document_title: United States Bill of Rights

question_text: who was president when the bill of rights was added to the constitution

question_tokens: who was president when the bill of rights was added to the constitution

text: United States Bill of Rights

text: Background

text: The Philadelphia Convention

text: Prior to the ratification and implementation of the United States Constitution, the thirteen sovereign states followed the Articles of Confederation, created by the Second Continental Congress and ratified in 1781. However, the national government that operated under the Articles of Confederation was too weak to adequately regulate the various conflicts that arose between the states.[5] The Philadelphia Convention set out to correct weaknesses of the Articles that had been apparent even before the American Revolutionary War had been successfully concluded.[5]

text: The convention took place from May 14 to September 17, 1787, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Although the Convention was purportedly intended only to revise the Articles, the intention of many of its proponents, chief among them James Madison of Virginia and Alexander Hamilton of New York, was to create a new government rather than fix the existing one. The convention convened in the Pennsylvania State House, and George Washington of Virginia was unanimously elected as president of the convention.[6] The 55 delegates who drafted the Constitution are among the men known as the Founding Fathers of the new nation. Thomas Jefferson, who was Minister to France during the convention, characterized the delegates as an assembly of "demi-gods."[5] Rhode Island refused to send delegates to the convention.[7]

text: On September 12, George Mason of Virginia suggested the addition of a Bill of Rights to the Constitution modeled on previous state declarations, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts made it a formal motion.[8] However, the motion was defeated by a unanimous vote of the state delegations after only a brief discussion. Madison, then an opponent of a Bill of Rights, later explained the vote by calling the state bills of rights "parchment barriers" that offered only an illusion of protection against tyranny.[9] Another delegate, James Wilson of Pennsylvania, later argued that the act of enumerating the rights of the people would have been dangerous, because it would imply that rights not explicitly mentioned did not exist;[9] Hamilton echoed this point in Federalist No. 84.[10] Because Mason and Gerry had emerged as opponents of the proposed new Constitution, their motion—introduced five days before the end of the convention—may also have been seen by other delegates as a delaying tactic.[11] The quick rejection of this motion, however, later endangered the entire ratification process. Author David O. Stewart characterizes the omission of a Bill of Rights in the original Constitution as "a political blunder of the first magnitude"[11] while historian Jack N. Rakove calls it "the one serious miscalculation the framers made as they looked ahead to the struggle over ratification".[12]

text: Thirty-nine delegates signed the finalized Constitution. Thirteen delegates left before it was completed, and three who remained at the convention until the end refused to sign it: Mason, Gerry, and Edmund Randolph of Virginia.[13] Afterward, the Constitution was presented to the Articles of Confederation Congress with the request that it afterwards be submitted to a convention of delegates, chosen in each State by the people, for their assent and ratification.[14]

text: The Anti-Federalists

text: Following the Philadelphia Convention, some leading revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee publicly opposed the new frame of government, a position known as "Anti-Federalism".[15] Elbridge Gerry wrote the most popular Anti-Federalist tract, "Hon. Mr. Gerry's Objections", which went through 46 printings; the essay particularly focused on the lack of a bill of rights in the proposed constitution.[16] Many were concerned that a strong national government was a threat to individual rights and that the president would become a king. Jefferson wrote to Madison advocating a Bill of Rights: "Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can."[17] The pseudonymous Anti-Federalist "Brutus"[a] wrote,

text: We find they have, in the ninth section of the first article declared, that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless in cases of rebellion—that no bill of attainder, or ex post facto law, shall be passed—that no title of nobility shall be granted by the United States, etc. If every thing which is not given is reserved, what propriety is there in these exceptions? Does this Constitution any where grant the power of suspending the habeas corpus, to make ex post facto laws, pass bills of attainder, or grant titles of nobility? It certainly does not in express terms. The only answer that can be given is, that these are implied in the general powers granted. With equal truth it may be said, that all the powers which the bills of rights guard against the abuse of, are contained or implied in the general ones granted by this Constitution.[19]

text: He continued with this observation:

text: Ought not a government, vested with such extensive and indefinite authority, to have been restricted by a declaration of rights? It certainly ought. So clear a point is this, that I cannot help suspecting that persons who attempt to persuade people that such reservations were less necessary under this Constitution than under those of the States, are wilfully endeavoring to deceive, and to lead you into an absolute state of vassalage.[20]

text: The Federalists

text: Supporters of the Constitution, known as Federalists, opposed a bill of rights for much of the ratification period, in part due to the procedural uncertainties it would create.[21] Madison argued against such an inclusion, suggesting that state governments were sufficient guarantors of personal liberty, in No. 46 of The Federalist Papers, a series of essays promoting the Federalist position.[22] Hamilton opposed a bill of rights in The Federalist No. 84, stating that "the constitution is itself in every rational sense, and to every useful purpose, a bill of rights. He stated that ratification did not mean the American people were surrendering their rights, making protections unnecessary: "Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing, and as they retain everything, they have no need of particular reservations." Patrick Henry criticized the federalist point of view, writing that the legislature must be firmly informed "of the extent of the rights retained by the people ... being in a state of uncertainty, they will assume rather than give up powers by implication."[23] Other anti-federalists pointed out that earlier political documents, in particular the Magna Carta had protected specific rights. In response, Hamilton argued that the Constitution was inherently different:

text: Bills of rights are in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgments of prerogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince. Such was the Magna Charta, obtained by the Barons, swords in hand, from King John.[24]

text: Massachusetts compromise

text: In December 1787 and January 1788, five states—Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut—ratified the Constitution with relative ease, though the bitter minority report of the Pennsylvania opposition was widely circulated.[25] In contrast to its predecessors, the Massachusetts convention was angry and contentious, at one point erupting into a fistfight between Federalist delegate Francis Dana and Anti-Federalist Elbridge Gerry when the latter was not allowed to speak.[26] The impasse was resolved only when revolutionary heroes and leading Anti-Federalists Samuel Adams and John Hancock agreed to ratification on the condition that the convention also propose amendments.[27] The convention's proposed amendments included a requirement for grand jury indictment in capital cases, which would form part of the Fifth Amendment, and an amendment reserving powers to the states not expressly given to the federal government, which would later form the basis for the Tenth Amendment.[28]

text: Following Massachusetts' lead, the Federalist minorities in both Virginia and New York were able to obtain ratification in convention by linking ratification to recommended amendments.[29] A committee of the Virginia convention headed by law professor George Wythe forwarded forty recommended amendments to Congress, twenty of which enumerated individual rights and another twenty of which enumerated states' rights.[30] The latter amendments included limitations on federal powers to levy taxes and regulate trade.[31]

text: A minority of the Constitution's critics, such as Maryland's Luther Martin, continued to oppose ratification.[32] However, Martin's allies, such as New York's John Lansing, Jr., dropped moves to obstruct the Convention's process. They began to take exception to the Constitution "as it was," seeking amendments. Several conventions saw supporters for "amendments before" shift to a position of "amendments after" for the sake of staying in the Union. The New York Anti-Federalist "circular letter" was sent to each state legislature proposing a second constitutional convention for "amendments before", but it failed in the state legislatures. Ultimately, only North Carolina and Rhode Island waited for amendments from Congress before ratifying.[29]

text: Article Seven of the proposed Constitution set the terms by which the new frame of government would be established. The new Constitution would become operational when ratified by at least nine states. Only then would it replace the existing government under the Articles of Confederation and would apply only to those states that ratified it.

text: Following contentious battles in several states, the proposed Constitution reached that nine state ratification plateau in June 1788. On September 13, 1788, the Articles of Confederation Congress certified that the new Constitution had been ratified by more than enough states for the new system to be implemented and directed the new government to meet in New York City on the first Wednesday in March the following year.[33] On March 4, 1789, the new frame of government came into force with eleven of the thirteen states participating.

text: Proposal and ratification

text: Anticipating amendments

text: The 1st United States Congress, which met in New York City's Federal Hall, was a triumph for the Federalists. The Senate of eleven states contained 20 Federalists with only two Anti-Federalists, both from Virginia. The House included 48 Federalists to 11 Anti-Federalists, the latter of whom were from only four states: Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and South Carolina.[34] Among the Virginia delegation to the House was James Madison, Patrick Henry's chief opponent in the Virginia ratification battle. In retaliation for Madison's victory in that battle at Virginia's ratification convention, Henry and other Anti-Federalists, who controlled the Virginia House of Delegates had gerrymandered a hostile district for Madison's planned congressional run and recruited Madison's future presidential successor, James Monroe, to oppose him.[35] Madison defeated Monroe after offering a campaign pledge that he would introduce constitutional amendments comprising a Bill of Rights at the First Congress.[36]

text: Originally opposed to the inclusion of a bill of rights in the Constitution, he had gradually come to understand the importance of doing so during the often contentious ratification debates. By taking the initiative to propose amendments himself through the Congress, he hoped to preempt a second constitutional convention that might, it was feared, undo the difficult compromises of 1787, and open the entire Constitution to reconsideration, thus risking the dissolution of the new federal government. Writing to Jefferson, he stated, "The friends of the Constitution, some from an approbation of particular amendments, others from a spirit of conciliation, are generally agreed that the System should be revised. But they wish the revisal to be carried no farther than to supply additional guards for liberty."[37] He also felt that amendments guaranteeing personal liberties would "give to the Government its due popularity and stability".[38] Finally, he hoped that the amendments "would acquire by degrees the character of fundamental maxims of free government, and as they become incorporated with the national sentiment, counteract the impulses of interest and passion".[39] Historians continue to debate the degree to which Madison considered the amendments of the Bill of Rights necessary, and to what degree he considered them politically expedient; in the outline of his address, he wrote, "Bill of Rights—useful—not essential—".[40]

text: On the occasion of his April 30, 1789 inauguration as the nation's first president, George Washington addressed the subject of amending the Constitution. He urged the legislators,

text: whilst you carefully avoid every alteration which might endanger the benefits of an united and effective government, or which ought to await the future lessons of experience; a reverence for the characteristic rights of freemen, and a regard for public harmony, will sufficiently influence your deliberations on the question, how far the former can be impregnably fortified or the latter be safely and advantageously promoted.[41][42]

text: Crafting amendments

text: James Madison introduced a series of Constitutional amendments in the House of Representatives for consideration. Among his proposals was one that would have added introductory language stressing natural rights to the preamble.[43] Another would apply parts of the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal government. Several sought to protect individual personal rights by limiting various Constitutional powers of Congress. Like Washington, Madison urged Congress to keep the revision to the Constitution "a moderate one", limited to protecting individual rights.[43]

text: Madison was deeply read in the history of government and used a range of sources in composing the amendments. The English Magna Carta of 1215 inspired the right to petition and to trial by jury, for example, while the English Bill of Rights of 1689 provided an early precedent for the right to keep and bear arms (although this applied only to Protestants) and prohibited cruel and unusual punishment.[31]

text: The greatest influence on Madison's text, however, was existing state constitutions.[44][45] Many of his amendments, including his proposed new preamble, were based on the Virginia Declaration of Rights drafted by Anti-Federalist George Mason in 1776.[46] To reduce future opposition to ratification, Madison also looked for recommendations shared by many states.[45] He did provide one, however, that no state had requested: "No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases."[47] He did not include an amendment that every state had asked for, one that would have made tax assessments voluntary instead of contributions.[48]

text:
First. That there be prefixed to the constitution a declaration that all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from the people.
That government is instituted, and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution.

Secondly. That in article 1st, section 2, clause 3, these words be struck out, to wit: "The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each State shall have at least one Representative, and until such enumeration shall be made;" and in place thereof be inserted these words, to wit: "After the first actual enumeration, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number amounts to—, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that the number shall never be less than—, nor more than—, but each State shall, after the first enumeration, have at least two Representatives; and prior thereto."

Thirdly. That in article 2nd, section 6, clause 1, there be added to the end of the first sentence, these words, to wit, "But no law varying the compensation last ascertained shall operate before the next ensuing election of representatives."

Fourthly. That in article 2nd, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be inserted these clauses, to wit, The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience by in any manner, or on any pretext infringed.
The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.
The people shall not be restrained from peaceably assembling and consulting for their common good, nor from applying to the legislature by petitions, or remonstrances for redress of their grievances.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.
No soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner; nor at any time, but in a manner warranted by law.
No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment, or one trial for the same office; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor be obliged to relinquish his property, where it may be necessary for public use, without a just compensation.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The rights of the people to be secured in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their other property from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, or not particularly describing the places to be searched, or the persons or things to be seized.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, to be informed of the cause and nature of the accusation, to be confronted with his accusers, and the witnesses against him; to have a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
The exceptions here or elsewhere in the constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people; or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution.

Fifthly. That in article 2nd, section 10, between clauses 1 and 2, be inserted this clause, to wit: No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases

Sixthly. That article 3rd, section 2, be annexed to the end of clause 2nd, these words to wit: but no appeal to such court shall be allowed where the value in controversy shall not amount to — dollars: nor shall any fact triable by jury, according to the course of common law, be otherwise re-examinable than may consist with the principles of common law.

