JB/050/056/001

Click Here To Edit Judicial Interprets to be certified. PROMULGATION NOTORIETY COMPOSIT. COMMON LAW:

+ 11.G.3.c.1.
A recent case that has d happened to attract
the attention of the Public, will serve very
well to illustrate what has I propose been proposed.

An Act is passed prohibiting persons of a certain
description from having in possession a certain
commodity beyond a certain amount, under
a specific as well as a pecuniary forfeiture +.

A person of the description in question contravenes
the Act: but it so happens that the in the particular: and seizure is made
commodity in question of the prohibited over-plus
but it so happens that the commodity
in question at the time of seizure has inextricably mingled
with another quantity commodity not included in
the prohibition, & consequently not liable
to seizure. The owner taking advantage of
this, refuses to submitt to withstands opposes the seizure: & upon

---page break---

2

an indictment & case stated it is determined
that the seizure that the opposition was criminal or <add> unwarrantable </add> under the circumstances was
lawful. # # Sh1.v.Ld Jst. Mawbey. and consequently the opposition is not

Now this decision one sees is a polychristo
applicable to all cases of specific forfeiture
where the thing forfeitable is inextricably
mingled with another - It was allways implicitly
contained in clauses or specific inflicting such a
forfeiture: but never expressly announced
till by this decison, and that then in this law not of
original enactment, but of interpretation:
But as the interpretation is more just than it
is obvious, there is as much reason, why it should
be notified undergo an express notification as why many others
should that have. As it is not obvious, by men
flattering themselves with being in such a way as this for to
the Law, may be led into transgressions upon
which they could not have ventured if they

---page break---

3

had known that the expedient would not save
them + + v.a Story from Paris in the Ann. Register 1771. p.136. of the Tax on Hogs brought into Paris at so much per Head. They were brought in without Heads.
this is one mischief: and of these men
some being detached; would prove too cunning
for themselves: and this is another mischief.

To It is therefore for the purpose on obviating those therefore in all cases it is that I propose
the Judges should certify to Parliament, at a brief note of it
the case to Parliament particular case cleared of all technical dross 2nd an Axiom in
the most general form of the most extensive application that can be given
it drawn from the reason of that case.
& from that it be from these Axioms at if approved of
next succeeding Session, it be standing rule
in the two Houses 3 at every Session to
take into consideration the Actions Axioms
that shall have been certified since the proceedings
& to incorporate them into the the purport of substance of all
those Laws to which they may apply.

---page break---

The form for example of such an Axiom in
the case instance in question might be this
"When a Forfeit Specific Forfeiture is
evry thing inextricably mingled with the thing
forfeited at the time of the seizure passes along way with it.

After this, if thought necessary might follow be subject
explanatory Aphorism or two to explain in which
case one 2 heaps of different commodities shall
be deemed inextricably mingled

Identifier: | JB/050/056/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 50.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	050	Main Headings	procedure code
Folio number	056	Info in main headings field	composit. common law judicial interpretn to be certified
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	[[watermarks::l v g propatria [britannia motif]]]
Marginals		Paper Producer	caroline vernon
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	16047
Box Contents