They assert that, by simply retaining the name, while altering the thing,--or by simply giving an old name to a new thing,--congress has power to utterly abolish the contract which the parties themselves entered into, and substitute for it any such new and different one, as they (congress) may choose to substitute.
Spooner critiques Congress's ability to redefine contracts by merely changing the terms while keeping the name.
Share
More from Lysander Spooner
They were even allowed to grant pardon to criminals, and to correct by their clemency the rigors of justice.
It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent.
In that case the trial is really a trial by the government, and not by the jury.
The answer is, that they are as reliable for that purpose as are the majority; they are as much presumed to have associated, and are as likely to have associated, for that object, as are the majority; and they have as much interest in such…