Franchises lost and gained: post-coloniality and the development of women’s rights in Canada

The Canadian constitution is to some extent characterised by its focus on equality, and in particular gender equality. This development of women’s rights in Canada and the greater engagement of women as political actors is often presented as a steady linear process, moving forwards from post-enlightenment modernity. This article seeks to disturb this ‘discourse of the continuous,’ by using an analysis of the pre-confederation history of suffrage in Canada to both refute a simplistic linear view of women’s rights development and to argue for recognition of the Indigenous contribution to the history of women’s rights in Canada. The gain of franchise and suffrage movements in Canada in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century are, rightly, the focus of considerable study (Pauker 2015), This article takes an alternative perspective. Instead, it examines the exercise of earlier franchises in pre-confederation Canada. In particular it analyses why franchise was exercised more widely in Lower Canada and relates this to the context of the removal of franchises from women prior to confederation

Agamben’s Grammar of the Secret Under the Sign of the Law

This paper suggests that a grammar of the secret forms a concept in Agamben’s work, a gap that grounds the enigma of sovereignty. Between the Indo-European *krei, *se, and *per themes, the secret is etymologically linked to the logics of separation and potentiality that together enable the pliant and emergent structure of sovereignty. Sovereignty’s logic of separation meets the logic of relation in the form of abandonment: the point at which division has exhausted itself and reaches an indivisible element, bare life, the exception separated from the form of life and captured in a separate sphere. The arcanum imperii of sovereignty and the cipher of bare life are held together in the relation of the ban as the twin secrets of biopower, maintained by the potentiality of law that works itself as a concealed, inscrutable force. But the ‘real’ secret of sovereignty, I suggest, is its dialectical reversibility, the point at which the concept of the secret is met by its own immanent unworking by the critic and scribe under the *krei theme, and subject to abandonment through the work of profanation; here, different species of the secret are thrown against one another, one order undoing the other. The secret founded upon the sacred is displaced by Agamben’s critical orientation toward the immanent: what is immanent is both potential and hiddenness

The Second Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England

The earliest book in this exhibition, this was printed by Elizabeth Flesher, a woman who was immersed in London\u27s book trade for her entire life. Flesher\u27s father, Cornelius Bee, was a haberdasher and book seller. She married James Flesher, a printer. He and several other printers agreed to pay Richard Atkyns, holder of the patent to print common-law books, £100 per year for the privilege of printing them. Upon her husband\u27s death ca. 1670, Flesher continued printing in his stead. In 1673, she briefly employed Thomas Dawks (1636-1689), who held the patent for Welsh language printing, and his son Ichabod. Flesher was active in printing until 1688. View in Library Cataloghttps://scholarship.law.wm.edu/womenhistorylaw/1018/thumbnail.jp

1600: Les Reports de Edvvard Coke L\u27Attorney Generall le Roigne

Coke, Edward. Les Reports de Edvvard Coke L\u27Attorney Generall le Roigne. Londini: in ædibus Thomæ Wight, 1600. Perhaps the preeminent legal mind of his time, Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) reported English cases in a series of volumes that became arguably the most influential reports in English law. Coke’s Reports elevated precedence over general principles, firmly entrenching the concept in English common law. Never one to shy away from adding his own, characteristically brilliant, views in his reports, Coke opened himself to criticism from enemies and later commentators and charges of inaccuracy that were not wholly unfounded. After the first volume, displayed here, appeared in 1600, the series had reached 11 disparate volumes by 1615, with publishers later adding two posthumous volumes to the series in 1658 and 1659. View this book\u27s record in the library catalog.https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/oldelawebookes/1017/thumbnail.jp

1614: A Booke of Entries

Coke, Edward. A Booke of Entries. London: Printed for the Societie of Stationers, 1614. Drawing from Sir Edward Coke\u27s (1552-1634) experience both as solicitor and judge, his book of precedents claims to correct some of the problems of earlier works and to include only previously unpublished entries. Despite these claims, many of the same pleadings are found in his Reports, and, unlike William Rastell (1508–1565), Coke (1552–1634) neglected to add precedents for some of the more contemporary issues. This copy previously belonged to Charles Carroll of Carrollton, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His bookplate is on the front pastedown. Other previous owners\u27 signatures are on the title page. View this book\u27s record in the library catalog.https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/oldelawebookes/1022/thumbnail.jp

The First Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England

The dower is a portion of property given by a husband to his wife, typically agreed upon at the time of the couple\u27s wedding, that is meant to support the wife should the husband pass away. This is different from a jointure, which is only granted to the wife upon the death of her husband. View in Library Cataloghttps://scholarship.law.wm.edu/womenhistorylaw/1026/thumbnail.jp

1614: A Booke of Entries

Coke, Edward. A Booke of Entries. London: Printed for the Societie of Stationers, 1614. Drawing from Sir Edward Coke\u27s (1552-1634) experience both as solicitor and judge, his book of precedents claims to correct some of the problems of earlier works and to include only previously unpublished entries. Despite these claims, many of the same pleadings are found in his Reports, and, unlike William Rastell (1508–1565), Coke (1552–1634) neglected to add precedents for some of the more contemporary issues. This copy previously belonged to Charles Carroll of Carrollton, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His bookplate is on the front pastedown. Other previous owners\u27 signatures are on the title page. View this book\u27s record in the library catalog.https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/oldelawebookes/1022/thumbnail.jp

1600: Les Reports de Edvvard Coke L\u27Attorney Generall le Roigne

Coke, Edward. Les Reports de Edvvard Coke L\u27Attorney Generall le Roigne. Londini: in ædibus Thomæ Wight, 1600. Perhaps the preeminent legal mind of his time, Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) reported English cases in a series of volumes that became arguably the most influential reports in English law. Coke’s Reports elevated precedence over general principles, firmly entrenching the concept in English common law. Never one to shy away from adding his own, characteristically brilliant, views in his reports, Coke opened himself to criticism from enemies and later commentators and charges of inaccuracy that were not wholly unfounded. After the first volume, displayed here, appeared in 1600, the series had reached 11 disparate volumes by 1615, with publishers later adding two posthumous volumes to the series in 1658 and 1659. View this book\u27s record in the library catalog.https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/oldelawebookes/1017/thumbnail.jp