xml:lang="en" lang="en" dir="ltr">

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Keep up to date with the latest news - subscribe to the Transcribe Bentham newsletter; Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/047/027/001

Jump to: navigation, search
Ready for review. Submitted by DavidHSpace

Click Here To Edit 2 Apr 1806
EVID. Exclusion b.1. Introduction. Ch.3. Short proof.
Deception ground
I When th Exclusion
is grounded in fear of
deception the admission
of accomplices
affords conclusion proof
of the impropriety of
it-for
1 as a proof by experience
for-
1 Temptation is at its
maximum
2 So improbity yet
material mendacity
not preponderantly
frequent deception
extremely rare. h.1
1
Conviction has taken &
may take place on this
evidence singly
2
2- as an argumentation
ad hominem
With what consistency
can evidence under less
temptation, & when then
is no proof of actual
improbity, &when
can of deception th
mischief and be inferior
be excluded
3
Apt on th single ground
of temptation, tho' but no-
-minal, or of improbity
without temptation, &
tho' th mischief be next
to nothing evidence is

in a thousand cases ex-
-cluded on this score. h.2
2. Vexation ground.
II When Vexation has
afforded the ground, th
vexation has been either
ideal or more than
counterbalanced. h.3
5
Th vexation is but a
pretence: for in th most
penal cases a man's
own testimony is received
agt him, in less trustworthy
shapes - viz
1. Hearsay evidence
2. Casually written evidence
6
Th evidence thus exclu-
ded is th safest and most trustworthy.
7
When an article of
written or oral evidence
is wanted, to save a man
from the vexation of merely
answering a question
concerning it the law sub-
-jects him to the greater
vexation of having his
house broken &searched
for it in the dead of th night h.3
3. Private Practice control
These exclusions can
not really regarded as
just by those who put
then - an never put by
themselves on the occasion
of their own affairs
when they have a real
wish to come at the truth
& decide accordingly. h.5
4. General jury producing proof
1
What agreement can be
mad out among man-
- kind in regards to this
practice and th opinion
connected with it, affords
no argument for th
propriety of it. h.6
2
No more than in th
case of supernatural
evidence by Duel ordeal
h6
3
Th agreement is rather
in words than substance
all th witnesses agree:
they all agree in being
liars. h.6
or using all about
quarrelling - in disagreeing.
5. Sequel, how.
1
Th impropriety of th
-
(the factor of the few
cases in which its propriety is
) being thus
in globe, what remains to be
done (after indication of th
cause of the error and th
remedy) is but th
th General proposition more
impressive by details, showing
th mischiefs, inconsistencies
and absurdities
Considering their
and extent of th error,

considering th mischievousness.
, ill- bestowed.- h.7.









Identifier: | JB/047/027/001
"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 47.

Date_1

1806-04-02

Marginal Summary Numbering

1, 1a, 2-7, 1-3, 1

Box

047

Main Headings

evidence

Folio number

027

Info in main headings field

evid. exclusion b. i introduction ch. 3 short proof

Image

001

Titles

Category

marginal summary sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

d2

Penner

john herbert koe

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

jeremy bentham

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

14895

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk