date

22 Jan y 1803 (7 Penal clauses says
22 Jan y 1803 (7

Penal clauses says a rule of law shall be construed strictly.

clauses says another rule of law shall be construed liberally. Penal

clauses shall be construed strictly: yes: but

when a remedy is bound up

with the penalty in them not in such sort of strictness as to

destroy the remedy. What may happen — what in abundance of

cases does happen, is — that a remedy is

provided in by an a set of words, a penalty

by

another: the remedy and the penalty so distinct, that the remedy

— a remedy of some sort of or other may stand, although the

penalty fall to the ground. But in the present instance, for all persons

coming and in these ample description here in question

— for the hundreds and thousands actually included in it in the

individual case in hand — there is no remedy whatsoever but

which (so at least it seems much to be feared) but what is bound

up with the penalties, and with them must stand or fall.

The Writ of Habeas Corpus,

the priority remedial operation employed and purchased

by this , would in point of law run in New South Wales? Would

Lord Alvanley

Ellenboroug

Lord Ellenborough would Lord Alvanley think it

obligatory upon them, or

upon the whole of this case, , allowable, to

open a writ of this sort, directed to the Governors of New South

Wales, to bring into the Court of Kings Bench or the Court of Common pleas

the bodies of the several thousands of

inhabitants thus circumstanced? The affirmative is an answer which

to my humble conception they would praise at least ere they gave

and so long as they praised, so long spok of this supposed

supremely remedial Act would the grievance,

this palpable and crying grievance, be without

remedy other than that, such as it is, which is bound up on the

texture of the penal phrases of it.

Yes
Similar Items
  • Title: [29 July 1805 Evidence 2 [.]
    Description: 29 July 1805

    Evidence

    2 [...?]

    Statutes according to this division are either penal or remedial. Penal are to be construed strictly: meaning by strictly /as appears by the exemplification/, the taking advantage of some particular word or words of /in/ the statute to avoid giving effect in this or that instance to what appears to have been the will and intention of the legislator upon the whole: here then the mark set up by the legislator is fallen short of by the Judge.

    Remedial statutes are to construed liberally. Here the mark set up by the legislator is to be overshot by the Judge. In a certain view /With a view to a certain and according to the measure of his faculties, The legislator the legislator, has made a law to a certain extent. On occasion and pretence of this law, the Judge, with a view to the same or to a different end, takes upon him to make another law /on [...?]/ to a further or collateral extent.

    Under this nomenclature /this distinction/ and this division which they /made by them/ in large part after the [...?] statutes not to say the whole/ there is no saying which part of the mass of statutes is marked out from misconstruction.

    For the misconstruction put upon penal statutes, a regard for humanity [the [...?] of lawyers a /an English lawyers/ humanity,] is the pretence: [for, whatever be the [...?] particular rule /becomes of other rules/ upon the carpet, the rule of hypocrisy is never deviated from].

    A pretence? yes: how should it be other than a pretence? 1. [In the first place] the distinction between penal and remedial is mere vapour. Unless in so far as it is remedial, what penal law of the final class any thing but /further than/ an act of tyranny? Till the system of legislation is perfect, in practice as well as theory, the mass of penal law in every nation will and must involve such acts of tyranny. That in an usurpation and temerity can any serviceable /useful/ remedy and /any/ advantageous substitute be found, for any such immemorial and [...? ...?] tyranny? But can the /any/ legal tyranny on the part of the supreme authority, find any advantageous corrective in the arbitrary power of that which should be its sub-ordinate.

    Note

    Unless in so far as affording a gratification to an inordinate vengeance, or even more causeless antipathy, (a case indeed but too frequently exemplified) is the /has been/ sole object of the law, what in any instance is punishment /good for or proposed to be [...?] for/ of any use, but in the character of a tyranny? And of /what sort of efficacy can be possessed by/ what effect were any arrangements of law, call it remedial or any thing else, unless it have punishment, /more or less as bound/ to back it?
  • Title: [22 Nov r 1802 + 2 Letter 5 (3. XV.]
    Description: 22 Nov r 1802 + 2 Letter 5 (3. XV.

    Hulk System compared with Penitentiary and N. S.

    Wales Systems.

    From the foregoing demonstrations — if such by curtesy

    at least they may be stiled — may be deduced, in

    inte in the form of a corollary, a short estimate on the subject

    of the Hulks. In the scale of utility, its

    station would be found, if my judgment does not deceive

    me, in the

    midway between penitentiary

    imprisonment, taken without the benefit of the panopticon improvements, and the punishment of penal colonization, taken on the footing on

    which it stands in New South Wales. With the former, it agrees in

    respect of its severity from drunkenness with the attendant miseries and

    mischiefs: with the latter, in respect of the promiscuous

    aggregation; with the universal corruption

    issuing

    from it. As a preservative of physical health

    On the ground of healthiness, meaning physical healthiness

    as it is from drunkenness, it may rank not much below the

    penitentiary system: on the ground of moral health as a school of

    As a preventative of present

    mischief

    of mischief considered as under and during the punishment

    — it may rank not much below the penitentiary system: it stands

    at a prodigious height above New

    South Wales. On the ground of

    healthiness as (meaning physical healthiness),

    cleared as it

    of drunkenness is from drunkenness, it may again rank not

    much below the penitentiary system: on the ground of moral health, as a school of post-liberation

    wickedness, it stands scarce at all above the level of New South

    Wales. In

    the article of comfort. it can never

    come up to considering the miseries of forced

    and crowded association, it can never come up to — it can never

    do otherwise than fall deplorably short of — a well-ordered

    Penitentiary House. In the article of economy,

    in our point of view it can not but fall considerably short of

    it, since

    among
  • Title: [1818 Jan y 28 Not Paul III]
    Description: 1818 Jan y 28

    Not Paul

    III Doctrine

    Ch Mysticism

    5

    § Lord’s Supper

    A bad thing wine unquestionably wine when drunk to excess, which however it can scarcely be without bringing after it if not with it its own punishment: a bad thing on any occasion: but why so excessively bad on this occasion so excessively bad as to doom a man to the very extreme of punishment? The answer―an / the / answer in Paul’s style has been already given. The man who on this occasion drinks the wine to excess drinks it unworthily: and he who in this way or in any other way on this same occasion drinks it ‘unworthily shall be guilty it should have been will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.’ Guilty says the English translation: more craftily because more ambiguously and less palpably absurdity / absurd / partaker easily improved / heightened / into accomplice says Paul’s original says the Greek original of Saint Paul he shall sometime or other be deemed construed and taken as an English lawyer would phrase / have / it to have been an accessory after the fact in the murder of the Lord Jesus. Instead of the office of Gamaliel had Paul been bred up in the King’s Bench Crown Office, he could not have got up a constructive murder in a more accomplished Common Law of England style.