★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
Auto loaded |
No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>Judicial Estab. Judges Number</head> | |||
<p>in question is <gap/>: one part of the public guided<lb/>judging <add>merely by from <add>by</add> the</add> prejudice shall <del>approve</del> think the<lb/>decision of the Judge is a right one merely because<lb/>it is his decision: and with respect to this part<lb/>he sense of security will remain inviolate. But<lb/>another part at the same time will <del>be guided by</del><lb/><del>reason</del> form an opinion of their own and judge<lb/> from reason: and with respect to this part the<lb/>sense of security will suffer a wound more or<lb/>less keen <add>sharp acute</add> in proportion to the injustice.</p> | |||
<p><del>This ground of independence on public opinion</del><lb/><del>will <gap/> itself is evident in proportion to</del><lb/><note>8<lb/>Instances<lb/>1. Parliament of<lb/>Paris.<lb/>2. Middlesex Election.<lb/>3. Functionary decision<lb/> in the <gap/><lb/>cause.</note> | |||
<lb/> | |||
The strength of this ground of independence <del>it</del><lb/>must increase it is evident in proportion to the<lb/>numbers. <del>To the <gap/></del> In France while there existed<lb/>a Parliament of Paris there must always have<lb/>been <del>great multitudes</del> <add>a large proportion</add> of the people with whom<lb/>any decision whatever given by <del>its</del> so numerous<lb/>a body of Judges of high station as the Parliament<lb/>of Paris would have passed for good merely because<lb/> it was the decision of the Parliament of<lb/>Paris.<hi rend="superscript">+</hi> | |||
<note><hi rend="superscript">+</hi>In England the<lb/>decision of the twelve<lb/>Judges though settled<lb/>over a bottle at Serjeant's<lb/> Inn has carried<lb/> many an absurdity<lb/> through the<lb/>public with a degree<lb/>of facility which would<lb/>not have been experienced by<lb/>any one or any four of<lb/><del>by a single Court or a</del><lb/><del>single Judge</del><lb/>them.</note> | |||
<add>In the same country <del><gap/></del> what <del>there were</del> multitudes were there on whom</add> In England a measure so palpably unjust<lb/><hi rend="superscript">+</hi> <lb/><note><hi rend="superscript">+</hi>and subversive<lb/>of the rights of<lb/>electors</note><lb/> | |||
as the decision against M<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> Wilkes relative<lb/>to the Middlesex Election <add>passed <del>with</del></add> <del>there were multitudes</del> for <add>just</add></p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
Judicial Estab. Judges Number
in question is : one part of the public guided
judging merely by from <add>by the</add> prejudice shall approve think the
decision of the Judge is a right one merely because
it is his decision: and with respect to this part
he sense of security will remain inviolate. But
another part at the same time will be guided by
reason form an opinion of their own and judge
from reason: and with respect to this part the
sense of security will suffer a wound more or
less keen sharp acute in proportion to the injustice.
This ground of independence on public opinion
will itself is evident in proportion to
8
Instances
1. Parliament of
Paris.
2. Middlesex Election.
3. Functionary decision
in the
cause.
The strength of this ground of independence it
must increase it is evident in proportion to the
numbers. To the In France while there existed
a Parliament of Paris there must always have
been great multitudes a large proportion of the people with whom
any decision whatever given by its so numerous
a body of Judges of high station as the Parliament
of Paris would have passed for good merely because
it was the decision of the Parliament of
Paris.+
+In England the
decision of the twelve
Judges though settled
over a bottle at Serjeant's
Inn has carried
many an absurdity
through the
public with a degree
of facility which would
not have been experienced by
any one or any four of
by a single Court or a
single Judge
them.
In the same country what there were multitudes were there on whom In England a measure so palpably unjust
+
+and subversive
of the rights of
electors
as the decision against Mr Wilkes relative
to the Middlesex Election passed with there were multitudes for just
|
Identifier: | JB/051/379/003"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 51. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
6-8 |
|||
|
051 |
evidence; procedure code |
||
|
379 |
judicial establishment judges number |
||
|
003 |
|||
|
text sheet |
4 |
||
|
recto |
f7* / f8* / f9 / f10 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::l munn [britannia with shield emblem]]] |
||
|
benjamin constant |
|||
|
16544 |
|||
