« ZurückWeiter »
There are also provisions made by legislation for the adjustment and disposition of every condition which may be presented in dealing with land, or which may arise in the disposition of land, either by rent, lease, sale, devise, descent, or in any other way.
In the adoption of such a system in our own State, there would of necessity arise difficulties in the way of adjusting the system to the constitutional limitations which now obtain. These difficulties are not insuperable, however, nor should they stand in the way of any development which would bring so much of practical good to the commonwealth. The details and methods for bringing about precise and lawful harmony between such a system and our present Constitution is not within the scope of this report. If the things to be obtained by the adoption of the Torrens System of land registration are, in the opinion of the Georgia Bar Association, of sufficient importance and dignity to demand its further attention and to receive its approval, there could be no wiser course adopted than to follow generally in the footsteps of some of the other States, upon the line of calling the attention of the General Assembly to this matter, and invoking from that branch of the government such action as would be appropriate to the disposition of this far-reaching matter. To that end, it is suggested that this body appoint a committee to appear before the General Assembly, now in session, and request that body to appoint a commission of three members from the House, and two from the Senate, and two from this Association, who shall be charged with the duty of investigating the Torrens System of Registration of Land Titles, with the further duty upon the part of said commission to report upon the advisability of adopting such system.
If the legislature should see fit to appoint such a commission, an opportunity would be afforded all the citizens of Georgia interested to be heard, and the views of the wisest and best of our citizens could be considered.
WASHINGTON DESSAU, Chairman,
SUNDAY AS VIEWED BY AMERICAN LAW. ☺
RICHARD D. MEADER,
Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Bar Association:
Sunday has long been known to the law. Constantine the Great, Emperor of the Roman Empire, a famous lawgiver of his day and a zealous Christian as well, did by edict, A.D. 321, command his entire empire, which at that time included very nearly all the civilized world, to observe and keep holy the Sabbath day in the following language:
"On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all work-shops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in the work of cultivation may fully and lawfully continue their pursuits, because it often happens that another day is not so suitable for grainsowing or for vine-planting, lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of Heaven should be lost."
This edict at the present day would no doubt be declared unconstitutional by the courts, as being class legislation and would be denounced on the hustings as a cheap bid for the Granger vote. Sunday was known to and well beloved by the Common Law
of England from the earliest times. There are on record many ancient Sabbatarian laws of England, commencing with the reign of King Ina, A. D. 688, and coming down to the time of King Canute, A. D. 1026, the latter also a very pious king and faithful Christian, long to be remembered as the king who in order to rebuke the fulsome flattery of his time-serving courtiers, who ascribed to him powers of a Diety over the elements, had his throne placed on the edge of the beach, as the tide was advancing landwards, and sitting on his throne with his false flatterers grouped about him, commanded the tide to stop, without result. What became of the offending courtiers history does not relate, but it is to be hoped that they met a punishment in proportion to their offending. · These various laws and edicts, enacted through this long period, agreed in prohibiting all worldly work on Sunday and in prescribing when this holy day should begin and end.
Edward the Confessor and his masterful successor, William the Conqueror, unlike in most respects, both prescribed that no courts should be held on Sunday. Hence Sunday was first called dies Dominicus, non juridicus. Coke says in 2d Institutes, p. 264, that this was the ancient law of England and extended as well to prohibiting the making of contracts on Sunday.
Hence it will be seen that these various enactments and edicts had, by the processes by which the Common Law was developed and built up, become a part of the Common Law of England.
In 1678 was passed by Parliament the Statute known as 29 Charles II. It has been stated that this is the statute after which most of the American Sunday statutes were modeled.
This statute of Charles II. (in the making of which no doubt Charles had but little part), was worded in part as follows:
"No tradesman, artificer, workman, laborer, or other person
whatsoever, shall do or exercise any worldly labor, business, or work of their ordinary calling on the Lord's day or any part thereof, works of necessity or charity only excepted.”
Another part prescribed that “No writ, process, order, judgment, warrant or decree should be served on the Lord's day, except in case of treason, felony or breach of the peace.”
The Act just quoted has been held by authority to be nothing more than an affirmance of the Common Law of England as it then stood. Chitty's Coll. Stat. 1039.
When the colonists came from England to America they brought with them their peculiar religious beliefs. Indeed, one of the remarkable things connected with the colonization of America by Englishmen is the fact that the people who first formed each colony were, for the most part, God-fearing, relig. ious people, and they came prepared to begin the practice and observance of their respective beliefs as soon as they landed.
The Pilgrims and Puritans have always been held up as the most conspicuous example of this fact. They were seeking, as the poetess hath it, for freedom to worship God. To repeat the time-honored pun, "When they landed at Plymouth Rock, they first fell on their knees, then on the aborigines.”
And as time went on, they looked about them and took notice that there were some among them who had departed somewhat from the rigorous articles of the Puritan faith.
Some they burned at the stake, as witches, at Salem; the Quakers were allowed to meditate on the evil of their ways while unwillingly sitting in undignified postures in the stocks, while the Baptists found themselves so unwelcome that they were fain to journey with Roger Williams to Rhode Island and the Providence plantations.
Thus did the early Pilgrims show the strength of their faith. They had left England because the rest of England would not