JB/056/271/001: 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/056/271/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto upload
 
Ohsoldgirl (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>1828 July 25<lb/>Jud</head> <!-- in pencil --> <p><note>Preface<lb/>Equity procedure</note></p> <p>from p.5 before the lecture</p> <p><note>73. 21<lb/>Connexion between<lb/>Equity &amp; Common Law</note></p> <p>This <add><unclear>for</unclear></add> much as to the Common Law practice and<lb/>the Equity Court practice separately considered.  But <del>the <gap/></del><lb/>between the <del>Eq</del> Common L:Aw Court practice and the Equity<lb/>Court practice a particular and very extraordinary sort<lb/>of connexion has place: and without some explanation given of<lb/>the nature of this connexion very imperfect would be the <del><gap/></del><lb/>best <gap/> <add>of either</add> that could be <gap/> of either one or the<lb/>other.</p> <p><note>74 or 22<lb/>Equity jurisdiction &#x2014; 1 <sic>Equ.</sic><lb/>cases in general &#x2014; 2 Injunctions</note></p> <p>Cases of which the Equity Courts take cognizance<lb/>may be divided in the first place be divided into two<lb/>classes. <del><gap/></del> 1. Equity cases at large, and 2. Injunctive<lb/>cases.</p> <p><note>75 or 23<lb/><del>While</del> a suit at Common<lb/>Law almost concluded &#x2014;<lb/>may be stopped by Injunction<lb/>in Equity.  Origin To<lb/>gain by an set of lawyers<lb/>added <add>commencement of</add> gain to another set.<lb/>Hence no such hostility as<lb/>between K.B. &amp; C.P.</note></p> <p>Of Equity cases at large presently &#9758; <foreign>Quere</foreign> if at all,<lb/>Now as to Injunctive cases.  These are cases in which<lb/><del>of</del> alone in <add>to a demand made in</add> a Common Law Court every operation of procedure<lb/>has been gone through with the exception of those <gap/><lb/>ones by which execution and effect has been given a demand<lb/>made in a Common Law Court the which is put a stop<lb/>to and rendered of no avail by a suit commenced. &#x2014; the<lb/>injunction bill filed in an equity Court.  For the immediate<lb/>purpose now in hand namely the <sic>shewing</sic> the English<lb/>Procedure system as its origin &#x2014; the origin of the several judicatories<lb/>of the <gap/> order and those <add>several</add> modes of procedure<lb/>elicitation of evidence included &#x2014; this account short as it is<lb/>may perhaps be found sufficient.  <add>By an Injunction Bill  To the suitors</add> the cost of which one<lb/>set of lawyers had the benefit was superadded the commencement<lb/>of the costs of which another set of lawyers had the benefit.<lb/><add>Here</add> Then for between the interests of the one and the interests<lb/>of the other there existed not any such clashings <add>hostility</add> as to<lb/>produce the sort of warfare we have seen carried on between<lb/>the Kings Bench <add><gap/></add> Common Law Court and the Common Pleas<lb/>Superior Common Law Court. <hi rend="superscript">[2]</hi> <note><hi rend="superscript">[2]</hi> At different periods of the<lb/>contest the <del><gap/></del> property<lb/>of the suitor became a prey<lb/>to both</note>  If the Common Law Courts had the<lb/>advantage in one shape, the Equity Courts had it in another shape <hi rend="superscript">[+]2</hi> <note><hi rend="superscript">[+]2</hi> The Common Law Courts<lb/>to feed upon the property of<lb/>the suitors in its yet unbroken<lb/>state: the equity courts<lb/>no more than the remnant of<lb/><!-- continues along the edge of the page --> it.  But <del><gap/></del> wherever the remnant was large enough to endure both dreams, the utmost quantity of the matter of wealth capable of being absorbed by the <add>procedure of</add> the Equity Courts far exceeded<lb/>the <gap/> quantity capable of being absorbed by that of the Common Law Courts</note></p>
 
 


<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}}

Revision as of 14:16, 29 September 2025

Click Here To Edit

1828 July 25
Jud

Preface
Equity procedure

from p.5 before the lecture

73. 21
Connexion between
Equity & Common Law

This for much as to the Common Law practice and
the Equity Court practice separately considered. But the
between the Eq Common L:Aw Court practice and the Equity
Court practice a particular and very extraordinary sort
of connexion has place: and without some explanation given of
the nature of this connexion very imperfect would be the
best of either that could be of either one or the
other.

74 or 22
Equity jurisdiction — 1 Equ.
cases in general — 2 Injunctions

Cases of which the Equity Courts take cognizance
may be divided in the first place be divided into two
classes. 1. Equity cases at large, and 2. Injunctive
cases.

75 or 23
While a suit at Common
Law almost concluded —
may be stopped by Injunction
in Equity. Origin To
gain by an set of lawyers
added commencement of gain to another set.
Hence no such hostility as
between K.B. & C.P.

Of Equity cases at large presently ☞ Quere if at all,
Now as to Injunctive cases. These are cases in which
of alone in to a demand made in a Common Law Court every operation of procedure
has been gone through with the exception of those
ones by which execution and effect has been given a demand
made in a Common Law Court the which is put a stop
to and rendered of no avail by a suit commenced. — the
injunction bill filed in an equity Court. For the immediate
purpose now in hand namely the shewing the English
Procedure system as its origin — the origin of the several judicatories
of the order and those several modes of procedure
elicitation of evidence included — this account short as it is
may perhaps be found sufficient. By an Injunction Bill To the suitors the cost of which one
set of lawyers had the benefit was superadded the commencement
of the costs of which another set of lawyers had the benefit.
Here Then for between the interests of the one and the interests
of the other there existed not any such clashings hostility as to
produce the sort of warfare we have seen carried on between
the Kings Bench Common Law Court and the Common Pleas
Superior Common Law Court. [2] [2] At different periods of the
contest the property
of the suitor became a prey
to both
If the Common Law Courts had the
advantage in one shape, the Equity Courts had it in another shape [+]2 [+]2 The Common Law Courts
to feed upon the property of
the suitors in its yet unbroken
state: the equity courts
no more than the remnant of
it. But wherever the remnant was large enough to endure both dreams, the utmost quantity of the matter of wealth capable of being absorbed by the procedure of the Equity Courts far exceeded
the quantity capable of being absorbed by that of the Common Law Courts



Identifier: | JB/056/271/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 56.

Date_1

1828-07-25

Marginal Summary Numbering

[[marginal_summary_numbering::73 [or] 21 - 75 or 23]]

Box

056

Main Headings

Procedure Code

Folio number

271

Info in main headings field

Jud

Image

001

Titles

Category

Text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

C9

Penner

Watermarks

B&M 1828

Marginals

George Bentham

Paper Producer

Arthur Moore; Richard Doane

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1828

Notes public

ID Number

18327

Box Contents

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