★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
m Protected "JB/081/035/001": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)) |
Auto approved |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''[{{fullurl:JB/081/035/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | '''[{{fullurl:JB/081/035/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]''' | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<p>1</p> | |||
''This | <p>1828. Nov<hi rend="superscript">r.</hi> <lb/> | ||
<head>Petition for Justice.</head><lb/> | |||
<note>1. Case.<lb/> | |||
V. Oaths necessitated</note></p> | |||
<p>1.<lb/> | |||
V. Device 5. Oaths for<lb/> | |||
mendacity necessitated.<lb/> | |||
Suprà the purpose.<lb/> | |||
Now the <hi rend="underline">mode</hi>.<lb/> | |||
Wishing to <hi rend="underline">prevent</hi> mendacity,<lb/> | |||
you employ the<lb/> | |||
oath: to <hi rend="underline">produce</hi>, leave<lb/> | |||
it unemployed, giving<lb/> | |||
effect, as above, to the<lb/> | |||
unsanctioned assertions.</p> | |||
<p>2.<lb/> | |||
Oaths properties, proved<lb/> | |||
below. It is<lb/> | |||
1. Needless.<lb/> | |||
2. Inefficacious<lb/> | |||
3. Mischievous<lb/> | |||
3*. Eludible<lb/> | |||
4. Inconsistent with | |||
natural Religion<lb/> | |||
5. Antiscriptural<lb/> | |||
6. Subservient to Judge's<lb/> | |||
sinister interest.</p> | |||
<p>3. Needless Witness <hi rend="underline">House</hi>.<lb/> | |||
1. Needless. Witness<lb/> | |||
<gap/> House.<lb/> | |||
1. Prince in legislation.<lb/> | |||
2. Holds the purse.<lb/> | |||
3. Originally most laws.<lb/> | |||
4. More important<lb/> | |||
legislation than Judicature.<lb/> | |||
5. Not less necessary<lb/> | |||
to it is information as<lb/> | |||
to facts.<lb/> | |||
6. Preeminent the attention<lb/> | |||
to elicitation.<lb/> | |||
7. Best the mode.<lb/> | |||
8. Source – motive –<lb/> | |||
real desire to obtain<lb/> | |||
serviceable truths.<lb/> | |||
9. Sole security ag<hi rend="superscript">st</hi><lb/> | |||
mendacity, imprisonment<lb/> | |||
direct; fine indirect.</p> | |||
<pb/> | |||
<p><head>II. Inefficiency</head></p> | |||
<p>4. Needless Witness House.<lb/> | |||
10. Oath none.<lb/> | |||
11. Efficacious greater<lb/> | |||
than of perjury, punishment<lb/> | |||
in ordinary<lb/> | |||
judicature.<lb/> | |||
12. Cause, efficiency of<lb/> | |||
Houses' procedure.<lb/> | |||
13. – promptitude of<lb/> | |||
the punishment.<lb/> | |||
14. This, notwithstanding<lb/> | |||
the imprisonment's<lb/> | |||
continual diminution<lb/> | |||
and ultimate extinction.</p> | |||
<p>5.<lb/> | |||
2. Further proof needless,<lb/> | |||
were <add>it</add> ot for the<lb/> | |||
importance: the extent<lb/> | |||
to which swearing excludes<lb/> | |||
justice.</p> | |||
<p>6.<lb/> | |||
Quaker's testimony admitted<lb/> | |||
without oath<lb/> | |||
A<hi rend="superscript">o.</hi> 17. G. 2. C.<lb/> | |||
in criminali A<hi rend="superscript">o.</hi> 182.<lb/> | |||
Needless from Quakers,<lb/> | |||
can it be indispensable<lb/> | |||
from non-Quakers?</p> | |||
<p>7.<lb/> | |||
What should hinder a<lb/> | |||
non Quaker from personating<lb/> | |||
a Quaker?<lb/> | |||
<hi rend="underline">in civili</hi>, giving success<lb/> | |||
to <unclear>wrong</unclear>: <hi rend="underline">in criminali</hi>,<lb/> | |||
impunity to<lb/> | |||
guilt, or punishment<lb/> | |||
to non-guiltiness.</p> | |||
<p>8.<lb/> | |||
From the assuredness<lb/> | |||
of the non-facilitation<lb/> | |||
of mendacity, by the<lb/> | |||
admission <hi rend="underline">in civile</hi><lb/> | |||
causes it's exclusion<lb/> | |||
<hi rend="underline">in criminali</hi>.</p> | |||
<pb/> | |||
<p><head>II Inefficacious</head></p> | |||
<p>9. Promissory<lb/> | |||
2. Inefficient.<lb/> | |||
In promissory, sanction<lb/> | |||
same as in assertory.<lb/> | |||
Of the promissory<lb/> | |||
known instances of<lb/> | |||
violation are more<lb/> | |||
abundant than of assertory.</p> | |||
<p>10. Promissory<lb/> | |||
Examples –<lb/> | |||
1. Irish Bishop's perjuries.<lb/> | |||
Promise to institute<lb/> | |||
schools in the parishes<lb/> | |||
within the Diocese.<lb/> | |||
A<hi rend="superscript">o.</hi> 1825, performances,<lb/> | |||
782: perjuries,<lb/> | |||
480. Such holy<lb/> | |||
Ghost's antiseptic power<lb/> | |||
against perjury.</p> | |||
<p>11. Promissory<lb/> | |||
2. Through Oxford,<lb/> | |||
pass half the English<lb/> | |||
Priests and Bishops –<lb/> | |||
Statute sanctioned<lb/> | |||
by oath – Perjury daily<lb/> | |||
and universal.<lb/> | |||
From clergy as well<lb/> | |||
as laity, protests these<lb/> | |||
50 years ineffectual.</p> | |||
<p>12. Assertory Custom Houses.<lb/> | |||
Assertory Oaths. Of<lb/> | |||
universal violation<lb/> | |||
notorious example.<lb/> | |||
Custom House Oaths.<lb/> | |||
How beneficial to Finance<lb/> | |||
and trade, if<lb/> | |||
asseveration, with appropriate<lb/> | |||
punishment,<lb/> | |||
in case of mendacity<lb/> | |||
were substituted, and<lb/> | |||
defendant subjectable<lb/> | |||
by adverse interrogatee<lb/> | |||
to a limited loss, as<lb/> | |||
by Equity interrogatee<lb/> | |||
he is to loss of all he<lb/> | |||
had?</p> | |||
<pb/> | |||
<p><head>III Mischievous</head></p> | |||
<p>13.<lb/> | |||
3. Mischievous.<lb/> | |||
Part only of the mischief<lb/> | |||
is that produced by the<lb/> | |||
mendacity licence, as above,<lb/> | |||
<hi rend="underline">in civile</hi>.</p> | |||
<p>14.<lb/> | |||
<hi rend="underline">In criminali</hi>, by <hi rend="underline">declining<lb/> | |||
oath</hi>, any man may attach<lb/> | |||
impunity to crime in any<lb/> | |||
shape, or to innocence<lb/> | |||
punishment in any shape.</p> | |||
<p>15.<lb/> | |||
So success to the party<lb/> | |||
in the wrong <hi rend="underline">in civili</hi>.</p> | |||
<p>16.<lb/> | |||
Committed he might be<lb/> | |||
But this would not reverse<lb/> | |||
the judgment:<lb/> | |||
and whatever were the<lb/> | |||
punishment for the contempt,<lb/> | |||
it might be made<lb/> | |||
worth his while to undergo<lb/> | |||
it. How he might avoid<lb/> | |||
this, see below.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
1
1828. Novr.
Petition for Justice.
1. Case.
V. Oaths necessitated
1.
V. Device 5. Oaths for
mendacity necessitated.
Suprà the purpose.
Now the mode.
Wishing to prevent mendacity,
you employ the
oath: to produce, leave
it unemployed, giving
effect, as above, to the
unsanctioned assertions.
2.
Oaths properties, proved
below. It is
1. Needless.
2. Inefficacious
3. Mischievous
3*. Eludible
4. Inconsistent with
natural Religion
5. Antiscriptural
6. Subservient to Judge's
sinister interest.
3. Needless Witness House.
1. Needless. Witness
House.
1. Prince in legislation.
2. Holds the purse.
3. Originally most laws.
4. More important
legislation than Judicature.
5. Not less necessary
to it is information as
to facts.
6. Preeminent the attention
to elicitation.
7. Best the mode.
8. Source – motive –
real desire to obtain
serviceable truths.
9. Sole security agst
mendacity, imprisonment
direct; fine indirect.
---page break---
II. Inefficiency
4. Needless Witness House.
10. Oath none.
11. Efficacious greater
than of perjury, punishment
in ordinary
judicature.
12. Cause, efficiency of
Houses' procedure.
13. – promptitude of
the punishment.
14. This, notwithstanding
the imprisonment's
continual diminution
and ultimate extinction.
5.
2. Further proof needless,
were it ot for the
importance: the extent
to which swearing excludes
justice.
6.
Quaker's testimony admitted
without oath
Ao. 17. G. 2. C.
in criminali Ao. 182.
Needless from Quakers,
can it be indispensable
from non-Quakers?
7.
What should hinder a
non Quaker from personating
a Quaker?
in civili, giving success
to wrong: in criminali,
impunity to
guilt, or punishment
to non-guiltiness.
8.
From the assuredness
of the non-facilitation
of mendacity, by the
admission in civile
causes it's exclusion
in criminali.
---page break---
II Inefficacious
9. Promissory
2. Inefficient.
In promissory, sanction
same as in assertory.
Of the promissory
known instances of
violation are more
abundant than of assertory.
10. Promissory
Examples –
1. Irish Bishop's perjuries.
Promise to institute
schools in the parishes
within the Diocese.
Ao. 1825, performances,
782: perjuries,
480. Such holy
Ghost's antiseptic power
against perjury.
11. Promissory
2. Through Oxford,
pass half the English
Priests and Bishops –
Statute sanctioned
by oath – Perjury daily
and universal.
From clergy as well
as laity, protests these
50 years ineffectual.
12. Assertory Custom Houses.
Assertory Oaths. Of
universal violation
notorious example.
Custom House Oaths.
How beneficial to Finance
and trade, if
asseveration, with appropriate
punishment,
in case of mendacity
were substituted, and
defendant subjectable
by adverse interrogatee
to a limited loss, as
by Equity interrogatee
he is to loss of all he
had?
---page break---
III Mischievous
13.
3. Mischievous.
Part only of the mischief
is that produced by the
mendacity licence, as above,
in civile.
14.
In criminali, by declining
oath, any man may attach
impunity to crime in any
shape, or to innocence
punishment in any shape.
15.
So success to the party
in the wrong in civili.
16.
Committed he might be
But this would not reverse
the judgment:
and whatever were the
punishment for the contempt,
it might be made
worth his while to undergo
it. How he might avoid
this, see below.
|
Identifier: | JB/081/035/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 81. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1828-11 |
1-16 |
||
|
081 |
petition for justice |
||
|
035 |
petition for justice |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
marginal summary sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
d1 / e1 |
||
|
john flowerdew colls |
b&m 1828 |
||
|
arthur moore; richard doane |
|||
|
1828 |
|||
|
25822 |
|||