Seventhly. That in article 3rd, section 2, the third clause be struck out, and in its place be inserted the classes following, to wit:
The trial of all crimes (except in cases of impeachments, and cases arising in the land or naval forces, or the militia when on actual service in time of war or public danger) shall be by an impartial jury of freeholders of the vicinage, with the requisite of unanimity for conviction, of the right of challenge, and other accustomed requisites; and in all crimes punishable with loss of life or member, presentment or indictment by a grand jury shall be an essential preliminary, provided that in cases of crimes committed within any county which may be in possession of an enemy, or in which a general insurrection may prevail, the trial may by law be authorized in some other county of the same State, as near as may be to the seat of the offence.
In cases of crimes committed not within any county, the trial may by law be in such county as the laws shall have prescribed. In suits at common law, between man and man, the trial by jury, as one of the best securities to the rights of the people, ought to remain inviolate.

Eighthly. That immediately after article 6th, be inserted, as article 7th, the clauses following, to wit:
The powers delegated by this constitution, are appropriated to the departments to which they are respectively distributed: so that the legislative department shall never exercise the powers vested in the executive or judicial; nor the executive exercise the powers vested in the legislative or judicial; nor the judicial exercise the powers vested in the legislative or executive departments.
The powers not delegated by this constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively.

Ninthly. That article 7th, be numbered as article 8th.

text: Federalist representatives were quick to attack Madison's proposal, fearing that any move to amend the new Constitution so soon after its implementation would create an appearance of instability in the government.[50] The House, unlike the Senate, was open to the public, and members such as Fisher Ames warned that a prolonged "dissection of the constitution" before the galleries could shake public confidence.[51] A procedural battle followed, and after initially forwarding the amendments to a select committee for revision, the House agreed to take Madison's proposal up as a full body beginning on July 21, 1789.[52][53]

text: The eleven-member committee made some significant changes to Madison's nine proposed amendments, including eliminating most of his preamble and adding the phrase "freedom of speech, and of the press".[54] The House debated the amendments for eleven days. Roger Sherman of Connecticut persuaded the House to place the amendments at the Constitution's end so that the document would "remain inviolate", rather than adding them throughout, as Madison had proposed.[55][56] The amendments, revised and condensed from twenty to seventeen, were approved and forwarded to the Senate on August 24, 1789.[57]

text: The Senate edited these amendments still further, making 26 changes of its own. Madison's proposal to apply parts of the Bill of Rights to the states as well as the federal government was eliminated, and the seventeen amendments were condensed to twelve, which were approved on September 9, 1789.[58] The Senate also eliminated the last of Madison's proposed changes to the preamble.[59]

text: On September 21, 1789, a House-Senate Conference Committee convened to resolve the numerous differences between the two Bill of Rights proposals. On September 24, 1789, the committee issued this report, which finalized 12 Constitutional Amendments for House and Senate to consider. This final version was approved by joint resolution of Congress on September 25, 1789, to be forwarded to the states on September 28.[60][61]

text: By the time the debates and legislative maneuvering that went into crafting the Bill of Rights amendments was done, many personal opinions had shifted. A number of Federalists came out in support, thus silencing the Anti-Federalists' most effective critique. Many Anti-Federalists, in contrast, were now opposed, realizing that Congressional approval of these amendments would greatly lessen the chances of a second constitutional convention.[62] Anti-Federalists such as Richard Henry Lee also argued that the Bill left the most objectionable portions of the Constitution, such as the federal judiciary and direct taxation, intact.[63]

text: Madison remained active in the progress of the amendments throughout the legislative process. Historian Gordon S. Wood writes that "there is no question that it was Madison's personal prestige and his dogged persistence that saw the amendments through the Congress. There might have been a federal Constitution without Madison but certainly no Bill of Rights."[64][65]

text:
[hide]Approval of the Bill of Rights in Congress and the States[66]

Seventeen Articles
Approved by the House
August 24, 1789

Twelve Articles
Approved by the Senate
September 9, 1789

Twelve Articles
Approved by Congress
September 25, 1789

Ratification
Status

First Article:
After the first enumeration, required by the first Article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.
First Article:
After the first enumeration, required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred; to which number one Representative shall be added for every subsequent increase of forty thousand, until the Representatives shall amount to two hundred, to which number one Representative shall be added for every subsequent increase of sixty thousand persons.
First Article:
After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.
Pending:
Congressional Apportionment Amendment

Second Article:
No law varying the compensation to the members of Congress, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Second Article:
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Second Article:
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Ratified:
May 5, 1992[3]
Twenty-seventh Amendment

Third Article:
Congress shall make no law establishing religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, nor shall the rights of Conscience be infringed.
Third Article:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Third Article:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
First Amendment

Fourth Article:
The Freedom of Speech, and of the Press, and the right of the People peaceably to assemble, and consult for their common good, and to apply to the Government for a redress of grievances, shall not be infringed.
(see Third Article above)

Fifth Article:
A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.
Fourth Article:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Fourth Article:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Second Amendment

Sixth Article:
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Fifth Article:
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Fifth Article:
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Third Amendment

Seventh Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Sixth Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Sixth Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Fourth Amendment

Eighth Article:
No person shall be subject, except in case of impeachment, to more than one trial, or one punishment for the same offense, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case, to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
Seventh Article:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case, to be a witnesses against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
Seventh Article:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Fifth Amendment

Ninth Article:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against him, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.
Eighth Article:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against him, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favour, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.
Eighth Article:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Sixth Amendment

Tenth Article:
The trial of all crimes (except in cases of impeachment, and in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in actual service in time of War or public danger) shall be by an Impartial Jury of the Vicinage, with the requisite of unanimity for conviction, the right of challenge, and other accostomed [sic] requisites; and no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherways [sic] infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment by a Grand Jury; but if a crime be committed in a place in the possession of an enemy, or in which an insurrection may prevail, the indictment and trial may by law be authorised in some other place within the same State.
(see Seventh Article above)

Eleventh Article:
No appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, shall be allowed, where the value in controversy shall not amount to one thousand dollars, nor shall any fact, triable by a Jury according to the course of the common law, be otherwise re-examinable, than according to the rules of common law.
Ninth Article:
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by Jury shall be preserved, and no fact, tried by a Jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Ninth Article:
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by Jury shall be preserved, and no fact, tried by a Jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Seventh Amendment

Twelfth Article:
In suits at common law, the right of trial by Jury shall be preserved.
(see Ninth Article above)

Thirteenth Article:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Tenth Article:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Tenth Article:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Eighth Amendment

Fourteenth Article:
No State shall infringe the right of trial by Jury in criminal cases, nor the rights of conscience, nor the freedom of speech, or of the press.

Fifteenth Article:
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Eleventh Article:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Eleventh Article:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Ninth Amendment

Sixteenth Article:
The powers delegated by the Constitution to the government of the United States, shall be exercised as therein appropriated, so that the Legislative shall never exercise the powers vested in the Executive or Judicial; nor the Executive the powers vested in the Legislative or Judicial; nor the Judicial the powers vested in the Legislative or Executive.

Seventeenth Article:
The powers not delegated by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it, to the States, are reserved to the States respectively.
Twelfth Article:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Twelfth Article:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Ratified:
December 15, 1791
Tenth Amendment

text: Ratification process

text: The twelve articles of amendment approved by congress were officially submitted to the Legislatures of the several States for consideration on September 28, 1789. The following states ratified some or all of the amendments:[67][68][69]

text:
New Jersey: Articles One and Three through Twelve on November 20, 1789, and Article Two on May 7, 1992
Maryland: Articles One through Twelve on December 19, 1789
North Carolina: Articles One through Twelve on December 22, 1789
South Carolina: Articles One through Twelve on January 19, 1790
New Hampshire: Articles One and Three through Twelve on January 25, 1790, and Article Two on March 7, 1985
Delaware: Articles Two through Twelve on January 28, 1790
New York: Articles One and Three through Twelve on February 24, 1790
Pennsylvania: Articles Three through Twelve on March 10, 1790, and Article One on September 21, 1791
Rhode Island: Articles One and Three through Twelve on June 7, 1790, and Article Two on June 10, 1993
Vermont: Articles One through Twelve on November 3, 1791
Virginia: Article One on November 3, 1791, and Articles Two through Twelve on December 15, 1791[70]
(After failing to ratify the 12 amendments during the 1789 legislative session.)

tag: ol

text: Having been approved by the requisite three-fourths of the several states, there being 14 States in the Union at the time (as Vermont had been admitted into the Union on March 4, 1791),[63] the ratification of Articles Three through Twelve was completed and they became Amendments 1 through 10 of the Constitution. President Washington informed Congress of this on December 30, 1791.[71]

text: As they had not yet been approved by 11 of the 14 states, the ratification of Article One (ratified by 10) and Article Two (ratified by 6) remained incomplete. The ratification plateau they needed to reach soon rose to 12 of 15 states when Kentucky joined the Union (June 1, 1792). On June 27, 1792, the Kentucky General Assembly ratified all 12 amendments, however this action did not come to light until 1996.[72]

text: Article One came within one state of the number needed to become adopted into the Constitution on two occasions between 1789 and 1803. Despite coming close to ratification early on, it has never received the approval of enough states to become part of the Constitution.[64] As Congress did not attach a ratification time limit to the article, it is still technically pending before the states. Since no state has approved it since 1792, ratification by an additional 27 states would now be necessary for the article to be adopted.

text: Article Two, initially ratified by seven states through 1792 (including Kentucky), was not ratified by another state for eighty years. The Ohio General Assembly ratified it on May 6, 1873 in protest of an unpopular Congressional pay raise.[73] A century later, on March 6, 1978, the Wyoming Legislature also ratified the article.[74] Gregory Watson, a University of Texas at Austin undergraduate student, started a new push for the article's ratification with a letter-writing campaign to state legislatures.[73] As a result, by May 1992, enough states had approved Article Two (38 of the 50 states in the Union) for it to become the Twenty-seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution. The amendment's adoption was certified by Archivist of the United States Don W. Wilson and subsequently affirmed by a vote of Congress on May 20, 1992.[75]

text: Three states did not complete action on the twelve articles of amendment when they were initially put before the states. Georgia found a Bill of Rights unnecessary and so refused to ratify. Both chambers of the Massachusetts General Court ratified a number of the amendments (the Senate adopted 10 of 12 and the House 9 of 12), but failed to reconcile their two lists or to send official notice to the Secretary of State of the ones they did agree upon.[76][63] Both houses of the Connecticut General Assembly voted to ratify Articles Three through Twelve but failed to reconcile their bills after disagreeing over whether to ratify Articles One and Two.[77] All three later ratified the Constitutional amendments originally known as Articles Three through Twelve as part of the 1939 commemoration of the Bill of Rights' sesquicentennial: Massachusetts on March 2, Georgia on March 18, and Connecticut on April 19.[63] Connecticut and Georgia would also later ratify Article Two, on May 13, 1987 and February 2, 1988 respectively.

text: Application and text

text: The Bill of Rights had little judicial impact for the first 150 years of its existence; in the words of Gordon S. Wood, "After ratification, most Americans promptly forgot about the first ten amendments to the Constitution."[78][79] The Court made no important decisions protecting free speech rights, for example, until 1931.[80] Historian Richard Labunski attributes the Bill's long legal dormancy to three factors: first, it took time for a "culture of tolerance" to develop that would support the Bill's provisions with judicial and popular will; second, the Supreme Court spent much of the 19th century focused on issues relating to intergovernmental balances of power; and third, the Bill initially only applied to the federal government, a restriction affirmed by Barron v. Baltimore (1833).[81][82][83] In the twentieth century, however, most of the Bill's provisions were applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment—a process known as incorporation—beginning with the freedom of speech clause, in Gitlow v. New York (1925).[84] In Talton v. Mayes (1896), the Court ruled that Constitutional protections, including the provisions of the Bill of Rights, do not apply to the actions of American Indian tribal governments.[85] Through the incorporation process the United States Supreme Court succeeded in extending to the States almost all of the protections in the Bill of Rights, as well as other, unenumerated rights.[86] The Bill of Rights thus imposes legal limits on the powers of governments and acts as an anti-majoritarian/minoritarian safeguard by providing deeply entrenched legal protection for various civil liberties and fundamental rights.[87][88][89] The Supreme Court for example concluded in the West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) case that the founders intended the Bill of Rights to put some rights out of reach from majorities, ensuring that some liberties would endure beyond political majorities.[87][88][89][90] As the Court noted the idea of the Bill of Rights “was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts.”[90][91] This is why “fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”[90][91]

text: First Amendment

text: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[92]

text: The First Amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. Initially, the First Amendment applied only to laws enacted by Congress, and many of its provisions were interpreted more narrowly than they are today.[93]

