“He [Rawle] is a London trained lawyer (London only teaches British law)”
You know who else were London trained lawyers?
These Framers of the Constitution.
John Blair of Virginia studied law at London’s Middle Temple.
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, of South Carolina studied law London’s Middle Temple, attended Christ Church Christ Church College, Oxford, where he heard the lectures of the legal authority Sir William Blackstone and graduated in 1764.
John Rutledge of South Carolina studying law at London’s Middle Temple in 1760
William Houston of Georgia legal training at Inner Temple in London.
John Dickinson of Delaware In 1753, Dickinson went to England to continue his studies at London’s Middle Temple.
Of the remaining lawyers at the Convention most were trained in the 1760s so they would have been trained in English Common Law as it applied to the American colonies.
“His father [Rawle’s] was a British Loyalist”
No. His father, Francis Rawle died in 1761. His step-father, Samuel Shoemaker was a loyalist.
“That case referenced with William Lewis and Jared Ingersoll is “Negress Flora v Joseph Graisberry”.”
Also often cited as Negro Flora v Joseph Graisberry.
Rawle argued that the 1790 Pennsylvania Constitution outlawed slavery.
“Accordingly they arranged the famous case of Negro Flora v. Joseph Graisberry, and brought it up to the Supreme Court of the state in 1795. It was not settled there, but went up to what was at that time the ultimate judicial authority in Pennsylvania, the High Court of Errrors and Appeals. Some seven years after the question had first been brought to law this august tribunal decided after lengthy and able argument that negro slavery did legally exist before the adoption of the constitution of 1790, and that it had not been abolished thereby.”
In Massachusetts the same argument had been successfully used in Littleton v Tuttle, 4 Massachusetts 128
And it was a bullsh*t claim when Massachusetts did it too. It was a deliberate misrepresentation of what the framers of the Massachusetts constitution meant when they borrowed that "all men are created equal" line from the Declaration.
John Blair of Virginia studied law at London’s Middle Temple.
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, of South Carolina studied law London’s Middle Temple, attended Christ Church Christ Church College, Oxford, where he heard the lectures of the legal authority Sir William Blackstone and graduated in 1764.
John Rutledge of South Carolina studying law at London’s Middle Temple in 1760
William Houston of Georgia legal training at Inner Temple in London.
John Dickinson of Delaware In 1753, Dickinson went to England to continue his studies at London’s Middle Temple.
And they went through the process of creating American law (based on Vattel's ideas) while William Rawle did not. Notice the dates they graduated versus when William Rawle graduated? *HE* was not exposed to any of the cauldron of creation in regards to US Independence.
Yes, the Nation kept up the English law practices for everything that was not expressly rejected by American principles of government. Do you know the thing which was *MOST* rejected by the principles of American governance?
Being a "subject."
We rejected the idea of "subject", and we rejected the foundation on which "subject" was based.
Rawle argued that the 1790 Pennsylvania Constitution outlawed slavery.
He also argued that being born on the soil made someone a "citizen", and therefore all slaves born in America were free.