Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
Too busy focusing on making our government look like the one in England I think. You know, that one with a *KING* or something.

And government just kept trying, too.

That's what cracks me up about anyone quoting 'Sharswood's Blackstone'. George Sharswood decided to edit Blackstone's Commentaries in 1893...over 100 years after the Founders said the English common law was not adopted by the federal government and Tucker had already illustrated the parameters for English influence in the American States.

Thanks for the quotes by Wilson, BTW. I was reading more of his lectures yesterday, and discovered he could have some pretty salty language at times (LOL!).... but like the rest of them, his points were exceptionally clear.

306 posted on 02/04/2015 8:26:13 AM PST by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies ]


To: MamaTexan
And government just kept trying, too.

Years ago I read an excellent commentary that said "In 1776, our Founders created a new form of government which had never existed before. Ever since, the Aristocracy as been trying to reimpose the old system."

That is what we have now. The Leadership of the Democrat party wants there to be only two classes of people; The Elite, and the peasants.

The Democrat Party, which runs most of the government, fancies itself as "those who know better". It also includes very wealthy and upper income class people, as well as the rich Hollywood Celebrity types.

All of these people see themselves as the nomenklatura, the "elite", the natural aristocracy, the people who OUGHT to be ruling the rest of us. They really do favor Monarchy/Aristocracy over a Free Republic.

That's what cracks me up about anyone quoting 'Sharswood's Blackstone'. George Sharswood decided to edit Blackstone's Commentaries in 1893...over 100 years after the Founders said the English common law was not adopted by the federal government and Tucker had already illustrated the parameters for English influence in the American States.

I believe there has been a lot of revision to our history. A lot of things seem to make a lot more sense when you ignore whatever happens to be the common narrative nowadays and look for motives and deeper meanings.

Thanks for the quotes by Wilson, BTW. I was reading more of his lectures yesterday, and discovered he could have some pretty salty language at times (LOL!).... but like the rest of them, his points were exceptionally clear.

Yes, Wilson is a good read, and he is exceptionally eloquent by today's standards. But then, so is everyone from that era. I am often just amazed at the clarity of thought you see in any of the writings from this time period.

315 posted on 02/04/2015 10:46:37 AM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies ]

To: MamaTexan
That's what cracks me up about anyone quoting 'Sharswood's Blackstone'. George Sharswood decided to edit Blackstone's Commentaries in 1893 . . .

Sharswood's Blackstone is cited in 1866 by the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, among a host of authorities listed, to illustrate the existing law in the U.S. recognized the English jus soli principle.

This was during the debate on the citizenship clause of the Civil Rights Act. It was stated repeatedly (as was true of the 14th Amendment) that the clause is simply declaratory of existing law. (Excerpt is from Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., lst Sess. 1832 (1866).

330 posted on 02/04/2015 1:33:02 PM PST by CpnHook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson