GENERAL PRINCIPLES 5 
nation. For example: There is in the Revised 
Statutes of Illinois an act prohibiting the importa- 
tion of Texas cattle into the state from the first 
day of March to the first day of October. This 
law, originally passed in 1867, was intended to 
prevent the spread of the Texas cattle fever. A 
similar law in Missouri was pronounced unconsti- 
tutional by the Supreme Court of the United States 
because it violated the right of Congress over 
interstate commerce. Since then the Illinois 
court has similarly decided that the Illinois stat- 
ute is unconstitutional also.? This act should have 
been repealed by the legislature. It remains as 
one of the old curiosities. It is not law, though 
it has the appearance of being such. 
Statutes are enactments made by the legislative 
body having jurisdiction. The field for statutes 
is such subjects as need a definite settlement, 
but the decision relative to which may need to 
be revised. The statute must not violate consti- 
tutional provisions. Otherwise, so long as the 
law stands, whatever it commands must be done, 
and it must be done in the way it is thus ordered. 
The Texas law ordered that a butcher must 
report to the County Commissioner’s Court at 
each term the number and description of all 
cattle slaughtered by him since the last report. 
The fact that a butcher presented such a report, 
duly made out and sworn to, at a subsequent term 
did not excuse his failure to comply with the law.’ 
1H. & St. J. B. RB. Co. v. Erickson, 91 Ill. 613; Jarvis v. 
Husen, 5 Otto, 465. Riggin, 94 Ill. 164. 
2Salzenstein v. Mavis, 91 3Bruns v. State, 33 Tex. Cr. 
Til. 391; GC. & A. RB. R. Co. v. 415, 26 8. W. 722. 
