DOCSLIB.ORG

An Bille Um Athchoiriu an Du Reachtuil, 1981 Statute Law Revision Bill, 1981

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Bille Um Athchoiriu an Du Reachtuil, 1981 Statute Law Revision Bill, 1981 Oireachtas Library 54023001279147 AN BILLE UM ATHCHOIRIU AN DU REACHTUIL, 1981 STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL, 1981 Mar a tionscnaiodh As initiated ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Section 1. Repeals. 2. Saving 3. Short title. SCHEDULE REPEALS PARTI Pre-U nion Irish Siaiutes PART II Enoi ish Siatutes Applied by Poynings ' Act, 1495 PARTIII English and British Statutes Extended to Ireland , 1495-1800 PART IV British Statutes , 1801-1922 [No. 27 of 1981] AN BILLE UM ATHCHOIR1U AN DU REACHTUIL, 1981 STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL, 1981 BILL entitled AN ACT TO PROMOTE THE REVISION OF THE STATUTE 5 LAW BY REPEALING ENACTMENTS WHICH HAVE CEASED TO BE IN FORCE OR HAVE BECOME UNNECESSARY. BE IT ENACTED BY THE OIREACHTAS AS FOLLOWS: Repeals. 1.—The enactments of former Parliaments of Ireland. England, 10 Great Britain and the United Kingdom described in the Schedule are hereby repealed to the extent specified in the third column. Saving.. 2.—(1) This Act shall not affect any existing principle or rule of law or equity, or any established jurisdiction, form or course ofpleading, practice or procedure, notwithstanding that it may have been in any 15 manner derived from, affirmed or recognised by anyenactment hereby repealed. (2) Where any enactment not repealed by this Act has been con­ firmed, revived or perpetuated by an enactment hereby repealed, such confirmation, revivor or perpetuation shall not be affected by 20 the repeal. Short title. 3.—This Act may be cited as the Statute Law Revision Act, 1981. 2 SCHEDULE Section 1 REPEALS PART I PRE-UNION IRISH STATUTES Session or Session and Chapter Short Title or Subject Extent of Repeal 1236. 20 Hen. 3. Observance in Ireland of Statute of The whole statute. Merton. [Statute for repeal: Sch.. Pt. II. ] 1237. 21 Hen. 3. Concerning those born before wedlock. The w hole statute. [Obsolete] 1238. 22 Hen. 3. Inheritance of bastard. The whole statute. [Obsolete. ] 1284. 12 Edw. 1. Observance in Ireland of Statute of The whole statute. Rutland. [Statute for repeal: Sch., Pi. II.] 1285. 13 Edw. 1. Observance in Ireland of Statute of West­ The whole statute. minster the First and Statute of Gloucester. [Statutes for repeal: Sch.. Pt. II.] 1285. 13 Edw. 1. Observance in Ireland of Statute of West­ The whole statute minster the Second. except c.l (Statute [Statute for repeal in part: Sch.. Pt. II. ] Dc Donis Condi- tionalibus. 1285) and c.15 (Infants (Next Friend) Act. 1285). 1300. 28 Edw. 1. Custom of Ireland as to goods of testator. The whole statute. [Superseded. ] 1300. 28 Edw. 1 Export of silver. The whole statute. [Obsolete] 1307. 1 Edw. 2. Observance in Ireland of Statute of The whole statute Winchester, except that part of jObsolete. ] c. 6 relating to prohibition on holding fairs and markets in churchyards. 1320. 13 Edw. 2. Confirmation of observance in Ireland of The whole statute. Statutes of Merton. Marlborough. Westminster the First. Westminster the Second. Gloucester. [Statutes for repeal: Sch., Pi. II ] Sole The Matuics in fhis Pari from ill Hen .3 lo II Hen 4 arc to be louml in Volume 1 of the Public Record Office Scries of Statutes of the Parliament of Ireland, edited b\ Henrs F Bern (1*407 to 1914) The Statute of 18 Edw. 4 is in Volume 4 of the senes edited by James F. Momssey (1939). 3 Session or Session and Chapter Short Title or Subject Extent of Repeal 1324. 17 Edw. 2. Observance in Ireland of Statute of The whole statute. Lincoln. [Statute for repeal: Sch., Pt. II. ] 1324. 17 Edw. 2. Observance in Ireland of Statute of York. The whole statute. [Statute for repeal: Sch., Pt. II.] 1355. 29 Edw. 3. Forestalled of Fish. The whole statute. [Obsolete.] 1357. 31 Edw. 3 State of the Land of Ireland. The whole statute. [Obsolete. ] 1366. 40 Edw. 3 Statute of Kilkenny The whole statute. [Obsolete, j 1389. 13 Ric. 2. Prohibition of sale of falcons, hawks, etc. The whole statute. [Obsolete. ] 1391. 