[PEN-L:33457] Re: Re: Re: ocal Government Rejects Corporate Personhood

["Michael Hoover" <hooverm@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 12/26/02 21:17 PM >>>
Corporate personhood came the long after corporate charters became
relatively easy to get.  The advantage of the corporate charter was
bankruptcy protection, which did stimulate business.  The purpose of
personhood was freedom from regulation -- not necessarily require to
stimulate business, as Justin suggested.
Michael Perelman
<<<>>>

corporate charters, of course, existed in colonial
america...few in number (most had been orignally granted to finance colonization itself), they
provided holders with various economic powers
and privileges...part of reason for 1776 revo was existence of such charters...

few charters were granted from early republic
period through civil war...u.s. constitution
doesn't mention corporations, states imposed
strict limits on them (they were banned from
political activity, they didn't have 'immortality'
or 'limited liability') and denial/revocation was common...

increased issuance of corporate charters at
end of 19th century coincides with expansion
of 'judicial activism' in service of
industrial capital (i had opportunity to ask
robert bork some years ago about this and
he could only say that he agreed with such
decisions, get angry and leave the room)...

1886 santa clara case is often cited re. 'corporate
personhood'...but john marshall's 1819 majority
opinion in 'dartmouth v woodward' declared
corporation was to be considered a 'person'
entitled to constitutional rights of persons...

in any event, reference to u.s. supreme court
'per se' is akin to what c. wright mills called
'crackpot realism'...   michael hoover