Who, then, will be the rightful interpreter of the laws? Will it be the sovereign, the trustee of the actual wills of all, or the judge, whose sole function[127] it is to examine whether such and such a man has committed an illegal act or not?
In every criminal case a judge ought to form a complete syllogistic8 deduction9, in which the statement of the general law constitutes the major premiss; the conformity10 or non-conformity of a particular action with the law, the minor11 premiss; and acquittal or punishment, the conclusion. When a judge is obliged, or of his own accord wishes, to make even no more than two syllogisms, the door is opened to uncertainty12.
Nothing is more dangerous than that common axiom, ‘We must consult the spirit of the laws.’ It is like breaking down a dam before the torrent13 of opinions. This truth, which seems a paradox14 to ordinary minds, more struck as they are by a little present inconvenience than by the pernicious but remote consequences which flow from a false principle enrooted among a people, seems to me to be demonstrated. Our knowledge and all our ideas are reciprocally connected together; and the more complicated they are, the more numerous are the approaches to them, and the points of departure. Every man has his own point of view—a different one at different times; so that ‘the spirit of the laws’ would mean the result of good or bad logic15 on the part of a judge, of an easy or difficult digestion16; it would depend now on the violence of his passions, now on the[128] feebleness of the sufferer, on the relationship between the judge and the plaintiff, or on all those minute forces which change the appearances of everything in the fluctuating mind of man. Hence it is that we see a citizen’s fate change several times in his passage from one court to another; that we see the lives of wretches17 at the mercy of the false reasonings or of the temporary caprice of a judge, who takes as his rightful canon of interpretation18 the vague result of all that confused series of notions which affect his mind. Hence it is that we see the same crimes punished differently by the same court at different times, owing to its having consulted, not the constant and fixed19 voice of the laws, but their unstable20 and erring21 interpretations22.
No inconvenience that may arise from a strict observance of the letter of penal laws is to be compared with the inconveniences of subjecting them to interpretation. The momentary23 inconvenience in the former case involves, indeed, correcting the words of the law which are the cause of the uncertainty, a task both easy and necessary; but the fatal licence of arguing, the source of so many arbitrary and venal24 disputes, is thereby25 prevented. When a fixed code of laws, which must be observed to the letter, leaves to the judge no further trouble than to inquire into the actions of citizens and to decide on their conformity to the written law; when the standard of just and[129] unjust, which should equally direct the actions of the ignorant citizen as of the philosophical26 one, is not a matter of controversy27 but of fact; then are people no longer subject to the petty tyrannies of many men, which are all the more cruel by reason of the smaller distance that separates the sufferer from the inflictor of suffering, and which are more pernicious than the tyrannies of a single man, inasmuch as the despotism of many is only curable by that of one, and a despot’s cruelty is proportioned, not to the power he possesses, but to the obstacles he encounters. Under a fixed code of laws citizens acquire that consciousness of personal security, which is just, because it is the object of social existence, and which is useful, because it enables them to calculate exactly the evil consequences of a misdeed. It is true they will also acquire a spirit of independence, but not such a spirit as will seek to shake the laws and prove rebellious28 against the chief magistrates29, except against such of them as have dared to apply the sacred name of virtue30 to a spiritless submission31 to their own self-interested and capricious opinions. These principles will displease32 those who have assumed the right to transfer to their subordinates the strokes of tyranny they themselves have suffered from their superiors. I personally should have everything to fear, if the spirit of tyranny and the spirit of reading ever went together.
点击收听单词发音
1 penal | |
adj.刑罚的;刑法上的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 legacy | |
n.遗产,遗赠;先人(或过去)留下的东西 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 posterity | |
n.后裔,子孙,后代 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 lawful | |
adj.法律许可的,守法的,合法的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 iniquitous | |
adj.不公正的;邪恶的;高得出奇的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 curbing | |
n.边石,边石的材料v.限制,克制,抑制( curb的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 disorders | |
n.混乱( disorder的名词复数 );凌乱;骚乱;(身心、机能)失调 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 syllogistic | |
adj.三段论法的,演绎的,演绎性的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 deduction | |
n.减除,扣除,减除额;推论,推理,演绎 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 conformity | |
n.一致,遵从,顺从 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 minor | |
adj.较小(少)的,较次要的;n.辅修学科;vi.辅修 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 uncertainty | |
n.易变,靠不住,不确知,不确定的事物 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 torrent | |
n.激流,洪流;爆发,(话语等的)连发 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 paradox | |
n.似乎矛盾却正确的说法;自相矛盾的人(物) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 logic | |
n.逻辑(学);逻辑性 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 digestion | |
n.消化,吸收 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 wretches | |
n.不幸的人( wretch的名词复数 );可怜的人;恶棍;坏蛋 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 interpretation | |
n.解释,说明,描述;艺术处理 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 fixed | |
adj.固定的,不变的,准备好的;(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 unstable | |
adj.不稳定的,易变的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 erring | |
做错事的,错误的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 interpretations | |
n.解释( interpretation的名词复数 );表演;演绎;理解 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 momentary | |
adj.片刻的,瞬息的;短暂的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 venal | |
adj.唯利是图的,贪脏枉法的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 thereby | |
adv.因此,从而 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26 philosophical | |
adj.哲学家的,哲学上的,达观的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27 controversy | |
n.争论,辩论,争吵 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28 rebellious | |
adj.造反的,反抗的,难控制的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29 magistrates | |
地方法官,治安官( magistrate的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30 virtue | |
n.德行,美德;贞操;优点;功效,效力 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31 submission | |
n.服从,投降;温顺,谦虚;提出 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
32 displease | |
vt.使不高兴,惹怒;n.不悦,不满,生气 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |