JB/106/110/001

Click Here To Edit

March 1807

Exemplification of the distinction between the question of
law and the question of fact under statutory law.

Words of the law suppose these Frequent if the law conceived for example in terms
such as those following

Every contract engagement which a man enters into shall be
binding upon him, and he shall be accordingly compellable
to fulfill it, unless except in the cases following, viz:
1. If it be at the time of entering into it he were
1. The case of force: viz: unlawful force.
2. The case of fraud.

Demand grounded in a contract. Defendant confesses
the act of entering into it: but as a ground of exemption
from the obligation pleads adduces the plea of force.

The testimony shape evidence adduced by him further
propose (his own testimony included or not included) this evidence
supposing it credited does it evince at the time of his entrance into the engagement that he was under a
force in the sense in which the word force is meant to be
employed in the body of the law? This is the question of law.

The evidence delivered does it warrant the conclusion?
Such part of it if any as is struck is it comes under the
denomination of direct evidence, does it deserve credit?

Such part of it, if any, as comes under the denomination
of circumstantial, is it in conjunction with the direct, sufficiently
strong to support the inference? This is the question
of the fact.

☞ Add The word force of itself not sufficiently explicit – thus put only
for exemplification pro tanto.

Identifier: | JB/106/110/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 106.
Date_1	1807-03-08	Marginal Summary Numbering	17
Box	106	Main Headings	scotch reform
Folio number	110	Info in main headings field
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	c6 / e1
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks
Marginals	jeremy bentham	Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	34698
Box Contents