JB/042/442/001

Click Here To Edit

1824. July 11
Constitutional Code.

+ Supposed Superseded.

1o
Ch. XII Judiciary collectively
(1 §.22 Preinterpretative function.

1o Supposed Superseded

§.22. Judge's preinterpretative function

1
Art. 1. Preinterpretative
function. By any Judge
Immediate, in due subjection
to Legislator's
authority, without suit
commenced, it is performable
1. By declaring the meaning
of a certain text
of the law to be so and
so: to wit so clearly
that for making it clear
no alternative is necessary.
The interpretation is
here declarative

2
Art. 2. By proposing
for consideration of the
Legislature an alternative
addition, substantive
or substitutive.
This meliorative-suggestive

3
Art. 3. Subject of a
meliorative-suggestive
interpretation may be
1. The matter of the
task has what is
meant to gi produce an effect different
from that of the original
meliorative suggestive alternative
2. The form . Here what
is meant is to produce
the effect meant by the
original, but by words
more appropriate to
more clear of ambiguity
and obscurity related
and in capacity of melioration expository
or explanatory.

Art. 1 Interpretative of the law by the authority of a Art.1 Preinterpretative function. Cases in which the By any Immediate
Judge subject to in due subjection to the authority of the Legislature
is preferred in effect any suit commenced
this performable function is performable in either of two ways

1. By declaring the words taking a portion of the text of thematter of law
and declaring the meaning of it to be so and so: but this so
manifestly and clearly, that for the giving expression to that same meaning
no words required to be added to or subtracted to, is subtracted
from the words that are already in it, in this case the interpretation
may be termed declarative.

2. By taking a portion of the matter text of the law, and
proposing to be added to or substituted, or subtracted from it certain
particular words, in the view that the alteration so proposed may
receive the sanction of the Legislature: in this case the interpretation,
is that which as per §. 17 is termed meliorative-suggestive.

3. In the case of a meliorative-suggestive Judicial interpretation
the m supposed meliorativesuggestive may regard either the
matter or the form: In regards the matter in so far as
the should the proposed amendment be adopted, the import
of the law would be different from that which the words as
were, it is supposed meant for expression: in this case, the melioration
they stand, express. It regards the form only, in so far as
suggested is termed explanatory alternative. It regards the form only, in so
far as should the proposed amendment be adopted, the import of the law
would not be different from that which the words as they stand,
were it is supposed, intended to express: in this case; the
melioration suggested is termed explanatory or expository — or explanatory
of clearness, that is to say either ambiguity or obscurity, or
reference relation had to the capacity of readers, is
[however covertly yet] necessarily imputed, to the text of the law.
In the case of addition, this is either of the amendment if adopted or grafted as it were on the text of the law. So in
case of substitution, the correspondent portion having been previously proved

Identifier: | JB/042/442/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 42.
Date_1	1824-07-11	Marginal Summary Numbering	1-3
Box	042	Main Headings	constitutional code
Folio number	442	Info in main headings field	constitutional code
Image	001	Titles	judges preinterpretative function
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	e1
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks
Marginals	jeremy bentham	Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public	[[notes_public::"supposed superseded / supposed superseded" [notes in bentham's hand]]]	ID Number	13365
Box Contents