JB/047/030/001

Click Here To Edit

6 May 1806
EVID. B. .Exclusion Introdn Ch. .Exclusn Proper Short View

S.1. Grounds of Exclusion

1.
Exclusion tho' generally
improper, proper when
admission wod produce
preponderant vexation
expence & delay.
p.1.

2.
Expence & vexation
are the inseparable
concomitants of the
receipt of evidence.
Reason sufficient for
the exclusion of the
proposed evidence: if
irrelevant, or the demand
for it outweighed
by the vexation & expence.

3.
The onus of proving
the irrelevancy or preponderancy
lies however on
him who calls for the
exclusion.
p. 2

4.
Cases for exclusion reducible
to two - viz
1. Danger of misdecision
not increased
2 Greater injustice saved
Exemplification further
on.
p.3

5.
Modifications of Case 1
1. Irrelevancy
2. Persuasive force of
the mass not lessened.
3. — sufficient notwithstanding.
4. — the article in question
inoperative because
outweighed.
Add from the
to Cases for
p. 3

5(a)
In legislation, necessity
of a compleat view of
all the advantages, all
the disadvantages on
both sides.
The arrangement hence
gives the pourquoi along
with the quoi.
p. 3

6.
The danger of misdecision
the question
is the only possible mischief
from the exclusion
of evidence. in that
That in these several
cases the danger is not
increased by the exclusion
shown in other words.
p. 4

---page break---

S.2. Propriety, Law &

1.
Propositions relating to
vexation delay & expence
considered as
justification causes of
exclusion.
p1.
1. Under each separately,
much more under two
or three jointly, a mischief
greater than that
of exclusion may take
place.
p1

2.
2. The distinction between
the cases when the mischief
of admission is,
& when it is not, preponderant
over that
of exclusion, cannot
be sufficiently marked
out by general rules.
p 1

3.
3. On each individual
occasion the faculty of
marking out the
from the circumstances
of that individual case,
ought to be left free
for the Judge.
p.1

4.
4. As the demarcation
here cannot be properly
drawn, as above, by
Statute law, much less
can it by jurisprudential.
p 2

5.
5. To prevent the formation
of bad jurisprudential
law, the legislation
shd on this ground
forbid all reference to
preceding adjudications:
hence the Judge will
decide in this case, as
Juries do in all.
p 2

6
6. Without this latitude
secured to the Judge
the chances against
right decision will
in each instance be
as infinity to one.
p. 3

7.
7. In their cases reference
to precedents is as incongruous
as of, on the
second of two distinct
amounts,
to ballances of
the first.
p. 3

8
8. In their cases the
question shd always
be treated as a
question of fact - not
as a question of law.
p. 3

Identifier: | JB/047/030/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 47.
Date_1	1806-05-06	Marginal Summary Numbering	1-5, 5a, 6, 1-8
Box	047	Main Headings	evidence
Folio number	030	Info in main headings field	[[info_in_main_headings_field::evid. b [ ] exclusion ch. 6 exclusn proper short view]]
Image	001	Titles
Category	marginal summary sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d5
Penner	john herbert koe	Watermarks	iping 1804
Marginals		Paper Producer	bernardino rivadavia
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year	1804
Notes public		ID Number	14898
Box Contents