text: In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), the Court drew on Thomas Jefferson's correspondence to call for "a wall of separation between church and State", though the precise boundary of this separation remains in dispute.[93] Speech rights were expanded significantly in a series of 20th- and 21st-century court decisions that protected various forms of political speech, anonymous speech, campaign financing, pornography, and school speech; these rulings also defined a series of exceptions to First Amendment protections. The Supreme Court overturned English common law precedent to increase the burden of proof for defamation and libel suits, most notably in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964).[94] Commercial speech is less protected by the First Amendment than political speech, and is therefore subject to greater regulation.[93]

text: The Free Press Clause protects publication of information and opinions, and applies to a wide variety of media. In Near v. Minnesota (1931)[95] and New York Times v. United States (1971),[96] the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protected against prior restraint—pre-publication censorship—in almost all cases. The Petition Clause protects the right to petition all branches and agencies of government for action. In addition to the right of assembly guaranteed by this clause, the Court has also ruled that the amendment implicitly protects freedom of association.[93]

text: Second Amendment

text: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[92]

text: The Second Amendment protects the individual right to keep and bear arms. The concept of such a right existed within English common law long before the enactment of the Bill of Rights.[97] First codified in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 (but there only applying to Protestants), this right was enshrined in fundamental laws of several American states during the Revolutionary era, including the 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights and the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776. Long a controversial issue in American political, legal, and social discourse, the Second Amendment has been at the heart of several Supreme Court decisions.

text:
In United States v. Cruikshank (1875), the Court ruled that "[t]he right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government."[98]
In United States v. Miller (1939), the Court ruled that the amendment "[protects arms that had a] reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia".[99]
In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right" and that it "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home" but also stated that "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose".[100]
In McDonald v. Chicago (2010),[101] the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.[102]

text: Third Amendment

text: No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.[92]

text: The Third Amendment restricts the quartering of soldiers in private homes, in response to Quartering Acts passed by the British parliament during the Revolutionary War. The amendment is one of the least controversial of the Constitution, and, as of 2016[update], has never been the primary basis of a Supreme Court decision.[103][104][105]

text: Fourth Amendment

text: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[92]

text: The Fourth Amendment guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and seizure (including arrest) must be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer who has sworn by it. The amendment is the basis for the exclusionary rule, which mandates that evidence obtained illegally cannot be introduced into a criminal trial.[106] The amendment's interpretation has varied over time; its protections expanded under left-leaning courts such as that headed by Earl Warren and contracted under right-leaning courts such as that of William Rehnquist.[107]

text: Fifth Amendment

text: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[92]

text: The Fifth Amendment protects against double jeopardy and self-incrimination and guarantees the rights to due process, grand jury screening of criminal indictments, and compensation for the seizure of private property under eminent domain. The amendment was the basis for the court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), which established that defendants must be informed of their rights to an attorney and against self-incrimination prior to interrogation by police.[108]

text: Sixth Amendment

text: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.[92]

text: The Sixth Amendment establishes a number of rights of the defendant in a criminal trial:

text:
to a speedy and public trial
to trial by an impartial jury
to be informed of criminal charges
to confront witnesses
to compel witnesses to appear in court
to assistance of counsel[109]

text: In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the Court ruled that the amendment guaranteed the right to legal representation in all felony prosecutions in both state and federal courts.[109]

text: Seventh Amendment

text: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.[92]

text: The Seventh Amendment guarantees jury trials in federal civil cases that deal with claims of more than twenty dollars. It also prohibits judges from overruling findings of fact by juries in federal civil trials. In Colgrove v. Battin (1973), the Court ruled that the amendment's requirements could be fulfilled by a jury with a minimum of six members. The Seventh is one of the few parts of the Bill of Rights not to be incorporated (applied to the states).[110]

text: Eighth Amendment

text: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.[92]

text: The Eighth Amendment forbids the imposition of excessive bails or fines, though it leaves the term "excessive" open to interpretation.[111] The most frequently litigated clause of the amendment is the last, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment.[112][113] This clause was only occasionally applied by the Supreme Court prior to the 1970s, generally in cases dealing with means of execution. In Furman v. Georgia (1972), some members of the Court found capital punishment itself in violation of the amendment, arguing that the clause could reflect "evolving standards of decency" as public opinion changed; others found certain practices in capital trials to be unacceptably arbitrary, resulting in a majority decision that effectively halted executions in the United States for several years.[114] Executions resumed following Gregg v. Georgia (1976), which found capital punishment to be constitutional if the jury was directed by concrete sentencing guidelines.[114] The Court has also found that some poor prison conditions constitute cruel and unusual punishment, as in Estelle v. Gamble (1976) and Brown v. Plata (2011).[112]

text: Ninth Amendment

text: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.[92]

text: The Ninth Amendment declares that there are additional fundamental rights that exist outside the Constitution. The rights enumerated in the Constitution are not an explicit and exhaustive list of individual rights. It was rarely mentioned in Supreme Court decisions before the second half of the 20th century, when it was cited by several of the justices in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). The Court in that case voided a statute prohibiting use of contraceptives as an infringement of the right of marital privacy.[115] This right was, in turn, the foundation upon which the Supreme Court built decisions in several landmark cases, including, Roe v. Wade (1973), which overturned a Texas law making it a crime to assist a woman to get an abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which invalidated a Pennsylvania law that required spousal awareness prior to obtaining an abortion.

text: Tenth Amendment

text: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.[92]

text: The Tenth Amendment reinforces the principles of separation of powers and federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states or the people. The amendment provides no new powers or rights to the states, but rather preserves their authority in all matters not specifically granted to the federal government.[116]

text: Congress has sometimes gotten around the Tenth Amendment by invoking the Commerce Clause in Article One[117] or by threatening to withhold funding for a federal program from noncooperative States, as in South Dakota v. Dole (1987).

