of judicature in America, and therefore they might properly be said to give 
laws to America, for they determined in the last instance. A Pennsylvania act 
recited that the common law took place in America, but that the statute law 
did not unless specially named. This act was confirmed by the crown, so that 
it might be said to be the law of America. 330 A South Carolina act made 
several acts of Parliament of force, declaring the remainder impracticable for 
the province. 331 The judgment and authority of Parliament also favored 
this doctrine. The act of 4 George I, c. 11, for transportation of felons contained 
a specific extension to all the American plantations. If Parliament had thought 
that the act of itself extended to America, such clause would never have been 
inserted. Statutes had a local obligation, and many English statutes were passed 
before the discovery of America. What was not the object of the statute at the 
time of making could not by any construction be comprehended within it. 
The statute of 18 Edward I relating to the manner of levying fines was mentioned 
as an example of this doctrine. 332 A 1730 opinion of the crown law 
officers that no fines or recoveries in England could bar the entail of plantation 
lands without colonial legislation to that effect was cited as supporting the doctrine 
333 The Chief Justice then concluded discussion of this point with hope 
that he had satisfactorily shown "that the statute laws of England does not 
extend to the plantations unless specially named, and that there is more force 
and weight in the acts passed by our General Assembly than at first view may 
be apprehended." ssi 
Michie then entered upon a discussion of the meaning of "repugnancy" in 
the phrase "repugnant to the laws of England." 
Now by repugnancy, I apprehend is meant a direct opposition or contrariety as in 
pleading. If the matter all aledged be not directly contrary to what went before, 
'tis surplusage and not repugnancy. If it vary's only 'tis called a departure. I am 
of opinion that the laws of the plantations may differ and vary from the laws of 
England and yet not be repugnant. The King's letters patent or charter of King 
Charles the Second say that the Assembly shall pass laws, as near as may be agreable 
to the laws of England, not that they shall be exactly the same. 335 
To illustrate this, several laws passed in other colonies under the same restrictions 
and confirmed by the crown were cited. This was alleged to be the 
Particularly Mentioned" (2 Stat, at Large So. 
Car., 401-16). 
330 ihid., 233. The act referred to was presumably 
the 1718 Act for the Advancement 
of Justice, and more certain Administration 
thereof {Charter and haws Prov. Pa., 371), 
confirmed May 26, 1719 (1 Charters and 
Acts of Assembly Pa. [1762], 74). 
332 MS Journal So. Car. Court Common Pleas, 
1754-63. 233-34- 
333 gee 2 Chalmers, Opinions, 174. 
834 MS Journal So. Car. Court Common Pleas, 
1754-63, 234- 
331 See the 1712 "Act to Put in Force in 
this Province the Several Statutes of the 
Kingdom of England or South Britain, Therein 
335 Ibid., 234.