...physically impossible to perform. Besides, said this court in United States 'v. Kirby, 7 Wall. 482, 486, " General terms should be so limited in their application...law in such cases should prevail over its letter." See also Carlisle v. United States, 16 Wall. 147, 153. So in Perry v. Skinner, 2 M. & W. 471, it was...

...intendit aliquid impossibile. In United States v. Kirby, (7 Wall., 486,) the Supreme Court say : " General terms should be so limited in their application...law in such cases should prevail over its letter." Considering, therefore, the specific purpose of the Act itself, the limitations of the treaty, the...

...physically impossible to perform. Besides, said this court in United States v. Kirby, 7 Wall. 482, 486, " General terms should be so limited in their application...law in such cases should prevail over its letter." See also Carlisle v. United States, 16 Wall. 147, 153. So in I\-n,y v. Skinner, 2 M. & W. 471, it was...

...its language. All l*ws should receive a sensible construction. General terms should l 8 Law Hep. 77. be so limited in their application as not to lead...law in such cases should prevail over its letter. The common sense of man approves the judgment mentioned by Puffendorf, that the Bolognian law which...

...congress unless clearly manifested by its language. § 887. Rule fur the construction of statutes. All laws should receive a sensible construction. General...an absurd consequence. It will always, therefore, Ь.э presumed that the legislature intended exceptions to its language which would avoid results of...

...supplementary or exceptive to the main provisions. United States v. Jackson,* 10 NY Leg. Obs., 451. § 2770. All laws should receive a sensible construction. General...injustice, oppression or an absurd consequence. It will be presumed in such cases that the legislature intended exceptions to its language which would avoid...

...which it was physically impossible to perform. "Besides," said this court in US v. Kirby, 7 Wall. 486, "general terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression, oran absurd consequence. It will always, therefore, be presumed that the legislature intended exceptions...

...argument of a general intent. [GRIER and CLIPFORD, JJ., dissenting.] Poor v. Considine, 6 Wai. 458. 15. All laws should receive a sensible construction :...application as not to lead to injustice, oppression, or absurd consequences ; and it will always be presumed thut the legislature intended exceptions to its...

...intendit aliquid impossibile." The reason of the law in such cases should prevail over its letter, and general terms should be so limited in their application...to injustice, oppression, or an absurd consequence, the presumption being indulged that the lawmakers intended exceptions to language which otherwise would...

...statute is to be interpreted, not only by its exact words, bufalso by its apparent general purpose. General terms should be so limited in their application...to injustice, oppression, or an absurd consequence. United States v. Freeman^ How. 556; United States v. Kirby,1 Wall. 482; United States v. Saunders,...