JB/063/121/002

Click Here To Edit

What and in what sense Intention 7
is regarded?

On the m popular side it was constantly contended that the criminal intent in the publication was of the
essence of the crime: that it was that of which the Jury were to consider [of] and of which if
they were not persuaded they could not consistently with their oaths find the Deft. Guilty. The bare intent to
do the act of publication was all along then confounded with the motives of doing
it. This have confusion fallacy was perhaps seen through by another party: it had
such an effect at least on the arguers on the ministerial side, that to avoid them
the obvious consequences they precipitated themselves into a position, which however familiar
in the historical language of Lawyers proved but a weak defence was of such a nature as
to have built a weak influence on minds not already by h prepared for its
reception by the prejudice of party or profession or by habit. Without making the above distinction & enjoying the relevancy question concerning of the motive they roundly asserted that the sometimes that it was
a matter of Law to be collected by the Judges from the perusal of the Record
containing the Libel Writing in question; sometimes without more ado that the criminality
of the intention (still preserving the ambiguity of the expression) was ipso
facto or inferred or presumed by the Law: sometimes again that the malice of
the intention (but without making any difference between the ? expressions this expression & the former)
was to be collected or was thus suffered or presumed.

It might well have be conjectured, were the event unknown, that these
arguments could be nothing less than satisfactory — apparently fallacious in themselves and
inconsistent with each other they could convinced none but such as were convinced
without them: and to consider the matter with impartiality it must be confessed acknowledged
that the popular declaimers trumpeted in the controversy. "Take for granted
without proof a fact position/circumstance which not being true have no guilt constitutes the guilt, which
not being true leaves none? the pretence of trial is but then/if this be the case a mockery —
with this liberty because tho' it were prescriptive of excluding presumptions and inferences to your purpose, no
proposition so absurd but may be supported: no man so innocent but may
be condemned: as well may you suppose at once presume a man guilty that man guilty whom you list without more ado
and punish him on that presumption.

Identifier: | JB/063/121/002 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 63.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	063	Main Headings	law in general
Folio number	121	Info in main headings field	why and in what sense intention is regarded?
Image	002	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d7
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	[[watermarks::[gr with crown motif] [britannia with shield motif]]]
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	20310
Box Contents