★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
PROCEDURE MURDER. LAW )( EXCT. 1
Castill v. Bambridge & Corbet
2d Str. 854.-857. Now this it is plain, is saying
which being in the disjunction I reckon but
as one
Now this it is plain is saying " if you will find the 8 facts, I will infer from the 6 pri
of them the intention & from the 2 last of them the causality: & having so done, I will also declare
that what is the standing inference of the Law from these for general proposition whensoever
they are, as thus they <add. will here</add> have been here established.
The 2 facts ultima gradus are such <note>
Here then we have two distinct inferences made by the Judge: one this one of general
facts which in general (if I may be permitted that expression for want of one more apposite) from the respective
particular facts: the 2d Law
from those general facts.
<note> The general facts are those which can the existence
of which may be predicated alike in every
be said to be
case of Murder
The aprticular one whose existence
is only predicable in this.
I call them particular, because
tho' you should give each of them a character
of generality by substituting A.B.
& C. in the of Castil
Bambridge & Corbet it is
a thousand to me against them
ever happening a transaction to which
which can be appliedthey will come under it
( together)
Now it is the first of these inferences which I say was one too many: for that <del.it he ought to have
left it to the Jury
if any there could be any advantage accrue form his assuming it rather than instead of then
it must be either with reference to the case in hand, or to future cases —
there could be none on this first score case in hand: for the qua Jury, were exactly as well qualified
for it, as he could be "qua" Judge. It was perfectly pure of every ,del>thing matter of Law; insomuch It is what they would be
equally as well qualified for if they had never so much as heard there were as any such thing of their being such a thing as Law, as if they b had
the whole System of it by heart.
What can out upon any occasion be an advantage towards the of a right decision,
possessed by the Judge, is the superior intelligence of Law — but that is no advantage
upon this.
Jury to determine if 1st Actions 2d
Phenomena
3. Causalities.
Actions are 1 external of body <gap/. internal
of mind
Internal are to be collected only from
causality — External may be perceived either so collected in
by some — Phenomena may be so
collected or perceived by sense
If it is said there he has also another advantage which is that of superior sagacity; I am
(besides that this is turned to profit another way) this argument applies against not more to one case than another but against the very institutions in all
the expediency of the institution is not here in dispute)
but the question only <add>here is, whether supposing them instituted, they ought or not to decide in this.
there is therefore no such advantage relative to the case in question: but neither is there
relative to future cases.
|
Identifier: | JB/050/078/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 50. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
050 |
procedure code |
||
|
078 |
procedure murder law & fact |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
c1 |
||
|
jeremy bentham |
[[watermarks::gr [crown motif] [britannia with shield motif]]] |
||
|
16069 |
|||
