This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1872 edition. Excerpt: ...public safety" called for emancipation--right of eminent domain annexed to sovereign power, and by its exercise private property can be disposed of without compensation.--Vattel, 112. The sovereign takes by prerogative, and not by title paramount.--Black Com., Book 2, p. 239. 4. Government interference in the execution of contracts does not impair their validity or obligation.--Atkinson vs. Ritchie, 10 East., 530; Sjoerds vs. Lmcomb, l6 East., 201; Bright vs. Page, 2 Bos. & Pull., 295; Hardy vs. Clark, 8 Term, 259; Caradine vs. Jane, Ibid; Boyles vs. Fettyplace, 8 Mass., 330; Toutong vs. Hub-Columbia, April, 1870. bard, 3 Bos. & Pull., 291; Rose vs. McLeod, 2 Bay., 108; Stent vs. Bailis, "2 P. 1V., 217; Loss produced by vis mnjor fulls on vendee or lessee.--Story Eii. Jurisp., 101, et seq.; Bullock vs Dormit, 6 Term, 650; White vs. Nutt, 1 P. W., 61; Mortimer vs. Copper, Bro. Rep., 156; Paine vs. Miller, 6 Ves., Jr., 349; Rugg vs. Minott, 11 East., 210; Story Eq. Jurisp., 101,1307; Sugdea on Vendors, 174; 2 Powell on Contracts, 61, 70. These cases afford analogies. 5. The State Convention of 1868 acted on the belief South Carolina was not a "State of the Union." Congress did not indubitably speak out.--McPherson's Hand-book of Politics for 1868, pp. 191, 837, where Reconstruction Acts collected. The point settled 1869, in the ease of The State of Texa vs. White and othern.--Am. Law Rep., Lead Cases, 2 V., p. 84. The highest law tribunal in America held, notwithstanding the rebellion, Texas was at all times a "State of the Union." " No State shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts."--10 Sec., Art. 1, Const. U.S., and Art. 6; Rutland vs. Copes, 15 Rich. Law, 116; Bank of Dubuque vs. State of Iowa, 12...