LAW OF VICINITY.

This violent breach in the community of Europe we must conclude to have

been made (even if they had not expressly declared it over and over

again) either to force mankind into an adoption of their system, or to

live in perpetual enmity with a community the most potent we have

ever known. Can any person imagine, that, in offering to mankind this

desperate alternative, there is no indication of a hostile mind, because

men in possession of the ruling authority are supposed to have a right

to act without coercion in their own territories. As to the right of men

to act anywhere according to their pleasure, without any moral tie, no

such right exists. Men are never in a state of TOTAL independence of

each other. It is not the condition of our nature: nor is it conceivable

how any man can pursue a considerable course of action without its

having some effect upon others; or, of course, without producing some

degree of responsibility for his conduct. The SITUATIONS in which

men relatively stand produce the rules and principles of that

responsibility, and afford directions to prudence in exacting it.

Distance of place does not extinguish the duties or the rights of men;

but it often renders their exercise impracticable. The same circumstance

of distance renders the noxious effects of an evil system in any

community less pernicious. But there are situations where this

difficulty does not occur; and in which, therefore, these duties are

obligatory, and these rights are to be asserted. It has ever been the

method of public jurists to draw a great part of the analogies, on which

they form the law of nations, from the principles of law which prevail

in civil community. Civil laws are not all of them merely positive.

Those, which are rather conclusions of legal reason than matters of

statutable provision, belong to universal equity, and are universally

applicable. Almost the whole praetorian law is such. There is a "Law of

Neighbourhood" which does not leave a man perfectly master on his

own ground. When a neighbour sees a NEW ERECTION, in the nature of a

nuisance, set up at his door, he has a right to represent it to the

judge; who, on his part, has a right to order the work to be stayed; or,

if established, to be removed. On this head the parent law is express

and clear, and has made many wise provisions, which, without destroying,

regulate and restrain the right of OWNERSHIP, by the right of VICINAGE.

No INNOVATION is permitted that may redound, even secondarily, to the

prejudice of a neighbour. The whole doctrine of that important head

of praetorian law, "De novi operis nunciatione," is founded on the

principle, that no NEW use should be made of a man's private liberty

of operating upon his private property, from whence a detriment may

be justly apprehended by his neighbour. This law of denunciation is

prospective. It is to anticipate what is called damnum infectum, or

damnum nondum factum, that is, a damage justly apprehended, but not

actually done. Even before it is clearly known whether the innovation

be damageable or not, the judge is competent to issue a prohibition to

innovate, until the point can be determined. This prompt interference is

grounded on principles favourable to both parties. It is preventive

of mischief difficult to be repaired, and of ill blood difficult to be

softened. The rule of law, therefore, which comes before the evil, is

amongst the very best parts of equity, and justifies the promptness

of the remedy; because, as it is well observed, Res damni infecti

celeritatem desiderat, et periculosa est dilatio. This right of

denunciation does not hold, when things continue, however inconveniently

to the neighbourhood, according to the ANCIENT mode. For there is a sort

of presumption against novelty, drawn out of a deep consideration of

human nature, and human affairs; and the maxim of jurisprudence is well

laid down, Vetustas pro lege semper habetur.

Such is the law of civil vicinity. Now where there is no constituted

judge, as between independent states there is not, the vicinage itself

is the natural judge. It is, preventively, the assertor of its own

rights, or remedially, their avenger. Neighbours are presumed to take

cognizance of each other's acts. "Vicini vicinorum facta praesumuntur

scire." This principle, which, like the rest, is as true of nations as

of individual men, has bestowed on the grand vicinage of Europe a duty

to know, and a right to prevent, any capital innovation which may amount

to the erection of a dangerous nuisance.

Selections from the Speeches and Writings of Edmund Burke · 第 220 / 361 题