part11-第2章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



knowlege　can　never　be　lost。　　To　preserve　the　freedom　of　the　human

mind　then　&　freedom　of　the　press；　every　spirit　should　be　ready　to

devote　itself　to　martyrdom；　for　as　long　as　we　may　think　as　we　will；　&

speak　as　we　think；　the　condition　of　man　will　proceed　in　improvement。

The　generation　which　is　going　off　the　stage　has　deserved　well　of

mankind　for　the　struggles　it　has　made；　&　for　having　arrested　that

course　of　despotism　which　had　overwhelmed　the　world　for　thousands　&

thousands　of　years。　　If　there　seems　to　be　danger　that　the　ground　they

have　gained　will　be　lost　again；　that　danger　comes　from　the　generation

your　cotemporary。　　But　that　the　enthusiasm　which　characterises　youth

should　lift　its　parricide　hands　against　freedom　&　science；　would　be

such　a　monstrous　phaenomenon　as　I　cannot　place　among　possible　things

in　this　age　&　this　country。　　Your　college　at　least　has　shewn　itself

incapable　of　it；　and　if　the　youth　of　any　other　place　have　seemed　to

rally　under　other　banners　it　has　been　from　delusions　which　they　will

soon　dissipate。　　I　shall　be　happy　to　hear　from　you　from　time　to　time；

&　of　your　progress　in　study；　and　to　be　useful　to　you　in　whatever　is

in　my　power；　being　with　sincere　esteem　Dear　Sir　your　friend　&　servt







　　　　　　　　COMMON　LAW　AND　THE　WILL　OF　THE　NATION




　　　　　　　　_To　Edmund　Randolph_

　　　　　　　　_Monticello；　Aug。　18；　1799_




　　　　　　　　DEAR　SIR；　　I　received　only　two　days　ago　your　favor　of　the

12th；　and　as　it　was　on　the　eve　of　the　return　of　our　post；　it　was　not

possible　to　make　so　prompt　a　despatch　of　the　answer。　　Of　all　the

doctrines　which　have　ever　been　broached　by　the　federal　government；

the　novel　one；　of　the　common　law　being　in　force　&　cognizable　as　an

existing　law　in　their　courts；　is　to　me　the　most　formidable。　　All

their　other　assumptions　of　un…given　powers　have　been　in　the　detail。

The　bank　law；　the　treaty　doctrine；　the　sedition　act；　alien　act；　the

undertaking　to　change　the　state　laws　of　evidence　in　the　state　courts

by　certain　parts　of　the　stamp　act；　&c。；　&c。；　have　been　solitary；

unconsequential；　timid　things；　in　comparison　with　the　audacious；

barefaced　and　sweeping　pretension　to　a　system　of　law　for　theU　S；

without　the　adoption　of　their　legislature；　and　so　infinitively　beyond

their　power　to　adopt。　　If　this　assumption　be　yielded　to；　the　state

courts　may　be　shut　up；　as　there　will　then　be　nothing　to　hinder

citizens　of　the　same　state　suing　each　other　in　the　federal　courts　in

every　case；　as　on　a　bond　for　instance；　because　the　common　law　obliges

payment　of　it；　&　the　common　law　they　say　is　their　law。　　I　am　happy

you　have　taken　up　the　subject；　&　I　have　carefully　perused　&

considered　the　notes　you　enclosed；　and　find　but　a　single　paragraph

which　I　do　not　approve。　　It　is　that　wherein　（page　2。）　you　say；　that

laws　being　emanations　from　the　legislative　department；　&；　when　once

enacted；　continuing　in　force　from　a　presumption　that　their　will　so

continues；　that　that　presumption　fails　&　the　laws　of　course　fall；　on

the　destruction　of　that　legislative　department。　　I　do　not　think　this

is　the　true　bottom　on　which　laws　&　the　administering　them　rest。　　The

whole　body　of　the　nation　is　the　sovereign　legislative；　judiciary　and

executive　power　for　itself。　　The　inconvenience　of　meeting　to　exercise

these　powers　in　person；　and　their　inaptitude　to　exercise　them；　induce

them　to　appoint　special　organs　to　declare　their　legislative　will；　to

judge　&　to　execute　it。　　It　is　the　will　of　the　nation　which　makes　the

law　obligatory；　it　is　their　will　which　creates　or　annihilates　the

organ　which　is　to　declare　&　announce　it。　　They　may　do　it　by　a　single

person；　as　an　Emperor　of　Russia；　（constituting　his　declarations

evidence　of　their　will；）　or　by　a　few　persons；　as　the　Aristocracy　of

Venice；　or　by　a　complication　of　councils；　as　in　our　former　regal

government；　or　our　present　republican　one。　　The　law　being　law　because

it　is　the　will　of　the　nation；　is　not　changed　by　their　changing　the

organ　through　which　they　chuse　to　announce　their　future　will；　no　more

than　the　acts　I　have　done　by　one　attorney　lose　their　obligation　by　my

changing　or　discontinuing　that　attorney。　　This　doctrine　has　been；　in

a　certain　degree　sanctioned　by　the　federal　executive。　　For　it　is

precisely　that　on　which　the　continuance　of　obligation　from　our　treaty

with　France　was　established；　and　the　doctrine　was　particularly

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；　for　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　&　constitutionally　declared；　remained　untouched。

For　the　nation　was　not　dissolved；　was　not　annihilated；　it's　will；

therefore；　remained　in　full　vigor；　and　on　the　establishing　the　new

organs；　first　of　a　convention；　&　afterwards　a　more　complicated

legislature；　the　old　acts　of　national　will　continued　in　force；　until

the　nation　should；　by　its　new　organs；　declare　it's　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；　&

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　it's　law。　　Apply　these　principles　to　the　present　case。

Before　the　revolution　there　existed　no　such　nation　as　the　U　S；　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　&　with　foreign

nations；　and　the　states　composing　the　association　chose　to　give　it

powers　for　those　purposes　&　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；　&　so　far　only　as　they

were　authorized　to　adopt。




　　　　　　　　I　think　it　will　be　of　great　importance；　when　you　come　to　the

proper　part；　to　portray　at　full　length　the　consequences　of　this　new

doctrine；　that　the　common　law　is　the　law　of　theU　S；　&　that　their

courts　have；　of　course；　jurisdiction　co…extensive　with　that　law；　that

is　to　say；　general　over　all　cases　&　persons。　　But；　great　heavens！

Who　could　have　conceived　in　1789　that　within　ten　years　we　should　have

to　combat　such　windmills。　　Adieu。　　Yours　affectionately。







　　　　　　　　IDEAS　FOR　A　UNIVERSITY




　　　　　　　　_To　Dr。　Joseph　Priestley_

　　　　　　　　_Philadelphia；　Jan。　18；　1800_




　　　　　　　　DEAR　SIR；　　I　have　to　thank　you　for　the　pamphlets　you　were　so

kind　as　to　s