Old Law
| Published date | 01 January 1937 |
| Date | 01 January 1937 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002201833700100109 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Old
Law
A
NYTHING
affecting the liberty of the subject has always
aroused the greatest interest in this
country;
nothing
stirs
the
Nonconformist Conscience more rapidly or more
certainly
than
the suggestion
that
some action or proposal is
an infringement of the liberty of
the
subject-that
great
principle for which
our
forefathers bled and died.
The
most
junior member of the Bar, if briefed upon an application for a
writ of habeas corpus, can enter any court in the High Court of
Justice, and upon his crying aloud, " My Lord, the liberty of
the
subject," he has the right to be heard at once, to the great
disturbance and prejudice of the business
then
before
the
Court.
(In
parenthesis, let it also be said
that
he would
probably be well advised not to act in this manner,
but
to send
a polite message to the Judge via the Associate that he desires
to make the application !)
The
liberty of the subject is based
upon
rights and
principles as old as Magna Carta itself, if not indeed as old as
the
laws of King Alfred. And yet, strangely enough, when a
man is convicted nowadays
under
aStatute fifty or a hundred
years old, there is at once a popular
outcry-fomented,
of
course, by the cheaper
newspapers-against
the wickedness of
putting such an antiquated law into operation. Is not this a
curious contradiction? A law may become obsolete and out of
date by the march of events and the progress of science and
civilization;
but
this is not necessarily so.
"Thou
shalt not
steal"
was one of the
Ten
Commandments, and it is at least
permissible to ask whether or not the direct simplicity of
that
prohibition has really been improved by the greater detail
of the Larceny Acts.
Old law is not bad, because it is
old;
there are many old
Statutes
that
have not actually been repealed, although they
10
4
To continue reading
Request your trial