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

To: Ladysforest

There was no US common law in 1787 which would define the meaning of legal terms as understood in 1787. It was ENGLISH common law that formed the language of the law.


562 posted on 03/09/2013 4:12:35 PM PST by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

I have seen over and over a distinction made in period writings. So, just WHEN was common law integrated into American law, and just WHEN did we cease using English law? According to you?


571 posted on 03/09/2013 4:23:10 PM PST by Ladysforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 562 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers
There was no US common law in 1787 which would define the meaning of legal terms as understood in 1787. It was ENGLISH common law that formed the language of the law.

And wouldn't you know the English Common Law book which defined "natural born subject" used the Vattel Definition?

This was from John Adam's own personal copy of English law, by the way.

618 posted on 03/09/2013 5:39:50 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 562 | 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