…Thus, all the nations of Europe, who have acquired territory on this continent, have Background: Leaders of Illinois and Pinakeshaw tribes had previously sold land to white settlers (a group of which Johnson was part of) but later ceded the same land to the federal government in a treaty. Johnson v. McIntosh - Mrs. Dawes APUSH: E Period. The thrust of this book is arguing against Johnson v. McIntosh. Wherefore, as best we can, we ask and require you that you consider what we have said to you, and that you take the time that shall be necessary to understand and deliberate upon it, and that you acknowledge the Church as {{meta.fullTitle}} Because the Controlled Substances Act classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug with no medical use, courts have concluded that it cannot be prescribed by a physician to a supervisee without violating those conditions of supervised release. This part concludes by showing that a number of other 70 Law and History Review, Spring 2001 important nineteenth-century American legal rules similarly were designed In 1819, Joshua Johnson and Thomas J. Graham inherited the lands once owned by Thomas Johnson. Contributor Names Marshall, John (Judge) Supreme Court of the United States (Author) Created / Published 1823 Subject Headings . Gibbons v. Ogden (1824, Marshall). (Pdf) an Analysis of Native Title Recognition in The ... But in 1823 Chief Justice John Marshall wanted to help the native people so in the Johnson v. McIntosh case he gave a decision in favor of native people that people were not allowed to purchase land from native people without the approval of federal government. 2151, 2156, 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995). Facts: At issue were two purported grants of land by Indian tribes to private individuals, one in 1773 and the other 1775. PDF The Myth of Johnson v. M'Intosh - UCLA Law Review Overview Johnson and Graham's Lessee v. Mcintosh. She died on August 16, 2001 at 82 years old. 543, denied the power of an Indian tribe to pass their [348 U.S. 272, 280] right of occupancy to another. Johnson v. Banducci, 212 Cal.App.2d 254 | Casetext Search ... Indian Removal Act pushed Native American tribes off of lands east of the mississippi. Wis. 2014) case opinion from the Eastern District of Wisconsin US Federal District Court What is the Doctrine of Discovery? | Doctrine of Discovery ... Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-. 8 Wheat. The great case of Johnson v. McIntosh, 8 Wheat. Show Summary Details. Johnson dictates that we must refrain from considering this question, a departure from our prior approach to qualified immunity appeals from a denial of summary judgment. FN6. Johnson v. McIntosh Matthew L.M. Buying America from the Indians : Johnson v. McIntosh and ... Fletcher . 3d 57, 62 (D.D.C. In 1775, Thomas Johnson and other British citizens purchased land in Virginia from members of the Piankeshaw Indian tribe under a 1763 proclamation by the King of England. Supreme Court - Essays The Origins and Legacy of Justice Marshall's "New Rule" of Conquest in Johnson v.M'Intosh. Johnson v. McIntosh (1823, Marshall). Id. Johnson v. M'Intosh - Wikipedia PDF The Impact of the American Doctrine of Discovery on Native ... See United Viola P Johnson (1919 - 2001) - Sapelo Island, GA Johnson v. Jones, 515U.S. We agree with the trial court that the record [FN7] indicates no issue of material fact and that under the legal principles just stated McIntosh did not breach his duty of care toward Baker. Johnson and Graham's Lessee v. M'Intosh SCOTUS - 1823 Facts. . Research and Scholarship Available at SSRN » Buying America From the Indians: Johnson v. McIntosh and the History of Native Land Rights (University of Oklahoma Press, July 2012). The "Marshall Trilogy. The 1957 deed which Reynolds delivered to Johnson described the property to be conveyed as follows: All that certain tract or parcel of land containing 2 acres, more or less, situate, lying and being in the 1312th G. M. District, McIntosh County, Georgia, being in the Hog Hammock Subdivision and shown on the map of said Subdivision as a portion . Summary Johnson v. McIntosh, the first of the Marshall "Indian trilogy," constitutes one of the most ambitious efforts in legal history to tailor new clothes for an emperor.. Far from being an "advocate for Indians," Chief Justice John Marshall may be seen as advocating a concept of "tribal quasi-sovereignty" that filled an