JB/047/026/001

Click Here To Edit

2 Apr. 1806
EVID. B Exclusion. B.1 Introduction Generalia Ch. 1. Connection with Ends. Ch. 2. Disregard (of ends)

§. 1. Connection & exclusion
with the ends of justice.

1.
Adjective law a means
to an end. p.1.

2.
Law of evidence of a
branch of adjective law.
p.1.

3
Fulfillmt of the predictions
of substantive law the
direct ends of justice.
Ultimate collateral
end or ends, avoidance
to impose on the Deft at
the end of the cause if undue,
the vexation attached
to the obligation, penal or
non-penal sought to be
imposed on him by the
commencemt of it:
incidental collateral end or ends, avoidance
to impose, on parties &
non-parties, so far as
unnecessary, & wherever
preponderant, in the shape
of vexation expence & delay,
liable to be produced in
the course of it. p.1.

4.
Account between mischief
of direct injustice
to the prejudice of Plffs
side, & do of indirect injustice
– injustice corresponding
to the collateral
ends, ultimate & incidental
as above, is an account
to be taken in every cause.
If the collateral injustice
from the admission of the
evidence is greater than
the direct from the exclusion
of it, it ought to be excluded.
So mutatis mutandis if
the evidence be proposed to
be admitted on the Plffs
side.

5.
Example – Penal law
transgressed, 5s penalty
incurred. Witness, to convict
or save the Deft, fetched
back from the East Indies.
p.2.

6
When the receipt wd as
above produce either a
neat injustice or ballance
on the side of injustice.
Exclusion of the evidence
ought to take place.
This mentioned here
in the way of admission
of concession.

7
In every other case
exclusion ought not to
take place.
This mentioned here
as a proposition to be
proved. p.3.

8

---page break---

Ch. 2. Ends disregarded.

8
Doctrine of evidence
with respect to exclusions
will thus be reducible to
one general rule with a
few exceptions:
1. Rule – admitt
2. Exceptions except when
admission wd produce
unnecessary or preponderant
collateral inconvenience
in any of the shapes
specified. p.4.

Ch. 2. Disregard of the ends of justice.

8. 1.
If this doctrine be just
all established systems
are made up of error
&. inconsistency. as may
sati. p.1.

1(a)
Universal error here
not a matter of wonder:
1. since marks never aimed
at will not be hit.
2. then matters have every
where been abandoned
by legislators to the lawyers
3. the interest of lawyers
is opposite to justice.
p.4.
4. it is his interest to
maintain disorder everywhere.
5. In physical science
all who have an interest
in its advancemt have
power: in this branch
of political none.
6. A few centuries ago
preference given to super-natural
evidence was
as universal, as erroneous
arrangements in
regard to natural are still.
p.1.

10. 2
They swarm with exceptions,
but none derived at
least rightly from the above
source: no regard p.6.
any where to proportions
as above indicated. p.3.

11. 3
All such of them in which
any regard has been paid
to reason, are referable
either to deception, or vexation:
(fear of the one or
the other). p.4.

12. 4
Fear of deception a right
principle, because directed
to an end (the direct) of
justice: but the measures
suggested by it uniformly
repugnant to the purpose. p.4.

13. 5
Fear of vexation a right
principle, but the measures
still incompetent to the
purpose. p.4.
If vexation being either
trifling or ideal or over-balanced
by advantage
from other sources. p.4.

---page break---

Ch. 2. Ends disregarded

14 6
But many cases will be
seen in which the ends of
justice appear not to
have been regarded in
any shape. p.4.

15 7
Even where the ends of
justice are hereinafter
referred to as connected with the occasion of
the established arrangements,
they must rather be considered
as grounds on which
the arrangements if at all,
may be defended, than as
sources from whence there
can be any assurance of
them having flowed. p.5.

16 8
Even when vexation has
been the object of regard,
supposing humanity to have
been the source of the arrangement,
no wisdom can be
ascribed to it: no wisdom
without proportions: & proportions
are never thought of.
p.5.

17. 9
Exemplification of the disregard
to proportions. In case
of a question tending to cause
the witness to be convicted of
a distinct offence, no regard
paid to the advantage, referable
to the prevention of other
offences of that sort. p.6.

18 10
Apply this observation to the
case put of rubbish as above.
The evidence given by the
witness as to the depositing
of it leads to the detection
& punishment of a robbery
& murder committed by
him at that place. Then
the vexation is greater than
in the E. India Writers
Case: but here overbalanced
there not. p.7.

Identifier: | JB/047/026/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 47.
Date_1	1806-04-02	Marginal Summary Numbering	1-8, 1-10
Box	047	Main Headings	evidence
Folio number	026	Info in main headings field	[[info_in_main_headings_field::evid. b [ ] exclusion b. i generalia ch. 1 connection with ends ch. 2 disregard (of ends)]]
Image	001	Titles	ch. 1 connection of exclusion with the ends of justice / ch. 2 ends disregarded
Category	marginal summary sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d1
Penner	john herbert koe	Watermarks	iping 1804
Marginals		Paper Producer	bernardino rivadavia
Corrections	jeremy bentham	Paper Produced in Year	1804
Notes public		ID Number	14894
Box Contents