« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
TABLE OF CASES.
In this Table each case which has the names of two parties is entered twice, – that is to say, under both names, - except where these are identical. Ejectment cases are entered a third time, under the name of the fictitious party. As regards cases in the notes, mere citations are generally omitted.
53 n. 146 n.
Page Allen, Darcy v. 15 Darcy v. Allen
15 Am. Ins. Co. v. Canter 350 Davis, Tennessee v.
11 Day v. Savadge Application of Senate 181 Den d. Bayard v. Singleton
78 Dennison, Commonwealth of Ken.
Dorrance, Vanhorne's Lessee v. 94
165 Bain, Wells r.
354 n. Baker, United States v. 258
Dyke Board, K. v. Baltimore, Barney v.
350 n. Barney v. Baltimore
350 n. Bayard, Den d., r. Singleton
78 Bertholf v. O'Reilly
E. Blacker, McPherson v.
158 n. Blake, Loughborough v. 349 n. | Eakin v. Raub
133 Bonham's Case 48 n. Ellzey, Hepburn v.
348 Borden, Luther v. 192, 254 Engelbrecht, Clinton v.
357 Bowman v. Middleton Bremen, Garbade v. Krieger v.
149 Byrne, Adm’rs of, v. Adm’rs of Stewart
Ferreira, United States v. 105 n., 160
Fong Yue Ting v. United States 374 Callan v. Wilson
Forty-three Gallons, United States v. Campbell v. Hall
40 Canter, Am. Ins. Co. v. 350 Fredericks, Sproule v.
250 Caton, Commonwealth v. 55 Frierson, Collier v.
262 Cavendish, In the Matter of
12 Chic. & G. T. Ry. Co. r. Wellman 170 Chirac v. Chirac
373 n. Chisholm v. Georgia
G. Clinton v. Engelbrecht
357 Clymer, Norris 1.
145 n. Garbade v. Bremen Cohens v. Virginia
285 Geofroy v. Riggs Collier v. Frierson 262 Georgia, Chisholm v.
295 Commonwealth v. Caton 55 v. Stanton
201 Green v. 177 Gibbons v. Ogden
266, 269 v. Smith 155 n. Gillson, People v.
169 Commonwealth of Kentucky r. Den- Giozza v. Tiernan
158 n. nison 195 n. Godden v. Hales
29 Cooper v. Telfair 105 Gordon v. United States
188 Crowninshield, Sturges v. 268 | Green v. Commonwealth
146 n. 373 n.
50 n. 354 n.
S. Lechmere, Winthrop r.
34 Livingston, North River Steamboat Sanborn, In re
187 266 Sandford, Dred Scott v. v. Van Ingen 266 Saunders, Ogden v'.
155 n. Loan Association v. Topeka
169 Savadge, Day v. Logan v. United States
313 Scott, Dred, v. Sandford Louisiana, Hans v. 293 Serè v. Pitot
349 New Hampshire 2.
302 n. Ship-Money, Case of Loughborough v. Blake 349 n Siebold, Er parte
326 Luther v. Borden 192, 254 Singleton, Den d. Bayard v.
78 Sinking Fund Cases
155 n. Smith, Commonwealth v.
155 n. M. Sproule r. Fredericks
250 Stanton, Georgia v.
201 McBride, State v. 263 State ». McBride
203 M'Culloch v. Maryland 271 v. Wheeler
103 McPherson v. Blacker
158 n. Stewart, Adm’rs of, Adm’rs of Byrne Madison, Marbury v. 107
154 Marbury v. Madison 107 | Sturges r. Crowninshield
208 Martin v. Hunter's Lessee
123 Suffolk Insurance Co., Williams v. 258 Maryland, M'Culloch v.
271 Middleton, Bowman v. Mississippi v. Johnson
T. Monopolies, Case of
15 Mormon Church v. United States 361 Tavlor r. Place
159 Munn v. Illinois 170 | Telfair, Cooper v.
105 Tennessee v. Davis
316 Texas, United States v.
310 N. v. White
Thorpe v. Rut. & Burl. R. R. Co. 157 Neagle, In re 335 Tiernan, Giozza v
158 n. New Hampshire, Louisiana v. 302 n. | Ting, Fong Yue, 2. United States 374
United States v. Baker
Wellington et al., Pet'rs.
Wheeler, State v.
258 | White v. Hart 105 n., 160
Texas v. 374 Williams, Houston v. 373 n. Williams v. Suffolk Insurance Co.
188 Wilson, Callan v.
361 Winter, N. 0. v.
313 Woods's Appeal
361 191 n. 310
73 155 n.
170 228 163 259 302 184 258 358 350
Van Ingen, Livingston v. Virginia, Cohens v.
Yale Todd's Case
CASES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
CONSTITUTIONS OF GOVERNMENT. — THE THREE DEPARTMENTS. –
THE OFFICE OF THE JUDICIARY.
A CONSTITUTION has been well defined as “ L'ensemble des institutions et des lois fondamentales, destinées à règler l'action de l'administration et de tous les citoyens.” It is often, as in England, an unwritten body of custom, though, since the assertion of the “ rights of man” which preceded the French Revolution, the written enactment of such fundamental principles has been not uncommon, as well on the European continent as in America. A written constitution usually contains provisions which make innovation less easy than in the case of customary constitutions, such as that of England, any part of which may be modified by an ordinary Act of Parliament.? - HOLLAND, Elem. Jurisp. (6th ed.) 323.
In every form of government (Toliteia) there are three departments (uópia), and in every form the wise law-giver must consider, what, in respect to each of these, is for its interest. If all is well with these, all must needs be well with it, and the differences between forms of government are differences in respect to these. Or these three, one is the part which deliberates (rò Boulevóuevov) 8 about public affairs; the second
1 Ahrens, Cours, iii. p. 380.
2 Ahrens, Cours, iii. p. 381. Mr. Bryce has suggested the use of the terms “rigid” and “flexible” to express this distinction. See Dicey, Law of the Constitution, p. 84, and Professor Dicey's own instructive and ingenious applications of the distinctions, 16. pp. 114-125.
3 The Greek legislature of the present day, a single chamber, is called The Boulè. - ED.
VOL. I. -1