TURNP. ACT. Observations on. XX
147 §§36 New
N.B This is a Polychrest — so whether
inserted in the Highway
Provided that, where a Forfeiture upon such extensive
prosecution shall have been paid or deliver'd,
such part thereof as is applicable to any other
use than the Informer's shall not be refunded to
the offender, but shall continue applicable to the
use whereto it it destined appropriated.
There seems to be much more reason for a Limitation
upon summary procedure than upon the
regular, since the former is carried on upon the
149 §§ 50 - mind
"Taking keeping or disposing This will take in
the cases persons using any means of one who should attempting by threats or others to
deter persons from purchasing the goods destined
when exposed to Sale. There seems nothing improbable
in the supposition that the forwardness of ignorant Clowns sometimes men among the
might exert itself in this manner, for instance either
out of mere spite to persons exciting the act, or to
persons the Delinquents, by causing to goods to be bought
in for them at an inferior value while his person
is secured. Well the storm blows over by his absconding
— And it is to be observed that the that appetite
a time certain [ days] within which the distress
& tale must be concluded.
Costs 2 ble By Highway
which proves it
is the right reading
in the Turnpike act.
Thus would it have stood if no more than ordinary costs had been given:
But to double those costs & things So treble or quadruple the profit of seeking the most
expensive remedy. What is it but to offer a premium
for oppression? The forfeiture [given by this act]
if simply doubled, in express words would probably have sounded
grievous in the ears of those who are content to
augment them 6 or 8 fold in reality effect — Thus it
is that men will strain out a gnat, while they
swallow a camel.
151 §§ 8.22
The 22d Section shews that when the Number of Horses Oxen
is but 4, the A horse is not meant to be required.
Where a provision of a general nature required it & applicable to many a number
of particular clauses, is inserted annexed particularly in to some, & of
Sections that number, & not in others; when one sees finds it
not to be annexed in the same manner to those others,
one naturally supposes it to be omitted altogether:
for if it was proper necessary to annex it particularly
to any, why not proper to all. If it was not necessary to
annex it particularly to any all why annex it then
to any. If it were not annext particularly to anywhere
it would naturally be concluded to be inserted generally somewhere
If it were omitted every where alike people would
naturally look for some clause wherein provision should
be made for it imposing it once for all
This species of redundance abundance/repetition however as allways
justifiable (& indeed proper) nor to be reckoned redundance wherever the same
[provision] appears to be perfect without a reference
to the foreign additament, & where
to repeat is as short as or shorter than to refer.
For example in Art ... §§ 31 without the
clause admitting establishing the View of the Magistrate
as for sufficient evidence of the offence in question,
the provision would might have been regarded as compleat:
the reader having nothing to direct him
to look further would have put the same negative
upon the notion of it's being applied to that
offence that as of its being applied to any other:
that is he would imbibe an error, which it
is odds whether he might afterwards correct;
some how or other than the mind ought to be led to
the consideration knowledge of this clause: the question is, whether
best by reference or repetition: this is decided
in favour of reference, in the 1st place as being always more satisfactory
coteries paribus than the other; & in the next
place, because it is here actually the shortest.
I admitt omitt many observations
out of mere
weariness & uncertainty
whether they may prove
useful enough to pay for the trouble of undertaking comprehending them.
an instance of or two of this sort teaches one to look no
further for the provision in question than the Section Clause
in hand: accordingly those Sections where I found it
not, I marked & continued for a long while to consider
as defective in this respect.
153 §§ 31.
Monaecous Redundancies Repetitions in like manner admitt
of different degrees of excuse, or even sometimes of
Justification — The circumstance upon which
their the propensity of ad admissibility depends <add>stands seems to be chiefly
that of the class of Persons whom they respect.
The propriety of admitting
chiefly to turn upon
In such articles as require the attention of persons
at large in whom no scarce any knowledge of the Law is
reasonably to be presumed, the advantage of repetition of them in the
place where they apply may often, counter balance
the mischief [ disadvantage/inconvenience of such an encrease as is necessary thence accruing to the body of the
Law & the Instrument in question on that score]
of voluminousness]. It is otherwise, with regard
to those that require the attention the commendable necessity of being appraised of which is confined to the Magistrate.
Identifier: | JB/095/111/002
"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 95.
turnp. act observations on xx
[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [lion with vryheyt motif]]]