vol. xxi. of Ordonnances des rois de France (1849), preceded by an Essai sur l’ancienne organisation judiciaire, which was reprinted in part in 1851. In 1843 Pardessus published a critical edition of the Loi salique, followed by 14 dissertations, which greatly advanced the knowledge of the subject. He died at Pimpeneau near Blois on the 27th of May 1853.
See notices in Journal général de l’instruction publique (July 27, 1853), in the Bibliothèque de l’école des chartes (3rd series, 1854, v. 453), and in the “Histoire de l’académie des inscriptions et belles lettres” (vol. xx. of the Mémoires de l’académie, 1861).
PARDO BAZÁN, EMILIA (1851–), Spanish author, was
born at Corunna, Spain, on the 16th of September 1851.
Married in her eighteenth year to Sr D. José Quiroga, a Galician country gentleman, she interested herself in politics, and is believed to have taken an active part in the subterranean campaign against Amadeo of Savoy and, later, against the republic. In 1876 she came into notice as the successful competitor
for a literary prize offered by the municipality of Oviedo,
the subject of her essay being the Benedictine monk, Benito
Jerónimo Feijóo. This was followed by a series of articles
inserted in La Ciencia cristiana, a magazine of the purest
orthodoxy, edited by Juan M. Orti y Lara. Her first novel,
Pascual López (1879), is a simple exercise in fantasy of no
remarkable promise, though it contains good descriptive
passages of the romantic type. It was followed by a more
striking story, Un Viaje de novios (1881), in which a discreet
attempt was made to introduce into Spain the methods of
French realism. The book caused a sensation among the literary
cliques, and this sensation was increased by the appearance of
another naturalistic tale. La Tribuna (1885), wherein the
influence of Zola is unmistakable. Meanwhile, the writer’s
reply to her critics was issued under the title of La Cuestión
palpitante (1883), a clever piece of rhetoric, but of no special
Value as regards criticism or dialectics. The naturalistic scenes
of El Cisne de Vilamorta (1885) are more numerous, more pronounced,
than in any of its predecessors, though the authoress
shrinks from the logical application of her theories by supplying
a romantic and inappropriate ending. Probably the best of
Sra Párdo Bazan’s work is embodied in Los Pazos de Ulloa
(1886), the painfully exact history of a decadent aristocratic
family, as notable for its portraits of types like Nucha and
Julián as for its creation of characters like those of the political
bravos, Barbacana and Trampeta. Yet perhaps its most
abiding merit lies in its pictures of country life, its poetic realization
of Galician scenery set down in an elaborate, highly-coloured
style, which, if not always academically correct, is invariably
effective. A sequel, with the significant title of La Madre
naturaleza (1887), marks a further advance in the path of
naturalism, and henceforward Sra Pardo Bazán was universally
recognized as one of the chiefs of the new naturalistic
movement in Spain. The title was confirmed by the publication
of Insolación and Morriña, both issued in 1889. In this year
her reputation as a novelist reached its highest point. Her
later stories. La Cristiana (1890), Cuentos de amor (1894), Arco
Iris (1895), Misterio (1903) and La Quimera (1905), though not
wanting in charm, awakened less interest. In 1905 she published
a play entitled Verdad, remarkable for its boldness rather than
for its dramatic qualities. (J. F.-K.)
PARDOE, JULIA (1806–1862), English writer, was born at Beverley, Yorkshire, in 1806. When fourteen years old she published a volume of poems. In 1835 she went to Constantinople and her experiences there furnished her with material for vivid pictures of Eastern life in the City of the Sultan (1837), Romance of the Harem (1839) and Beauties of the Bosphorus (1839). Her other works, not always historically accurate, include Louis XIV. and the Court of France in the Seventeenth Century (1847); The Court and Reign of Francis I.(1849); The Life and Memoirs of Marie de Medici (1852); Episodes of French
History during the Consulate and the First Empire (1859);
and several sprightly and pleasant novels. In 1860 she was granted a civil list pension. She died on the 26th of November 1862.
PARDON (through the Fr. from Late Lat. perdonare, to remit a debt or other obligation on a penalty), the remission, by the
power entrusted with the execution of the laws, of the penalty
attached to a crime. The right of pardoning is coextensive
with the right of punishing. In a perfect legal system, says
Beccaria, pardons should be excluded, for the clemency of the
prince seems a tacit disapprobation of the laws (Dei Delitti e
delle pene, ch. xx.).[1] In practice the prerogative is extremely
valuable, when used with discretion, as a means of adjusting
the different degrees of moral guilt in crimes or of rectifying a
miscarriage of justice. By the law of England pardon is the
sole prerogative of the king, and it is declared by 27 Hen. VIII.
c. 24 that no other person has power to pardon or remit any
treasons or felonies whatsoever. This position follows logically
from the theory of English law that all offences are breaches of
the king’s peace. Indictments still conclude with a statement
that the offence was committed “against the peace of our lord
king, his crown and dignity.” The Crown by pardon only remits
the penalty for an attack upon itself. The prerogative is in
modern times exercised by delegation, the Crown acting upon
the representation of the secretary of state for the home department
in Great Britain, or of the lord lieutenant in Ireland. The
prerogative of the Crown is subject to some restrictions: (1) The
committing of a subject of the realm to a prison out of the
realm is by the Habeas Corpus Act a praemunire, unpardonable
even by the king (31 Car. II. c. 2, § 12). (2) The king cannot
pardon an offence in a matter of private rather than of public
wrong, so as to prejudice the person injured by the offence.
Thus a common nuisance cannot be pardoned while it remains
unredressed, or so as to prevent an abatement of it. A fine or
penalty imposed for the offence may, however, be remitted.
By an act of 1859 (22 Vict. c. 32) his majesty is enabled to remit
wholly or in part any sum of money imposed upon conviction,
and, if the offender has been imprisoned in default of payment, to
extend to him the royal mercy. There are other statutes dealing
with special offences, e.g. by the Remission of Penalties Act 1875
his majesty may remit any penalty imposed under 21 Geo. III.
c. 49 (an act for preventing certain abuses and profanations on
the Lord’s Day called Sunday). (3) The king’s pardon cannot
be pleaded in bar of an impeachment. This principle, first
asserted by a resolution of the House of Commons in the earl of
Danby’s case (May 5, 1679), forms one of the provisions of the
Act of Settlement, 12 & 13 Will. III. c. 2. It is there enacted
“that no pardon under the great seal of England shall be plead able
to an impeachment by the Commons in parliament,” § 3,
This provision does not extend to abridging the prerogative
after the impeachment has been heard and determined. Thus
three of the rebel lords were pardoned after impeachment and
attainder in 1715. (4) In the case of treason, murder or rape
a pardon is ineffectual unless the offence be particularly specified
therein (13 Rich. II. c. 1, § 2). Before the Bill of Rights, 1 Will.
& M. c. 2, § 2, this statute seems to have been frequently evaded
by a non obstante clause. But, since by the Bill of Rights no
dispensation by non obstante is allowed, general words contrary
to the statute of Richard II. would seem to be ineffectual.
Pardon may be actual or constructive. Actual pardon is by warrant under the great seal, or under the sign-manual countersigned by a secretary of state (7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 28, § 13). Constructive pardon is obtained by endurance of the punishment. By 9 Geo. IV. c. 32, § 3, the endurance of a punishment on conviction of a felony not capital has the same effect as a pardon under the great seal. This principle is reaffirmed in the Larceny Act 1861, § 109, and in the Malicious Injuries to Property Act 1861, § 67. Further, pardon may be free or conditional. A conditional pardon most commonly occurs where an offender sentenced to death has his sentence commuted to penal servitude or any less punishment. The condition of his pardon is the endurance by him of the substituted punishment. The effect of pardon, whether actual or constructive, is to put the person pardoned in the position of an innocent man, so that he may have
- ↑ See further, on the ethical aspect, Montesquieu, Esprit des lois, bk. vi. ch. 21; Bentham, Principles of Penal Law, bk. vi. ch. 4.
