Warrant to attach goods of Abel Taylor, 1783

A warrant to seize nine pounds, the equal in property, or the body of Abel Taylor of Stow, to answer charges of debt brought by Nathan Smith of Weston.

Warrant to attach goods of Timothy Phelps and John Farwell, 1773

A warrant for 20 pounds, equal property, or the bodies of Phelps, a cooper, and Farwell a husbandman, both of Harvard to answer a charge of debt made by Nicholas Patterson of Shirley.

Writ for the attachment of goods or estate: action brought by Edward Hutchinson, Treasurer of Harvard College, 1731 June 5

Writ of attachment authorizing the Suffolk County Sheriff to seize £150 in money or property from John Orme, George Lawrence, and Samuel Pearce, all of Watertown, in response to action brought by Harvard College Treasurer Edward Hutchinson regarding the bond of John White. The case-specific information is handwritten onto a printed form.

Subsidiarity between Law and Economics. Research Papers in Law, 1/2005

From the Introduction. The present contribution is an attempt to raise awareness between the 'trenches' by juxtaposing the two approaches to subsidiarity. Subsequently, I shall set out why, in economics, subsidiarity is embraced as a key principle in the design and working of the Union and how a functional subsidiarity test can be derived from this thinking. Throughout the paper, a range of illustrations and examples is provided in an attempt to show the practical applicability of a subsidiarity test. This does not mean, of course, that the application of the test can automatically "solve" all debates on whether subsidiarity is (not) violated. What it does mean, however, is that a careful methodology can be a significant help to e.g. national parliaments and the Brussels circuit, in particular, to discourage careless politicisation as much as possible and to render assessments of subsidiarity comparable throughout the Union. The latter virtue should be of interest to national parliaments in cooperating, within just six weeks, about a common stance in the case of a suspected violation of the principle. The structure of the paper is as follows. Section 2 gives a flavour of very different approaches and appreciation of the subsidiarity principle in European law and in the economics of multi-tier government. Section 3 elaborates on the economics of multi-tier government as a special instance of cost / benefit analysis of (de)centralisation in the three public economic functions of any government system. This culminates in a five-steps subsidiarity test and a brief discussion about its proper and improper application. Section 4 applies the test in a non-technical fashion to a range of issues of the "efficiency function" (i.e. allocation and markets) of the EU. After showing that the functional logic of subsidiarity may require liberalisation to be accompanied by various degrees of centralisation, a number of fairly detailed illustrations of how to deal with subsidiarity in the EU is provided. One illustration is about how the subsidiarity logic is misused by protagonists (labour in the internal market). A slightly different but frequently encountered aspect consists in the refusal to recognize that the EU (that is, some form of centralisation) offers a better solution than 25 national ones. A third range of issues, where the functional logic of subsidiarity could be useful, emerges when the boundaries of national competences are shifting due to more intense cross-border flows and developments. Other subsections are devoted to Union public goods and to the question whether the subsidiarity test might trace instances of EU decentralisation: a partial or complete shift of a policy or regulation to Member States. The paper refrains from an analysis of the application of the subsidiarity test to the other two public functions, namely, equity and macro-economic stabilisation.2 Section 5 argues that the use of a well-developed methodology of a functional subsidiarity test would be most useful for the national parliaments and even more so for their cooperation in case of a suspected violation of subsidiarity. Section 6 concludes.

La consécration du critère de l’« accès au marché » au sein de la libre circulation des marchandises: mythe ou réalité? = Consecration of the criterion of "market access" in the free movement of goods: myth or reality? Research Papers in Law, 04/2011

No abstract.