The Constitution of England: Or, An Account of the English Government; in which it is Compared, with the Republican Form of Government, and Occasionally with the Other Monarchies in Europe
T. Spilsbury, and sold by G. Kearsley, 1775 - 448 стор.
De Lolme's treatise on the English constitution formerly enjoyed a high reputation. It appeared at a favourable moment, when the rise of modern radicalism made constitutional questions of engrossing interest; it flattered the national pride by representing England as the only country where the government was at once strong and free; it was written in an easy style; and, until recently, it kept a secure place through the absence of any good systematic work on the English constitution. It threw little, if any, fresh light on the subject. A foreign critic has truly described it as an elaboration of a single short chapter of Montesquieu. Bentham, indeed, comparing him with Blackstone, says: 'Our author has copied, but Mr. De Lolme has thought;' and certainly, amidst much exaggeration and distorted judgments, the essay contains many shrewd observations on political affairs. As an enthusiastic statement of the theory that the freedom of the English constitution is the result of the balance of the different parts, the 'equilibrium between the ruling powers of the state', it still deserves study. But as a history and exposition of the constitution it has been superseded.' [DNB]"--John Drury Rare Books Listing.
Відгуки відвідувачів - Написати рецензію
Не знайдено жодних рецензій.
Інші видання - Показати все
The Constitution of England, Or, an Account of the English Government: In ...
Jean Louis De Lolme
Попередній перегляд недоступний - 2015
advantages afterwards againſt alſo ancient appear Aſſembly attempt attended authority becauſe become beſides bill body called caſes cauſe Charles circumſtances Citizens Commons conſequence Conſtitution continued Court Crown danger effect election enacted England Engliſh enjoy eſtabliſhed Executive power fact fame favour firſt followed force give given Government hand himſelf Hiſtory Houſe important individual influence inſtance intereſt itſelf Judges Jury Juſtice kind King land laſt laws Legiſlative leſs liberty Lords manner matter means Members ment mentioned moſt muſt nature neceſſary never object obſerve once opinion Parliament particular perſons political prerogative preſent preſerved Prince principles privilege procured propoſed regard reign rendered Repreſentatives Republic reſpect ſaid ſame ſay ſecurity ſee Senate ſet ſeveral ſhall ſhould ſome Sovereign ſtill ſubject ſuch taken themſelves theſe things thoſe tion uſe views whole
Сторінка 110 - M. st. 2, c. 2, as one of the liberties of the people, " that the freedom of speech, and debates, and proceedings in parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of parliament.
Сторінка 304 - And, lastly, to vindicate these rights, when actually violated or attacked, the subjects of England are entitled, in the first place, to the regular administration and free course of justice in the courts of law; next, to the right of petitioning the king and parliament for redress of grievances; and, lastly, to the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defence.
Сторінка 264 - And the English constitution has not only excluded from any share in the execution of the laws those in whom the people trust for the enacting them, but it has also taken from them what would have had the same pernicious influence on their deliberations — the hope of ever invading that executive authority, and transferring it to themselves. This authority has been made in England one single, indivisible prerogative: it has been made for ever the...
Сторінка 164 - I. the court of king's bench, relying on some arbitrary precedents, and those perhaps misunderstood, determined that they could not upon a habeas corpus either bail or deliver a prisoner, though committed without any cause assigned, in case he was committed by the special command of the king, or by the lords of the privy council.
Сторінка 165 - I. c. 10. §8. whereby it is enacted, that if any person be committed by the king himself in person, or by his privy council, or by any of the members thereof, he shall have granted unto him, without any delay upon any pretence whatsoever, a writ of habeas corpus...
Сторінка 84 - England have intrusted the king, we are at a loss to reconcile them with the idea of a monarchy, which, we are told, is limited. The king not only unites in himself all the branches of the executive power; he not only disposes, without control, of the whole military power in the state ; — but he is, moreover, it seems, master of the law itself, since he calls up, and dismisses, at his will, the legislative bodies. We find him., therefore, at...
Сторінка 166 - Guernsey, or any places beyond the seas, within or without the king's dominions, on pain that the party committing, his advisers, aiders, and assistants, shall forfeit to the party...
Сторінка 282 - But whether the authority of the judges be exerted at the motion of a private individual, or whether it be at the instance of the government itself, their sole office is to declare the punishment established by the law : — it is to the jury alone that it belongs to determine on the matter of law as well as on the matter of fact ; that is, to determine, not only whether the writing...
Сторінка 83 - ... proper. VII. In fine, what seems to carry so many powers to the height, is, its being a fundamental maxim, that THE KING CAN DO NO WRONG : •which does not signify, however, that the king has not the power of doing ill, or, as it was pretended by certain persons in former times,, that every thing he did was lawful; but only that he is above the reach of all courts of law whatever, and that his person is sacred and inviolable.