15 Ric. 2. Observance in Ireland of statutes of The whole statute. England. [Obsolete.] 1402. 3 Hen. 4. Forcible Entry. The whole statute. [Obsolete, j 1410. 11 Hen. 4. Election of sheriffs: confirmation of The whole statute. rights. [Obsolete. ] 1478. 18 Edw. 4. Confirmation of rights; pestilence. The whole statute [Obsolete: c. 8 relates to freedom of turf except c. 8. cutting in Bog of Allen.] 1495. 10 Henry VII. c. 22. Poynings' Act, 1495. The following [Applied English statutes. Words for words: "And if repeal obsolete. ] any estatute or estatutes have been made within this said land, hereafter to the contrary, they and every of them by authority afore­ said be annulled, revoked void, and of none effect in the Law.” 1703. 2 Anne. c. 15. Sale of Livestock Act. 1703. The whole Act. [Obsolete. J 1705. 4 Anne. c. 8. Tolls Act. 1705. The whole Act. [Obsolete.] 1743. 17 Geo. 2. c. 4. Transportation. The whole statute. [Obsolete: r. in general terms: 26 Geo. 3 c. 21] 4 Session or Session and Chapter Short Title or Subject Extent of Repeal 1792. 32 Geo. 3, c. 39. Tolls Act. 1792. The whole Act. [Obsolete.) 1793. 33 Geo. 3, c. 21. Roman Catholic Relief. The whole statute. [Obsolete: virt.r.) 17%. 36 Geo. 3, c. 12. County Treasurers. The whole statute. [Obsolete.] PART II ENGLISH STATUTES APPLIED BY POYNINGS' ACT. 1495 Session Subject Extent of Repeal 1235. 20 Hen.3. Statute of Merton. The whole statute. [Obsolete: common of pasture; clover, etc.] 1267. 52 Hen. 3. Statute of Marlborough. The whole statute. [Obsolete: distress; sheriffs, etc.] 1275. 3 Edw. 1. Statute of Westminster the First The whole statute. 4 [Obsolete: felons;coroners; sheriffs, etc.] 1278. 6 Edw. 1. Statute of Gloucester. The whole statute. [Obsolete: r. except as to costs: 42 & 43 Viet. c. 59) 1284. 12 Edw. I. Statute of Rutland. The whole statute. [Obsolete: Exchequer.] 1285. 13 Edw. 1. Statute of Westminster the Second The whole statute, except Chapters [Obsolete: c. 1. Statute de Donis Condi- 1 and 15. tionalibus. 1285 (estates tail); c. 15: Infants (Next Friend) Act. 1285.) 1285. 13 Edw. 1. Statute of Circumspecte Agatis. The whole statute. [Obsolete since disestablishment of Irish Church. Related to clergy. Sees. 21 of Irish Church Act, 1869] 1289. 18 Edw. 1. Statute of the Writ of Consultation. The whole statute. [Obsolete since disestablishment of Irish Church.) 5 Session Subject Extent of Repeal 1295. 23 Edw. 1. Statute of Breaking Prisons. The whole statute. [Obsolete.] 1297. 25 Edw. 1. Statute concerning Tallage. The whole statute. [Obsolete: Tallage urn an arbitrary feudal tax. ] 1299. 27 Edw. 1. Statute of Fines. The whole statute. [Obsolete: superseded by s. 32 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Ireland) 1877.) 1300. 28 Edw. 1. Articles on the Charters. The whole statute. [Obsolete: distress; sheriffs] 1305. 33 Edw. 1. An Ordinance of the Forest. The whole statute. [Obsolete.] 1305. 33 Edw. 1. Champerty Act, 1305. The whole Act. 1306. 34 Edw. 1. Statute of Joint Tenants. The whole statute. [Obsolete, r. (inpt.) S.L.R. (1). 1872. 34 Edw. 1. An Ordinance of the Forest. The whole statute. [Obsolete. ] 1315. 9 Edw. 2. St. 1. Statute of Lincoln. The whole statute. [Obsolete since disestablishment of Irish Church.] 9 Edw. 2. St. 2. Statute of Sheriffs. The whole statute. [Obsolete. Office of high sheriff abolished: s. 52 of Court Officers Act. 1926.) 1318. 12 Edw. 2. St. 1. Statute of York. The whole statute. [R. (in pt.) S.L.R. (1). 1872. Remainder superseded by ss. 32 and 33 of Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Ireland) 1877. or obsolete, j 1322. 15 Edw. 2. Revocation of new Ordinances. The whole statute. [Obsolete. The Statute, which revokes cer­ tain ordinances, provides that laws are not to be made except by the King. Lords and Commonsin Parliament .) 1326. 1 Edw. 3. St. 1. Averment against false returns of The whole statute. bailiffs of liberties. [c. 5 obsolete. Remainder r. 9 Geo. 4 c. 53:S.L.R. (1). 1872:42 & 43 Viet, c. 59.) 6 Session Subject Extent of Repeal 1327. 1 Edw. 3. St. 2. Keepers of the peace. Maintenance. The whole statute. Indictments. [Obsolete. As to indictments. see Criminal Justice (Administration) Act. 1924. c. 14 given title Maintenance Act, 1326: No. 5 o/1962.J 1328. 