William Johnson (1771-1834) served on the U.S. Supreme Court from 1804 until his death in 1834. He melded federalists and states' rights views in his opinions. His most important contribution was his insistence on freedom of judicial expression in the form of dissenting opinions.
William Johnson was born on December 27, 1771, near Charleston, South Carolina in St. James Goose Creek Parish, one of two sons born to William and Sarah (Nightingale) Johnson. His father had relocated to South Carolina from New York in the early 1760s and became a hero of the Revolutionary War. When the British captured Charleston, Johnson's father was placed in detention in Florida and the family was evicted from their home. Several months later Johnson's father was released, and the family was reunited in Philadelphia and returned to Charleston together.
Johnson attended grammar school in Charleston, and in 1790 he graduated first in his class from Princeton University. He returned to Charleston to study law under Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, a close adviser to President George Washington. Johnson was admitted to the bar in 1793. On March 20, 1794, he married Sarah Bennett, the sister of Thomas Bennett, who would later become governor of South Carolina. The couple had eight children but only two lived to adulthood. They later adopted two children from St. Domingue who had fled the island during a slave revolt.
Became State Legislator, Judge
Under the laws of the time, Johnson was eligible to run for political office due to his property holdings, which included several slaves. In 1794 Johnson was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives as a member of Thomas Jefferson's Republican Party. He served three two-year terms, and in 1798, the last year of his tenure in the lower assembly, he was elected as Speaker of the House.
In 1798 he chose not to seek re-election to the House of Representatives so that he could accept an appointment to the Court of Common Pleas, the state's highest court. For the next six years Johnson gained valuable experience addressing many important issues of the time, most notably the relationship between the states and the infant federal government.
Named to Supreme Court
In 1804 Johnson was tapped as President Jefferson's first Supreme Court nominee. At issue for Jefferson was Republican control of the judiciary. His predecessor, President John Adams, had appointed John Marshall, a staunch Federalist, as chief justice. Marshall took strong control of the court, insisting on unanimous decisions. Prior to Marshall's appointment, nearly twenty percent of the court's decisions contained dissenting opinions; after his appointment, no dissenting opinions had been rendered. Jefferson saw Johnson's independent nature and strong personality as a means to exert a brake on Marshall's dominance. Jefferson nominated Johnson on March 22, 1804. Two days later Johnson received Senate confirmation by a voice vote. On May 7, 1804, at 33 years of age, he took the oath of office.
As Jefferson hoped, Johnson provided an independent voice on the court. Although it was several years before he ventured to issue a dissenting opinion, from early on he struggled to overcome Marshall's insistence that the court present a unified front to the public. Although Johnson was successful in easing the iron grip Marshall held over the court, his opinions were often in line with Marshall's, which sometimes earned him the wrath of the president.
Johnson's first judiciary controversy of note occurred in 1808 in the case Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston. Under the executive orders of President Jefferson's Embargo Act, the collector of the Port of Charleston refused sailing clearance to vessels in port. Jefferson had issued the orders to withhold trade to France and Great Britain, which were at war with each other and regularly raiding U.S. ships. When Adam Gilchrist, owner of a grounded ship, petitioned Johnson in circuit court, Johnson reportedly boarded the ship himself and issued sailing orders. His opinion upon granting the mandamus stated that the executive instructions had no legal basis, namely, Congress had not authorized the detention of ships, and the president held no executive right to enforce such acts that infringed on personal liberties.
Jefferson was dismayed at this apparent betrayal by his appointee. The Federalists, on the other hand, were overjoyed with Johnson's reproach of the president and made sure the incident was highly publicized. The president turned the matter over to the U.S. Attorney General, Caesar A. Rodney, who rebuffed Johnson's actions, stating that Johnson acted outside the Constitution when he ordered the ship to sail. Although Johnson initially defended his actions, in a separate Supreme Court decision in 1813 he conceded that he had acted outside his jurisdiction. Nonetheless, Johnson's actions were instrumental in cementing the Supreme Court's role as a protector of individual rights and establishing the connection between legislative action and presidential powers. As a result, Congress passed legislation that clearly delineated the president's right to order such detentions.