text: Display and honoring of the Bill of Rights

text: George Washington had fourteen handwritten copies of the Bill of Rights made, one for Congress and one for each of the original thirteen states.[118] The copies for Georgia, Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania went missing.[119] The New York copy is thought to have been destroyed in a fire.[120] Two unidentified copies of the missing four (thought to be the Georgia and Maryland copies) survive; one is in the National Archives, and the other is in the New York Public Library.[121][122] North Carolina's copy was stolen from the State Capitol by a Union soldier following the Civil War. In an FBI sting operation, it was recovered in 2003.[123][124] The copy retained by the First Congress has been on display (along with the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence) in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom room at the National Archives Building in Washington, D.C. since December 13, 1952.[125]

text: After fifty years on display, signs of deterioration in the casing were noted, while the documents themselves appeared to be well preserved.[126] Accordingly, the casing was updated and the Rotunda rededicated on September 17, 2003. In his dedicatory remarks, President George W. Bush stated, "The true [American] revolution was not to defy one earthly power, but to declare principles that stand above every earthly power—the equality of each person before God, and the responsibility of government to secure the rights of all."[127]

text: In 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared December 15 to be Bill of Rights Day, commemorating the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights.[128] In 1991, the Virginia copy of the Bill of Rights toured the country in honor of its bicentennial, visiting the capitals of all fifty states.[129]


document_title: The Italian Job

question_text: where was the opening sequence of the italian job filmed

root

text: The Italian Job

text: Plot[edit]

text: Charlie Croker is released from prison with the intention of doing a "big job" in Italy. He soon meets with the widow of his friend and fellow thief Roger Beckermann, who was killed by the Mafia while driving a Lamborghini Miura in the Italian Alps. Mrs Beckermann gives Croker her husband's plans for the robbery that attracted the hostile attention of his killers, which detail a way to steal $4 million in the city of Turin and escape to Switzerland.

tag: p

text: Croker breaks back into his former prison to convince powerful crime lord Mr. Bridger to finance the plan. Bridger, who has bribed almost all of the prison guards to work for him, initially rejects the plan, but changes his mind after he learns Fiat is set to build a new factory in China.

text: With Bridger's backing, Croker recruits computer expert Professor Peach, his girlfriend Lorna and a team of thieves and drivers. The plan calls for Peach to replace the programme in the computer controlling Turin's traffic control system, creating a paralysing traffic jam that will allow the thieves to escape with the gold in three Mini Cooper S getaway cars.[9]

text: After planning and training, Croker and crew set out for Turin. Mafia boss Altabani and his underlings are waiting in the Alps at the same pass where they killed Beckermann. Altabani warns Croker that the Mafia are aware of the gang's intentions and smashes their Jaguar E-Type cars, sending Croker's personal Aston Martin DB4 drophead off a cliff. Just as Altabani is about to give the order to shoot the gang, Croker tells him that Mr. Bridger will avenge their deaths by attacking the Italian community in Britain. Altabani lets them go, ordering them to return to England. Instead, they proceed with the plan, replacing the traffic control system's magnetic tape data storage reels. On the day of the robbery, Croker sends gang member Birkinshaw, disguised as a football fan, to jam the closed circuit television cameras that monitor traffic. The substitute data reel then causes widespread traffic chaos. The gang converge on the gold convoy, overpower the guards, and tow the armoured car into the entrance hall of the Museo Egizio. There, the gang transfer the gold to the Minis.

text: Altabani recognises that "If they planned this jam, they must have planned a way out." Pursued by the Turin police, the three Minis race through the shopping arcades of the city, speed down stairs, jump between rooftops, and finally escape the traffic jams by a pre-planned route across a weir. The getaway is timed perfectly, and they throw off the police by driving through a large sewer pipe. As Mr. Bridger receives the cheers and adulation of his fellow prison inmates, the gang drive the Minis into the back of a moving customised coach. They then unload the gold and dispose of the Minis by pushing them off the mountainside.

text: The rest of the gang, having sneaked out of the city in a minibus while disguised as football supporters, rendezvous with the coach in the Alps. On the looping mountain roads, driver "Big" William loses control of the coach. The back of the bus is left teetering over a cliff and the gold slides towards the rear doors. As Croker attempts to reach the gold, it slips further. The film finishes on a literal cliffhanger with Croker announcing:  "Hang on a minute lads, I've got a great idea".[10]

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Michael Caine as Charlie Croker
Noël Coward as Mr. Bridger
Benny Hill as Professor Simon Peach
Raf Vallone as Altabani
Tony Beckley as Camp Freddie
Rossano Brazzi as Roger Beckermann
Maggie Blye as Lorna
Irene Handl as Miss Peach
John Le Mesurier as the Prison Governor
Fred Emney as Birkinshaw
John Clive as Garage manager
Graham Payn as Keats
Michael Standing as Arthur
Stanley Caine as Coco
Barry Cox as Chris
Harry Baird as Big William
George Innes as Bill Bailey
John Forgeham as Frank
Robert Powell as Yellow

Derek Ware as Rozzer
Frank Jarvis as Roger
David Salamone as Dominic
Richard Essame as Tony
Mario Valgoi as Manzo
Renato Romano(in Italian) as Cosca
Franco Norvelli as Altabani's driver
Robert Rietti as Police chief
Timothy Bateson as Dentist
David Kelly as Vicar
Arnold Diamond as Senior computer room official
Simon Dee as Shirtmaker
Alistair Hunter as Warder (cinema)
Lana Gatto as Mrs. Cosca
John Morris as Standin
Louis Mansi as Computer room official
Henry McGee as Tailor
Lelia Goldoni as Mrs Beckermann
Valerie Leon as Hotel Receptionist

tag: table

text: Noël Coward, who played Bridger, was godfather of the director, Peter Collinson. Bridger's fellow convict and confidant, Keats, was played by Graham Payn, Coward's long-time partner. Lana Gatto was the nom de crédit of Hazel Collinson, otherwise known as Mrs. Peter Collinson. Michael Caine's brother Stanley Caine also appears as one of Croker's gang. The gang also included Robert Powell, in his first film role. Frank Kelly appears as an uncredited prison officer, also in his first film role. American distributors Paramount wanted Robert Redford to play the lead.

text: Ending[edit]

text: According to a "Making Of" documentary,[11] producer Deeley was unsatisfied with the four written endings and conceived the current ending as a literal cliffhanger appropriate to an action film which left an opportunity for a sequel. The documentary describes how helicopters would save the bus seen on the cliff at the end of the first film. The grateful gang would soon discover that it is the Mafia that has saved them, and the sequel would have been about stealing the gold bullion back from them.

text: In interviews in 2003 and 2008, Michael Caine revealed that the ending would have had Croker "crawl up, switch on the engine and stay there for four hours until all the petrol runs out... The van bounces back up so we can all get out, but then the gold goes over."[12] The bus containing the gold would crash at the bottom of the hill where the Mafia would pick it up. The sequel would then have Croker and his men trying to get it back.

