3 ms·

>"Unlawful acts, performed long enough and with sufficient vigor, are never enough to amend the law." Based on this logic, I'm sure that the USA will be paying

• dTal 6y ago
  "Benjamin Franklin stated that the destroyed tea must be paid for, all ninety thousand pounds[citation needed] (which, at two shillings per pound, came to £9,000, or £1.15 million [2014, approx. $1.7 million US]).[76] Robert Murray, a New York merchant, went to Lord North with three other merchants and offered to pay for the losses, but the offer was turned down.[77]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party#Reaction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party#Reaction
• Nasrudith 6y ago
  They are safe on a technicality there as they never try to claim continuity with old laws and new laws. Even if dumping the shipments of foreign merchants is illegal under both sets of laws or indeed copied verbatim it is breaking of the old set of law and not the new law as it wasn't "born" yet.
• TMWNN 6y ago
  The Treaty of Paris (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Paris_(1783) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Paris_(1783)) ending the Revolutionary War, and Jay Treaty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Treaty) together settled all such outstanding debts.