Another important decision came in 1812 when Johnson issued the court's opinion rejecting common law federal crimes. Up to that time, federal courts had ruled on criminal cases over which they had not been given legislative authority, which was limited by Congress to such offenses as treason and counterfeiting. The matter became political when a federal grand jury indicted several newspaper editors in Connecticut for seditious libel against President Jefferson. Whereas the Federalists believed that the federal government held inherent powers of self-defense that allowed it to prosecute cases without explicit criminal statutes, Jeffersonians viewed the practice of trying common law crimes in federal courts as an abuse of power. When the seditious libel case came before the Supreme Court as U.S. v. Hudson and Goodwin, Johnson issued the court's majority opinion, which refused to extend federal jurisdiction to include criminal cases. According to James W. Ely, Jr. in Historic U.S. Court Cases, "Although the case before the Court concerned prosecution of seditious libel, Johnson addressed the broader issue of whether the federal courts could exercise any non-statutory criminal jurisdictions. … [His] opinion was grounded on federalism and strict construction of legislation. Stressing the limited nature of the federal government, Johnson declared that federal power was 'made up of concessions from the several States' and that the states reserved all powers not expressly delegated." As he often did in opinions, Johnson relied on both Federalist and Republican principles, pleasing and displeasing each party.
Justice Joseph Story, the most prominent figure on the bench next to Marshall, vehemently disagreed with Johnson's common law opinion. He wrote a sharply worded dissent and disregarded Johnson's majority decision in his own rulings. Johnson butted heads with Story again over extending the jurisdiction of the admiralty into inland waterways. Johnson, who believed in limiting the powers of the government at sea, was also unsympathetic to extending corporate power. Although he concurred with the constitutionality of maintaining a federal bank, he denied the bank's right to sue in federal court.
Johnson, a firm believer in states' rights, was opposed to the federal government superseding its power; however, at the same time, he was a staunch defender of the union, especially in matters of trade and commerce. Because he did not fit easily into any camp, he incurred the wrath of both parties. The Federalists bemoaned Johnson's close reading of legislative authority, and the Jeffersonians, with whom he aligned himself politically, complained of his restrictive interpretation of executive power and his commitment to states' rights.
Resentment in the South
Johnson was viewed with growing ambivalence in his home state. His pro-union sentiment did not play well in South Carolina at a time when anti-federalism was strong. Resentment grew in 1823 after Johnson invalidated the South Carolina Negro Seaman Act in circuit court in the case Elkison v. Deliesseline. According to the act, all free black seamen who docked in a South Carolina port were required to be jailed during the time their ships were in port. Johnson ruled that such an ordinance violated the federal government's power over commerce and greatly weakened the state of the union. Despite the ruling, South Carolina continued the practice of incarcerating black sailors, and Johnson defended his opinion in a series of letters, written under the pen name Philonimus, which were printed in the Charleston newspapers. Though Johnson was against the abolition of slavery, he did abhor the inhumane treatment of slaves and further alienated his home state by denouncing South Carolina for withholding the rights of due process to slave rebel Denmark Vesey.
Johnson provoked the anger of South Carolinians again when he rebuked the state's efforts to nullify the Tariff of 1828. According to vice president John C. Calhoun, who vehemently opposed the tariff in an anonymous letter, the Constitution was not supreme law, but rather a contractual agreement among sovereign states. States therefore had the right to nullify or reject any federal requirements they believed to be unconstitutional. Johnson, who saw nullification as a serious threat to the stability of the union, once again voiced his opinions in the South Carolina newspapers, first under the pseudonym Hamilton and later in a signed eight-point statement that rejected nullification. Johnson became so unpopular in his home state that he moved to Pennsylvania in 1834.
The First Great Dissenter
Johnson's opinions were sometimes very sound and forthright; however, other times he tended to lack clarity, often basing his opinions on abstract political or natural law theories. He was in many ways overshadowed by Marshall. Johnson did play an important role in reinstating the standard practice of submitting dissenting opinions. Prior to Marshall's reign, each Supreme Court Justice offered a separate, or seriatim, opinion. Over the course of his 29 years as a Supreme Court Justice, Johnson wrote 112 majority opinions, 21 concurrences, 34 dissents, and five seriatim opinions for a total of 172. Only Justices Marshall and Story rendered more opinions.
In his 1953 article on Johnson in The William and Mary Quarterly, Donald Morgan noted that Johnson "set up a record of separate utterance unparalleled in the early Court. … As elsewhere, Johnson's approach to opinion procedure was experimental. Besides expressing his views alone and agitating for seriatim opinions, he even introduced views held privately in an opinion rendered for the majority. The outcome of his ventures in strategy is clear: it was the establishment of that procedure for rendering the decrees of the Supreme Court which most harmoniously reconciled authoritativeness with intellectual freedom—the single statement for the majority combined with separate utterances by independents." Thus, Johnson is often referred to as "the first great Dissenter."
Not always completely comfortable with his roll as instigator on the court, Johnson found himself distracted by outside interests, including land speculation and writing. He published a two-volume biography of Revolutionary War hero Nathaniel Greene in 1822 and the Eulogy of Thomas Jefferson in 1826. He was also a member of the American Philosophical Society, and he contributed frequently to its meetings and publications. Although Johnson's independent temperament made him prickly with those who did not share his opinions, Johnson was also known as a man of sincerity, modesty, and warm-heartedness. He died unexpectedly on August 4, 1834, in New York City, due to post-surgical complications after jaw surgery.
Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd edition, Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1997.
Chase, Harold, Samuel Krislov, Keith O. Boyum, and Jerry N. Clark, Biographical Dictionary of the Federal Judiciary, Gale, 1976.
Garraty, John A., and Mark C. Carnes, American National Biography, Oxford University Press, 1999.
Johnson, John W., Historic U.S. Court Cases, 1690-1990: An Encyclopedia, Garland Publishing, 1992.
Mauro, Tony, Illustrated Great Decisions of the Supreme Court, CQ Press, 2000.
Roller, David C., and Robert W. Twyman, The Encyclopedia of Southern History, Louisiana State University Press, 1979.
Witt, Elder, Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 2nd ed., Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1990.
The William and Mary Quarterly, January 1953. □
William Johnson, in his efforts to keep orderly records of his business transactions and the events in Natchez, Mississippi, wrote one of the most important historic documents of Antebellum America. His diaries constitute one of the few records that give extensive insight into this part of U.S. social and economic history. As a slave who had been freed, Johnson became a successful businessman and a slaveholder. He began with a barbershop and expanded into various business as well as land ownership. Johnson's diary records how he negotiated a society of racial limitations and discrimination while embracing many white aristocratic values. Although Johnson's experiences serve as an example of the complex role of a free person of color and a slaveholder, his ability to negotiate amicable relations with whites in the pre-Civil War period marked a unique instance for the times. Johnson was able to rise to a level of prominence in Natchez and was respected by both black and white persons in his community.
William Johnson was born in 1809 to Amy Johnson, a slave in Natchez, Mississippi. Amy Johnson and her children were owned by William Johnson of Adams County. Although the child bore the status of his mother, his father ultimately determined his condition. Amy Johnson never openly said that her master, William Johnson, was the father of her children but it was known to be true. When young Johnson was five years old, his mother was emancipated by her owner. Four years later, in 1818, Amy's daughter, a mulatto girl named Delia, was also emancipated by Johnson. It was not until 1820, when young Johnson was eleven years old, that he was freed through a petition submitted also by his master to the Mississippi General Assembly. Johnson was apprenticed to his brother-in-law James Miller, a Philadelphia-born free Negro barber in Natchez. Miller was a well-established and respected local businessman. He taught Johnson the barber business, and he took the place of a father by imparting ethical principals and behaviors that shaped Johnson's character. Miller also initiated him into the ways of upper class free Negroes and the vaguely marked boundaries of economic and social status in the white Natchez community. The lessons that Johnson learned became a key part of his business and social practices throughout his life in Natchez.
Becomes Successful Businessman
In 1828 Johnson acquired a barbershop in Port Gibson, Mississippi. Two years later Johnson sold his Port Gibson shop to purchase Miller's shop in Natchez when Miller moved to New Orleans. The Natchez barbershop served a predominately white clientele and was very popular. Johnson and his staff provided haircuts, shaves, fitted wigs, and sold fancy soaps and oil. He was so enterprising that in 1833 he was able to purchase a brick building on Main Street. The following year he opened a bathhouse at this location and was able to pay it off within two years. Johnson owned several rental properties, rented rooms for office and retail use, as well as loaned money in small amounts for short periods of time. He speculated on farmland and owned as many as fifteen slaves before his death. As a smart businessman, he also kept abreast of social issues that were important to his status. Johnson dressed fashionably, read newspapers, and purchased books. Though not belonging to one particular denomination, Johnson did attend church. His hobbies supported his competitive side: he enjoyed sports such as hunting, fishing, and horse racing, and participated in lotteries, cards, checkers, raffles, and shuffle-board. He recorded his wins and losses for these activities as well as his business transactions in his diary.
In 1833, Johnson spent two months visiting New York, Philadelphia, and other cities. In a search for a potential bride, he began traveling to New Orleans, St. Francisville, Louisville, as well as other lower Mississippi towns to vacation. After traveling widely, he settled for a local woman. In 1835 Johnson married Ann Battles, the daughter of a family friend and a hometown girl of Natchez. Both Battle and her mother were freed slaves who were emancipated in 1826. Battle was perceived as catching the most eligible bachelor in her class in Natchez. The couple spent sixteen years together and had ten children, with the last child born only a month before Johnson's death.
- Born into slavery in Natchez, Mississippi
- Freed and apprenticed to brother-in-law James Miller
- Acquires barbershop in Port Gibson, Mississippi
- Purchases Miller's Barbershop in Natchez
- Keeps diary of business transactions and life in the Antebellum South
- Expands business to include money lending, land and slaves
- Marries Ann Battles of Natchez
- Murdered by Baylor Winn in Natchez, Mississippi on June 17
- Johnson's diary is published by family
In 1835 with his new wife, Johnson completed a three-story brick home only half a block from the Adams County Courthouse. His other ventures included a toy shop, engaging in wallpaper sales, and providing cart rentals for transporting goods. He also expanded his money-lending operations, agricultural holdings, and slave ownership. However, even as the most respected and successful free Negro in Natchez, Johnson was still subject to racism. He had access to the courts, but he could not vote, sit on a jury, or bare arms in the local militia. At the theater he was still relegated to the balcony. On Sundays he stood outside to hear sermons at white churches where Negroes were not allowed to enter. The only time he truly crossed the line of segregation was in death: he was buried in the local white cemetery. His mother and one of his daughters were also buried there.
Life in Natchez
Embracing the genteel white tradition of keeping a diary, Johnson recorded his view of the antebellum South. With no formal education, Johnson learned about his community and its social rules from his brother-in-law. Politically and socially, Johnson had unusual relationships with whites. He was able to conduct business on a fairly equal basis. As a freed person, Johnson knew both enslaved and free Negroes, as well as the white aristocrats and the white lower class. He loaned money to whites, employed them in some of his businesses, and even sued them in court. He did not write much about religion, and he left political issues such as slavery as a whole to others. Although he could not vote, he was interested in politics and was sympathetic to the Democratic Party. He was in favor of universal suffrage and education. Johnson did offer an opinion on some local issues. Business transactions were a key part of Johnson's dairy, and he also made notes regarding his slaves and related transactions. He vacillated between scorn and pity for other blacks. Regarding his role as slaveholder, Johnson recorded the circumstance of one problem slave. He determined that the slave, Stephen, who drank excessively, was to be sold. He agonized over the decision but came to no other solution. Johnson took the slave system as it was.
