JB/052/271/001

Click Here To Edit

1825. Jany. 25 +
Procedure Code

b 1
Ch. VI Judiciary Application
§.7 Application how commenced
Oaths none — why.

Rationale (1)

1
Oath none why?
Answer 1 needless 2
inefficacious to good
purpose, 3 effective
to evil purpose.

Question. As a security for testimonial veracity — why is
not the called taking an oath been employed?

Answer. Because it is needless, to every good purpose
inefficacious, to an evil purpose evil purpose in prodigious extent
effective

2
1 Needless why

1. It is needless: the responsibility here proposed respectability
satisfactional and upon occasion distractant
is sufficient in a degree responsibility to the legal
sanction — responsibility to the popular or moral sanction
to the judicial official and Public Tribunals is abundantly
sufficient

3
2 Inefficacity proved
by experience

2. It is inefficacious utterly devoid of efficacy as is proved
by universal and continually continual repeated experience. In Under the English System
invalidity unobligatoriness in respect of moral obligation is abundantly recognized
by the practice of the constituted authorities.

1 in the case of Jurymen

1. In the situation of Jurymen. In no instance when the there is any
difference of in opinion has place can any verdict be given without
a breach of the promise thus pretended to be The
verdict being delivered as unanimous part save of the
Jurors from one in any number from one to eleven
must have done that which they have all of them sworn
not to do. made declaration uttered a declared opinion
contrary to their real one.

2 In declarations of
value of articles taken
of defendants not being
guilty

2. Instances are happening happen every day and always have been happening
in which they unanimously with one voice they all concur in delivering as one
that which all know to be untrue and when out been
simple not to declare their believing knowing to be untrue 1. Declaring
a of quantity of money which to be 1 under a certain sum when in fact
what was stolen if indeed it was stolen was could not have been
less than several times that sum 2 declaring a defendant is not guilty
when
when according to ample
uncontradicted and
unquestioned evidence
he was guilty. In
both cases for the known
and indefensible purpose
of saving the defendant from a punishment appointed by law.

Identifier: | JB/052/271/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 52.
Date_1	1825-01-25	Marginal Summary Numbering	1-3
Box	052	Main Headings	procedure code
Folio number	271	Info in main headings field	procedure code
Image	001	Titles	rationale
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	c1
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	j whatman turkey mill 1824
Marginals	george bentham	Paper Producer	jonathan blenman
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year	1824
Notes public		ID Number	16944
Box Contents