2 Edw. 3. Statute of Northampton. The whole statute. [ Obsolete: pardons for felony: sheriffs, etc.] 1330. 4 Edw. 3. Assizes. Sheriffs. The whole statute. • Qualifications of sheriffs. [Obsolete.] 1331. 5 Edw. 3. Qualifications of sheriffs. Attachment. The whole statute. [Obsolete. Office of high sheriff abolished by s. 52 of Court Officers Act. 1926.) 1340. 14 Edw. 3. St. 1. Confirmation of Liberties. The whole statute. [ Obsolete.) 1344. 18 Edw. 3. St. 1. Declaration concerning exigents. The whole statute. [R. (in pt. —so far as relates to false money) 2 & 3 Will. 4 c. 34. s. 1 Residue obsolete. Relates to obsolete criminal proceed­ ings. An exigent was a writ commanding defendant to appear on pain of outlawry. ] 1344. 18 Edw. 3. St. 2. Keepers of the Peace. Outlawry. The whole statute. [Obsolete. ] 1344. 18 Edw. 3. St. 3. Exemption for prelates. The whole statute. [ Obsolete. ] 1346. 20 Edw. 3. Ordinance for the justices. The whole statute. [Superseded by s. 32 of Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Ireland). 1877.) 1350. 25 Edw. 3. St. 1. A statute for those who are born in Parts The whole statute. beyond Sea. [/?. (in pt.) by British Nationality and Sta ­ tus of Aliens Act. 1914, s. 28(1) and Sch. 3. Remainder not applicable to State. ] 1351. 25 Edw. 3. St. 4. Provisors of benefices.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Magna Carta and the Development of the Common Law
    Magna Carta and the Development of the Common Law Professor Paul Brand, FBA Emeritus Fellow All Souls College, Oxford Paper related to a presentation given for the High Court Public Lecture series, at the High Court of Australia, Canberra, Courtroom 1, 13 May 2015 Magna Carta and the Development of the Common Law I We are about to commemorate the eight hundredth anniversary of the granting by King John on 15 June 1215 of a ‘charter of liberties’ in favour of all the free men of his kingdom [of England] and their heirs. That charter was not initially called Magna Carta (or ‘the Great Charter’, in English). It only acquired that name after it had been revised and reissued twice and after the second reissue had been accompanied by the issuing of a separate, but related, Charter of the Forest. The revised version of 1217 was called ‘The Great Charter’ simply to distinguish it from the shorter, and therefore smaller, Forest Charter, but the name stuck. To call it a ‘charter of liberties’ granted by king John to ‘all the free men of his kingdom’ of England is, however, in certain respects misleading. The term ‘liberty’ or ‘liberties’, particularly in the context of a royal grant, did not in 1215 bear the modern meaning of a recognised human right or human rights. ‘Liberty’ in the singular could mean something closer to that, in the general sense of the ‘freedom’ or the ‘free status’ of a free man, as opposed to the ‘unfreedom’ of a villein. ‘Liberties’, though, were something different (otherwise known as ‘franchises’), generally specific privileges granted by the king, particular rights such as the right to hold a fair or a market or a particular kind of private court, the right to have a park or a rabbit warren which excluded others from hunting or an exemption such as freedom from tolls at markets or fairs.
    [Show full text]
  • New Media, Free Expression, and the Offences Against the State Acts
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2020 New Media, Free Expression, and the Offences Against the State Acts Laura K. Donohue Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/2248 https://ssrn.com/abstract=3825722 Laura K. Donohue, New Media, Free Expression, and the Offences Against the State Acts, in The Offences Against the State Act 1939 at 80: A Model Counter-Terrorism Act? 163 (Mark Coen ed., Oxford: Hart Publishing 2021). This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, European Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, International Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, Legislation Commons, and the National Security Law Commons New Media, Free Expression, and the Offences Against the State Acts Laura K. Donohue1 Introduction Social media has become an integral part of modern human interaction: as of October 2019, Facebook reported 2.414 billion active users worldwide.2 YouTube, WhatsApp, and Instagram were not far behind, with 2 billion, 1.6 billion, and 1 billion users respectively.3 In Ireland, 3.2 million people (66% of the population) use social media for an average of nearly two hours per day.4 By 2022, the number of domestic Facebook users is expected to reach 2.92 million.5 Forty-one percent of the population uses Instagram (65% daily); 30% uses Twitter (40% daily), and another 30% uses LinkedIn.6 With social media most prevalent amongst the younger generations, these numbers will only rise.
