d philosophers, who have, in a few words, stated the
substance, the object, and the result of all morality, and politics, and
law.
"Nihil est quod adhuc de republica putem dictum, et quo possim longius
progredi, nisi sit confirmatum, non modo falsum esse illud, sine injuria
non posse, sed hoc verissimum, sine summa justitia rempublicam regi non
posse."--_Cic. Frag._ lib. ii. _de Repub._
"Justice is itself the great standing policy of civil society, and any
eminent departure from it, under any circumstances, lies under the
suspicion of being no policy at all."--_Burke's Works_, vol. iii. p.
207.
FOOTNOTES
[1] See "A Syllabus of Lectures on the Law of England, to be delivered
in Lincoln's-Inn Hall by M. Nolan, Esq." London, 1796.
[2] I have not been deterred by some petty incongruity of metaphor from
quoting this noble sentence. Mr. Hume had, perhaps, this sentence in his
recollection, when he wrote a remarkable passage of his works. See
Hume's Essays, vol. ii. p. 352. ed. Lond. 1788.
[3] The learned reader is aware that the "jus naturae" and "jus gentium"
of the Roman lawyers are phrases of very different import from the
modern phrases, "law of nature" and "law of nations." "Jus naturale,"
says Ulpian, "est quod natura omnia animalia docuit." D. I. I. I. 3.
"Quod naturalis ratio inter omnes homines constituit, id que apud omnes
peraeque custoditur vocaturque jus gentium." D. I. I. 9. But they
sometimes neglect this subtle distinction--"Jure naturali quod
appellatur jus gentium." I. 2. I. II. _Jus feciale_ was the Roman term
for our law of nations. "Belli quidem aequitas sanctissime populi Rom.
feciali jure perscripta est." Off. I. II. Our learned civilian Zouch has
accordingly entitled his work, "De Jure Feciali, sive de _Jure inter
Gentes_." The Chancellor D'Aguesseau, probably without knowing the work
of Zouch, suggested that this law should be called, "_Droit entre les
Gens_," (Oeuvres, tom. ii. p. 337.) in which he has been followed by a
late ingenious writer, Mr. Bentham, Princ. of Morals and Pol. p. 324.
Perhaps these learned writers do employ a phrase which expresses the
subject of this law with more accuracy than our common language; but I
doubt whether innovations in the terms of science always repay us by
their superior precision for the uncertainty and confusion which the
change occasions.
[4] This remark is suggested by an objection of _Vattel_, which is more
specious than solid. See his
|