JB/091/308/001: 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/091/308/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
TB Editor (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/091/308/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/091/308/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p><!-- pencil -->1 March 1808</p>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<p><head>II. 5  No exemption from the obligation of furnishing evidence<lb/>
 
except on special grounds</head></p>
 
<p>In this as in the other cases these grounds to be<lb/>
 
sufficient must <del>consist in</del> be resolvable into <del><gap/></del> <add>a</add> preponderant<lb/>
mass of evil in the shape of delay vexation<lb/>
and expence, preponderant over the evil consisting in<lb/>
the danger of a certainty of misdecision attached to the<lb/>
exclusion of the evidence.</p>
<p>Innumerable and <del>the cases</del> in the aggregate to a<lb/>
prodigious degree extensive are the cases in which under<lb/>
the technical system <add>of procedure</add>, more especially the English branch<lb/>
of it exemptions of this sort are granted.  Were they<lb/>
placed on any such grounds, they would be right in<lb/>
principle <add>at any rate or</add> as having regard to the ends of justice:  <del>the<lb/>
only error they would be <gap/></del> in the application of<lb/>
the principle to particular cases they would <add>still</add> be susceptible<lb/>
of error, but that error would be no other than what<lb/>
<hi rend="underline">might</hi> happen to be the result of a <unclear>wrong</unclear> appretiation <add>estimate</add><lb/>
taken of the amount of the evil in question on the one<lb/>
or the other side.  Supposing no other persons concerned<lb/>
in the point of interest but A and B, no advantage would<lb/>
result but the contrary in subjecting B to a <add>mass of</add> expence<lb/>
and vexation taken together such as £20 would be no<lb/>
more than an adequate compensation for, to save A from<lb/>
a loss to the amount of £20, that being the amount of the<lb/>
loss produced by an act of misdecision <add>a wrong judgment</add> pronounced against<lb/>
him for want of the <del>extra</del> evidence which <add>A</add> B would in case of<lb/>
compulsion, have afforded.</p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 17:45, 24 March 2023

Click Here To Edit

1 March 1808

II. 5 No exemption from the obligation of furnishing evidence
except on special grounds

In this as in the other cases these grounds to be
sufficient must consist in be resolvable into a preponderant
mass of evil in the shape of delay vexation
and expence, preponderant over the evil consisting in
the danger of a certainty of misdecision attached to the
exclusion of the evidence.

Innumerable and the cases in the aggregate to a
prodigious degree extensive are the cases in which under
the technical system of procedure, more especially the English branch
of it exemptions of this sort are granted. Were they
placed on any such grounds, they would be right in
principle at any rate or as having regard to the ends of justice: the
only error they would be
in the application of
the principle to particular cases they would still be susceptible
of error, but that error would be no other than what
might happen to be the result of a wrong appretiation estimate
taken of the amount of the evil in question on the one
or the other side. Supposing no other persons concerned
in the point of interest but A and B, no advantage would
result but the contrary in subjecting B to a mass of expence
and vexation taken together such as £20 would be no
more than an adequate compensation for, to save A from
a loss to the amount of £20, that being the amount of the
loss produced by an act of misdecision a wrong judgment pronounced against
him for want of the extra evidence which A B would in case of
compulsion, have afforded.


Identifier: | JB/091/308/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 91.

Date_1

1808-03-01

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

091

Main Headings

scotch reform

Folio number

308

Info in main headings field

Image

001

Titles

no exemption from the obligation of furnishing evidence except on special grounds

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

e1

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

th 1806

Marginals

Paper Producer

andre morellet

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1806

Notes public

ID Number

29304

Box Contents

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