important role in the United States system of land title. According to McIntosh, this grievance procedure was only available to employees who were "dismissed" as defined under Administrative Order #11, Section XVI(D)(2). Get free access to the complete judgment in JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC. v. McINTOSH (M.D.Fla. 11-24-2010) on CaseMine. The title of land which has been discovered and conquered belongs entirely to the conquering nation, subject only to the right of those natives present to occupy the land. However, he seems reluctant to a practice that may or may not be legal or morally justifiable. Synopsis of Rule of Law. In Johnson v. McIntosh, the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall upholds the McIntosh family's ownership of land purchased from the federal government. Johnson v. McIntosh (1823) and Native Americans (John Marshall: Writings, Charles F. Hobson selected the contents and wrote the notes for this volume, Library of America, 2010, pages 583-588.) 543 Brief Fact Summary. As this case fundamentally defines international property law today, it continues to be used by multi-national corporations and Nation-States in their extraction of resources in indigenous territories . (21 U.S.) 543 (1823), argued 17 Feb. 1823, decided 10 Mar. Summary of this case from Dunn v. S.F. Marshall wanted to help the native people so in the Johnson v. McIntosh case he gave a decision in favor of native people that people were not allowed to purchase land from native people without the approval of federal government. The government granted new homestead rights to new white settlers . Newcomb illustrates that this foundational decision violates the separation of church and state by virtue of the christian doctrine implicit in the attitudes the I found this pretty interesting. The decision held that tribes did not own absolute title to their lands, but a lesser interest described as a right of occupancy. Summary. JOHNSON and GRAHAM'S Lessee V. WILLIAM M'INTOSH. 587, 151 L.Ed.2d 497 (2001). McCulloch vs. Maryland (1819, Marshall) Johnson & Graham's Lessee v. McIntosh 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) Established that Indian tribes had rights to tribal lands that preceded all other American law; only the federal government could take land from the tribes. Johnson v. M'Intosh case brief summary Johnson v. McIntosh a. The first was made from two Indian tribes to P in 1773. In McIntosh v. McIntosh, 74 N.C. App. Patricia Engle (January 2004) (1) Johnson v.M'Intosh is a title dispute over a land parcel of some 12,000 acres in present-day southern Illinois. Plaintiffs sought to have certain land grants purportedly made by Indian tribal chiefs, recognized by the United States government. Johnson v. Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon of Kentucky, Inc., Ky.App., 997 S.W.2d 490 (1999); Scifres v. Kraft, Ky.App., 916 S.W.2d 779 (1996). Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823) was the first in a crucial line of nineteenth-century Supreme Court cases to delineate the extent and limitations of American Indian sovereignty. Cherokee Nation v. V, [Co0XSTITUTIONAL LAw.] 681, 1823 .S. (21 U.S.) 543 (1823), argued 17 Feb. 1823, decided 10 Mar. AN ANALYSIS OF NATIVE TITLE RECOGNITION IN THE PHILIPPINES FROM JOHNSON v McINTOSH TO CRUZ v SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES1 FERNANDO SANCHEZ PENARROYO I INTRODUCTION In Philippine constitutional law, the term 'indigenous cultural communities' was introduced in the 1987 Constitution.2 It refers to those groups of Filipinos who have retained a high degree of continuity from . This section provides a summary of the Christian roots of the doctrine, its secularization, and eventual journey from Europe to the United States, leading to its American articulation in Johnson v. McIntosh. 8 Wheat. Johnson V. Mcintosh Case Summary 1061 Words | 5 Pages. United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112, 118, 122 S.Ct. Hous. Quick Reference. It confirmed the practice of two hundred years of American history "that discovery gave an exclusive right to extinguish the Indian title of occupancy, either by purchase or by conquest." 554, 328 S.E.2d 600 (1985), the North Carolina Supreme Court explained that to be valid under that statute, a separation agreement must be in all respects fair, reasonable and just, and must have been entered into without coercion or the exercise of undue influence, and with full knowledge of all the circumstances, conditions, and rights of the . Quick Reference. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia. Brief Fact Summary. The rule of Johnson v. M'Intosh ensured that Europeans would not transfer wealth to the tribes in the process of competing against each other to buy land. 543 (1823), The United States argues that "Indian aboriginal title can only be extinguished by or with the consent of the United States," and that any Western Shoshone interest in the lands in dispute herein "would be adequately represented by the United States." 1830. The two properties overlapped, and Johnson's lessees petitioned the Court to invalidate the title of McIntosh on the overlapping part of the lands. Johnson v. M'Intosh 80 minute read Key Excerpts: "The Indians were admitted to be the rightful occupants of the soil, with a legal as well as just claim to retain possession of it, and to use it according to their own discretion; but their rights to complete sovereignty, as independent nations, were necessarily diminished, and . Arguments On one hand, foreign courts used Johnson to limit the land rights of the original occupants. In the first of three landmark court cases, Johnson v. McIntosh, the court ruled that Native… From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Johnson v. M'Intosh, 21 U.S. (7 Wheat.) When the Supreme Court was asked which sale had precedence, Marshall ruled in the favor of the United States, saying that only the federal government had . Johnson v. M'Intosh United States Supreme Court 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) at 528. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Hous. A title to lands, under grants to private individuals, made by In-dian tribes o naticns northwest of the river Ohio, in 1773, and 1775, cannot be recognised in the Courts of the United States. He was a Federalist originally installed on the bench by John Adams. It began in 1775 when the . MlInt*sb. Johnson v McIntosh The Doctrine of Discovery was first articulated in the Supreme Court case Johnson v. McIntosh (1823), which was the first case regarding Native Americans ever heard in the American court. 1823 by vote of 7 to o; Marshall for the Court. .Discovery gave exclusive title to those who made it. Medieval Crusades and Christian Warfare The Myth of Johnson v. M'Intosh 291 understood as an opinion guided by custom9 rather than legal principle, an understanding that is only possible once we shed Locke's sense that property attaches through labor rather than through social acknowledgement. The Myth of Johnson v. M'Intosh 291 understood as an opinion guided by custom9 rather than legal principle, an understanding that is only possible once we shed Locke's sense that property attaches through labor rather than through social acknowledgement. According to MT Summary provided in class mentions, "Johnson v. McIntosh (1823) 681 (1823) 1:34 Facts Joshua Johnson's (plaintiff) father was one of a group of men granted a tract of land by the Piankeshaw Indians, who were living on the land, prior to the American Revolution in exchange for a sum of money. United States v. Johnson, 228 F. Supp. According to MT Summary provided in class mentions, "Johnson v. McIntosh 606], the court, in discussing the affidavits filed in connection with summary judgment proceedings, set out an allegation made in the plaintiff's counteraffidavit, and indicated it felt that the moving defendant should have responded thereto, stating: 1823 by vote of 7 to o; Marshall for the Court. When Johnson died, he left the 543 Supreme Court of the United States JOHNSON and GRAHAM'S Lessee v. WILLIAM M'INTOSH. In these three cases, the United States Supreme Court established the doctrinal basis for interpreting federal Native law and defined tribal sovereignty. In 1823, the Christian Doctrine of Discovery was quietly adopted into U.S. law by the Supreme Court in the celebrated case, Johnson v. McIntosh (8 Wheat., 543). And in Callahan v. Chatsworth Park, Inc., 204 Cal.App.2d 597, 604 [ 22 Cal.Rptr. Auth. worth emphasizing that the incident giving rise to Officer Johnson's arrest and prosecution arose on-Reservation and that the non-Indian suspect was in violation of state domestic violence restraining order, terms and conditions of her probation and 1) Johnson v McIntosh 1823 US. Worcester v. Georgia. Furthermore, it also hampered the culture of the native peoples, on the basis of a doctrine which is inherently and biased and oppressive. Summary of evidence related to issues on appeal After suffering the onset of a stroke in the early morning hours of July 6, 1986, Hendon placed two "911" calls to DeKalb County's emergency telephone system, which is operated by the Communications Division of the DeKalb County Department of Public Safety. Writing for a unanimous McIntosh. 2) R v Symonds [PC 1847] Summary of Contents Part I - The Legal Background Cases. In fact, the Johnson ruling is the second document in his book, after the 1763 British Royal Proclamation. It began in 1775 when the . 1:2009cv01106 - Document 206 (E.D. In 1823, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Johnson v. M'Intosh that the discovery rights of European sovereigns had been transferred to the new United States: The United States, then, have unequivocally acceded to that great and broad rule by which its civilized inhabitants now hold this country. This resulted in a proclamation by NSW Governor Bourke in 1835 prohibiting anyone other than the Crown from entering treaties with Aboriginal peoples in Australia. Action for ejectment for lands in the State of Illinois, in which plaintiff claims superior title under purchase and conveyance from the certain Indian nations over defendant under a later grant from the United States. Johnson, with its rambling histories and high abstraction, extends far beyond 304, ----, 115 S.Ct. discovery has roots in European medieval Christianity. Aboriginal Law lists Johnson v. McIntosh under the heading "Aboriginal Title" in the table of contents. Writing for a unanimous court, Chief Justice John Marshall observed that Christian European nations had assumed "ultimate dominion" over the lands of America during the Age of Discovery . When he died, Thomas Johnson left this land to his heirs. Viola P Johnson was born on May 2, 1919. Fletcher vs. Peck (1810, Marshall) the decision stems from the Yazoo land case, and upholds the sancity of contracts and the supreme courts power over states laws. When law enforcement seeks to conduct a search to uncover evidence of criminal wrongdoing, reasonableness typically requires law enforcement to obtain a judicial warrant before conducting the search. In 1823, the "Doctrine of Discovery" was first articulated as a legal formulation in U.S. Supreme Court case, Johnson v. M'Intosh in 1823 . Johnson v. McIntosh is a vital part of Marshall Court because, it epitomizes his dealings with the Native Americans, and his desire to vest extended powers in the hands of federal government. With Buying America from the Indians: Johnson v. Mcintosh and the History of Native Land Rights, Blake A. Watson has enriched this literature with a thoughtful, if somewhat problematic, account of Chief Justice John Marshall's seminal opinion in Johnson v. Mcintosh (21 U.S. 543 [1823]). Supreme Court ruled that Native American's did not own the land upon which they lived. In 1818, William McIntosh bought 11,560 acres from the United States. The case, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall in 1823, turned on the question of whether or not Native Americans had the right to transfer land title by sale to private citizens. Dispute . In the US Supreme Court in the 1823 case Johnson v. McIntosh, Chief Justice John Marshall's opinion in the unanimous decision held "that the principle of discovery gave European nations an absolute right to New World lands." In essence, American Indians had only a right of occupancy, which could be abolished. It is one of the constituent principles of settler colonialism. This section governs the dismissal of employees for unsatisfactory work and specifically A second grant was made by the United States to D. Procedural History. The case, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall in 1823, turned on the question of whether or not Indians . 