    [Show full text]
  • High Treason
    11th October 2017 High Treason The first Treason Act in England was enacted by Parliament at the time of Edward III in 1351, which codified the common law of Treason and contained most of acts defined as Treason. It is still in force but has been very significantly amended (Wikipedia - Treason Act 1351). The main definitions relate to any person planning or imagined: “to harm the King or his immediate family, his sons and heirs or their companions; levying war against the King, plus actions against the King's officials, counterfeiting the Great Seal. Privy Seal or coinage of the realm.” The definitions also included that any person who "adhered to the King's enemies in his Realm, giving them aid and comfort in his Realm or elsewhere was guilty of High Treason" The penalty for these offences at the time was Hanging, Drawing and Quartering. The Act is still in force today (without the "drawing and quartering part") The Act was last used to prosecute William Joyce in 1945, who was subsequently hanged for collaborating with Germany during WWII More recently the Treason Felony Act (1848) declared that It is treason felony to: "compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend: • to deprive the Queen of her crown, • to levy war against the Queen, or • to "move or stir" any foreigner to invade the United Kingdom or any other country belonging to the Queen.” Blair and the New Labour government enacted The Crime and Disorder Act (1998) which amended The Treason Felony Act (1848) and formally abolished the death penalty for the last offences carrying it, namely treason and piracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorist Speech and the Future of Free Expression
    TERRORIST SPEECH AND THE FUTURE OF FREE EXPRESSION Laura K. Donohue* Introduction.......................................................................................... 234 I. State as Sovereign in Relation to Terrorist Speech ...................... 239 A. Persuasive Speech ............................................................ 239 1. Sedition and Incitement in the American Context ..... 239 a. Life Before Brandenburg................................. 240 b. Brandenburg and Beyond................................ 248 2. United Kingdom: Offences Against the State and Public Order ....................................................................... 250 a. Treason............................................................. 251 b. Unlawful Assembly ......................................... 254 c. Sedition ............................................................ 262 d. Monuments and Flags...................................... 268 B. Knowledge-Based Speech ................................................ 271 1. Prior Restraint in the American Context .................... 272 a. Invention Secrecy Act...................................... 274 b. Atomic Energy Act .......................................... 279 c. Information Relating to Explosives and Weapons of Mass Destruction............................................ 280 2. Strictures in the United Kingdom............................... 287 a. Informal Restrictions........................................ 287 b. Formal Strictures: The Export Control Act ..... 292 II. State in
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Capital Territory
    AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY Imperial Acts Application Ordinance 1986 No. 93 of 1986 I, THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL of the Commonwealth of Australia, acting with the advice of the Federal Executive Council, hereby make the following Ordinance under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910. Dated 18 December 1986. N. M. STEPHEN Governor-General By His Excellency’s Command, LIONEL BOWEN Attorney-General An Ordinance relating to the application in the Territory of certain Acts of the United Kingdom Short title 1. This Ordinance may be cited as the Imperial Acts Application Ordinance 1986.1 Commencement 2. (1) Subject to this section, this Ordinance shall come into operation on the date on which notice of this Ordinance having been made is published in the Gazette. (2) Sub-section 4 (2) shall come into operation on such date as is fixed by the Minister of State for Territories by notice in Gazette. (3) Sub-section 4 (3) shall come into operation on such date as is fixed by the Minister of State for Territories by notice in the Gazette. Authorised by the ACT Parliamentary Counsel—also accessible at www.legislation.act.gov.au Imperial Acts Application No. 93 , 1986 2 Interpretation 3. (1) In this Ordinance, unless the contrary intention appears—“applied Imperial Act” means— (a) an Imperial Act that— (i) extended to the Territory as part of the law of the Territory of its own force immediately before 3 September 1939; and (ii) had not ceased so to extend to the Territory before the commencing date; and (b) an Imperial Act, other than an Imperial
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Magna Carta, Lincoln Cathedral
    Lincoln Cathedral: Magna Carta/USA Week Lecture 15 June 2005 The Principles of Magna Carta: Under threat after 790 years of evolution? By Sir Robert M. Worcester1 Magna Carta Trustee Today is the very anniversary of the sealing of the Magna Carta, that great charter which laid down the basis for English common law, now spread throughout the world. Magna Carta gave protection of law against despotism by kings and their cronies, which has been challenged by self-appointed and elective dictatorships over centuries, but (mostly) upheld by both public opinion and legal testing over centuries, and which survives even today, 790 years later. I take much pride and not a little pleasure being asked to attend this magnificent Cathedral this evening to deliver the inaugural Magna Carta/USA Week lecture. I do so for many reasons. One, historic. A short history compared to 790 years of English history since the barons met with King John at Runnymede, only 48 in my case. In 1957 I first visited the country of my ancestors, England. My first visit to any museum, gallery or library on that occasion was to the British Museum to gaze with awe at their copy of the Magna Carta, my reason for our visit. When I decided to come here to live in January 1969, my first weekend here with my family, we made a pilgrimage to Runnymede to visit the site of the signing of the Magna Carta. I am still an American, and take pride and not a little pleasure in still claiming citizenship of the country of my birth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Common Law Mind in the Age of Sir Edward Coke by Michael Lobban
    The common law mind in the age of Sir Edward Coke by Michael Lobban ir Edward Coke (1552 1634) was the greatest or legalo rules had existed in the same form priorr to the lawyerJ of his age.o Havingo been Elizabeth I's conquest, and to argue that where, in the past, the ancient S Attorney-General, he became Chief Justice, first of common law had been diverted from its true course, it the Common Pleas in 1606,' and then of the King'so Bench had over time been restored again to its purity. in 1612. He held this post until his dismissal lour years Yet, as Pocock pointed out, this vision seems later in the aftermath of his notorious clash with Lord paradoxical. A customary legal system implies change and Chancellor Ellesmere over equity's jurisdiction to stay development. Sir Matthew Hale (1609 76) realised this, executions of common law judgments. In the following when he compared the common law with the growing decade, he played a prominent role in Parliament, notably body of a man, which could change while remaining in the debates leading to the Petition of Right in 1628. essentially the same. By contrast, Coke's vision of history, Having published the first eleven volumes of his Reports in part inspired by that of Sir John Fortescue before leaving the bench, he later turned to writing the O ' O (c!395 c!477), seems crudely static. Historians have four volumes of his Institutes, the first part of which sought to resolve this paradox by arguing that Coke's known as Coke upon Littleton — was published in 1628, and vision of history is either unimportant to his the other three parts posthumously, in 1642 1644.
