There are obvious reasons why they might choose to consult the king, and obtain his approbation of the sentence they were about to impose, without supposing any legal necessity for their so doing.
Spooner suggests that peers might consult the king for approval of their sentences without any legal obligation to do so.
Share
More from Lysander Spooner
Proud from victory, and with their swords in their hands, would they surrender their liberties to a private man?
It would also be making them consent to what they regard as the destruction of their own rights.
That the legislation of the king was of no authority over a jury, is further proved by the oath taken by the kings at their coronation.
In nearly or quite all the States of the United States the juries are illegal, for one or the other of the same reasons that make the juries in England illegal.