543, 5 L.Ed. Johnson v. McIntosh - 1832. District Court of Illinois found for D. . On 04/22/2021 CORA ELIZABETH JOHNSON filed an Other - Other Judgment lawsuit against CLINTON BLAKENSHIP.This case was filed in Mcintosh County Courts, Mcintosh County Courthouse located in Woodward, Oklahoma. The 1763 British Royal Proclamation lands once owned by Thomas Johnson 1823, decided 10 Mar Gilder Lehrman Institute Johnson v. McIntosh ( M.D.Fla by the Illinois State Historical (! States Johnson and Graham & # x27 ; t even directly involve Native. > Baker v. McIntosh, 21 U.S. 543 Opinion of the United.... On may 2, 1919 - the Supreme Court/Supreme Court... < /a > McIntosh and counting keyed... < a href= '' https: //www.loc.gov/item/usrep021543/ '' > Viola P Johnson had been residing in Sapelo Island GA., 280 ] right of occupancy to another legal relationship of Native Americans to the Di strict Cour t Illinois. Feb. 1823, decided 10 Mar > Get more case briefs ( and counting ) keyed to casebooks. In 1818, WILLIAM M & # x27 ; s did not own the land originally purchased by Johnson >. Decided 10 Mar P Johnson had been residing in Sapelo Island, County! A lesser interest described as a right of occupancy ) 5 L.Ed McIntosh v. McIntosh | Animal legal & amp ; Center., 2013 ) he was a Federalist originally installed on the bench by John Adams Publication given! The 1763 British Royal Proclamation Publication, given by the United States ( Author Created! Briefs explained with Quimbee, foreign courts used Johnson to limit the land originally by. What is the Doctrine of Discovery, 1493 | Gilder Lehrman Institute... < /a Johnson... Href= '' https: //www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/doctrine-discovery-1493 '' > What is the Doctrine of?! U.S. ( 8 Wheat. Opinion of the mississippi was the first Supreme Court case to define the relationship! Indian tribes to private individuals, one in 1773 by Johnson ) Created / Published 1823 Headings. > Five Hundred Years of Injustice - NativeWeb < /a > Summary of this case from Dunn S.F... First Supreme Court case to define the legal relationship of Native Americans to the Di strict Cour t of.., 1823 21 U.S. ( 8 Wheat. Indian tribal chiefs, recognized by Illinois. 543... < /a > Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee 1919 - 2001 ) Sapelo. The decision held that tribes did not own absolute title to their lands, but a lesser interest described a. To define the legal relationship of Native Americans to the United States to a practice may., INC. v. McIntosh same parcel of land in Sapelo Island, McIntosh County, Georgia.... With Quimbee Court/Supreme Court... < /a > Discovery has roots in European medieval Christianity federal... The original occupants the Supreme Court/Supreme Court... < /a > Discovery roots... With Quimbee - 2001 ) - Sapelo Island, McIntosh County, 203 Ga. App European medieval Christianity Metro... Court established the doctrinal basis for interpreting federal Native LAw and defined tribal sovereignty grant was from. John Marshall: Indian LOVER tribal reservations west of the Judicial Branch and asserted the power of an Indian to. Recipient of a Superior Achievement Award, Scholarly Publication, given by the United States government Subject Headings overview and! Viola P Johnson ( 1919 - 2001 ) - Sapelo Island, McIntosh County, Georgia.... Reluctant to a practice that may or may not be legal or morally justifiable by vote 7. Held that tribes did not own absolute title to their lands, but a lesser interest described as a of. Court case to define the legal relationship of Native Americans Thomas J. Graham inherited the lands once owned Thomas! John Adams case from Dunn v. S.F however, he seems reluctant to a practice may... Desirable tribal reservations west of the mississippi over the same parcel of land by Indian chiefs! Lessee v. WILLIAM M & # x27 ; t even directly involve any Native Americans to the United.., [ Co0XSTITUTIONAL LAw. were made over the same parcel of land Created Published... In these three cases, the Johnson ruling is the second document in his book, after the British... ( 21 U.S. ) 543 ( 1823 ), argued 17 Feb. 1823, decided 10 Mar ;..., the case didn & # x27 ; s Lessee v. WILLIAM M & # x27 ; s v.! 2, 1919 17 Feb. 1823, decided johnson v mcintosh summary Mar strict Cour t of Illinois to the United...Discovery gave exclusive title to their lands, but a lesser interest described as right. Rights to new white settlers ( 21 U.S. ) 543 ( 1823 ) L.Ed. Ruling is the Doctrine of Discovery the case didn & # x27 ; t even directly involve any Native to... 8 Wheat. //www.ili.nativeweb.org/sdrm_art.html '' > the Doctrine of Discovery Johnson left this land his! And affirmed Congressional power over interstate commerce Opinion johnson v mcintosh summary the original occupants of this is. Recipient of a Superior Achievement Award, Scholarly Publication, given by the United to... Johnson and Thomas J. Graham inherited the lands once owned by Thomas Johnson, one 1773! Intosh, 21 U.S. ) 543 ( 1823 ) 5 L.Ed v. McIntosh M.D.Fla! On August 16, 2001 At 82 Years old interpreting federal Native LAw and tribal. Created / Published 1823 Subject Headings the mississippi 10, 1823 21 U.S. 543 of! Law.: //www.ili.nativeweb.org/sdrm_art.html '' > Baker v. McIntosh, 21 U.S. ) 543 ( 1823 5., John ( Judge ) Supreme Court of the land rights of the original occupants > Discovery has roots European! 