In 1851 at the age of forty-two Johnson was murdered over a land-border dispute. Baylor Winn, a long time neighbor, had recently been at odds with Johnson over land and timber rights. Winn ambushed Johnson after he lost the dispute. Johnson lived until the next day and left a statement that Winn was the person who shot him. The fact that Winn claimed to be a white man was the central issue in the trial. Although legally Winn had passed for white, the Johnsons were able to get documentation with certification from the governor of the state that showed Winn and his family to be free Negroes from King William County. The defense was able to have this information left out due to legal technicalities. This ruling, which allowed Winn's claim that he was white, prevented the crucial eyewitness testimony to be given. All three witnesses for the case were Negroes and by Mississippi law Negroes were legally barred from testifying against whites. The case continued through two trials and at two separate locations and was abandoned after two years. Local papers all over the state followed the case as it unfolded. Until her death in 1866, Johnson's wife maintained the family. Her sons and employees maintained the barbershop through the Civil War and afterwards. By 1872, the family name had been changed to Johnston and as members of the family died over the years, the local Natchez press continued to refer to their lineage as one of the most respected local families.
William Johnson, in his efforts to succeed and achieve acceptance, tried diligently to conduct himself as an honorable human being. At the time of his death Johnson had acquired 350 acres of farmland and timberland, several buildings and businesses, and fifteen slaves. Johnson's diary, which was cherished and preserved by his family for nearly a century, contains over two thousand pages in fourteen volumes. The diary of life in Natchez, Mississippi from 1835 to 1851 gives accounts of antebellum Southern life, race relations, economic and social conditions, political affairs, and a unique look at a freed slave's rise to a level of prominence.
Davis, Edwin Adams. "William Johnson." In Dictionary of American Negro Biography. Eds. Rayford W. Logan and Michael R. Winston. New York: Norton, 1982.
――――― and William Ransom Hogan. The Barber of Natchez. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1954.
Lissek, Deborah. "William Johnson." In American National Biography. Vol. 12. Eds. John A. Garraty and Mark C. Carnes. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Salzman, Jack. Encyclopedia of African-American Culture and History, Supplement. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2001.
William Johnson's original diary and 1,310 additional items are housed in the Department of Archives at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Lean'tin L. Bracks
William Johnson served in the South Carolina House of Representatives from 1794 to 1798 and as speaker of the house in 1798. He was then elected judge of the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas. In 1804 he was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court. He served on the U.S. Supreme Court until his death in 1834, earning a reputation as a critic of Chief Justice john marshall, a writer of dissenting opinions, and a nationalist with regard to federal-state relations.
Johnson was born December 27, 1771, in Charleston, South Carolina. He was the son of Sarah Nightingale Johnson and of William Johnson, a blacksmith, legislator, and well-known Revolutionary patriot. During the Revolutionary War, when the British captured Charleston, Johnson's father was sent to detention in Florida, and the family was exiled from its home. The Johnsons returned to South Carolina after being reunited months later.
Johnson graduated first in his class from Princeton in 1790. He then returned to Charleston to study law under Charles C. Pinckney, a prominent adviser to President george washington. Johnson was admitted to the bar in 1793.
In 1794 Johnson married Sarah Bennett, sister of Thomas Bennett, a future governor of South Carolina. The couple had eight children, six of whom died in childhood. They also later adopted two refugee children from Santo Domingo.
From 1794 to 1798, Johnson served in South Carolina's house of representatives as a member of Thomas Jefferson's new republican party. Johnson was speaker of the house in 1798. He was then elected judge of the court of common pleas, the state's highest court.
In 1804 President Jefferson appointed Johnson to the U.S. Supreme Court. During his thirty years of service on the Court, Johnson became known as a critic of Chief Justice John Marshall. Johnson has been called the first great Court dissenter because he established a tradition of dissenting opinions. Among his most noteworthy opinions was his dissent in Craig v. Missouri, 29 U.S. (4 Pet.) 410, 7 L. Ed. 903 (1830). In Craig v. Missouri, Johnson argued in his dissent that states should be able to issue temporary bills of credit or loans.
"In a country where laws govern, courts of justice necessarily are the medium of action and reaction between the government and the governed."
In general, Johnson leaned toward the nationalist position in judicial issues involving federal-state relations, as illustrated by his concurring
opinion in gibbons v. ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1, 6 L. Ed. 23 (1824). Gibbons was a landmark decision that held that the commerce clause gave to Congress, to the exclusion of the states, the power to regulate interstate commerce, which included navigation between the states. In his circuit court duties as well, Johnson stead-fastly held that the federal government had the right to control interstate commerce, including the commerce of slaves. This position proved so unpopular in his native state that he was forced to move to Pennsylvania in 1833.
