JB/042/239/001: 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/042/239/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto approved
 
(4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>1825. Nov. 4. J<lb/>
Constitutional Code ++ Cop<hi rend="superscript">d</hi></head>
 
<note>Ch. XII. Judiciary collectively<lb/>
&sect;.3. Judicatories &#x2014; their grades</note>
 
<p>3</p>
 
<p>Ratiocinative<lb/>
Art. 7. Question 3. Why not <hi rend="underline">more</hi> than one</p>
 
<p><!-- This para interlinear with "Answer", below -->
Not, as per <!-- blank --><lb/>
of several modes of change, all of<lb/>
them capable of having place, <gap/><lb/>
reversal is but one: let in the<lb/>
service others and see what<lb/>
endless confusion, with addition of<lb/>
<sic>expence</sic> delay and vexation will<lb/>
be let in with them</p>
 
<note>Suppose in the<lb/>
decree of the Judge Immediate<lb/>
confirmed<lb/>
by that of the Judge<lb/>
Appellate, and reversed<lb/>
by the Judge Super<lb/>
Appellate: what<lb/>
<add>assignable</add> ground can there be in<lb/>
this case for confidence<lb/>
in the <del>aptitude</del> <add>justice</add> of the<lb/>
decree thus pronounced<lb/>
by the Judge Super Appellate</note>
 
<p><hi rend="underline">Answer</hi>. &#x2014; Reasons &#x2014;</p>
 
<p>1. Because of the vast increase of expense, <del>vexation</del>,<lb/>
<del>and</del> delay, <add>and <del>vexation</del> vexation,</add> without any adequate degree of probability<lb/>
of appropriate aptitude on the part of the ultimate<lb/>
decision; and <del><add>therefore</add> on the part of the people, <add>without any</add></del> correspondent<lb/>
confidence on the part of the people.</p>
 
<note>By an <gap/> and<lb/>
secret understanding <add>confederacy</add><lb/>
between the Judge Immediate<lb/>
and the Judge<lb/>
Super Appellate the<lb/>
security afforded, as<lb/>
per Art <!-- blank --> by the jurisdiction<lb/>
of the Judge<lb/>
Appellate might <add>would</add> be<lb/>
extinguished.</note>
 
<p>2. <del>Say another without any such increase.</del> <add>To come to particulars.</add> For<lb/>
suppose, instead of <hi rend="underline">two</hi> such grades, three. From the<lb/>
Immediate Judge, appeal to a Judge Appellate; from<lb/>
the Judge <add>Appellate</add>, appeal <add>say</add> to a Judge <hi rend="underline">Super-Appellate</hi>.<lb/>
Suppose now the decision of the Immediate<lb/>
Judge confirmed by the Judge Appellate; <add>then</add> reversed<lb/>
by the Judge Super-Appellate. Here then<lb/>
are in favour of the decision two <hi rend="underline">voices</hi> &#x2014; say<lb/>
<add>accordingly</add> two <hi rend="underline">chances</hi>; &#x2014; in <hi rend="underline">disfavour</hi> of it but one: <del>the</del> <add>consequent</add><lb/>
result <del>is that</del> it is reversed. Of The <del><add>applaptitude of</add></del> Super-Appellate<lb/>
Judge <add>the appropriate aptitude in all its several branches,</add> has more chances in its favour than that of<lb/>
either of his two <del>inferiors</del> <add>subordinates</add>. True: but has it more than<lb/>
both of them put together? for, if, in respect of length<lb/>
of triedness he has the advantage over both his<lb/>
subordinates, still has his immediate subordinate<lb/>
the Judge Appellate no inconsiderable <del>show</del> <add>stock</add> of<lb/>
that desirable quality: and thus, <del>by</del> from the vast addition<hi rend="superscript">[+]</hi><lb/>
<note><hi rend="superscript">[+]</hi> made to <del>the</del> <sic>expence</sic> delay<lb/>
and vexation by this addition<lb/>
of a third grade<lb/>
to the machinery, no <del><gap/><lb/>
more grades etc</del> <add>other</add> addition<lb/>
<add>would be made</add> to the probability of<lb/>
rectitude of decision<lb/>
than that which<lb/>
would be<lb/>
made by<lb/>
the difference between<lb/>
the lesser degree of appropriate<lb/>
aptitude on<lb/>
the part of the Judge<lb/>
Appellate, and the<lb/>
supposed greater<lb/>
degree on the part<lb/>
of the Judge Super<lb/>
Appellate.</note></p>
 
