★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<!-- header in pencil --> | |||
<p>3<lb/><note>Escape<lb/>Observations and<lb/>Answers.</note></p> <p><del>I pass over the cases where</del></p> <p>There are other cases, where the Court of King's<lb/>Bench (to say nothing of other Courts) exercise legislative<lb/>power, not in the <foreign><hi rend="underline">ex-post-facto</hi></foreign> way, but before<lb/>the fact, just as Parliament does: for instance<lb/>Rules and Orders relative to Procedure, and relative to<lb/>the management of the King's Bench Prison. In<lb/><del>the former</del> <add>the <del>exp</del> <foreign><hi rend="underline">ex-post-facto</hi></foreign></add> cases, <del>necessity</del> there <hi rend="underline">is</hi>, or at least there<lb/><hi rend="underline">was</hi>, the plea of necessity: since the demand for<lb/>security in society was constant, <del>while</del> <add>at a time that</add> the existence<lb/>of a legislative power was but occasional, and<lb/>even rare. In those <del>latter</del> cases <add>of preventive legislation</add> there may be convenience<lb/>for aught I know, and at any rate under<lb/>the <foreign><hi rend="underline">lex</hi> <del>gravier</del> <hi rend="underline">gravior</hi></foreign> of Parliament no inconvenience:<lb/>but as to necessity, what is it when<lb/>compared to the <del>present case?</del> singular case in which<lb/>I give it by <del>auth</del> express authority of Parliament?</p> <p>As to <hi rend="underline">impertinence</hi> and <hi rend="underline">presumption</hi>, I might<lb/>be taxed with it, and perhaps with justice enough,<lb/>if it were a <del>form</del> <hi rend="underline">Form</hi> that I gave the Court; but<lb/>what I gave them is, not a <hi rend="underline">Form</hi> but an <hi rend="underline">example</hi>.<lb/>As such it was <hi rend="underline">meant</hi>, and such accordingly it is<lb/><hi rend="underline">called</hi>. Why <del>give the</del> <add>an</add> example? — 1. That it<lb/>might be seen that the sort of laws I wanted to get<lb/>made by the King's Bench, were <del>what</del> such as Parliament<lb/>could not make. 2. That <add>the Court</add> being seen to have<lb/>a pattern before them, which so long as it was at all<lb/>regarded would be sufficient to guard the power from<lb/>abuse, it might be seen that the power given to <del>them</del> <add>the Court</add><lb/>was not of the number of those which are open to abuse.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
3
Escape
Observations and
Answers.
I pass over the cases where
There are other cases, where the Court of King's
Bench (to say nothing of other Courts) exercise legislative
power, not in the ex-post-facto way, but before
the fact, just as Parliament does: for instance
Rules and Orders relative to Procedure, and relative to
the management of the King's Bench Prison. In
the former the exp ex-post-facto cases, necessity there is, or at least there
was, the plea of necessity: since the demand for
security in society was constant, while at a time that the existence
of a legislative power was but occasional, and
even rare. In those latter cases of preventive legislation there may be convenience
for aught I know, and at any rate under
the lex gravier gravior of Parliament no inconvenience:
but as to necessity, what is it when
compared to the present case? singular case in which
I give it by auth express authority of Parliament?
As to impertinence and presumption, I might
be taxed with it, and perhaps with justice enough,
if it were a form Form that I gave the Court; but
what I gave them is, not a Form but an example.
As such it was meant, and such accordingly it is
called. Why give the an example? — 1. That it
might be seen that the sort of laws I wanted to get
made by the King's Bench, were what such as Parliament
could not make. 2. That the Court being seen to have
a pattern before them, which so long as it was at all
regarded would be sufficient to guard the power from
abuse, it might be seen that the power given to them the Court
was not of the number of those which are open to abuse.
|
Identifier: | JB/124/027/003"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 124. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
124 |
panopticon |
||
|
027 |
|||
|
003 |
|||
|
text sheet |
4 |
||
|
recto |
d1 / d2 / d3 / d4 |
||
|
41716 |
|||
