★ Keep up to date with the latest news - subscribe to the Transcribe Bentham newsletter; Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
6)
Construction
named, and Bishops being of a still higher order.
This is to say, that if the legislature will put use in
general words, they (the Judges) will pay no regard to
them. When did the Legislature ever tell them, that
such words should operate downwards only and not
upwards? Or who can be sure of telling whether an assemblage
of articles are put or no in gradation? and who can be sure
in such an assemblage of what is superior and what
is inferior? Suppose Deans had been omitted, and
Prebendaries had been the first word, would Canons
have been to stand included or excluded? What is remarkable
is that the Statute here serving made to serve as an example,
is the same that stood as an example of the
preceding rule; and there our Author speaks of it
to extend to Bishops. On our Author himself Nothing is here chargeable
on our Author except the inconsistency just mentioned:
but let me lament let us lament however the condition of the Law, thus
corrupted by the subtleties of its professors. Tis
to such construction such as this, that we owe in great measure those
never ending strict never-ending specifications, with which under the load
of which all legal instruments are overwhelmed.
The third rule is, that "Penal Statutes must be construed
strictly". F A rule, the application of which
has been and to this hour is the subject of more constant controversy, than perhaps
of any in the whole circle of the Law.
We may gather a little more light concerning it
Identifier: | JB/028/105/002 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 28.
|
|||
---|---|---|---|
not numbered |
|||
028 |
comment on the commentaries |
||
105 |
construction |
||
002 |
|||
text sheet |
4 |
||
recto |
f5 / b6 / f7 / b8 |
||
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::[gr with crown motif] propatria [britannia motif]]] |
||
9370 |
|||