JB/081/036/001

Click Here To Edit

2

1828. Novr.
Petition for Justice.
1. Case.
V. Oaths necessitated

17. Mischievous by producing Perjury
By test oaths, perjury
all-comprehensive is
established by law. Premium
for perjury the aggregate
value of the offices
to which it is attached.
Oaths sown, as per Blackstone:
annual crops
reaped.

18.
For years of perjury
Archbishoprick of Canterbury.

19.
Thus profited by
perjurious mendacity
can a man wish to
prevent it?

20.
Not that it follows
that by such perjury
no fear of future punishment
is felt, but
that none is feared
from this source.

21.
Established Bishop
has been a national
school of Orthodoxy.
By Judges, Westminster
Hall a national
school of Perjury.

21* Mischievous by excessive punishment
By want of propinquity
and uncertainty,
it has produced punishment
excessive in
magnitude on prosecution
for perjury.

---page break---

22. Needless Affirmation Sufficient
Declaration of the part
of a man takes on any
public occasion, are
frequently necessary.
But for this purpose
no oath is needful.

23. Absurd.
In respect of the punishment
after death for the
profanation, the Attorney
administering the oath
is to God what the Chief
Justice is to the Sheriff
to whom he issues his
writ.

24.
The Attorney, for his
shilling, draws a draught
on God for the eventual
punishment: will
it be honored?

25. Needless Association Sufficient
To mark the distinction
between an assertion
intended and do.
not intended to be legally
operative, employ
the word asseveration
instead of oath.

26. Needless Inefficient
Sole advantage from
the oath, expectation of
the eventual addition
of the punishment for
the profanation, to do.
for the mendacity.
This the sole good
to set against the
abovementioned mountain
of evil.

---page break---

27. Inefficient
The posthumous punishment
expected for
mendacity, will vary
with the evil produced:
for a self-exculpatory
lie, the punishment
expected will not be
so great as for a murder-producing
lie:
But the profanation
is the same offence
in both cases.

28.
5 Repugnancy to
scriptures. 1. Old Testament
2Second Commandmt.
Thou shalt not take
the name of the Lord
in vain, &c.
2. New Testament.
Quoth Jesus swear not
at all.
3. Quoth Saint
Pursued for interpretation
is the rule of contraries.

29.
Says God to man, swear
not: says man to God
swear. God shall punish
disregard to the
oath.

30.
if imposer were believer,
this commandment
would have
more influence than
what as above thus forbidden,
the ceremony
is seen to have.

31.
For the use of so powerful
an instrument
of profitable maleficence,
no posthumous
punishment is deemed
too great.

---page break---

32. Inefficient else why not universalizing?
Suppose this ceremony
a preservation against
mendacity, why not against
crime and vice
in every shape?
Take the whole list of
maleficent acts, constituted
or not constituted
offences, and make every
person swear he will
not commit them.

Identifier: | JB/081/036/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 81.
Date_1	1828-11	Marginal Summary Numbering	17-32
Box	081	Main Headings	petition for justice
Folio number	036	Info in main headings field	petition for justice
Image	001	Titles
Category	marginal summary sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d2 / e2
Penner	john flowerdew colls	Watermarks
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	25823
Box Contents