★ 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
Advocates Contents
Advocates Mercenary Lawyers
§. 1. Ought to
have no monopoloy
§. 3. Ought not to be
excluded from
any Court.
§. 2. Ought to
have no monopoly
one species
against
another
§. 4. Ought not
to be eligible
to the Office of
Judge till they
have quitted
their profession
and served in
the capacity
of Judge depute.
---page break---
1
Forcing upon a
man a law-assistant
whom he
is compelled to pay
is oppression and
extortion. p.
2
Reasons alledged
in favour of this
violence. p. 2
1. Ignorant men
can not make themselves
understood
by a Judge. p. 2.
3
2. Turbulent men
might behave with
indecorum before a
Judge. p. 3
4
Answer – This argument
is inconsistent supposes
with the suitors to be made
foregoing for Judges. p. 3
And is inconsistent
with the foregoing
by supposing exquisite
sensibility
united to extraordinary stupidity.
Judges are better
protected from against gusts
of passion than Attornies. p. 3.
---page break---
5.
It would prove that
a Judge should hear
no witnesses. p. 4
6
– and that nor low
malefactors who
get no law-assistance.
should
not be heard with
p. 4.
6 7
Reason 3. It saves
the time of the Judge.
Answer at the expence
of more than
double the time. p. 5
8
In France, the
final causes of the
monopoly were not
the above justificative
reasons, but
the money that Kings
got by it.
---page break---
9
The right of
pleading in person by ones
own mouth would
be useless without
the right of pleading
by the mouth
of an unmercenary
friend, to the weak
and the bashful. p. 7.
10
– and even incompleat
with regard to others. p. 7.
10a
Objection – the
monopoly being
once established
it would b can
not be abolished
without injustice
to those who share
in it. p. 9.
11
Answer – 1. This monopoly
is more
oppressive than
any other. p. 9
12
Answer – 2. No reasons
can be alledged
for it than
what would apply
equally on behalf
of the most mischievous
monopolies
that were
ever abolished. p. 9
---page break---
13
These are –
1. Supposed
mischief to the
public by exposing
suitors
to make choice
of unfit assistants. p. 10.
14
Answer 1. The danger
here if
there were any is
what the remedy
has no tendency to
lessen. p. 10
15
I. In the case of
Attorneys – The
examination taken
in England affords
not test of intelligence. p. 11.
16
Nor of probity
without which
intelligence is
but the more mischievous. p. 11
17
II. The tests to
which they are
subjected are mere
mockeries or worse. p. 12.
18
Of such tests of
fitness if the effect
if they had any
would be mischievous
by inspiring
groundless security. p. 12.
---page break---
19 20
If such tests were
necessary in the instance
of the Attorney
at law, they would be
still more so in that
of the Attorney ad negotia,
to which they
are never applied. p. 15
18
The mischief a lawyer
is capable of doing
depends not on his
own qualities but upon
the opportunity left
him by the law. p. 13
19
The English laws by
making it the interest
of Clients to act malȃ
fide creates a demand
& thence an inevitable
supply of malȃ fide
practisers. p. 14
21
This one of the most
conspicuous instances
of the quackery of
tests. p. 16
22
2. Mischief to the present
partakes of the benefit
of the monopoly. p. 17
23
Answers
1. The right of which
the monopoly is a violator
is more important
and sacred than
any derivable under the
monopoly. p. 17.
---page break---
24
2. The benefit of
the monopoly has
always been subject
to arbitrary
taxation by which
the profession might
be injured more
than by the abolition
of the monopoly. p. 18
25
3. So, by amendment
of the law. p. 18
26
4. The prejudice
resulting from the
abolition of the monopoly
to the present
sharers in it would
in fact be very questionable. p. 19.
---page break---
27
Good effect of the
destruction of the
monopoly – Abolition
of the distinction between
the Advocate and the
Attorney. p. 21
28
To shew the effect of
such destruction a
view must be given
of the a feature in
the domestic mode
of procedure. p. 21
29
Advantages resulting
from the bringing
the parties face to face
before the Judge in
the first stage. p. 22.
30
1. Conclusion by
desertion of malȃ
fide causes. p. 22
31
2. So of causes grounded
on error. p. 22.
32
3. Indication of
the point on which
the dispute hinges. p. 22.
33
4. Trouble and expence
of proving
points not meant
to be contested saved
by admissions. p. 23
34
5. Prevention of sham
pleas. p. 23
---page break---
34*
6. Prospect afforded
of an eventual decision. p. 24
35
7. Conclusion of many
causes by immediate
decision. p. 25.
36
8. Opening made
for a compromise
in cases where it is
consistent with justice. p. 25
37.
9. Confining the delay
given to the
quantum necessary. p. 26.
38
The need of assistance
inevitably produces
hired service in this
as in other cases. p. 27
39
How the separation
between the Attorney &
the Advocate
came to take place. p. 29
40
It was advantageous
even to the
inferior branch. p. 30
41
But prejudicial
in most instances
to the Suitor.
1. By more than
doubling the expence. p. 31
---page break---
42
By encrease multiplication
by the admission
of ill-grounded
cases, and of well-grounded
ones so
ill supported as to
require double trial. p. 32.
43
Obstacles to this where
there is but one law-assistant. p. 32.
44
Facilities where there
are two. p. 32.
45
Facilities resulting
from the situation of
the Attorney. p. 33
46
2 – from that of the
Advocate. p. 35
Domestic Procedures
1
1 The proper model
of the forensic. p. 1
2
Improperly departed
from in all the established
systems. p. 2
3
First lines of it
1. Mutual appearance in facie.
2. Parties – witnesses probe admitted
3. Compelled in se
4. All witnesses admitted.
5. All compelled.
6. Answer impromptu
to each question before the next.
7. Narration without interruption
on pretence of its being hearsay.
8. Confrontation if necessary
9. No delay without Special
cause
10. No allegation without
the best security for its
truth
|
Identifier: | JB/051/077/002 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 51.
|
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1-46, 1-3 |
|||
|
051 |
evidence; procedure code |
||
|
077 |
advocates contents |
||
|
002 |
|||
|
marginal summary sheet |
4 |
||
|
recto |
|||
|
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::l munn [britannia with shield emblem]]] |
||
|
benjamin constant |
|||
|
16242 |
|||