The rights already treated of in the foregoing chapter, as for example the right to personal freedom or the right to free expression of opinion, do not, it may be between suggested, properly belong to the province of constitutional law at all, but form part either of private law strictly so called, or of the ordinary criminal law, Thus A’s right to personal freedom is, it may be said, only the right of A not to be assaulted, or imprisoned, by X, or (to look at the same thing from another point of view) is nothing else than the right of A, if assaulted by X, to bring an action against X, or to have X punished as a criminal for the assault. Now in this suggestion there lies an element of important truth, yet it is also undoubted that the right to personal freedom, the right to free discussion, and the like, appear in the forefront of many written constitutions, and are in fact the chief advantages which citizens hope to gain by the change from a despotic to Chapter a constitutional form of government. VIII.


Chapter VIII Personal Freedom Constitutional Form Military Tribunal Chief Advantage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mommsen, Abriss des rörnischen Staatsrecht (1893), p. 672.Google Scholar
  2. 1.
    Cf. Jennings, The Law and the Constitution (4th ed., 1952), pp. 297–298.Google Scholar
  3. See Hearn, Government of England (2nd ed., 1887), ch. iv; of. Gardiner, History of England, vol. x (1884), pp. 144, 145.Google Scholar
  4. 8.
    See Loi sur l’état de Siège, 9 Aout, 1849, Roger et Sorel, Codes et Lois (1882), p. 436; Loi 3 Avril, 1878, art. 1, and generally Duguit, Manuel de Droit Public français; Droit Constitutionnel (1907), para. 76, pp. 510–513; and para. 130, p. 926. See p. 292, post.Google Scholar
  5. 1.
    Cf. Miller v. Knox (1838) 6 Scott 1. See Report of the Committee (including Bowen, L.J., and R. B. Haldane, Q.C.), appointed to inquire into the Disturbances at Featherstone in 1893 [C. 7234].Google Scholar
  6. 1.
    See Stephen, History of the Criminal Law (1883), vol. i, pp. 202–205.Google Scholar
  7. 1.
    Roger et Sorel, Codes et Lois usuelles (1882), v° état de siège, pp. 435, 436.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. V. Dicey

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations