Abbeville press. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1860-1869, 1866-07-20
BY. ". A. j, LEE AND HUGH WILSON: !.

1 a1SoSA Aotn tadt Stoab uo0ou'y "nNAeSS'
voir Of rational jurisprudence, the Roman
law We are inclined to believe this.
The tradition is that Mr.. Justice Wilson,
who was member Of the Convention, and
a, Scottich lawyer, and learned in the civil
law, was the author. of the phrase
Whatever may be the correctness Of the
tradition, the term ''obligation" is certain
ly recognized familiarly by the Roman ju>
rists as denoting the legal tie which impo-
ses necessity Of doing or abstaining from
particular aos as distinguished from the
imperfect obligation arising from gratitude,
charity or other moral duties, binding upon
conscience, but having no legal remedy
for their enforcement. This latter is tile
essence Of the legal obligation. Silo Aac
conditions, 81 volans, aulla fit o6ligat;o.
CORPUS Juris, Book "A, Chapter Z, Lex.
s.) According to the Roman Law, whore
the legal obligation ceases to exist. Cam
nulla subest causa constat non posse con-
stitui obligationena. CORPUS Juris, Book
2, Chapter IA, L. S "a de pactis.)
In Ogden Us. Saunders, IL Wheat it is
said, "the obligation Of contract as sp o.
ken of in the Constitution, is legal not
mere moral obligation; it is the law which
binds the party to perform his undertaking.
The obligation does not iuhere or subsist in
the contract itself proprio vigorr, but in
the Law applicable to the contract; and
this law is mol the universal law OF nations,
but it is the law of the State where the
contract 10 made any Law, which enlarges,
or In any manner changes the intention of
the parties resulting from the stipulatiohs
in the contract, necessarily impairs it. Ad-
verting to these principles, Mr.. Justice
Trimble, who acted with the majority OF
tho Court, illus expresses himself: "The
great principle inteuded TO be established
by the Constitution was the inviolability Of
the obligation Of contracts as The obliga.
tion existed, and was recognized by tho
laws in force At the time the contracts, were
made" Whether the Law processes to ap.
ply to the contract itself, or to regulate the
remedy, it is equally within the true mean
ing Of tho Constitution, if it, in effect, i'm
pairs the obligation Of exciting contracts.
l do not mean to say that every alteration
of the existing remedies would impair the
the obligation Of contracts; but do say,
With great confidence, that law taking
away all remedy from existing contracts
zaald be msnifsstly law impairing the
obligation Of contracts. On the other
hand, great variety of instancea may
readily be imagined in which the Legisla-
cure of q State might alter, modify, or re-
peal existing remedies and enact Others in
their stead without the slightsst ground for
a supposition that the new law.impairsd the
obligation Of contracts. If there be in.
termsdiate cases of = more doubtful char
acter, j. win be Tina enough to odscide them
when they aiise." In Mather us: Bush; le
John b, 2s3, Chisf Justice Spencer com.
msnted on the, Gaze of sturges ": Crow.
ninshisld then recently decided. He said
be bowed dtoshe supermaoyo Of the Supreme
Court Of the United States upon the point
actually decided, viz the limited power Of
= State Legislasure to pass bankrupt laws.
But in reference to the distinction taken
bstween "a case ilnpairiug the obligation
Of contract and operating directly upon
it and . Law affecting Or modifying The