This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1883 edition. Excerpt: ...men, who working on the feelings, and pandering to the passions of the multitude, soon monopolized the supreme authority. But the majority of mankind were not so enei-getic or could not get rid of the highly dangerous royal animal. They merely strove to guard against his beak and claws, by setting limits to his power, by constitutional checks. These checks have gradually succeeded in curtailing to such an extent the royal functions, that government is virtually carried on by the community, through its representatives. It might appear no longer necessary to limit and check the supreme authority, which has thus descended to the Nation. It sounds like an axiom that the people have no need to restrict their authority over themselves. But this axiom is a fallacy. The will and interests of the sovereign nation is the will and interests of the most numerous or the most active part of the community, of the majority, or of those who succeed in making themselves accepted as the majority, and this majority, real or apparent, is as dangerous to the minority as the original unrestricted royal vulture. Civil liberty is in need of protection both in absolute and in representative governments. This protection has been obtained not by doing away with standing armies, --an impossibility in the present age, --not by instituting national guards to counteract the regular army, --a permanent encouragement to civil strife and commotion, --but by establishing a sacred area of individual liberty of action, on which the supreme political authority is not allowed to intrude, except under exceptional circumstances clearly defined, and with the concurrence, or the approval of an independent judicial authority. 118. This sacred area of individual liberty is hedged.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the "public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Britannia's Embrace revises current understandings about the origins of refuge, which have focused exclusively on the period post-1914. It argues that the responsibility to protect persecuted foreigners developed in nineteenth-century Britain through a popular movement that equated refugee relief with what it meant to be liberal on a global stage.

This two-volume book, published open access, brings together leading scholars of constitutional law from twenty-nine European countries to revisit the role of national constitutions at a time when decision-making has increasingly shifted to the European and transnational level. It offers important insights into three areas. First, it explores how constitutions reflect the transfer of powers from domestic to European and global institutions. Secondly, it revisits substantive constitutional values, such as the protection of constitutional rights, the rule of law, democratic participation and constitutional review, along with constitutional court judgments that tackle the protection of these rights and values in the transnational context, e.g. with regard to the Data Retention Directive, the European Arrest Warrant, the ESM Treaty, and EU and IMF austerity measures. The responsiveness of the ECJ regarding the above rights and values, along with the standard of protection, is also assessed. Thirdly, challenges in the context of global governance in relation to judicial review, democratic control and accountability are examined. On a broader level, the contributors were also invited to reflect on what has increasingly been described as the erosion or ‘twilight’ of constitutionalism, or a shift to a thin version of the rule of law, democracy and judicial review in the context of Europeanisation and globalisation processes. The national reports are complemented by a separately published comparative study, which identifies a number of broader trends and challenges that are shared across several Member States and warrant wider discussion. The research for this publication and the comparative study were carried out within the framework of the ERC-funded project ‘The Role and Future of National Constitutions in European and Global Governance’. The book is aimed at scholars, researchers, judges and legal advisors working on the interface between national constitutional law and EU and transnational law. The extradition cases are also of interest to scholars and practitioners in the field of criminal law. Anneli Albi is Professor of European Law at the University of Kent, United Kingdom. Samo Bardutzky is Assistant Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.