The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-06-16
OUR KNOWLEDGE or OUR LAWS.

Recently The TINES had occasion in the
Washington city case to point out the dense
ignorance of and indifference to citizens
rights under the laws Of the land. possessed
by the average military officer. and in doing
so we pointed out the same ignorance on the
part of the Washington Post.
Our fundamental constitutional law is the
happiest and best that any people have so
far. in the history of the world, been blessed
with. and it does not seem possible to improve
much on it, II was devised and constructed
by wise men out of the material furnished by
the whole past. and it reduced to concrete
form all the separate principles guaranteeing
his rights Of person and property to the citi-
zen that ages of statesmen and soldiers had
agreed and fought for and martyrs had died
for.
Yet. blessed with these happy institutions,
how little attention do we give to teaching
the people what they are? We send our SONS
German and music, whilst they are allowed
to remain in absolute ignorance of the laws
under which they are TO live.
Complete knowledge of our laws is given TO
no one. The writer. though he has had con-
siderable experience in practcing law, was
asked a few days back if patent granted by
the United States Government for an inven-
ton was liable to the owners debts. and he
was unable 10 answer the question. He asked
three brother lawyers the same question and
neither one could answer. Determined TO
know the law of the case he betook himself
10 his books and found out what it was. but
with no little difficulty.
1t was decided by the Supreme Court Of the
United States in 1881 in the case of Ager
against Murray, lO5 U. S. r., l26. that such a
patent was liable TO the owners debts, but il
does not seem to have been so decided before.
And it was not an easy matter TO dispose Of
even then. II was contended that right 10
make a machine consisted in knowledge and
skill that was in mans brain and that that
was kind of property, if property at all,
that was entirely intangible and, therefore,
not capable Of sale on an execution. and much
authority was produced in support of the
claim. The Court. however, solved the diff.
Guilty thus: 1t held that even though a patent
could not be sold on execution. yet if the cred
itor got q judgment against his debtor and
then applied to court of equity. that court
with its ability to mould its process to all
emergencies and having the person of the
debtor under its control. could compel him
to make an assignment of the patent whereby
the assignee would acquire all the rights that
the patentee had had.
1t ID not TO be expected that we can have
our Sons taught all such niceties of legal
learning as this. but we might have them
taught that when a military officer under
takes TO turn one of them out Of his house in
time of peace with no warrant for his act but
the command of a superior military officer
the Constitution and laws Of the land justify
him in resisting that military officer with
force and even taking his life if no lesr
force will do. Yet how many of our citizens
who are not trained lawyers know so much OF
our fundamental laws as even this?