Summary

Nathan Clifford Mount Pleasant v. Beckwith — Opinion of the Court

Neither argument nor authority is necessary to prove that a State legislature cannot pass a valid law impairing the obligations of a contract, as that general proposition is universally admitted. Contracts under the Constitution are as sacred as the Constitution that protects them from infraction, and yet the defence in this case, if sustained, will establish the proposition that the effect of State legislation may by such as to deprive a party of all means of sustaining an action of any kind for their enforcement.
Source: Wikisource

Nathan Clifford Mount Pleasant v. Beckwith — Opinion of the Court

Instead of that, the constant practice is to divide large municipalities and to consolidate small ones, or set off portions of territory from one and annex it to another, to meet the wishes of the residents or to promote the public interests as understood by the legislature,-it being everywhere understood that the legislature possesses the power to make such alterations and to apportion the common property and burdens as to them may seem just and equitable.
Source: Wikisource

Nathan Clifford Mount Pleasant v. Beckwith — Opinion of the Court

Institutions of the kind, whether called cities, towns, or counties, are the auxiliaries of the State in the important business of municipal rule; but they cannot have the least pretension to sustain their privileges or their existence upon any thing like a contract between themselves and the legislature of the State, because there is not and cannot be any reciprocity of stipulation between the parties, and for the further reason that their objects and duties are utterly incompatible with every thing partaking of the nature of compact.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature