Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-10-26

e =
ST. to Ia The UniOa bat the practice has heen
10 admit protests TOR non acceptance aud non
payment OF Bills, under ia. official seal of no.
u - psbic, 10 be conclusive evidence of the
Fact, ~ liSe m;siuer as III the case of foreign
b"iS-ol coarse they may be considered as
foreign Bills" / rcGyr to what is here stated,
not as Ia, Kind vfauthorty which we were in
search of, hat us the statement Of a learned
yudoe, III highly commercial state, III relation
to the practice of lawyers and merchants up
on this subject. La the case of Ki,ur V. VaLkes,
! Black. Rep. 1885, 1t wa. said by Counsel, and
not contradlctcd by the Bench or Bar, I" that
II had been questioned whether Scots Bills of
Exchange were inland or foreign bills, aud
been determined by Z. J. Ryder, at Gudhall,
that they were foreign Bills"
That inland bills prior TO the statute of the
aud w. ). c. II. We're confined to England,
IS strongly to be inferred from the provisions
of that statute, which speaks of Bills drawn at
any place in the Kingdom of England, Don,i,a-
soa q Uates, or toton Of Ber,cic& upon T,ceed /;
although Wales and Berwick had been, previ-
Gus to that statute, as firmly united to Eug-
land, As Scotland was after the Union. 1t is
possible that naming Scotland, and the town
oil Berwick was unnecessary, and that they
might have been considered as included under
the general terms Kingdom Of Ensiand. How
ever tins might have been, il would seem that
1ac legislature which enacted that statute,
thoigh, otherwise, or it is not likely they
would have been included by express words.
Ii Bills drawn in England on Scotland be
'niand Bills, they are of peculiar character
- 1t IS perfectly clear they are not, within the
PROVISIONS OF the above Statute and conse-
quently cannot he protested /; nor are they en-
titled to any ofthe privileges bestowed by that
Statute Oh aud Bills. And il, in fact, they
ar SO treated, Il is Uncomfortable that that por-
ton ot tn" British du.ninions, and even Eng
land should fnr so long have been subjected to
The Inconvenience o{ having species of COM
merclal paper, which is neither IL foreign Bill.
nor statutary inland Bill unless they are
considered and treated rs of the former de-
sSrpt'on, 1t Is highly probable that the Statute
6and VIVA. ,. would have been extended To
Scotland, as it was 20 Wales and the town of
Berwick.
If, in point Of fact those Bills are treated az
foreign bli,a-a conclusion TO which nv mind
strongly incliaes-it cannot bat have strong
bearing upon this case. The union between
England and Scotland is, politically speaking,
as intimate rs between England and Wales. or
between the different counties of either. They
10 IN one Kingdom, are subject to the same
government, and are represented in the same
Legislative body and, although the laws and
chstums Of Scotland, iafDrce ut the time of The
union, were suffered To continue, vet they are
aiterable by the Parliament Of Great Britain,
even as they relate 10 private rights, if the al
teT'itIon Should be deemed Tor the evident u
tiiliy of the people Of Scotland. How differ
cnt is the union OF these states. They are in
their separate political capacities, sewerage
and independent OF cacEoiher, except SD far as
thcy are united for their common defence and
Tor national purposes They have each a
Constitution and form of Government, with
all the attributes of sovereignty. As to matters
ot national concern, they form one Govern
ihen;, are subject TO the same laws, and may
I've emphatically denominatcd one peoplr.-In
al other respects, they are as distinct as diff
lSftnt forms OF Government and differ laws
can reader them. II is true, that the citizen,
o! each state, are entitled TO ali the privileges
ana Immunl;ics ut citizens in every other state
--tnat the sovereignty of the states in relation
To iugItivcs from justice and from service, is
linitcd-and each state is bound to give full
faith aud credit to the public acts, records, and
judicial proceedings of her sister states. But
thes" privileges and disabilities are mere crca-
tires Ut the Constitution; and it is quite fair
q argue, that the trainers of that Instrument
deemed 1t necessary tn secure them, by ex-
press provisions.
IN the case of Harder " .4rreN; Wash.
hep the question in part was, whether the
te dec laws of Pennsylvania, where the con-
ira was made, ought to be regarded by the
courts OF Virginia, where the suit was brought:
And throughout the opinions delivered by the
judges, Pennsylvania was treated as "A foreign
country. The President OF the Court is express
upon this point. lie observes, F." that in cases
ot contract, the laws ola foreign country where
The contract is made must govern. The same
principle applies though with no greater force
to the different States Of America for though
1hey form cOnfeilcrated government, vet
ihe several states retain their individual sovc-
relSntles, and, Uih respect to tkeir municipal
faics are TO each other foreign"
III the union between the states he go com
Piete, that a bill drawn in one state upon an
Diner, IS to be- treated as an inland Bill
one would suppose that discharge under the
jnsolvent laws of one state, though the creditor
resided in another would be regarded as IA dis
charge in every other state. Yet the law is
otherwise laid down in Massachusetts, and n
York, and perhaps in others of the statcs.-
fan Raugh v. pdn .4rsdain, 3 Gaines Rep.
I'D. Smith v. !Smlih, Johns Rep. 256.--
These decisions in strict conformity with
the rule in England, that a discharge under a
foreign Bankrupt Law is no bar TO debt con-
fracted IN England due to Creditor residing
there. Easts Rep. 6. In Pennsylvania the
rule OF reciprocity is Observed aud the Court
here viii discharge on Common Bail, IA per
son who has been discharged by the nsolyent
laws of another state, ifMe Court QfMdt state
rT The same courtesy tOioardS The citizens Of
PennSytrdnta, Binn. 30. Even the Judg-
Inents of other states are considered in the
Courts of Vermont, massachusetts,, and .Nep
York, as being foreign ; that the grounds of
them may be inquired into, if impeachcd
by the defendant. .Hotdut Y. .Men-
Chipm. Rep. ~. Bartlett V. Knight, /. Mass.
Rep. 4O1. HitchcOct v. .1icktn, Gaines Rep.
400. lin H,tbbeL V. COiCdreu. 3 Johns Rem