INNOCENCE1, The absence of guilt2.
2. The law presumes in favor of innocence, even against another presumption3 of law: for example, when a woman marries a second hushand within the space of twelve months after her hushand had left the country, the presumption of innocence preponderates4 over the presumption of the continuance of life. 2 B. & A. 386 3 Stark5. Ev. 1249. An exception to this rule respecting the presumption of innocence has been made in the case of the publication of a libel, the principal being presumed to have authorized6 the sale, when a libel is sold by his agent in his usual place of doing business. 1 Russ. on Cr. 341; 10 Johns. R. 443; Bull. N. P. 6; Greenl. Ev. 36. See 4 Nev. & M. 341; 2 Ad. & Ell. 540; 5 Barn. & Ad. 86; 1 Stark. N. P. C. 21; 2 Nov. & M. 219.
INNOCENT CONVEYANCES8. This term is used in England, technically9, to signify those conveyances made by a tenant10 of his leasehold11, which do not occasion a forfeiture12 these are conveyances by lease and release, bargain and sale, and a covenant13 to stand seised by a tenant for life. 1 Chit. Pr. 243, 244.
2. In this country forfeitures14 for alienation15 of a greater right than the tenant possesses, are almost unknown. The more just principle prevails that the conveyance7 by the tenant, whatever be its form, operates only on his interest. Vide Forfeiture,
INNOMINATE CONTRACTS, civil law. Contracts which have no particular names, as permutation and transaction, are so called. Inst. 2, 10, 13. There are many innominate contracts, but the Roman lawyers reduced thein to four classes, namely, do ut des, do ut facias, facio ut des, and facio ut facias. (q. v.) Dig. 2, 14, 7, 2.
INNOTESCIMUS, English law. An epithet16 used for letters-patent, which are always of a charter of feoffment, or some other instrument not of record, concluding with the words Innotescimus per praesentes, &c. Tech. Dict. h. t.
INNOVATION. Change of a thing established for something new.
2. Innovations are said to be dangerous, as likely to unsettle the common law. Co. Litt. 370, b; Id. 282, b. Certainly no innovations ought to be made by the courts, but as every thing human, is mutable, no legislation can be, or ought to be immutable17; changes are required by the alteration18 of circumstances; amendments19, by the imperfections of all human institutions but laws ought never to be changed without great deliberation, and a due consideration of the reasons on which they were founded, as of the circumstances under which they were enacted20. Many innovations have been made. in the common law, which philosophy, philanthropy and common sense approve. The destruction of the benefit of clergy21; of appeal, in felony; of trial by battle and ordeal22; of the right of sanctuary23; of the privilege to abjure24 the realm; of approvement, by which any criminal who could, in a judicial25 combat, by skill, force or fraud kill his accomplice26, secured his own pardon of corruption27 of blood; of constructive28 treason; will be sanctioned; by all wise men, and none will desire a return to these barbarisms. The reader is referred to the case of James v. the Commo wealth, 12 Serg. & R. 220, and 225 to 2 Duncan, J., exposes the absurdity29 of some ancient laws, with much sarcasm30.