The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 4 (of 9): Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and PrivateJefferson, Thomas
History
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 4 (of 9): Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and Private
Jefferson, Thomas
United States -- Politics and government -- 1775-1783; United States -- Politics and government -- 1783-1865
developed in a letter to Gouverneur Morris, written with the approbation
of President Washington and his cabinet. Mercer once prevailed on the
Virginia Assembly to declare a different doctrine in some resolutions.
These met universal disapprobation in this, as well as the other States,
and if I mistake not, a subsequent Assembly did something to do away the
authority of their former unguarded resolutions. In this case, as in all
others, the true principle will be quite as effectual to establish the
just deductions. Before the revolution, the nation of Virginia had, by
the organs they then thought proper to constitute, established a system
of laws, which they divided into three denominations of 1, common law; 2,
statute law; 3, chancery: or if you please, into two only, of 1, common
law; 2, chancery. When, by the Declaration of Independence, they chose
to abolish their former organs of declaring their will, the acts of will
already formally and constitutionally declared, remained untouched. For
the nation was not dissolved, was not annihilated; its will, therefore,
remained in full vigor; and on the establishing the new organs, first
of a convention, and afterwards a more complicated legislature, the old
acts of national will continued in force, until the nation should, by its
new organs, declare its will changed. The common law, therefore, which
was not in force when we landed here, nor till we had formed ourselves
into a nation, and had manifested by the organs we constituted that
the common law was to be our law, continued to be our law, because the
nation continued in being, and because though it changed the organs for
the future declarations of its will, yet it did not change its former
declarations that the common law was its law. Apply these principles to
the present case. Before the revolution there existed no such nation as
the United States; they then first associated as a nation, but for special
purposes only. They had all their laws to make, as Virginia had on her
first establishment as a nation. But they did not, as Virginia had done,
proceed to adopt a whole system of laws ready made to their hand. As their
association as a nation was only for special purposes, to wit, for the
management of their concerns with one another and with foreign nations,
and the States composing the association chose to give it powers for those
purposes and no others, they could not adopt any general system, because
it would have embraced objects on which this association had no right to
form or declare a will. It was not the organ for declaring a national will
in these cases. In the cases confided to them, they were free to declare
the will of the nation, the law; but till it was declared there could be
no law. So that the common law did not become, _ipso facto_, law on the
new association; it could only become so by a positive adoption, and so
far only as they were authorized to adopt.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account