★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
Auto upload |
No edit summary |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>1827. <sic>Sept<hi rend="superscript">r</hi>.</sic> 17<lb/><add>Procedure</add> <del>Constitutional</del> Code</head> <p><note><del><sic>Ch.</sic> X <gap/></del> <add>Prefat</add><lb/>§.</note></p> <p>Between Technical and Natural Procedure, the<lb/>characteristic difference may be expressed in a few words.</p> <p>Of technical procedure the <add>prime</add> object is — to do every thing as<lb/>near as possible to what <add>whatever</add> has been done before. <add>beyond this the design of it does not extend of making more eligible <gap/><lb/>this is so much on a<lb/><gap/> endeavoured to<lb/> be <unclear>restrained</unclear></add> Of Natural<lb/>Procedure the object is to give execution and effect <add>principal <gap/> as</add> to the substantive<lb/>branch of the law, with as little delay, vexation and<lb/><sic>expence</sic> as possible.</p> <p>The technical branch of procedure is <add>in effect</add> a branch<lb/>from the Judge-made species — the so called Common Law.<lb/>The Common Law in its totality has for its object as above<lb/> the day every thing as near as possible to whatever has been done<lb/>before. As to the effect upon human happiness, <add>upon any such matter</add> scarce a<lb/><add>much as a single</add> thought is here expended by <add>upon</add> it. In the chief tribune of the<lb/>Common Law — the first of Lord Chief Justice <unclear>Coles</unclear> first Valuer of<lb/>Institutes, if under the name of the argument at <unclear>inconceivable</unclear><lb/>a <add>sort of</add> feint allowance is made to it, this state instead of being the<lb/>first is <del>neither a bundle of argument</del> <add><del>in</del> a</add> bundle composed of <gap/><lb/>of Common Law argument, as neither the first nor yet the last<lb/>but confounded with the <unclear>crowd</unclear></p> <p>A <unclear>competitor</unclear> of opposite analysis is a defaulter which<lb/>is a denomination, which by one writer <add>an <gap/> <unclear>Authority</unclear> later</add><lb/>has been employed in <note>& duty in law</note><lb/>the character of a definition of the same Common Law. Nor yet<lb/>by any means with impropriety. Nor is the account of the<lb/>creator either <add>an</add> instructor or improper, as far as it goes. With<lb/>the account hereabove just given it <gap/> not inexactly<lb/><add><gap/> and <gap/> it is — that</add> <gap/> gives as positive whether <sic>stiled</sic> rules or <gap/> or<lb/>what else so ever of Common Law are deduced by analysis<lb/>than if taken from those of previous <unclear>dicts</unclear> and so on without end,<lb/>except in so far as <gap/> of the matter of Statute law comes in<lb/><add>as it were</add> and overlaps <add>overlays</add></p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} |
1827. Septr. 17
Procedure Constitutional Code
Ch. X Prefat
§.
Between Technical and Natural Procedure, the
characteristic difference may be expressed in a few words.
Of technical procedure the prime object is — to do every thing as
near as possible to what whatever has been done before. beyond this the design of it does not extend of making more eligible
this is so much on a
endeavoured to
be restrained Of Natural
Procedure the object is to give execution and effect principal as to the substantive
branch of the law, with as little delay, vexation and
expence as possible.
The technical branch of procedure is in effect a branch
from the Judge-made species — the so called Common Law.
The Common Law in its totality has for its object as above
the day every thing as near as possible to whatever has been done
before. As to the effect upon human happiness, upon any such matter scarce a
much as a single thought is here expended by upon it. In the chief tribune of the
Common Law — the first of Lord Chief Justice Coles first Valuer of
Institutes, if under the name of the argument at inconceivable
a sort of feint allowance is made to it, this state instead of being the
first is neither a bundle of argument in a bundle composed of
of Common Law argument, as neither the first nor yet the last
but confounded with the crowd
A competitor of opposite analysis is a defaulter which
is a denomination, which by one writer an Authority later
has been employed in & duty in law
the character of a definition of the same Common Law. Nor yet
by any means with impropriety. Nor is the account of the
creator either an instructor or improper, as far as it goes. With
the account hereabove just given it not inexactly
and it is — that gives as positive whether stiled rules or or
what else so ever of Common Law are deduced by analysis
than if taken from those of previous dicts and so on without end,
except in so far as of the matter of Statute law comes in
as it were and overlaps overlays
Identifier: | JB/056/121/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 56. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
1827-09-17 |
|||
056 |
Procedure Code |
||
121 |
Procedure Code |
||
001 |
|||
Text sheet |
1 |
||
recto |
|||
18177 |
|||