text: In 2008, the Royal Society of Chemistry held a competition for a solution that had a basis in science, was to take not more than 30 minutes and did not use a helicopter.[13] The idea was to promote greater understanding of science, and to highlight the 100th anniversary of the periodic table, on which gold is one of the 118 elements.[12] The winning entry, by John Godwin of Surrey, was: Break and remove two large side windows just aft of the pivot point and let the glass fall outside to lose its weight; break two windows over the two front axles, keeping the broken glass on board to keep its weight for balance; let a man out on a rope through the front broken windows (not to rest his weight on the ground) who deflates all the bus's front tyres, to reduce the bus's rocking movement about its pivot point; drain the fuel tank, which is aft of the pivot point, which changes the balance enough to let a man get out and gather heavy rocks to load the front of the bus. Unload the bus. Wait until a suitable vehicle passes on the road, hijack it, and carry the gold away in it.[14] MIT physicist Mike Follows claims to have come up with a more practical ending.[15]

text: Locations[edit]

text: The opening sequence of the film featuring Beckermann driving his Lamborghini Miura through The Alps was filmed on the Great St Bernard Pass, Aosta, Italy, with the opening scene featuring the Dardanelli Viaduct, which was constructed in 1961. The large house featured momentarily during the sequence is the Maison de Refuge.

text: The tunnel in which Beckermann abruptly meets his demise at the hands of the Mafia was shot at La Thuile on road SS26, Italy.

text: The interior of the prison that held Bridger was Kilmainham Gaol in Dublin, Ireland. The exterior, seen when Croker leaves, is HM Prison Wormwood Scrubs in west London.

text: Upon his release, Croker stays at the Royal Lancaster Hotel in Bayswater, London. Denbigh Close, Notting Hill, W11, was used as the location for Croker's (Michael Caine) home.[16]

text: The highrise apartment where the Turin job is planned was the penthouse flat at Alembic House (now known as Peninsula Heights) on the Albert Embankment. The property was later seen in films such as Theatre of Blood (1973), A Touch of Class (1973), and Sweeney! (1977). It became the London home of novelist Jeffrey Archer.[citation needed]

text: The training sessions shown for the Mini drivers were at the Crystal Palace race track in Upper Norwood, South London. The attempt to blow the doors off the bullion van, which led to its destruction and Croker's famous line, took place at Crystal Palace Sports Centre. The Crystal Palace transmitter can be seen in the background.

text: The meeting at the misty funeral was filmed in Cruagh Cemetery, in the foothills of the Dublin Mountains.

text: The office block that doubled as the Turin traffic control centre was Apex House, the Hanworth, Middlesex head office of the television rental chain DER.[11]

text: The chase sequences were filmed in Turin, except for the chase through the sewer tunnel, which was shot in the Sowe Valley Sewer Duplication system in the Stoke Aldermoor district of Coventry in the English Midlands, filmed from the back of a Mini Moke.[11] The person on the far side who closes the gate at the end of sewer tunnel is the director, Peter Collinson. Collinson also appeared in the scene on the highway when the ramps get jettisoned, clinging to the right-hand rear door of the coach as the Minis enter at speed.[11]

text: During the getaway the Minis are pursued by police around the rooftop test track of what was then a Fiat factory in the Lingotto building in Turin. The weir the Minis cross in the car chase is just down river from the Ponte Vittorio Emanuele I at the end of Via Po in central Turin.

text: A portion of the car chase was filmed as a dance between the Minis and police cars inside Pier Luigi Nervi's Exhibition Building, with a full orchestra playing "The Blue Danube".[11] It was cut from the final version and appears as an extra on the DVD.

text: The final escape from Turin was filmed on the road to Ceresole Reale via Lago Agnel and Colle del Nivolet (the highway does not lead to France or Switzerland because it is a dead end). The bus was left hanging off this corner[17] in the climatic ending.

text: Vehicles[edit]

text: Roger Beckermann's orange Lamborghini Miura in the opening scene is actually two cars. The first was a Miura P400 that was sold as new afterwards. In 2015 it was found and verified, and now belongs to Cheshire Classic Cars.[18] The car tumbled down the chasm by the Mafia bulldozer was another Miura that had been in a serious accident and was not roadworthy.

text: According to the director's commentary on the DVD, despite the publicity the film would give to the Mini, the car's maker, BMC, only provided a token fleet of Minis and the production company had to buy the rest at trade price. Fiat offered the production as many super-charged Fiat cars as they needed, several sports cars for the Mafia confrontation scene, plus $50,000, but the producers turned down the offer because it would have meant replacing the Minis with Fiats.

text: The Minis seen on screen carry registration numbers HMP 729G (Red), GPF 146G (White) and LGW 809G (Blue). As at July 2012, a DVLA query indicates that two of these plates may still be registered; these, however, are not the cars used in the film as the film cars had "future dated" plates to make them current with the release date of the film, and as such would not be road legal. There were also numerous detail differences between the Minis used during filming and the launch of the "G" year suffix. According to the "making of" DVD extra, the Minis used in the chase scenes were all destroyed in accidents while filming the sewer sequence.

text: As Croker walks through the garage where the Minis are being prepared, viewers hear that "Rozzer's having trouble with his differential", and the back of the red Mini Cooper is jacked up where Rozzer is working. This is an inside joke since the Mini has front-wheel drive and does not have a rear differential. In the early 1960s, front-wheel-drive cars were new and asking a car mechanic to repair a Mini's rear differential was a popular snipe hunt.

text: Gold cost $38.69 per troy ounce in 1968,[19] so four million dollars in gold bars would have weighed about 3200 kg (7000 lb), requiring each of the three Minis to carry about 1070 kg (2300 lb) in addition to the driver and passenger. Since a 1968 Mini only weighs 630 kg (1400 lb),[20] each of these vehicles would have had to carry 1½ times its own weight in gold.

text: The coach at the end of the film was a 1964 Bedford VAL with Harrington Legionnaire Body, distinctive for its twin front steering axles. The most famous coach ever? ALR 453B which was delivered new to Battens coaches of London, then eventually into the hands of the production team and it was converted especially for the film. After its epic use in the film ALR did go back to being a coach and was scrapped about 1990 after being in service with several operators, mainly in the Scotland area. The coach had to be reinforced behind the driver's seat so that when the Coopers came into the back they didn't crush the driver. Even though plating had been secured, the driver's seat was still pushed forward several inches, enough for the driver to be touching the steering wheel with his stomach.

text: When the Legionnaire was on its way to Turin, it has London-Turin on the destination display above the windscreen; on the way back it had been changed to Turin-London. It also proudly displayed 'Charlie Croker's Coach Tours' logos on the rear and both flanks. Following the filming, the coach had its improvised rear doors welded and was used on a Scottish school bus route until the mid-1980s when, according to the Legionnaire register, it was scrapped. However, it can be found on the roadside at New Invention, Willenhall, West Midlands.

text: Charlie Croker picks up his Aston Martin DB4 convertible from a garage after release from prison. The scene was mostly improvised, which caused visible lighting irregularities since the crew did not know where the actors would be. The location of the underground carpark and lift is now part of Park Lane BMW, London.