    [Show full text]
  • Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Page 1
    Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Page 1 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 1998 CHAPTER 37 Sweet & Maxwell Ltd. UK Statutes Crown Copyright. Reproduced by permission of the Controller of Her Majesty©s Stationery Office. An Act to make provision for preventing crime and disorder; to create certain racially-aggravated offences; to abolish the rebuttable presumption that a child is doli incapax and to make provision as to the effect of a child©s failure to give evidence at his trial; to abolish the death penalty for treason and piracy; to make changes to the criminal justice system; to make further provision for dealing with offenders; to make further provision with respect to remands and committals for trial and the release and recall of prisoners; to amend Chapter I of Part II of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 and to repeal Chapter I of Part III of the Crime and Punishment (Scotland) Act 1997; to make amendments designed to facilitate, or otherwise desirable in connection with, the consolidation of certain enactments; and for connected purposes. [31st July 1998] BE IT ENACTED by the Queen©s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:Ð PART I Prevention of crime and disorder CHAPTER I England and Wales Crime and disorder: general 1.Ð Anti-social behaviour orders. (1) An application for an order under this section may be made by a relevant authority if it appears to the authority that the following conditions are fulfilled with respect to any person aged 10 or over, namelyÐ (a) that the person has acted, since the commencement date, in an anti-social manner, that is to say, in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself; and (b) that such an order is necessary to protect relevant persons from further anti-social acts by him.
    [Show full text]
  • 268KB***The Law on Treasonable Offences in Singapore
    Published on e-First 14 April 2021 THE LAW ON TREASONABLE OFFENCES IN SINGAPORE This article aims to provide an extensive and detailed analysis of the law on treasonable offences in Singapore. It traces the historical development of the treason law in Singapore from the colonial period under British rule up until the present day, before proceeding to lay down the applicable legal principles that ought to govern these treasonable offences, drawing on authorities in the UK, India as well as other Commonwealth jurisdictions. With a more long-term view towards the reform and consolidation of the treason law in mind, this article also proposes several tentative suggestions for reform, complete with a draft bill devised by the author setting out these proposed changes. Benjamin LOW1 LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore). “Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”2 I. Introduction 1 The law on treasonable offences, more commonly referred to as treason,3 in Singapore remains shrouded in a great deal of uncertainty and ambiguity despite having existed as part of the legal fabric of Singapore since its early days as a British colony. A student who picks up any major textbook on Singapore criminal law will find copious references to various other kinds of substantive offences, general principles of criminal liability as well as discussion of law reform even, but very little mention is made of the relevant law on treason.4 Academic commentary on this 1 The author is grateful to Julia Emma D’Cruz, the staff of the C J Koh Law Library, the Lee Kong Chian Reference Library and the ISEAS Library for their able assistance in the author’s research for this article.
