Mr.Baldwin zat elf maanden gevangen, waarna de rechtbank oordeelde, dat hij
niets verschuldigd was. Mr.Manie zat twee maanden vast, waarna de rechter het
affidavit, waarop hij gearresteerd was, ongeldig verklaarde. Earl Stanhope noemde dit
in strijd met de Magna Charta en gaf een uitvoerig voorbeeld van fictieve gronden,
waarop men werd gearresteerd. Toen hij daarover zijn rechtskundige aansprak
antwoordde deze dat his lordship deze zaken niet begreep, het waren wat
rechtskundigen noemden 'nullities'. Het is moeilijk de volslagen ontkenning door
het recht van de mens als persoon met vrijheid van handelen en verantwoordelijkheid
daarvoor, duidelijker aan te tonen. Geven wij het woord weer aan Earl Stanhope:
My lords, down in Kent there is a little country village, called Chevening, and in that village
there is a little cottage which belongs to myself; and a circumstance happened there about
30 years ago, which led me first to know something about counts. There was one of those
strolling characters that go about the country, who came to this cottage; and putting his
head within the door, staring around the place, and not perceiving any body, he thought
proper to lay hold of a pair of leather breeches which were hanging up, and walked away
with them. - (A laugh.) - This circumstance was soon known; and it made a great noise, as it
was likely to do in a country village, and at lenght it attracted the notice of this man of ability
in the law, who was there at the time, and who seemed determined to convince these
villagers of his great sagacity; perhaps, he had a further object, that of getting some money
from me upon the occasion. Presently, my lords, he act about drawing a declaration, with
which he waited upon me to show how well he could do it. Having stated the circumstances,
he gave me this declaration to read; and I accordingly began to read with this same lawyer
standing at my elbow; and then, for the first time, I acquired a knowledge of this wonderful
science of declaration making. There were no less than twelve counts in this declaration
about taking away the leather breeches. There was no force - no vi et armis in the business;
for there was nobody belonging to the cottage at home when the breeches were taken
away; I was therefore somewhat surprized to find it charged that the defendant had with
guns, pikes, halberts, pistols, and a variety of other deadly weapons, broken open the
cottage and taken away the leather breeches. This was the first count. On looking at the
second, I found, that the defendant, not content with small arms, had attacked this cottage
with cannons, cannon-balls, bombs, howitzers, and other similar arms, and taken away the
leather breeches, in the third count, 100 horses, and 100 horsemen upon these 100 horses,
had been brought into this village to storm the unfortunate cottage, and carry away the
leather breeches: in short, out of the 12 counts, 11 were pure fictions, there being only one
that bore the least resemblance to the truth. I naturally asked the lawyer, what was the
meaning of these guns, pikes, pistols, &c. The lawyer, smiling at my ignorance, answered, "Oh,
I see your lordship don't understand these matters; that is what we lawyers call a nullity." What
do you mean by these cannons, bombs, &c.? That is likewise what we lawyers call a nullity."
What do you mean by this troop of horse coming to carry away the leather breeches? That is
what we lawyers call a nullity. In short, my lords, all were nullities except one; the stroller having
quietly stolen away the breeches. But the system of fiction was most comprehensive in the
practice of the lawyers. Their lordships must not be surprised to learn, that the arrest upon
mesne process arose entirely out of fiction; for the court from which the writ issued charged
the defendant with being guilty of contempt in not appearing; and then upon the defendant
denying the contempt, he is imprisoned for the denial; that is, he is punished for denying a
falsehood. But the system of fiction was extended still farther, Originally, all civil actions were
tried in the court of Common Pleas; but the court of King's Bench, in order to have a share of
the good things belonging to such actions, contrived to bring them under its cognizance, by
the fiction of charging the defendant with a breach of the peace, although the peace had
not at all been violated; and the court of the Exchequer, in order also to participate of the
spoil, contrived to extend its jurisdiction to civil actions, by the fiction of charging the