<!-- The following para and note are deleted -->
<p>Think now of the confusion and denial <add>contempt of the ends</add><lb/>
of justice which have place in the case of the<lb/>
Scottish Judicature, in which in those classes<lb/>
of non-penal suits which are regarded as of<lb/>
the highest importance, appeal may have<lb/>
place in six or seven grades one above<lb/>
another.<hi rend="superscript">+(a)</hi></p>
 
<p>Note <hi rend="superscript">(a)</hi><lb/>
<hi rend="superscript">+</hi> See letter in <gap/><gap/><gap/> or Morn. Chron.<lb/>
at the latter end of Oct. or beginning of Nov. 1825.</p>
 






<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 17:41, 20 October 2023

Click Here To Edit

1825. Nov. 4. J
Constitutional Code ++ Copd

Ch. XII. Judiciary collectively
§.3. Judicatories — their grades

3

Ratiocinative
Art. 7. Question 3. Why not more than one

Not, as per
of several modes of change, all of
them capable of having place,
reversal is but one: let in the
service others and see what
endless confusion, with addition of
expence delay and vexation will
be let in with them

Suppose in the
decree of the Judge Immediate
confirmed
by that of the Judge
Appellate, and reversed
by the Judge Super
Appellate: what
assignable ground can there be in
this case for confidence
in the aptitude justice of the
decree thus pronounced
by the Judge Super Appellate

Answer. — Reasons —

1. Because of the vast increase of expense, vexation,
and delay, and vexation vexation, without any adequate degree of probability
of appropriate aptitude on the part of the ultimate
decision; and therefore on the part of the people, without any correspondent
confidence on the part of the people.

By an and
secret understanding confederacy
between the Judge Immediate
and the Judge
Super Appellate the
security afforded, as
per Art by the jurisdiction
of the Judge
Appellate might would be
extinguished.

2. Say another without any such increase. To come to particulars. For
suppose, instead of two such grades, three. From the
Immediate Judge, appeal to a Judge Appellate; from
the Judge Appellate, appeal say to a Judge Super-Appellate.
Suppose now the decision of the Immediate
Judge confirmed by the Judge Appellate; then reversed
by the Judge Super-Appellate. Here then
are in favour of the decision two voices — say
accordingly two chances; — in disfavour of it but one: the consequent
result is that it is reversed. Of The applaptitude of Super-Appellate
Judge the appropriate aptitude in all its several branches, has more chances in its favour than that of
either of his two inferiors subordinates. True: but has it more than
both of them put together? for, if, in respect of length
of triedness he has the advantage over both his
subordinates, still has his immediate subordinate
the Judge Appellate no inconsiderable show stock of
that desirable quality: and thus, by from the vast addition[+]
[+] made to the expence delay
and vexation by this addition
of a third grade
to the machinery, no
more grades etc
other addition
would be made to the probability of
rectitude of decision
than that which
would be
made by
the difference between
the lesser degree of appropriate
aptitude on
the part of the Judge
Appellate, and the
supposed greater
degree on the part
of the Judge Super
Appellate.

Think now of the confusion and denial contempt of the ends
of justice which have place in the case of the
Scottish Judicature, in which in those classes
of non-penal suits which are regarded as of
the highest importance, appeal may have
place in six or seven grades one above
another.+(a)

Note (a)
+ See letter in or Morn. Chron.
at the latter end of Oct. or beginning of Nov. 1825.




Identifier: | JB/042/239/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 42.

Date_1

1825-11-04

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

042

Main Headings

constitutional code

Folio number

239

Info in main headings field

constitutional code

Image

001

Titles

ratiocinative

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

e3

Penner

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

"copd"

ID Number

13162

Box Contents

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