JB/057/294/001: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 09:58, 4 February 2020

1826. Septr.
Procedure Code

Ch. Evidence
(1 §. Veracity security
all embracing
Oath none
Reason

(3)

☞ As to Oath see Judge Parker's conversation with the Morn. Chron.
Sept. . for the day see the Reference Paper.

Question 1. For enforcing the obligation of veracity
to a judicial purpose, why not employ, as hitherto
has been the custom, the ceremony called an
oath — the ceremony called the administering and
taking of an oath?

Question 2. Why give this uniform universality
to the application of the instrument to wit the
punishment employed, for securing the veracity
of every assertion made on a judicial occasion,
or immediately or eventually directed to a
judicial purpose?

Answer. The questions are put together, because
one and the same set of answers are
required for each, and may therefore serve
for both.

If on any one judicial; occasion, veracity
is a needful handmaid to justice, so is she on
every other. True it is that a in individual instances
the importance of veracity is subject to diversification
upon an infinitely extended scale, but
this is only because so is that of justice. What
requires consideration, in addition to the importance
of veracity in this or that individual
case is the importance of the habit of veracity
the inbred habit in all cases as a security
for justice.

Identifier: \| JB/057/294/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 57.
Date_1	1826-09	Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	057	Main Headings	procedure code
Folio number	294	Info in main headings field	procedure code
Image	001	Titles
Category	copy/fair copy sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	e1
Penner		Watermarks	j whatman turkey mill 1826
Marginals		Paper Producer	admiral pavel chichagov
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year	1826
Notes public		ID Number	18624
Box Contents

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
-<head>1826. <sic>Sept<hi rend="superscript">r</hi>.</sic><lb/> Procedure Code</head> <!-- in pencil apart from Ch and the section sign --> <p><note><sic>Ch.</sic> Evidence</note><lb/>(1 <note>&sect;. Veracity security<lb/> all <gap/><lb/> Oath now<lb/> Reason</note></p> <!-- in pencil  --> <p><del>(3)</del></p> <!-- addition in Bentham's hand --> <p> &#9758; As to Oath see Judge Parker's <unclear>conversation</unclear> with the <unclear>China <sic>Morn. Chron.</sic></unclear><lb/><sic>Sept.</sic> <!-- blank space --><gap/> . for the day see the Reference Paper.</p> <p>Question 1.  For enforcing the obligation of veracity<lb/> to a judicial purpose, why not employ, as hitherto<lb/> has been the custom, the ceremony called an<lb/> oath &#x2014; the ceremony called the administering and<lb/>taking of an oath?</p> <p>Question 2.  Why give this uniform universality<lb/> to the application of the instrument to wit the<lb/> punishment employed, for securing the veracity<lb/> of every assertion made on a judicial occasion,<lb/>or immediately or eventually directed to a <lb/> judicial purpose?</p> <p>Answer.  The questions are put together, because<lb/>one and the same set of answers are<lb/> required for each, and may therefore serve<lb/> for both.</p> <p> If on any one judicial; occasion, veracity<lb/> is a needful handmaid to justice, so is she on<lb/> every other.  True it is that <del>a</del> in individual instances<lb/> the importance of veracity is subject to diversification<lb/> upon an infinitely extended scale, but<lb/> this is only because so is that of justice.   What<lb/> requires consideration, in addition to the importance<lb/> of veracity in this or that individual<lb/> case is the importance of the habit of veracity<lb/>the inbred habit in all cases as a security<lb/> for justice.</p>
+<head>1826. <sic>Sept<hi rend="superscript">r</hi>.</sic><lb/>
+Procedure Code</head> <!-- in pencil apart from Ch and the section sign -->
+<p><note><sic>Ch.</sic> Evidence</note><lb/>
+(1 <note>&sect;. Veracity security<lb/>
+all embracing<lb/>
+Oath none<lb/>
+Reason</note></p>
+<!-- in pencil --> <p><del>(3)</del></p>
+<!-- addition in Bentham's hand --> <p> &#9758; As to Oath see Judge Parker's conversation with the <gap/> <sic>Morn. Chron.</sic><lb/>
+<sic>Sept.</sic> <!-- blank space --><gap/> . for the day see the Reference Paper.</p>
+<p>Question 1. For enforcing the obligation of veracity<lb/>
+to a judicial purpose, why not employ, as hitherto<lb/>
+has been the custom, the ceremony called an<lb/>
+oath &#x2014; the ceremony called the administering and<lb/>
+taking of an oath?</p>
+<p>Question 2. Why give this uniform universality<lb/>
+to the application of the instrument to wit the<lb/>
+punishment employed, for securing the veracity<lb/>
+of every assertion made on a judicial occasion,<lb/>
+or immediately or eventually directed to a <lb/>
+judicial purpose?</p>
+<p>Answer. The questions are put together, because<lb/>
+one and the same set of answers are<lb/>
+required for each, and may therefore serve<lb/>
+for both.</p>
+<p>If on any one judicial; occasion, veracity<lb/>
+is a needful handmaid to justice, so is she on<lb/>
+every other. True it is that <del>a</del> in individual instances<lb/>
+the importance of veracity is subject to diversification<lb/>
+upon an infinitely extended scale, but<lb/>
+this is only because so is that of justice. What<lb/>
+requires consideration, in addition to the importance<lb/>
+of veracity in this or that individual<lb/>
+case is the importance of the habit of veracity<lb/>
+the inbred habit in all cases as a security<lb/>
+for justice.</p>
 <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
-{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}
+{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Views

JB/057/294/001: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 09:58, 4 February 2020

Navigation

Search