    [Show full text]
  • British Statutes in American Jurisdictions 197
    December, 1929 BRITISH STATUITES IN AMERICAN JURISDICTIONS FREDERICKI G. MCKEAN, JR. The abstraction called the Law is a magic mirror wherein we see reflected not only our own lives, but the lives of all men that have been.-Attributed to Mr. Jus- tice Holmes. It has been said that man differs from other animals chiefly in this: that he retains in each generation that which has been handed down by its predecessor,, and, after applying the touchstone of experience, passes it to his successors. This commonplace has been phrased in the folk saying, "Experience is the best teacher", and in the legal aphorism that "the life of the law has been-experi- ence". An outstanding characteristic of the founding of this re- public was the tenacity with which our forefathers clung to their inheritance of the laws which their immigrant ancestors brought into the New World and adapted to the requirements of changed environment. John Adams is credited with the statement that he would not have taken the stand that he did in the War for Inde- pendence, if such action had involved the loss of the common law. Chief Justice Taft says, "We embodied in the Bill of Rights in our Constitution the principles of the British Constitution as they had. been established at the Common Law."' At the threshold of the Revolution the American Continental Congress of 1774, under the presidency of George Washington, adopted this resolution: "Resolved, N. C. D. 5. That the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more espe- cially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage, according to the course of that law.
    [Show full text]
  • Treason Felony Act 1848
    Status: This is the original version (as it was originally enacted). Treason Felony Act 1847 1848 CHAPTER 12 An Act for the better Security of the Crown and Government of the United Kingdom. [22d April 1848] WHEREAS by an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain passed in the Thirty-sixth Year of the Reign of His late Majesty King George the Third, intituled An Act for the Safety and Preservation of His Majesty s Person and Government against treasonable and seditious Practices and Attempts, it was among other things enacted, that if any Person or Persons whatsoever, after the Day of the passing of that Act, during the natural Life of His said Majesty, and until the End of the next Session of Parliament after the Demise of the Crown, should, within the Realm or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend Death or Destruction, or any bodily Harm tending to Death or Destruction, Maim or Wounding, Imprisonment or Restraint of the Person of His said Majesty, His Heirs or Successors, or to deprive or depose Him or Them from the Style, Honour, or Kingly Name of the Imperial Crown of this Realm or of any other of His said Majesty's Dominions or Countries, or to levy War against His said Majesty, His Heirs and Successors, within this Realm, in order, by Force or Constraint, to compel Him or Them to change His or Their Measures or Counsels, or in order to put any Force or Constraint upon or to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, or to move or stir any Foreigner or Stranger with Force to invade this Realm or
    [Show full text]
  • Submission No. 187 COMMENTS on BEHALF of the BAR OF
    Submission No. 187 COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE BAR OF ENGLAND AND WALES PROSCRIPTION Coverage 1. This paper sets out some comments, from the perspective of the Bar of England and Wales, on those provisions of the National Security (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2003 (the “Bill”) which amend the Societies Ordinance to provide for the proscription of organisations. It also summarises the appeal procedures created in the UK under immigration and terrorism legislation. Introductory comments 2. In approaching the proposed provisions we consider that it is fundamental to recognise the importance of the right of an individual to freedom of expression, to freedom of association and to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. 3. Only where absolutely necessary should these freedoms be restricted on the grounds of national security. Any such restriction should be necessary and proportionate. 4. Any legislation providing the basis for restriction of these rights should be absolutely clear and should protect the rule of law. Comments on Section 8A(2)(a) and (b) 5. There is inevitably a problem in defining with sufficient precision the minimum conditions which must be met before an order for proscription may be made. One solution to the problem is to seek 1 to define the types of activity which may lead to proscription of an organization which commits, promotes, encourages or is otherwise concerned with such acts. This broadly speaking is the approach adopted in England by the Terrorism Act 2000 (“TA 2000”) in Sections 1 and 3. 6. This statutory scheme and its implementation are very controversial in the UK.
    [Show full text]