JB/026/034/001

Click Here To Edit

March 1809 2
Press Judge's Opinion

§§.3.3. Acquittal directible

1.
Quest III.par.3. No case
proper for direction of
acquittal ever occurred.

How should they
endure the definition
of a libel as above framed
by Kings & Judges as above?
p.17

2.
par. 8. "Whenever it
shall happen — viz
never p.17

---page break---

§§.4.4 Intention proveable?

1
Quest. IV.par.2.(a) Impossible
to give direct
answer. — Say not
pleasant. p.18

2.
par.3(a) Criminal intention
matter of form
1. Soyons justes This about
the non-necessity of
proof of intention, has
more reason in it
than liberty-men will
readily admitt p.18

---page break---

3.
In defamation, intention
means not as in other
offences. p.18

4
In homicide no intention
to kill or hurt
no mischief of 2d order
viz the far greatest
part of the mischief,
especially if no temerity
or negligence p.18

5
Secus in defamation
mischief of 2d order
not lessened. p.18

6.
In defamation knowledge
&
of contents, & intention
of publishing proved,
intention to produce the
disrepute follows of course?
without proof p.19

7
Ulterior intention ex
gr. booksellers' to gain
money is here immaterial.
p.19

8.
Objects commonly confounded
with intention
1. Character or disposition
2. Knowledge. p.19

9.
Take Argans case —
1. Suppose his ulterior
intention meritorious:
viz, deeming D of York
unfit, intention of
displacing him.

2. But for the imputation
cast for that purpose
is not only false but
known to the defamer
so to be: the lady with
the £400 a conspiratrix.
p.20

---page break---

§§.4.4. Intention proveable?

10
Far from justifying
the spreading the false
imputation the ulterior
good intentions do not
extenuate it. Mischief
of neither order is diminished
by them.
p.20

11
But though ulterior
good intentions extenuate
not where the intention
in question is criminal,
want of knowledge does
tho' accompanied with
temerity or negligence.
p.21

12.
— viz — in defamation
where the defamation believes
the imputation true —
extenuation the stronger,
the stronger the reason
for such his belief —
i.e. the greater the probative
force of the evidence
which operated on him.
p.21

13.
Non-knowledge why
an extenuation —
1. Mischief of 2d order
lessened or done away.
p.22

14.
2. Mischief of 1st order
comparatively small
& each separable
viz — by recantation.
p.22

15
Less punishment necessary
to prevent a
man from defaming
through negligence or
temerity i.e. for
mere want of care
(carelessness) than to
deter him from a
design suggested by
urgent sinister
interest. p.23

16
In republishing bookseller's
case non-knowledge
operates as a
ground of extenuation
if not justification.
p.24

17.
Moreover it proves
all punishment unmeet
because
1. needless p.24

18.
2. & preponderantly
expensive. p.24.

Identifier: | JB/026/034/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 26.
Date_1	1809-03	Marginal Summary Numbering	1-2, 1-18
Box	026	Main Headings	law amendment
Folio number	034	Info in main headings field	press judge's opinion
Image	001	Titles
Category	marginal summary sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d2
Penner	john herbert koe	Watermarks	iping 1804
Marginals		Paper Producer	bernardino rivadavia
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year	1804
Notes public		ID Number	8767
Box Contents