★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<!-- Date, heading and marginal summaries in pencil --> <p>7 June 1804 2</p> <head>Procedure</head> <p><note><sic>Justiciability</sic></note></p> <p><note>3<lb/> <sic>Justiciability</sic> what <gap/><lb/> 1 ultimate or definitive<lb/> 2 initial 3 | <!-- Date, heading and marginal summaries in pencil --> <p>7 June 1804 2</p> <head>Procedure</head> <p><note><sic>Ch. Justiciability</sic></note></p> <p><note>3<lb/> <sic>Justiciability</sic> what <gap/><lb/> 1 ultimate or definitive<lb/> 2 initial 3 interlocutory<lb/> Ultimate the first object<lb/> with the legislator, as<lb/> being the standard to<lb/> which the two others<lb/> should be shaped — —<lb/> <hi rend="underline">Series</hi> with the Suitor<lb/> the practitioner, the<lb/> Judge and the Law<lb/> Expounder —</note></p> <p>It is at the commencement of the <add>each</add> suit that <sic> justiciability</sic><lb/> comes to be arrived at <add> provided for</add> by the party <add>suitor</add> and the Judge. It is<lb/> therefore at the commencement of the course <add>system</add> of procedure that it<lb/>comes naturally enough to be spoken of by the law-writer<lb/> whose object it is to bring to view <add> in any <gap/></add> the system of procedure as it<lb/> is. But if the view of the suitor, the Judge, and the law-expounder <add>Expounder</add><lb/> may be warranted in attaching themselves <del>with</del> in the first<lb/> instance to the commencement of the suit, if it be the first<lb/> object with <add>to</add> the suitor, the Judge and the Law Expounder —<lb/> with <add>to</add> the Legislator, and him who takes <add> in the calm of the <gap/></add> upon him to act as<lb/> counsel to the legislator, it is but the second.</p> <!-- pencil line denoting start of a new paragraph --> <p> Look to the end<lb/> in the first place and never lose sight of it is an instruction, <add> already familiar in the</add> <del><gap/> old</del><lb/> <add>days of</add> <del>as</del> Aristotle: <hi rend="superscript">+</hi> <note>+</note> an instruction <add>of</add> such value that had it <add>but</add> been steadily<lb/> observed, <add>followed</add> <del>little</del> in the art of legislation, not to speak of so many other<lb/> arts, little <add>work</add> would by this time have remained for the inventive<lb/>mind. <!-- brackets in pencil --> [But custom rivets the chains <del>which</del> imposed by power, <add>the slave/accomplice of tyranny rivets the chains which the law imposed</add> and<lb/> invention when not crushed outright drags on at snails pace.]</p> <!-- pencil line across the page --> <p><note> 4<lb/> Importance of the distinction<lb/> to practice exemplified<lb/> 1 No more vexation for<lb/> initiative than for definition.<lb/> 2. Arrangements respecting<lb/> the three branches ought<lb/> to coincide and <sic>harmonize.</sic><lb/> Not be disparate and<lb/>discordant: <sic>ex. gr.</sic> Execution<lb/> and <sic>Outlawry</sic></note></p> <p> If <sic>justiciability</sic> <add>of any sort</add> be necessary at the commencement of the suit —<lb/> <!-- brackets in pencil --> [and so on through each secondary period] it is only <del>for the sake</del> <add> in respect</add> <lb/>of <del> that instance to</del> its being so at the end of it. <add> conclusion of the suit</add> <sic>Justiciability</sic><lb/> may accordingly be distinguished into <del>ii</del> i ultimate or definitive,<lb/> and initiative, <del>or provisional</del> and interlocutory: the term provisional<lb/> serving <add> in common</add> to include the two last cases. [The distinction is not a barren<lb/> one: the ends conceding for the most part, so for the most part will<lb/> the means. The vexation that is not <add>in any given</add> warranted by ultimate <sic>justiciability</sic><lb/> will as little be warranted by initiative. [The] arrangements<lb/> employed with advantage that are at one] <add> found</add> necessary and efficient for the<lb/> purpose of initiative <sic>justiciability</sic> will not be much less necessary nor much less<lb/> efficient for the purpose of ultimate, and definition.</p> <p><note> Had this conundrum been<lb/> duly considered <add> observed</add> and regarded,<lb/> English law could<lb/> not have seen one set of<lb/>arrangements established and in<lb/> the kind of execution, provided<lb/> by a set of arrangements altogether<lb/> different and disparate<lb/> under the head of <sic>Outlawry</sic> </note></p> | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}} | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
7 June 1804 2
Procedure
Ch. Justiciability
3
Justiciability what
1 ultimate or definitive
2 initial 3 interlocutory
Ultimate the first object
with the legislator, as
being the standard to
which the two others
should be shaped — —
Series with the Suitor
the practitioner, the
Judge and the Law
Expounder —
It is at the commencement of the each suit that justiciability
comes to be arrived at provided for by the party suitor and the Judge. It is
therefore at the commencement of the course system of procedure that it
comes naturally enough to be spoken of by the law-writer
whose object it is to bring to view in any the system of procedure as it
is. But if the view of the suitor, the Judge, and the law-expounder Expounder
may be warranted in attaching themselves with in the first
instance to the commencement of the suit, if it be the first
object with to the suitor, the Judge and the Law Expounder —
with to the Legislator, and him who takes in the calm of the upon him to act as
counsel to the legislator, it is but the second.
Look to the end
in the first place and never lose sight of it is an instruction, already familiar in the old
days of as Aristotle: + + an instruction of such value that had it but been steadily
observed, followed little in the art of legislation, not to speak of so many other
arts, little work would by this time have remained for the inventive
mind. [But custom rivets the chains which imposed by power, the slave/accomplice of tyranny rivets the chains which the law imposed and
invention when not crushed outright drags on at snails pace.]
4
Importance of the distinction
to practice exemplified
1 No more vexation for
initiative than for definition.
2. Arrangements respecting
the three branches ought
to coincide and harmonize.
Not be disparate and
discordant: ex. gr. Execution
and Outlawry
If justiciability of any sort be necessary at the commencement of the suit —
[and so on through each secondary period] it is only for the sake in respect
of that instance to its being so at the end of it. conclusion of the suit Justiciability
may accordingly be distinguished into ii i ultimate or definitive,
and initiative, or provisional and interlocutory: the term provisional
serving in common to include the two last cases. [The distinction is not a barren
one: the ends conceding for the most part, so for the most part will
the means. The vexation that is not in any given warranted by ultimate justiciability
will as little be warranted by initiative. [The] arrangements
employed with advantage that are at one] found necessary and efficient for the
purpose of initiative justiciability will not be much less necessary nor much less
efficient for the purpose of ultimate, and definition.
Had this conundrum been
duly considered observed and regarded,
English law could
not have seen one set of
arrangements established and in
the kind of execution, provided
by a set of arrangements altogether
different and disparate
under the head of Outlawry
|
Identifier: | JB/057/067/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 57. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1804-06-01 |
3-4 |
||
|
057 |
evidence; procedure code |
||
|
067 |
procedure |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
d2 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
|||
|
18397 |
|||