In the first part of his career as a Supreme Court justice, Johnson sought a different appointment. He wrote to President Jefferson that he found the Court to be no "bed of roses." Nevertheless, he remained on the Court until his death.
Johnson's other accomplishments included the publication of Sketches of the Life and Correspondence of Nathaniel Greene, in 1822, and Eulogy of Thomas Jefferson, in 1826. Johnson also was a founder of the University of South Carolina. He died following surgery in 1834.
Kolsky, Meredith. 1995. "Justice William Johnson and the History of the Supreme Court Dissent." Georgetown Law Journal 83 (June): 2069–98.
Witt, Elder, ed. 1990. Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court. 2d ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly.
(b. ca. 1610; d. London, England, September 1665)
Born into the gentry and probably educated for the clergy, Johnson began his career as a chemist about 1648. In June 1648 the College of Physicians of London had decided to erect a laboratory for the preparation of chemical medicines by the doctors. Soon afterward, however, Johnson was allowed to fit up and man a laboratory at the west end of the College garden at his own expense. His effort to make this a commercial venture in which both the public and the College were served with his chemical preparations was unanimously condemned by the College; nevertheless Johnson soon became known as the operator to the Royal College of Physicians, and his career as such is in many respects typical of a seventeenthcentury chemical operator—a competent technician versed in the manipulations of chemistry.
As operator to the College, Johnson prepared chemical medicines and ingredients as samples and for sale.(His occupation as a dispenser of chemical medicines was recognized when he was granted the freedom of the Society of Apothecaries in 1654.) He instructed Collegians and possibly the public in chemical operations and analyzed suspicious medicines for the College, using, in part, a rudimentary comparison by weights.
Johnson served his profession with the publication of Lexicon Chemicum (1652), which he freely admitted was simply gleaned and rearranged from such German authors as Basilius Valentinus, J. B. van Helmont, and especially Ruland. At least five printings attest to the usefulness of such a dictionary, in which the dark phrases of chemists were ordered and classified.
Because of the Lexicon and a less orderly publication, issued in the same year, Johnson was placed among the early followers of Helmont but later was considered a traitor by the dogmatic iatrochemists, who soon were challenging the established legal medical practice of London. One of the more important of these chemists was George Thomson, in reply to whose Galeno- pale (London, 1665) Johnson wrote Some Brief Animadversions on behalf of the College of Physicians. The College expressed its pleasure with a gift of £ 100. While the medical theories at stake are of great interest, for Johnson they were secondary to more immediate questions of the technical competence and professional status of the writers. His defense of chemical Galenism rarely attempted to tackle the philosophical issues raised.
The urgency of this debate was increased by the outbreak of the plague, which took the lives of some of the chief participants, including Johnson, who had taken part in the dissection of the body of a plague victim.
I. Original Works. Johnson’s writings include Lexicon chemicum (London, 1652, 1657, 1660); and’ Аλυρτο-Мαστiξ or Some Brief Animadversions Upon Two Late Treatises. . . (London, 1665). Johnson was the editor of some parts of The Excellence of Physik and Chirurgery. . . Short Animadversions Upon a Work of Noah Biggs, Three Exact Pieces of Leonard Phiororant, etc.(London, 1652).
II. Secondary Literature. G. N. Clark, History of the Royal College of Physicians (London, 1964); Gerard Eis, “Vor und nach Paracelsus,” in Medizin in Geschichte und Kultur, 8 (1965), 141; Patricia P. MacLachlan, “Scientific Professionals in the Seventeenth Century,” (Ph. D. the- sis, Yale University, 1968), pp. 61- 83; and C. Wall, H. C. Cameron, and E. A. Underwood, A History of the Worshipful Society of Apothecaries of London, I (London, 1963), 335. Appropriate extracts from the unpublished Annals of the Royal College of Physicians and Farre’s MS History of the Royal College of Physicians were furnished by Mr. L. M. Payne, librarian of the R. C. P., London.
Patricia Petruschke MacLachlan