as I try to keep up with  who has been at his crusade of canceling founders for what seems like months on dozens of pages and tens of thousands of words. For example, he has opened and closed three (3, III) simultaneous RfC's on the same question because he didn't like the results (a Wikipedia record?), and is now looking for a different conclusion (which wouldn't count anyway given the results of three simultaneous RfC "loses") I'll answer further within a day or two, can only juggle so many of his new discussions at a time (which he knows and is maybe - surely? - counting on) but I do ask him now, is he going to add this campaign to the Peyton Randolph page, who, given Allreet's wishes, would lose Founding Father status on Wikipedia? Randy Kryn (talk) 23:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's true I opened three RfC's. A mere drop in the bucket considering I'm concerned about changes made to over 50 pages, as of my latest count. None of the RfC's garnered much feedback from editors, not anywhere near enough, so I closed them. It's a total distortion, then, to call these "losses" or that I "didn't like the results". I think four editors responded, pathetic, but at least three agreed with me. @User:Randy Kryn, please stick with the issues instead of attacking me. As for my "crusade", what's a Wikipedian to do other than try to keep the record straight? Allreet (talk) 09:31, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute unsourced Founding Father label