★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
TURNPIKE ACT. Observations on. XVIII
As to Bill,It is probably seems to be put in contradistinction
to original, &
used to be inserted to have been at least, for the sake
of giving Jurisdiction to the
King's Bench not entirely comprehending wherein consists what particular
mode of prosecution if any, distinct from Action
it is meant to design. I have nothing more
to say.2 Whether the
new model by that
extends to Debts thus
by Forfeiture Plaint being a proceeding in a
County Court would sends the matter (except it be in any other
County than in Middlesex) to be tried by the Attorney
(whoever he is that in spite of the Statute is the
Under-Sheriff) at an the next Alehouse were it not for the words that follow.These words cure that
mischief, but then thus
make the other word
negatory
It is pleasant enough to
observe how the common
Function &c The particular
advantage of proceeding by Information, is, that it
adds makes a comfortable addition to the expense. The
of the matter seems to be, that the , used accustomed to the
single, going on without any discretion
from the thinking faculty
131 §53
The common by which the Exchequer gets it
Jurisdiction applies pleasantly enough to an Action
thus founded. The Plff by way of inducement
to the Court to take his cause in hand, acquaints
them, that by his not having this Horse, for
whatever it is that he expects the Action will by & by to
give him be worth to him) he finds himself disabled from paying
what he ows to his Majesty— just as so I
lost was £20,000 out of pocket by [not being in] the last Lottery.
131 §59
Let no one doubt whether a .... will betake
himself to this crooked path approval to Justice, when the Law
to him a straight one: he will not to prefer the ;
agreeably to the established ink on all these cases,
which is when the same thing and can be done compared either by truth or
falsehood, to chuse prefer the latter.
Guided, or rather indeed
compelled by
usage
good old rule of old established
for all these cases
Constables
132 §47
The term expression of carrying Act into execution" is so vague
that it might be considered looked upon by some as imparting an the
obligation on these Officers to prosecute inform as is laid upon
Turnpike Officers; such, I must acknowledge was the
light in which it struck me at the first reading.
The truth is on the contrary, that the sphere of their
action is meant to be, considering the class of what it ought to be, very confined:
it is but to follow (except in the case of keeping
seizures) under the direction which is particular
in each instance of the Magistrate. All then,
that is wanting, to take away from the description from their duty this
face of terror formidable appearance, is to represent it this in its in true just
light.
133 §53
It is a pity that no express provision is to be found in
this Act, concerning the application of pecuniary Forfeitures
---page break---
when recovered in the regular mode: It may be inferred that they
are to go in entirety to the Informer, since the distribution
made of them between the Informer & the in §57
extends only to summary prosecutions
134 §53 New
Where the sum recoverable by Action is limited [only] not
to one, but limited between 2
fixed, the greatest sum may be demanded: & any sum
within the limits specified may be given by
the Jury.
Redundancy
Heteroecous
135 §53
Double Recovery
This serves only to introduce a provision
What this clause does is just what
the well-known provision of the Common Law, does
without it:Buller's Nisi
Prius (1st Edit) 183. It is therefore needless: we will
now see whether it be innocent.
whether a prior yet depending,
would afford a plea in Bar to a posterior: if not
how could the Deft extricate himself from a posterior
if the conviction on the prior was not to take
place before the posterior was got beyond
the stage at which when pleading could be admitted.
. could this be done on Motion? indeed at
any stage before . Improve the Plea if not by
might be withdrawn, to make way for for the Plea
of Autrefois — convict. These I believe
are motions of
course. What becomes of Costs
in this case — does the Plff when thus repelled by this plea pay them of the Deft?
that he
does. Bull. 183.
This might would be hard in the case of a bona fide
Plff. Do they rest on the Deft? This is
hard upon a Deft & opens the door to oppression
by setting up a multitude of suits. The remedy for
this seems to be, that a Def<hi rend="superscript">t Plff, upon
<hi rend="underline">notice given by the Deft of a prior Action, should
proceed a <hi rend="underline">the find of Costs if the Def<hi rend="superscript">t be convicted
or acquitted without in that
[prior] Action.
|
Identifier: | JB/095/109/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 95. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
not numbered |
|||
|
095 |
|||
|
109 |
turnpike act observations on xviii |
||
|
002 |
|||
|
text sheet |
2 |
||
|
recto |
|||
|
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [lion with vryheyt motif]]] |
||
|
30995 |
|||
