Publisher's Synopsis
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1844 edition. Excerpt: ... But such right, it is said, i* not claimed. It is a cause of forfeiture, then, because it is an abuse of the right to issue; and being effected by a perversion of the corporate powers in suspending, the forfeiture arises out of that perversion, and not out of the purpose for which it was resorted to. Every suspension, then, stands on the same footing. The legal right is the same in every case; and the question as to the right necesssarily arises upon any suspension, whatever be the motive, or purpose. The slightest trespass is a sufficient ground for an action of trespass to try the title to lands; and a verdict either way settles thequestion of title between the parties. There may be a great deal of matter of aggravation, much injury, and insult; but the owner has the right to raise the question of title by evidence of any trespass, however slight, which may be construed into an act of ownership. Upon an usurpation of delegated authority, the possible consequences; to which the allowance of the usurpation might lead, are all very properly to be considered; but in order to raise the question of usurpation, the slighest exercise of the authority is sufficient. Still less can the right depend upon the use made of an usurped authority. A magistrate who claimed and exercised the right to try, and execute, his fellow citizens for capital offences, would hardly be supposed to put himself on safe ground, by shewing that he hung none but those who richly deserved the gallows. How are you to draw the line between a proper, and an improper exercise of an illegal authority 1 The very attempt to draw the distinction is, for all practical purposes, to admit the authority to be legal. Take the case of the banks. It is cheerfully conceded, that the...
