On the record
The property in such presents was declared to be theirs, not as a fund for their benefit, but in order to found a legal title to a civil suit.
Said by
Edmund Burke
Source
gutenberg.orgEdmund Burke: “The property in such presents was declared to be theirs, not as a fund for their benefit, but in order to found a legal…”
Editor's note · Context
Burke explains that the legal declaration of property in presents does not serve the intended purpose of justice for the oppressed.
Share
More from Edmund Burke
Jan 1, 1790
The House of Lords, for instance, is not morally competent to dissolve the House of Commons,--no, nor even to dissolve itself, nor to abdicate, if it would, its portion in the legislature of the kingdom.
Jan 1, 1790
As he is not to obey us, but we are to obey the law in him, our Constitution has made no sort of provision towards rendering him, as a servant, in any degree responsible.
Jan 1, 1790
Do they mean to attaint and disable backwards all the kings that have reigned before the Revolution, and consequently to stain the throne of England with the blot of a continual usurpation?
Jan 1, 1790
When such an unwarrantable maxim is once established, that no throne is lawful but the elective, no one act of the princes who preceded this era of fictitious election can be valid.
Other voices in this conversation
