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.
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 the United States and that their
courts have, of course, jurisdiction co-extensive with that law, that is
to say, general over all cases and persons.
Pages:
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745