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


Jump to: navigation, search

Click Here To Edit

The Common Judges cannot make any exceptions
to a rule of Law, but what are deducible
from some other — although it may happen that
the rule of the beneficial in the main upon the whole, is so
only ex majori parte, & not as to those

The course of expectation was fixed by the general
rule estab which was formed without a view
to those exceptions: instance after instance has happen'd
to comprise the rule before the case
that (consistently with independent utility) called for
the exception — people acquire
that any case that shall come within the
aspect of the rule will be governed by it
they act accordingly — that is it is apparent they would if
they knew of the rule and not by it's opposite kind would make the example
(which tho' ensuring
not they can do not it must always be supposed
they do) It is for the Judges who the case causes
to put themselves in the place of the people puts himself in the place of the people
upon the occasion.

And as the expectation was made up before the case
altering for the exception was , it is now
too late to alter it after the act has happened

But it is not too
late to alter it for the
legislature if they
it before it happened.
---page break---

Besides that there is always a considerable chance
that what is consequent to analogous to what is already established,
is useful consequent also to absolute utility.

In Legislation, each case stands upon its own
bases — single, uncomplicated with others
there is no necessity for any analogy to be
observed between one Law & another+ + N.B. to limit that

It seems as if it could not be right for a
Judge to prefer analogy to utility unless it
were more easily agreed upon bent the former than
the latter.

If they are more easily agreed about the analogy
than utility why is it expedient that the Legislature
itself should make any alterations
in the choice of analogy for the sake of particular
utility? save there is mischief more danger
of their being mistaken (viz: disagreeing with
the majority) in their notions of the utility of
the alteration, then there is probability.

Things to be considered
1 Re probability of the
analogy of the
course of decision
offer'd with the rest
of the choice
2. Of their judgement
being right that

Identifier: | JB/063/049/003
"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 63.


Marginal Summary Numbering



Main Headings

law in general

Folio number


Info in main headings field

law common & statute differentia motivorum condendi exempla





text sheet

Number of Pages




Page Numbering


jeremy bentham


[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [lion with vryheyt motif]]]


Paper Producer


Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number


Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk