306 on interdicts. Fuly 4 
to hold up to'the public eye every thing of that kind, 
that our countrymen may learn to know them, and 
to judge of them aright. The evil that I mean to 
select, as the subject of my present lucubration, is the 
strange facility that prevails in most of our courts 
of justice, to grant an interdict, on any subject, when- 
-ever it is demanded; without hearing parties, or even 
‘bestowing the smallest attention to the case, so as te 
‘be able toknow whether an interdict be really ne- 
-cefsary or not. 
That a summary interdict may be in some cases 
necefsary,, cannot be denied ; because in some instances 
.4man may do as much harm, ina few hours, as could 
not pethaps’be ever repaired. Whenever a case of that 
nature occurs it ought to be granted. But before an 
interdict be granted, ought not the man who applies 
for it to be required to declare, upon oath, that the 
ease is such, as that a delay, till parties can be heard, 
might be productive of irreparable injury; or at least 
very high damages to himself, without subjecting 
the party complained of to considerable inconvenience? 
and if, upon examination, it fhould appear that the 
complainer had given a false representation, or had 
injuredhis opponent, by interrupting his businefs uns 
necefsarily, and without a sufficient cause, that he 
fhould be ordained ‘to pay all damages the other had 
-sustained, to the full amount; with a fine of qua- 
druple the sum, for his having wantonly and unnecef- 
sarily disturbed the peace of society. If this would 
. hot be justice, I beg of those who think otherwise te 
specify what they think could be so, 
