This Article will demonstrate that history does in fact provide guidance to the intention of the framers when they rejected the language of the Fourth Amendment and adopted the unique language of article I, section 7. Contrary to the Ringer court\u27s assertion, federal and state case law, legal academic articles, and newspaper articles from the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century provide a wealth of information from which the rationale behind the framers\u27 decision to choose the specific language in article I, section 7 can be hypothesized
