retro-active. (1 Bl. Com. 45-'6; 1 Tuck Com. 3, B. I; Elliott's Ex'or v. Lyell, 3 Call, 277; Com'th v. Hewet, 2 Hen. & M. 181; Gaskins v. Com'th, 1 Call, 197; Baugher v. Nelson, 9 Gill, 299; Potter's Dwar. Stats. 162-3, & seq., and n (9)); W. C. 1. The several classes of Retrospective Laws. The classes of retrospective laws include, (1), Retrospective laws touching crimes; (2), Retrospective laws touching civil rights; and (3), Retrospective laws touching civil remedies; W. C. 1. Retrospective Laws touching Crimes. These are called ex post facto laws; they are laws which make an act punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable when committed; or which change the rules of evidence so that less or different testimony is required to convict. (Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cr. 87; Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wal. 277; Synops. Crim. L. 8.) Ex post facto laws are prohibited both to the States and to Congress. (Va. Const. 1869, Art. V, § 14; U. S. Const. Art. I, §x, 1; Id. § ix, 3; Federalist, Nos. 44, 84; 2 Stor. Const. § 1373, 1345; Ex-parte Garland, 4 Wal. 333; Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wal. 277.) 2h. Retrospective Laws, touching Civil Rights. Laws impairing the obligation of contracts are prohibited to the States by the Federal Constitution, and to Virginia by that of the State. (U. S. Const. Art. I, x, 1; Va. Const. 1869, Art. V, § 14; Hepburn v. Griswold, 8 Wal. 603; Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wal. 457; Homestead Cases, 22 Grat. 266; Antoni v. Wright, Id. 833; Gunn v. Barry, 15 Wal. 610.) V. Other retrospective laws touching rights are objectionable, and they are never construed retrospectively, unless in pursuance of express words; but they are not void. (Baugher v. Nelson, 9 Gill, 299; Elliott's Ex'or Lyell, 3 Call, 279; Com'th v. Hewet, 2 Hen. & M. 181; Gaskins v. Com'th, 1 Call, 197; Day v. Pickett, 4 Munf. 109; Satterlee v. Mathewson, 2 Pet. 380; Bac. Abr. Stat. (C.); Drehman v. Stifle, 8 Wal. 603, and cases cited; Watson & als. v. Mercer, 8 Pet. 110; Balt. & Susq'h R. R. Co. v. Nesbit & als., 10 How. 401-22; Duval v. Malone, 14 Grat. 28.) 3. Retrospective Laws touching Civil Remedies. Retrospective laws touching civil remedies are not only admitted to be valid, but are comparatively free from objection, unless they materially affect the obli gation of contracts, in which case they are void. The reason why retrospective laws touching remedies are viewed with so much more leniency than when they relate to rights seems to be that, in the nature of things, remedies must be frequently changed in order to subserve the convenience of society; and if the practitioner were obliged to remember what remedy was applicable, having reference to the date of the cause of action, greater embarrassments would result than from allowing the statute which alters a remedy to have a retro-active effect. (Bronson v. Kinzie & als., 1 How. 311; McCracken v. Haywood, 2 How. 645; Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy, 4 Wal. 548; Quackenbush v. Danks, 1 Denio, 128; 3 Do. 594; State v. Carew, 13 Richardson (Law), 506; Taylor v. Stearns & als., 18 Grat. 244, 262, 272.) But even as to remedies, a retrospective effect is not allowed to any law, unless such effect be clearly contemplated by the legislature. (Baugher v. Nelson, 9 Gill, 299; Elliott's Ex'or v. Lyell, 3 Call, 279, & seq.; Bac. Abr. Stat. (C.); Duval v. Malone, 14 Grat. 28.) 28. The time whence Laws take effect; W. C. 1h. Doctrine at Common Law. Statutes took effect, at common law, from the first day of the session of parliament at which they were enacted, unless another day were named. (Rex v. Thurston, 1 Lev. 91; Latless & als. v. Holmes, 4 T. R. 660; Bac. Abr. Stat. (C.).) 2h. The modern English Rule. Statutes take effect from the time they receive the Royal assent, if no other day is specified. (Stat. 33 George III, c. 13; 1 Bl. Com. 185, n (77).) 3. Rule in Virginia. Statutes take effect from 1 July ensuing their enactment, if no other day be specified. (V. C. 1873, ch. 15, § 3.) But generally it is specified that they shall be in force from the day of their passage, which it is presumed means their approval by the Governor, or their enactment over his veto. (Va. Const. 1869, Art. IV, § 8.) 4h. Rule in respect to United States Statutes. They take effect from the time they receive the President's approval, or are passed over his veto, if no other day is specified. (1 Bright. Dig. 846, § 4; Id. 20, §1.) 3. Mode of Publication of Laws; W. C. 1. Mode of publication, at Common Law. Before the invention of printing, laws were pub lished by the sheriff of every county (in pursuance of the king's writ, sent at the end of every session, together with a transcript of the acts), by proclaiming them at his county court, and keeping them there, for copies to be made by all who chose. Since the invention of printing, by publication by the king's printer, and distribution of the printed copies through the realm. (1 Bl. Com. 185, and n (78).) 