★ 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
2
CERTAINTY Construction of INDICTMENTS
Agreably to this observation, the specification of the person who is the object of an offence such offence as which
consists in the invasion of Property, may well be spared || || Or the Composition of the Indictment may have the choice of a triple alternative 2 or 3 persons - a Corporation to go for reckon as one and so of Man & Wife - just as the alias gives alternatives in the name of the accused - For if goods be stolen, it is no mat what matter is it
of who whom they belonged to? if a man be robbed of goods in his possession, what matter is it whether
'rare his own or any others? If a false Instrument be circulated with intent to defraud,
that is, to procure money at the expense on the credit of it of another some one + + for defrauding, as such is no object of a man's intention. , what matters is whether of that man
or of another? If a House be set on fire, what matters whether it be the dwelling of Tit.
or Semperonius ? For Titius & Semperonius are equally entitled to be protected against losses [the best] ( protection ) [the Law can give from
alarms, frauds, & Fire; & which ever of them chance to have been the object of any of these
calamities, the mischief to the state is equally or so nearly & so generally equal, as a
to justify the making any difference in the punishment on this Score and this Law which guards them: at least which is
sufficient, no such difference is made.
No good therefore results from this specification: but then does harm. If it is not n
to be proved it is unnecessary & on that score mischievous. P If it is to be proved, it is
that the Jury may be satisfied concerning it: it adds one therefore to the points respecting
---page break---
which the Jury must be satisfied before they can give their verdict: who is certain for
deliberations of It adds in the first place to the difficulty of producing proof, in the second place to that of their judging upon up
that proof when produced: it perplexes the deliberations and adds to the scenarios of dissention in that
Assemblies, who [often] find it hard enough to ag bring themselves to a concurrence c
concerning prints articles that are necessary without being obliged put to extend it to such as are not
so.
1st Hale p. 512 & seq.
Many doubts niceties concerning the designation of the proposition in Larceny and Robbery are to be met with on this Head in Sr M Hale's treatise solved from
time to him by determinations: together with one which coincides with this doctrine contended for & renders them
unnecessary
FACTIONS
Factions in a free state will unavoidably (when all is done) that can be done subsist in a degree sufficient to preserve Liberty
It is there laid down that "an Indictment of Larceny of the Goods of a Person unknown
is good, for (says the Author), it is at the Kings suit + + He means in contradistraction to an Appeal for which is brought if the sort of a private person who must be the proprietor. & tho' the owner be not known
the Felony must be punished. " 21. H6. Indictment 12. - And this is a form at this time of day frequently
adopted.
Now to say that the goods are the property of a person somebody unknown, is in effect to not
Nothing say whose they are of nobody for every thing that can be taken is the property of somebody: and in fact
years before the latter determination, it had been an Indictment without any specification of the Law
|
Identifier: | JB/050/134/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 50.
|
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
050 |
procedure code |
||
|
134 |
certainty construction of indictments |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
c2 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::j honig & zoonen [lion with vryheyt motif]]] |
||
|
cc1 |
|||
|
16125 |
|||