Wynehamer v People.pdf - The University of Texas at Austin

ALBANY, MAECH, 1856. 393Wynehamer against The People.violation of no existing law—a law which destroys or impairsthe lawful private contracts of citizens — a law that makes aman a judge in his own case—a law that takes property fromA and gives it to B. It is against all reason and j ustice fora people to entrust a legislature with such powers, andtherefore it cannot be presumed that they have done it.The legislature cannot change innocence into guilt, or punishinnocence as a crime, or violate the right of antecedent lawfulprivate contract, or the right of private property.'" ChiefJustice Marshall said, in Fletcher v. Peck (6 Cranch, 135):"It may be doubted whether the nature of society andof government does not prescribe some limits to the legislativepower; and if any be prescribed, where are theyto be found, if the property of an individual, fairly and honestlyacquired, may be seized without compensation ?" [See also DashV. Van Kleeck, 7 Johns., 477; Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill, 146—per Bronson, J. ; Goshen v. Stonington, 4 Conn., 225—per Hosmer, J.)I entertain no doubt that, aside from the special limitationsof the constitution, the legislature cannot exercisepowers which are in their nature essentially judicial orexecutive. These are, by the constitution, distributed toother departments of the government. It is only the" legislative power" which is vested in the senate andassembly. But where the constitution is silent, and thereis no clear usurpation of the powers distributed to otherdepartments, I think there would be great difficulty andgreat danger in attempting to define the limits of thispower. Chief Justice Marshall said (Fletcher v. Peck, supra):" How far the power of giving the law may involve everyother power, in cases where the constitution is silent, neverhas been, and perhaps never can be, definitely stated."That very eminent judge felt the difficulty; but the dangerwas less apparent then than it is now, when theories, allegedto be founded in natural reason or inalienable rights, butsubversive of the just and necessary powers of government.