The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1901-07-17
SPEECH OF HON. E. B. GARY.
Continued from First Page.

To the foregoing list may be added the of Rr6y
u.s. United Staes thereafter decided in which the Court
held that much of the Act of Congress of March B.
1875, provides that the judgment of conviction against
the principal the of embezzement larceny OF
property of the United States shall be evidence against
receiver thereof, that the property embezzled or
stoen is in violation of the Sixth Amendment of the Con-
stituton declaring that accused shall be confronted
with the witnesses against him also the of Fa6a
u.s. United States Fl, Sup. Ct 64o which the Court
in exceedingly elaborate opinion held hat stamp tax
on foreign bill of ladng, is in substance and effect
equivalent to tax duty EXPORTS and in conflict with
the constitutional prohibition"
There four that stand out in bold relief
showing that the Supreme Court refused to reflect in its de-
csons the bitterness and hatred against the South just
after the
They are both entertaining and instructive, but it
would prolong remarks great length, to dis
cuss them We however give the names of them they
Mligans case, Wall Ex Parte Garland d. Wall 333
Cummings Missouri Wall 277, and United States VS.
Lee, 1o6 U. S. Io6.
In a recent decision of the Supreme Court of the
United States quite interesting discussion to how
far the principles of the law applicable to
arising under the Constitution and Acts of Congress-
The Court after quoting the following language from
Smith vs. Alabama, I24 U. S. 4o5 to wit:
There is no law of the United States in the
sense of national customary law distinct from the COM
law Of adopted by the several sates each
for ITSELF applied its local law, and subject such al
teation may be provided by its statutes Wheaton
in case of what that law may be different in court
the United States from that which prevails in the ucica
tribunals of particular state This arises from the
that the courts of the United States in
within their jurisdiction where they called upon to ad
the law OF the state which they by which
the transaction is governed, exercise an independent
though concurrent jurisdiction and required
tain and declare the law according their own Judgment
This is illustrated by the of NeaO York C. r. Co. a.
Lockavood II WALL 557, Fl L. ed 627 where the COM
law in Of Vork in
the liability of carriers for negligence received
different Interpretation from that placed upon by the
judicial tribunals of the but the law as applied
none the less the law of that state" says:
Properly understood, exceptions can be taken to
declarations of this kind There is no body of Federal
law separate and distinct from the law
existing in the several states the that there
body of law enacted by Congress and dis
tnct from the body of statute law enacted by the several
states But it entirely different thing hold that
there law in force generally throughout the
United States and that the countless multitude of inter-
state commercial transactions subject no rules and
burdened by other than those expressed in
the statutes of Congress. .
What is the common law' According to Kent :
The common law includes those principles usages and
rules of action applicable the and security
person and property which do not for their authority
upon any express and positive declaration of the will Of
the legislature Kent Con- Al. AS Blackstone says
Whence it is that in law the goodness of custom
depends upon its having been used time of mind or
SoeAuily VI 'oul phrase, time WnereOf the
memory Of man runneth not to the contrary This it is
that gives its weight and authority and of this nature
the maxims and customs which compose the common
law Ax sc,zbta, of this Kingdom. This unwrten
common, law is properly dstnguishable into three
kinds l. General customs which the universal rule
of the whole Kingdom, and form the common law in its
stricter and more usual signfcation.' b. CON- 67
In Blacks Law Dictionary page 232, it is thus defined
AS distinguished from law created by the enactment of
legislatures the law comprises the body of those
of 70 he
and security of persons and property which derive their
authority solely from usages and customs of mmemoral
antiquity or from the judgments and DEGREES of the courts
recognizing affirming and enforcing such usages and
toms; and in this sense particularly the ancient un-
written law of England
Can it be that the great multitude of interstate COM
merca transactions freed from the burdens created by
the law, Defined and are subject to no rule
clearly of opinion that this be so and that the
principles of the law operative upon all inter-
state commercial transactions except far as they are
modified by congressional enactment
Reference may also be made to the elaborate opinion
OF District Judge Shiras holding the circuit in the
northern district of Iowa, in Murray a. Chicago g. w. W.
r. Co. o2 Fed. Rep. IS, in which is colated number Of
extracts from opinions of this court all tending to show
the recognition of general common law existing through
out the United States not it is true body of law
as containing the general rules and principles by which all
transactions controlled except SO far as those rules
and principles set aside by express statute"
BY the Judiciary Act M provided that the trial of is
sues of fact in the Supreme Court in all actions at law
oft he T1p;t