JB/141/014/001: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:43, 12 November 2021

B.1. Ch.5 12

Rule 9. When the act is conclusively
indicative of a habit such an increase must
be given to the punishment as may enable it to
outweigh the profit not only of the individual
offence, but of such other like offences as are
likely to have been committed with impunity
by the same offender.

Severe as this conjectural calculation
may appear it is absolutely necessary in some
cases, of this kind are crimes fraudulent crimes
using false weights and or measures and if using
base coin. If the coiner were only punished
according to the nature of the single crime
that he had committ of which he is convicted,
his fraudulent practice would upon the whole be
a lucrative one. Punishment would therefore
be inefficacious if it did not bear a proport
proportion to the total gain which may be
supposed to have been derived not from one
particular act, but from a train of actions of the
same kind.

There may be a few other circumstances
or considerations which may influence in some small
degree the demand for punishment, but as the
propriety of these is either not to demonstrable, or
not so constant, or the application of them not so
determinate as that of the foregoing, it may be
doubted whether they be are worth putting on a level
with the others.

Identifier: \| JB/141/014/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 141.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	141	Main Headings	rationale of punishment
Folio number	014	Info in main headings field
Image	001	Titles	rule 9
Category	copy/fair copy sheet	Number of Pages	2
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	f12 / f10
Penner	richard smith	Watermarks	dusautoy & rump 1809
Marginals		Paper Producer	edward collins
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year	1809
Notes public		ID Number	48231
Box Contents

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 '''[{{fullurl:JB/141/014/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
 <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
+<p>B.1. Ch.5  12</p>
-<head>B.I.UL.5</head>
+<p>Rule 9.  <hi rend="underline">When the act is conclusively<lb/>
+indicative of a habit such an increase must<lb/>
-<p>Rule 9. <hi rend="underline">When the act is conclusively<lb/> indicative of a habit such an increase must<lb/> be given to the punishment as may enable it to<lb/> outweigh the profit not only of the individual<lb/> offence, but of such other like offences as are<lb/> likely to have been committed with impunity<lb/> by the same offender.</hi></p>
+be given to the punishment as may enable it to<lb/>
+outweigh the profit not only of the individual<lb/>
-<p>Severe as this conjectural calculation<lb/> may appear it is absolutely necessary in some<lb/> cases, of this kind are <del>crimes <gap/></del> fraudulent crimes<lb/> using false weights <del>and</del><add>or</add> measures and if using<lb/> base coin. If the coiner were only punished<lb/> according to the nature of the single crime<lb/> <del>that he had committ</del> of which he is convicted,<lb/> his fraudulent practice would upon the whole be<lb/> a lucrative one. Punishment would therefore<lb/> be inefficacious if it did not bear a <del><gap/></del><lb/> proportion to the total gain which may be<lb/> supposed to have been derived not from one<lb/> particular act, <add>but</add> from a <gap/> of actions of the<lb/> same kind.</p>
+offence, but of such other like offences as are<lb/>
+likely to have been committed with impunity<lb/>
-<p>There may be a few other circumstances<lb/> or considerations which may influence in some small<lb/> degree the demand for punishment, but as the<lb/> propriety of these is either not to demonstrable, or<lb/> not so constant, or the application of them not so<lb/> determinate as that of the <unclear>forging</unclear>, it may be<lb/> doubted whether they <del><gap/></del><add>are</add> worth putting on a level<lb/> with the others.</p>
+by the same offender.</hi></p>
+<p>Severe as this conjectural calculation<lb/>
+may appear it is absolutely necessary in some<lb/>
+cases, of this kind are <del>crimes <gap/></del> fraudulent crimes<lb/>
+using false weights <del>and</del> <add>or</add> measures and if using<lb/>
+base coin.  If the coiner were only punished<lb/>
+according to the nature of the single crime<lb/>
+<del>that he had committ</del> of which he is convicted,<lb/>
+his fraudulent practice would upon the whole be<lb/>
+a lucrative one.  Punishment would therefore<lb/>
+be inefficacious if it did not bear a <del>proport</del><lb/>
+proportion to the total gain which may be<lb/>
+supposed to have been derived not from one<lb/>
+particular act, <add>but</add> from a train of actions of the<lb/>
+same kind.</p>
+<p>There may be a few other circumstances<lb/>
+or considerations which may influence in some small<lb/>
+degree the demand for punishment, but as the<lb/>
+propriety of these is either not to demonstrable, or<lb/>
+not so constant, or the application of them not so<lb/>
+determinate as that of the foregoing, it may be<lb/>
+doubted whether they <del>be</del> <add>are</add> worth putting on a level<lb/>
+with the others.</p>
 <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
-{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}}
+{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Ready_For_Review}}

Views

JB/141/014/001: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:43, 12 November 2021

Navigation

Search