JB/050/088/001

Click Here To Edit

To say that a Judge may give a General
Verdict wherever they please, what does it
amount to? To this, that they are judges
of Law whenever they please — for no
not when they choose to keep the questions of fact and law unseparated, they may decide of both
general verdict can be given, but the
Law as well as the fact, must thereby
have been determined.

To say that Judges are the proper Judges of Law,
and Juries, of fact," what does it amount
to? That when the two questions are once
separated, (which cannot be done but by the
act of the Jury) then it is that the question
of fact belongs to the Jury to answer, not
to the Judges, the question of the Law, to the
Judges to answer not to the Jury; that
the Jury may have advice whenever they
chuse to ask it, but cannot be compelled
to ask it, (much less to abandon the
---page break---
deserving) when they think they need none.
I speak all this while in full contemplation
in causes of a political nature which engage the passions of men of the generality, and in any other causes which may happen to engage the passions of that particular body of men
of the inconveniences of giving this double power
to the Jury: in full persuasion that it
is the way to have one law for one man,
and another for another.

In full [correction] One that it is easier for a
Jury to discover their consciences in respect
to a matter of law than to a matter of fact
that it is doubly easy for men to find shelter
from the reproach of a false decision knowingly
pronounced, when they are at liberty
to shift their ground, and f represent their
conduct to t others or to themselves as built
at one time upon their opinion the matter of Law, another
trend upon the opinion of a the matter of fact, as they see
occasion: as the arguments that press against
one or the other of their foundations seem the
strongest.
give them the most uneasiness.

Procedure

---page break---

Has the Judge a right to compel the
Jury in any case to find their verdict
not general, but special? If he has, in
that case, when if he thinks fit to exercise
that right the Jury are proper judges
of Law. If he has not, they are Judges
of the Law in every case when they please,
that is when they please to find a general
verdict.

---page break---

Strange indeed would it be, if a Jury were compellable
to take advice whether they would
or no. The Law, that is the blind disingenuous
and unfeeling sophistry of Lawyers, supposes
of every man, without viewed without taking indeed the unimaginable
step to make him so, is acquainted
with the Law. There is nobody to tell him
what it is, it is criminal for any body to
attempt to tell him (for it is criminal to publish
reports,) but however, it is criminal for
him not to knowe know it. In the hurry of
business, in the moment of for action, under in the
crisis hurry of temptation, every man every woman
every child, in many millions, in is supposed [+] to know it.
[+] whether he has ability or no whether he thinks he [or no] he has ability

Shall the same Law [all on the sudden change
it's note and] say, that 12 men, 12 picked men
with full leisure to examine, with all opportunities
of inquiry after full debate had before them by
experienced persons interested in each side, with the assistance
of as much instruction as they please to take

The Law X Fact. Juries |13R|1| | Judges of Law

Identifier: | JB/050/088/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 50.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	050	Main Headings	procedure code
Folio number	088	Info in main headings field	procedure law & fact juries judges of law
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [britannia with shield motif]]]
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	16079
Box Contents