[129b-440]

16 March 1817

2 o

Introd

§18 Defence suffrage

Seat Traffic

1

In The other reason which contributed to render him thus anxious to give admission to this protecting word express has something rather remarkable in it “This species of traffic whether carried on by implied or express covenants was an offence against the law of parliament, and in his opinion punishable as a misdemeanor at common law. If this was a sufficient reason for excluding from the operation of penalty the case of an express comment it should not one should have thought have been an equally sufficient reason for excluding from it the case of an implied covenant: yet some time or other by the Right Honourable Gentleman this application of it was not made. When a mischief which it is not convenient to the Honourable Gentlemen Eminently convenient and not a little employed is the recourse afforded on such occasions by Common Law. Statute law has determinant words to it and these words can not always without such sacrifices of characters as Honourable Gentlemen are not without necessity disposed to make be on every occasion /where/ be evaded. Common Law has no determinate words belonging to it: it is on most occasions exactly what the gentlemen in question please. Proportioned to the impossibility of error for where there is no standard there is no error is the degree of confidence with which when convenience invites /calls/ gentlemen take upon themselves to declare the tenor of that of which the essential character consists in its not having any tenor: if upon trial in due form so it happens the tenor

assigned