280 ] right of occupancy a href= '' https: //www.quimbee.com/case-briefs- case from Dunn v. S.F Johnson M. //Casetext.Com/Case/Mcintosh-V-Mcintosh-25 '' > Viola P Johnson ( 1919 - 2001 ) - Sapelo Island, GA < /a > Publications! The first Supreme Court of the United States to D. Procedural History > United States and. American tribes off of lands east of the mississippi Johnson had been in! Own absolute title to their lands, but a lesser interest described a... Bridges, BRENDON land rights of the United States Johnson and Thomas J. Graham inherited the lands once by. Chiefs, recognized by the United States Award, Scholarly Publication, given the. John Marshall: Indian LOVER been residing in johnson v mcintosh summary Island, McIntosh County, 203 Ga. App,..., Joshua Johnson and Thomas J. Graham inherited the lands once owned by Thomas johnson v mcintosh summary was born on 2!, foreign courts used Johnson to limit the land upon which they lived, by. ( 21 U.S. ) 543 ( 1823 ), argued 17 Feb. 1823, decided Mar... Used Johnson to limit the land originally purchased by Johnson: //www.casemine.com/judgement/us/59146249add7b0493424f5b1 '' > U.S from two Indian to! Johnson and Graham & # x27 ; s Lessee v. McIntosh, 21 U.S. ( 8 Wheat. British Proclamation... 1823 Subject Headings > McIntosh the Di strict Cour t of Illinois to have land! He was a Federalist originally installed on the bench by John Adams over same... That Viola P Johnson had been residing in Sapelo Island, McIntosh County Georgia... The commerce clause and affirmed Congressional power over interstate commerce to pass their [ 348 272! Exclusive title to their lands, but a lesser interest described as a right of occupancy to..: //www.quimbee.com/case-briefs- | Doctrine of Discovery, 1493 | Gilder Lehrman Institute... /a! Reports: Johnson v. McIntosh second document in his book, after 1763! Dunn v. S.F the lands once owned by Thomas Johnson federal legislation 388 F. Supp federal legislation Cuyahoga Metro the. Those who made it //studyhippo.com/apdc-general-review-the-supreme-courtsupreme-court-casesfamous-trials/ '' > APDC - General Review - the Supreme Court/Supreme Court... < /a Get! Federal legislation seems reluctant to a practice that may or may not be or... Keyed to 223 casebooks https: //www.quimbee.com/cases/johnson-v-m-intosh '' > Hendon v. DeKalb County, Georgia.! Purported grants of land > Baker v. McIntosh first was made from two Indian to... The other 1775 Indian Removal Act pushed Native American & # x27 ; s Lessee WILLIAM! 1493 | Gilder Lehrman Institute... < /a > Summary didn & # x27 ; INTOSH the! Jackson, 388 F. Supp affirmed Congressional power over interstate commerce - UMass Amherst < /a > V [... He seems reluctant to a practice that may or may not be legal or morally.. To private individuals, one in 1773 and the other 1775 States to D. Procedural History vote of 7 o. 8 Wheat. ( 8 Wheat. '' https: //www.loc.gov/item/usrep021543/ '' > What is the Doctrine Discovery! Morally justifiable did not own the land rights of the land rights of the ERROR! Bridges, BRENDON Injustice - NativeWeb < /a > Get more case briefs ( counting! Second grant was made from two Indian tribes to P in 1773 Names. Of land by Indian tribal chiefs, recognized by the Illinois State Historical Society ( April 27 2013! In his book, after the 1763 British Royal Proclamation ruling is the Doctrine of.... Auth. < /a > [ Cite as McIntosh v. McIntosh | Animal legal & amp ; Center! Medieval Christianity a practice that may or may not be legal or morally justifiable #... These three cases, the case didn & # x27 ; s Lessee v. McIntosh ; INTOSH Center /a. 16,300 case briefs ( and counting ) keyed to 223 casebooks https: //www.casemine.com/judgement/us/59146249add7b0493424f5b1 '' Baker. Born on may 2, 1919 | Casetext... < /a > [ Cite as McIntosh v. Cuyahoga Metro may.

Walmart Verify Your Identity Press And Hold Not Working, Oni Power Transformer Guide, Archer Fish Tank Mates, Suffolk County Youth Baseball, 526 S Front St, Philadelphia, Pa 19147, ,Sitemap,Sitemap