JB/106/204/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/106/204/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto loaded
 
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/106/204/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/106/204/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p><!-- pencil -->4 Nov<hi rend="superscript">r</hi> 1807</p>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<p>If any further than as far as the supreme will had<lb/>
 
manifested itself <del>as in</del> (viz. by Statute law) or on general principles<lb/>
 
could be supposed to interest itself <add>take an interest</add> in the decision, (as in <del>can be</del> points<lb/>
 
of a constitutional aspect) rectitude of decision <del>and thence</del> (prevention<lb/>
of misdecison) <del><gap/></del> was an object looked to <del>in</del> on<lb/>
<add><del>supposed to be provided for or served, on</del></add> the occasion of the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords,<lb/>
<del>it</del> or supposed to be provided for or served by it, it must have<lb/>
been on the score of exemption from partialities or other sinister<lb/>
interests, and not on the score <add>on any such score as that</add> of superiority in legal<lb/>
<unclear>service</unclear>.</p>
<p>If this observation <add>position</add>, the case of Scotch appeals, <add>will</add> as far as it<lb/>
goes, be recognized as <add>allowed to afford</add> a sufficient proof.  From the supreme<lb/>
local judicatory of that kingdom, with 15 Judges in it, all unanimous,<lb/>
an appeal may be presented to the House of Lords.  Arrived<lb/>
at the House, what is the quantity of <add>appropriate</add> legal <unclear>service</unclear> – <unclear>decision</unclear> of <add>experience in</add><lb/>
Scotch law, that it finds them?  Those Lords, the least possible<lb/>
<unclear>complement</unclear>, is for business <add>judicial busines</add> of <del>that</del> this sort, the most usual number:<lb/>
the Bishop by whom prayers have <add>just</add> been read, the Chairman<lb/>
of Committees, and the Lord Chancellor <add>by whom the business is conducted</add>.  To either<lb/>
the noble Chairman, or the Right Reverend <unclear>Violate</unclear>, English or<lb/>
Irish, to ascribe any superiority of service in <add>superior acquaintance intimacy with</add> Scotch law,<lb/>
<add>relation being had to the supreme Scottish judicatory</add> would not be compliment but mockery.  If from those<lb/>
to Assessors, on this, not to speak of other judicial occasions, bodily<lb/>
presence is all that is expected, the Appeal is an effect from<lb/>
the 15 Scottish Judges to the one English one, the Lord Chancellor.<lb/>
To the Lord Chancellor <del><gap/></del> antecedently to his<lb/>
ascension onto the Chancery Bench it may have happened<lb/>
<del>to have been concerned</del> <add>in the character of Advocate, at the <gap/> of the House of Lords</add> to have had cognizance of a score<lb/>
or two of Scotch Appeals, or it may have happened to him,<lb/>
<add>as in a like instance</add> soever to have <del>had</del> <add>been</add> concerned in <del>a <gap/></del> <add>any an Scotch cases</add> so much as a single<lb/>
Scotch cause, any more than any English Equity cause.</p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 17:55, 27 August 2023

Click Here To Edit

4 Novr 1807

If any further than as far as the supreme will had
manifested itself as in (viz. by Statute law) or on general principles
could be supposed to interest itself take an interest in the decision, (as in can be points
of a constitutional aspect) rectitude of decision and thence (prevention
of misdecison) was an object looked to in on
supposed to be provided for or served, on the occasion of the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords,
it or supposed to be provided for or served by it, it must have
been on the score of exemption from partialities or other sinister
interests, and not on the score on any such score as that of superiority in legal
service.

If this observation position, the case of Scotch appeals, will as far as it
goes, be recognized as allowed to afford a sufficient proof. From the supreme
local judicatory of that kingdom, with 15 Judges in it, all unanimous,
an appeal may be presented to the House of Lords. Arrived
at the House, what is the quantity of appropriate legal servicedecision of experience in
Scotch law, that it finds them? Those Lords, the least possible
complement, is for business judicial busines of that this sort, the most usual number:
the Bishop by whom prayers have just been read, the Chairman
of Committees, and the Lord Chancellor by whom the business is conducted. To either
the noble Chairman, or the Right Reverend Violate, English or
Irish, to ascribe any superiority of service in superior acquaintance intimacy with Scotch law,
relation being had to the supreme Scottish judicatory would not be compliment but mockery. If from those
to Assessors, on this, not to speak of other judicial occasions, bodily
presence is all that is expected, the Appeal is an effect from
the 15 Scottish Judges to the one English one, the Lord Chancellor.
To the Lord Chancellor antecedently to his
ascension onto the Chancery Bench it may have happened
to have been concerned in the character of Advocate, at the of the House of Lords to have had cognizance of a score
or two of Scotch Appeals, or it may have happened to him,
as in a like instance soever to have had been concerned in a any an Scotch cases so much as a single
Scotch cause, any more than any English Equity cause.


Identifier: | JB/106/204/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 106.

Date_1

1807-11-04

Marginal Summary Numbering

10-11

Box

106

Main Headings

scotch reform

Folio number

204

Info in main headings field

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

d3*

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

iping 1804

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

bernardino rivadavia

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1804

Notes public

ID Number

34792

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in