text: The original DB4 belongs today to a private English collection. According to several sources, the "Aston" pushed off the cliff was a Vignale Lancia Flaminia mocked up as an Aston. The two E-type Jaguars that suffered from the Mafia's revenge were restored to original condition, the red one of which is owned by Phillip Porter, the founder of the Jaguar E-type owners club.

text: The black Fiat Dino coupé of Mafia boss Altabani was bought by Peter Collinson but became so rusty that only its doors remain. The Italian police cars seen around Turin were Alfa Romeo Giulias. The Italian police armoured car which escorts the gold convoy is a conversion of a former Second World War American M8 Greyhound armoured car. The original 37mm gun was removed and replaced with a water cannon.

text: A Land Rover Series IIa Station Wagon, registration BKO 686C, was used to get to the convoy before attacking and was modified with window bars and a towbar.

text: A Ford Thames 400E van was used for the football fans' decorated van; this was referred to as the Dormobile, the name of a common camper-van conversion coachbuilder.

text: The cross-Channel ferry featured in one scene is the MS Free Enterprise I. The ship spent many years as a day cruise ship in Greek waters before being scrapped in 2013.

text: The "Chinese" plane delivering the gold to Turin is a rare Douglas C-74 Globemaster, of which only 14 were built and only four passed into private ownership. It had been abandoned in Milan by its owners and was moved to Turin for filming. It was destroyed by fire in 1970.[21]

text: Music[edit]

text:
Matt Monro – On Days Like These excerpt

An excerpt from Matt Monro's On Days Like These
Problems playing this file? See media help.

text: The music for the soundtrack was written by Quincy Jones. The opening theme, "On Days Like These", had lyrics by Don Black and was sung by Matt Monro. The closing theme, "Get a Bloomin' Move On" (AKA "The Self Preservation Society"), was performed by the cast and had lyrics featuring Cockney Rhyming Slang. Many incidental themes are based on British patriotic songs, such as "Rule, Britannia!", "The British Grenadiers" and "God Save the Queen".

text: Release[edit]

text: The film opened at the Plaza Cinema in London on 5th June 1969.[1]

text: Reception and legacy[edit]

text: The film has received generally positive reviews. On Rotten Tomatoes, it holds an approval rating of 85% and an average rating of 7.3/10, based on 26 reviews. The website's critical consensus reads, "The Italian Job is a wildly fun romp that epitomizes the height of Britannia style."[22] Most positive reviews focus on the climactic car chase and the acting of both Michael Caine and Noël Coward, complimenting Peter Collinson's directing. It is considered highly evocative of 1960s London and the era in Britain as a whole.[23] In a modern review Nik Higgins of Future Movies claims that the film makes Austin Powers's wardrobe appear 'drab and grey'. He compliments Michael Caine's ability to effectively portray the character of Charlie [24] and also praises the music of Quincy Jones. Higgins particularly highlights how the music 'hops between smooth lounges' like the opener "On Days Like These" and the latter "Get a Bloomin' Move On" ('The Self Preservation Society'), which plays near the film's end.

text: It has also received some negative reviews, focusing on what is perceived as a predictable chase[25] and a lack of real emotion.[26] Vincent Canby, writing at the time of the film's release, felt that the caper film had been made before and much better as well. He complimented the film's technological sophistication, only criticising what he saw as an 'emotionally retarded' plot. Canby also expressed concern that Coward's appearance in the film, although intended to be kind, 'exploits him in vaguely unpleasant ways' by surrounding his character with images of the royal family, which had not knighted him at the time. A contemporary review in Time magazine felt that the film spent too much time focusing on the film's caper as opposed to building the characters; it also criticised the car chases as 'dull and deafening'.[27]

text: Although it received a Golden Globe nomination for "Best English-Language Foreign Film", the film was not a success in America. Caine blamed its failure on unattractive and misleading advertising.[28] As a result, plans for a sequel were shelved.

text: The movie was the 14th most popular at the UK box office in 1969.[29]

text: The film remains popular, however, and is considered one of the greatest British films in modern polls.[30] James Travers of Films de France believes that the film's enduring appeal rests in the 'improbable union' of Michael Caine, Noël Coward and Benny Hill, whom he considers "three of the best known [British] performers... in the late 1960s". He states that the film has a cult status and stands as a 'classic of its genre'.[23]

text: A novelisation of the film, written by Troy Kennedy Martin and Ken Wlaschin, was published by Sphere Books in 1969. The book contains numerous differences to the film: for example there is a rival group of German gangsters called the Hamburg Syndicate who try to obtain Beckerman's plans for the robbery, Croker and the three minis travel to Italy by yacht, and Professor Peach is rescued by the gang after he is arrested. The ending of the novel is also significantly different. The bus successfully crosses the border into Switzerland and two days later the gang and the gold arrive on a beach near Dover in a landing craft where they are met by Mr. Bridger and Luigi Altabani. Mr. Bridger tells Charlie Croker that they have come to an agreement to "divide Europe" and that the gold must be given back to the Italians.

text: Since 2000, there have been two remakes of the film. The first was released in 2003 and also called The Italian Job, set in Los Angeles and starring Mark Wahlberg as Charlie Croker. It features Donald Sutherland as John Bridger, played as more of a father figure to Croker. It employs the updated Mini Cooper for a chase towards the end. An official Bollywood remake of the 2003 film, called Players, was released in 2012.[31]

text: There is a video game based on the 1969 film, released for the PlayStation game console in 2001 and Microsoft Windows in 2002 and published by Rockstar Games.

text: Michael Caine's performance and 'bloody doors' line has been parodied in several British comedies, and in a music video for Pick a Part That's New by Stereophonics.

text: Large portions of the car chase scenes were lifted directly from the film for use in the MacGyver episode "Thief of Budapest" (Series 1, Ep 3) with the main characters setting up the story with three Minis visible at the start of the episode. Most of the end of the episode is footage from The Italian Job.[32]

text: The film was also the subject of a play, Bill Shakespeare's "The Italian Job", written by Malachi Bogdanov, who used lines from Shakespeare plays to tell the story. It was performed in 2003 at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival.[33]

text: As part of a celebration of British culture at 2012 Summer Olympics, which were held in Great Britain, a replica of the bus was made and was exhibited balanced on the edge of the roof of The De La Warr Pavilion in Bexhill-on-Sea.[34] The famous dialogue and car blowing up scene were shown at the closing ceremony.[35]

text: In September 2016, NBC and Paramount Television began work on a TV series inspired by the original and the remake.[36]