2h. Mode of publication in Virginia. In colonial times, copies of the statutes were read publicly, on the first day of the "mounthlie corts," and were kept in those courts to be read by all who de sired it. (1 Hen. Stats. 177.) At present printed copies are distributed to every judge, justice, and clerk of any court in the State; to every attorney for the Commonwealth, and to every sheriff and sergeant, besides to a great number of other public officers, and public institutions. (V. C. 1873, ch. 15, § 4 to 14.) 3. Mode of publication of the United States Statutes. The Statutes of the United States are published under direction of the Secretary of State, in one newspaper of the District of Columbia, and in not more than two in each State and Territory, and pamphletcopies distributed to the various officers of the United States, and amongst the several States and Territories in proportion to the number of their representatives in Congress. (1 Bright Dig. 20 to 22, § 1, 4 to 6.) 4. By the law-making power in a State; W. C. 18. The Nature of Society, and of Civil Government. Society was ordained by God, who created mankind with such wants and affinities that they cannot exist without it. And as society cannot exist without restraints, and some agency to enforce them, God ordained government also. (1 Bl. Com. 47-48; Exod. xviii. 20; Deut. xvi. 18-20; Prov. viii. 15; Rom. xiii. 1-4). 2. The qualities which ought to characterize Govern ment. Government ought to possess wisdom to discern the real interest of the community; goodness to endeavor to pursue it; and power to carry such knowledge and intention into effect. (1 Bl. Com. 48.) 38. The different Forms of Government; W. C. 1. The Simple Forms of Government. 1 Bl. Com. 49, &c.; W. C. 1'. Democracy. Where the government is lodged in an assembly consisting of all the free members of the community. Abounds in honesty of intention (towards itself), and in patriotic zeal, but is wanting in wisdom to devise, and in energy to execute. (1 BI. Com. 49.) 21. Aristocracy. Where the government is lodged, not by delegation, but by inherent authority, in a counsel, composed of select members. Excels in wisdom of design, but is wanting in honesty of purpose, and in vigor of execution. (1 Bl. Com. 49, 50.) 31. Monarchy. Where all power is entrusted to a single person. Distinguished for vigor and concentration of purpose, but is apt to be deficient in honesty of design, and in wise providence. (1 Bl. Com 49, 50.) 2h. The Mixed Forms of Government; W. C. 1'. The English Constitution; 1 Bl. Com. 50, 51. W. C. 1. Element of Monarchy. The King. 2. Element of Aristocracy. 3k. Element of Democracy. The House of Commons, constituting the Representative-feature-the modern substitute for Democracy, and divested of several of its defects. 2. The American Constitutions; W. C. 1. Element of Monarchy. The President, and Governors of States. 2. Element of Aristocracy. Wholly wanting. 3. Element of Democracy. The Chambers of Legislature, embracing the representative feature; and divided into two bodies (sometimes, as in Congress, based on different principles), whereby the undue superiority which naturally attaches to the law-making power is counteracted, greater deliberation is secured, and the representation of different interests may be obtained. 4. The obligation of every society to cause the best laws possible to be enacted. Every State is bound to preserve and perfect itself. (Vat. B. I. § 14 to 37.) 2d. The several parts of a Law; W. C. 1o. Declaratory and Directory parts. 1 Bl. Com. 53 to 55. 2o. Remedial part. 1 Bl. Com. 56. 3. Vindicatory part. Containing the sanction, which is always necessary to cause obedience, and proposing punishment, rather than rewards. (1 Bl. Com. 56-'7.) 3. The Obligation to obey the Laws. It is a conscientious obligation, whether the law relate to a thing malum prohibitum, or malum in se; for without obedience, society (which is a divine ordinance) cannot exist. (1 Bl. Com. 58, and n (8).) And this deduction of reason is confirmed by the Scripture precepts, "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake," (1 Pet. ii. 13); "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God," (Rom. xiii. 1); "Wherefore, ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake," (Rom. xiii. 5.) 4. The Interpretation of Laws; W. C. 1o. The Method of Interpretation employed in the Roman Law. By reference to the Prince, who was the law-giver. This is at war with the just and necessary distribution of powers in a well-ordered government, and is the essence of tyranny. (Montesq. Sp. of L., B. XI, c. VI.; Va. Const. 1869, Art. II.) 2o. The signs whereby to interpret the will of the law-giver. 1 Bl. Com. 69; W. C. 1. The Words. Words are to be taken in their usual and popular sense, except when they are technical, and then according to the acceptation of the learned in the art. (1 Bl. Com. 59.) 2. The Context. The context is very important in ascertaining the meaning. Thus the preamble often helps the construction, as do other parts of the same law, or other laws in pari materia. (1 Bl. Com. 60; Bac. Abr. Stat. (I). 3; Dillard v. Tomlinson, 1 Munf. 206; Ailesbury v. Patteson, 1 Dougl. 27.) |