172
��DECISIONS OF CHIEF JUSTICE SMITH.
��DECISIONS OF CHIEF JUSTICE SMITH.
��[Smith's Decisions. Reports of the cases decided in the superior and supreme judicial courts of New Hampshire from 1802 to 1816, with opinions in the circuit and district courts of New Hampshire, with extracts from the treatise on pro- hate law, &c, hy Chief Justice Smith. Selected, edited and annotated by his son, Ex-Judge Jeremiah Smith. Bos- ton : Published by Little. Brown & Co. From the press of John Wilson & Son, 1S79.1
This volume is a mirror of the law of "the olden time," in its best estate. Chief Justice Smith was the pioneer in the field of jurisprudence in New Eng- land as Kent was in New York.
Kent at thirty-four, in February, 1798, became puisne Judge of the su- preme court of New York, and at forty- two, in July, 1806, its chief justice.
Parsons at fifty-six, in July, 1806, was made chief justice of the supreme judicial court of Massachusetts.
Smith, after serving four terms in ' congress, and as judge of probate in the county of Rockingham, was at for- ty-one, on Feb. 20, 1801, made Judge of the circuit court of the United States for the district of New Hampshire ; and on May 17, 1802, chief justice of the highest court in this state. He held this position until 1809, when he was over-persuaded by certain of his politi- cal friends, among whom was Daniel Webster, to abandon it for that of gov- ernor, because the supposed interests of the federal party required the nomi- nation of its most available candidate.
On July 12, i8i3,he again became chief justice, and held that place until June 29, 1 81 6, when he was swept from it by the political revolution of that year.
Prior to the appointment of Judge Smith in 1802, the law in this state as a science had no existence. For this there are two principal reasons :
1. Under the proprietary govern- ment of Mason, we had no law of our
��own, either statute or common. As late as 1660, Mason claimed that New Hampshire and Maine were governed by the law of the mother country. Portsmouth, Dover, Exeter and Hamp- ton were little principalities, and did substantially as they pleased. The province as such had no existence be- fore the union with Massachusetts, in 1 64 1, nor until after the forced separa- tion in 1679.
The first code of laws enacted in this province in 1679-1680 was in substance a re-enactment of the Mosaic code, was sent to the mother country for royal sanction, and was disallowed by the Privy Council as many others after- wards were.
During the reign of James II. the laws were silent. A trinity of pro-con- suls ruled and robbed, the people. In 1692, seventy years after the settle- ment, we were entirely destitute of what is called written law. Many statutes were enacted after this time which nev- er received the sanction of the king and council.
No laws were published until 1716, when an edition of sixty pages folio was published in Boston. In 1718, seventy-two pages were added, and in 1 719, twenty-four pages more. After this, and before 1728, sixteen pages more were added, making in all a vol- ume of one hundred and seventy-two pages. There was no printing press in this province till 1756. An edition of the statutes was published here in 1760, but discarded as not authentic, and a new and carefully printed edition was published in 1 7 7 1 . After the revolu- tion, the statutes were printed in folio till 1 789, when an octavo edition, con- taining the public and some of the pri- vate laws, was published by order of the legislature. The dissatisfaction of the public compelled the publication of anew and revised edition in 1792, which was followed by the edition of
�� �
